' 'tlfH''fmfW''ykm-''''. The Commoner. WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR 10 VOL. 10, NO. 44 Lincoln, Nebraska, November 11, 1910 Whole Number 512 "Thou Shalt Not Steal" Editor The Commoner: Will Tho Commoner kindly reprint In its valued columns, tho speech Mr. Bryan made a few years ago at Carnegie hall, New York City, entitled "Thou Shalt Not Steal?" The hest and most useful instructions in The, Commoner are Mr. Bryan's editorials and speeches. Trusting I am not presuming on your good graces, I am, Respectfully, ELMER G. WINDELS. Brooklyn, New York. Under the auspices of the Civic Forum, Car negie Hall, New York, on tho evening of Feb ruary 4, 1908, Mr. Bryan delivered an address entitled "Thou shalt not steal." Tho address follows: I appreciate the opportunity which tho Civic Forum has given me of presenting in this great center of trade and finance a subject which however hackneyed It may seem, still forces itself upon us, namely tho subject of larceny. The commandment "Thou shalt not steal" pre sents as clearly as it can bo presented a moral truth that may be classed among the self-evident truths. The greatest service that one can render a truth is to state it so plainly that it can be understood. I do not mean .that any truth can bo stated so plainly that it will not be denied by those who And it to their .interest to deny it. I believe that it. was Lord Macaulay who said that eloquent and learned men could be found to dispute the law of gravitation if any pecuniary advantage were to be gained hy it. What I mean to say is',, that a truth can be stated bo plainly that those who desire to see it, can see it, and that when it is seen, it needs no defense. If, for instance, you may say to a man that it is wrong to steal and he replies,-"Oh, I don't know about that," don't argue with him, search him and you will probably find the reason in his pocket. I have not selected this subject with any In tention of presenting an argument against steal ing. I am going to assuirte that those who listen to me agree that the commandment should be obeyed. It is my purpose rather to make some applications of the commandment to present con ' ditions, for I am satisfied that many are guilty without really being conscious of disobedience to the commandment or of committing a wrong. To steal or to commit larceny may be de fined as the wrongful taking of another's prop erty. Law writers have divided larceny into two classes petit larceny and grand larceny, the former term being used when the property stolen is of little value and the latter when tho' value is greater. There is a tendency in modern times to divide grand larceny into two classes, sp that now we are inclined to think larceny as petit larceny, grand larceny and glorious latceny. By glorious larceny I do not refer CONTENTS ,' ' "THOU SHALT NOT STEAL" . DAVID B. HILL - , PRESIDENT""OF PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC A WISE DECISION ELECTION RETURNS CURRENT TOPICS WHAT THE TARIFF HAS DONE FOR ME ELECTION NIGHT NEWS OF THE WEEK " - WHETHER COMMON OR NOT IF THE PEOPLE RULE WHY DON'T THEY GET WHAT THEY WANT? to tho policy which nations havo Indulged in of taking the property of other nations by forco an act that is sometimes described as not only innocent but even patriotic; I refer rather to that tendency quite discernible at tho present day to regard stealing upon a largo scalo as less reprehensible than stealing upon a small scale. If a man picks your pocket or enters your houso in the dark or accosts you upon tho highway and takes from you a' few dollars, you regard him as a vulgar thief. No ono can have respect for such a person, and tho punish ments of the law are in such cases Bwift and sure If tho offender is caught. Even in tho caso of grand larceny if the amount taken is not very great, tho thief finds It difficult to escapo, for he has no influential friends and ho cannot hire skillful lawyers to presont technicalities in his defense. If, however, ho steals a largo sum, It becomes quite a different matter, and the sum may bo so largo that wo overlook tho man's rascality in our amazement at the genius Which ho has displayed. As a rule, tho man who steals a million dollars has a better chanco of escapo than tho man who steals a thousand. So true is this that It has been suggested that we amend tho commandment to read, "Thou shalt not steal upon a small scale." Judgo Joro Black, tho celebrated Pennsylvania lawyer, In his argument In tho Credit Mobiller caso quoted a man of affairs as saying that to rob on indi vidual was criminal, to rob a corporation was reprehensible, to rob a municipality was a mat ter of doubtful morality, to rob a state was meritorious but to rob tho United States was tho highest achievement of human virtue. Wo should attempt to cultlvato a public opinion which will remove tho distinction between grand larceny and glorious larceny and insure tho enforcement of tho criminal law against all offenders alike, regardless of tho amount stolen -and