3 ages, and that they would seek a legal superiority of condition above others, laid the axe to the root of this Upas tree. The law of primogeniture—which secured to the eldest son of all following ages, the bulk of the father’s property—was not allowed. In new ther of these two prolific sources of evil could the aristocratic idea find hope of success. To what, could it turn?—to what, alas, did it turn? To the concentration and perpe* tuity of power in a few hands, by means of a combined Money Institution. While as yet the nation was in its infancy, the great apostle of federalism, Alexander Hamilton, suggested the policy which to this day is the subtle plan of federalism. Give them power, and as soon thereafter as they dare, they will, under guise of its being a public benefit inflict upon the nation a mighty money corporation. The Money power, when combined, the only one from which there is real danger. The power of moneyed corporations is of the most subtle and dangerous tendency, unless their privileges are few, simple, clearly defined, and within the rebuke andcontroi of the ballot box. If they are placed beyond the reach of the people, and large capacities given to them, there is no safety to the public. This species of reasoning is called by our opponents “party slang” and so forth. Let us look to history for a few facts showing the tendency of great charters, and the danger of giving them the slightest possible foothold. Let its slightly trace the rise and gradual spread of .the British. East India Company, showing how it stole on with deathless purpose from one po< sition of power to another. Let us carefully note its small beginning—the cloud no bigger thana man’s hand—until it overshadowed a continent. In 1582 Captain Stephens sailed to 'India by the Cape of Good Hope, being the first Englishman who ventured round that point. Great difficulties attended the trade from England to India at that early period. The notion that a few may have the benefits which the God of Nature has spread abroad for all, led a company of rich merchants in London to seek a’ charter from the then Queen, that they might have the exclusive right to trade to India. But lit tle opposition was made to the effort, and the money-holding class prevailed, and in the year 1600 the charter was'granted. The charier was a modest one, and limited to a period of fifteen years only. Mark this. In this simple, unobtrusive way the train was laid. Their first expedition to India consisted of but five ships—the largest not over 600 tons burthen, the smallest 130; the whole cost of which, vessels and cargoes, amounted to only 300,000 dollars, being not a ninetieth part of the. capital of the recent Unis ted States Bank. Thus it went on with all humility and deference to the publics sentiment, and the shortsighted politicians of that day flattered themselves upon the success of the plan. But, thus early, the company were laying a foundation for their subsequent gigantie power. Under pretext of getting some territory in India where they could land and safely keep their goods, they purchased for a mere trifle some real estate. Under similar pretences they gradually extended their territory, until they finally became rulers over the whole Mogul empire. From time to time’, under the plea of necessity and public utility, they got renewals of their charter. As time went by, they made many advocates for their exclusive pris vlieges, by the gift of money, offices, and the like. At length their power and influence became so great that they bade defiance to the British Parliament in these memorable words: “The laws of England,” said the principal agent of the company, “are a heap of nonsense, compiled by a few ignorant country gentlemen, who hardly knew how to make rules for the good government of their own private families, much less for there-, gulating of companies and foreign commerce.” In the spirit of these insulting words, the practice of the company was carried out. At length the public saw the embarrassment to free trade which this monopoly created, and in 1693 demanded a repeal of its charter. The struggle became severe between the aristocratic and democratic doctrines, but the latter triumphed for a short time. But, alas! the Government was in need of money; and it applied to the company—which but a few years before was composed of but a handful of merchants—for a loan. This was granted, and through this influence the old charter was annulled and a new one given, with greater powers. Here we see how that the “ borrower became servant to the lender,” even though that borrower were a government. Thus matters went on. As often as the charter would expire by its limitation, the company would lend the government more money—provided it would renew the monopoly. During all this time the company were making the boldest strides in India. It now had its own army, its own navy, its vast and impregnable forts and castles, its own cols leges, its courts of law. Soon it became ruler over one hundred millions of people!— giving them, such laws as it pleased—taxing them when it pleased—giving them such princes and officers as it pleased, and even interfering with their religious faith 1 It des
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=