The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-03-23


by enthusiasts as modern battle-ground
in which knights OF commerce engage in
conquests as romantic rs those of mediae-
val days. The American millionaire, pos
sessing the power Of kings, in wealth rival.
ling Croesus, has been held UP as an ad-
mirable and romantic figure He has been
likened to the knights who went forth to
conquer OF old and won kingdoms. Nor
gan, Carnegie. Rockefeller. have all at one
time or another been thus glorihed. But.
in sober truth. how about it?
Is the American millionaire-or any
other, for that matter-a romantic figure
Does he compare to the dashing heroes OF
the days Of King Arthur? Is he the re-
doubtable figure his inspired biographers
make him? Are his conquests as pic
turesque, as admirable as those Of Crom-
well or Napoleon?
To put it bluntly. and speaking gen.
orally. I consider the modern millionaire
an unmitigated evil There are, suppose.
exceptions. But one cannot judge class
by exceptions. One judges by the major
fly; and. Judging by the majority, cannot
say admire millionaires.
You have asked me whether ! consider
the battlefelds of commerce-you specify
those of America-romanttc2 Do they
compare for heroism, chivalry, adventure,
the opportunity for the display of heroic
characteristics, with those Of medieval
days? / do not think so.
Why? WE'LL / will tell you.
But. first, put the question to yourself
Can you, for instance, imagine Rookie
Teller going out to fight tremendous
financial battle with his lady's kerchief
next to his heart?
Can you picture Carnegie in the tumul.
tuous arena of the Stock Exchange spurred
on in his zest by the sweet fragrance of
rose from his lady's hair?
Does any millonaire-even Mr.. Morgan
go out TO this modern battle with the
desire to achieve distinction so that he
may be himself dsting uished in the eyes
of his lady2
Do you find any modern millionaire or
any Of these great fnanciers / have men.
toned spending the night before the
launching of some business campaign in
patient vigil before an altar, as the old
knights did, on their knees, praying for
guidance and the strength to battle for
the right?
But remember the slim, 1.-THE lad of early
days who had not yet made his career or
won dominions for his king; how did he
fare forth? Perchance a fair face fioated
before him as he galloped to war on his
fiery steed. He had. indeed he had, his
lady's kerchief, or a rose from her hair,
next to his heart! And his motive in
winning-it was what?
He went forth, first. to attain distinction
that one he loved might be proud Of him.
He went forth TO win domnions, not for
himself, but for his king. Perchance he
thought OF rewards of honors--but this
was secondary. He went forth. first, to
attain something for another; he followed
an ideal, whatever it was, and this ideal
was not primarily selfish.
That Is the keynote of the conquests
CT early days. That Is the keynote of the
cavalier who Jared forth to battle. His
heart beat warm; he was filled with gen.
erous emotions; he was kind as he was
brave. He was courageous daring, seek
ing of adventure; but he remained, always,
generous hearted, chivalrous to women,
the follower of an Ideal. He possessed the
qualities of the hero-the admirable quail
tiles of an inspired human being.
On the other hand. take your modern mil
lionaire. Does he go to his offices In the
teeming marts Of commerce lamingly in
spired to carry on financial campaign In
order that he may right wrong? Can you
picture the mighty master Of banks plan
ming some sweeping campaign against a
rival in order that some atrocIous Injustice
to an army OF defrauded stockholders may
be righted? Do you find any thus engaged,
and, when they win their battle, their bank
Golfers filled with spoils. do you find them
.eotifying wrongs inflicted by fellow cap
Halists and refunding money to widows
600 men and orphans who have been
Subbed?
You do not.
Take the conqueror of old who Jared
tprth TO avenge some atrooity committed
ty a rival conqueror or king. He may
have been ruthless in his campaigns, but
he fought bravely, corageously, inspired
BY the desire for victory not for himself,
but for others. He won spoils; he divided
lhem. The victory itself sufficed for him.
The material riches might go to those who
had aided him.
He was not primarily unselfsh.
The modern millionaire is primarily
selfish.
That is the difference.
A hero must be heroic, and to be heroic
lie must be not only indomitable perse.
vering, brave. but unselfsh OF heart.
Tho modern millionaire as romantic
figure does not fulfil this demand He Is
not the ideal of the hero Of romance.
whom does he engage in mighty financial
erxB? For a fiancee A wife3 To get
U,nney for the poor? Never
He can and does buy his wife.
Sls object is solely the requirement OF
material wealth for himself. In his battles
thousands may be robbed; poor investors
may find their bank accounts pillagsd
themselves are driven to ruin, some to
sCtcfde. These wrongs are never righted
Ruthless. determined, brutal, the money.
cruHader carries on his operations, protects
pRnfcs and pockets his gains Why does
ha dsaira this weaith-the modern million.
sfr4f That It may give him power. For
NggsI9 sSEISSI54sSZz Z@1zsSg5
EM1cg x@S 1l1xmMMMMM&M8M