regardless of the social, business or political position of the thief. But my object tonight is rather to draw your attention to tho various ways in which larceny may bo committed. There is a distinc tion that can bo drawn between direct and in direct larceny; that is, between tho ono who does the stealing himself and tho ono who does it through another, and this Is a larger subject than at first appears, for those who produce con ditions which result in such gross injustico that tho victims of the Injustice are driven to desti tution, to despair, to desperation and finally to theft those who produce these conditions aro not entirely guiltless. But tho discussion of this subject would lead us Into sociology, and I want to confine myself to criminology. For tho purposes of this discussion let .-us divide larceny into two classes larceny in viola tion of the law and larceny through tho opera tion of law. While both branches of the subject aro important, the second branch is tho larger and the less considered. I think I am within tho truth when I say that measured by tho value of the property taken, stealing through tho operation of law, if not so frequent, reaches a larger aggregate than stealing in violation of tho law. But the stealing which Is done In violation of law is enormous aud the methods employed many. Tako for illustration the ad ministration of our tax laws. Let us suppose that tho law is mado by well-meaning legisla tors and -in its requirements approaches justice as closely aB Infallible man can approach justice. The assessor Is sometimes corrupted not al ways by money but moro often by influence. That is, the person favored does not always pay tho assessor a fixed sum but helps to elect him or re-elect him and thus becomes respon sible for tho continuation of his salary. Inequality In taxation is merely a form of larceny. If two men llvo side by side and one contributes in taxation ten dollars when his just share is only five dollars and the other only pays flvo whon ho ought to pay ton, ono loses flvo dollars that ho ought to keep whiio tho other keeps flvo dollars that ho ought to give to tho government. Tho effect in this caso Is just tho samo as if ono man took tho other man's property and applied it to his own uso. Tho fact that tlio government, acting as. a col lector, took the five dollars from tho man who is overburdened and gavo it to tho man who is undcrburdened docs not change tho character of tho transaction. If equality in taxation is duo to tho act of an assessor who, at tho solicitation of a property owner undor-asHestJcs him, then tho assessor and tho man favored aro guilty of tho wrongful taking of tho property of another. If wo ox amlno tho assessment books In any city, wo will find many instances such as that abovo mentioned. Ono piece of property will bo as sessed at half Its value, another piece of property at a third of its value, and still anothor at a fourth of its value, and whoro thoro Is this difference in the basis of assessment, tho dis crimination Is usually in favor of tho largo proporty holder who Is able to qxort an Influence upon the assessor to bias him In favor of an under-valuatlon. Not only is tho largo business block often favored at tho expenso of the small home, but tho property of big corporations is ofton favored at tho expense of Individual holders. Tako, for instance, a street car company, a wator plant or a gas plant. On tho stock markot theso franchise-holding corporations never forget to count in tho valuo of tho franchise, and this intanglhlo asset is sometimes as valuable as tho physical properties owned by tho corpora tion. Taxes aro generally estimated on tho basis of. physical property while tho dividends aro paid upon the faco valuo of tho stocks and bonds. It seems strango that a corporation which receives a valuable franchise from tho public as a gift should refuse to pay taxes in proportion to the market valuo of its stocks and bonds, and yet there is scarcely a city or state In which the public is not in a constant struggle to compel franchise-holding corporations to pay their share of the taxes, and oven then tho basis upon which they pay Is notoriously lower than tho basis upon which tho Individual property owner, especially the small property owner pays. If a certain sum Is to bo collected In taxes and some pay less than they should, the others must pay moro than their share. Is It not worth while to insist that both tho under-assessed citizen and tho unscrupulous official shall obey tho commandment, "Thou shalt not steal?" I need not waste time on the tax dodger or the smuggler, for those who, by concealment, deliberately deceive tho assessor or collector aro as guilty of larceny as if they boldly took tho property of others. But what If the fault Is In tho law Itself? What shall wo say If those who make the law write it with the Intention of overburdening some and releasing others from just obligations? Time does not permit an extended discussion of the various systems of taxation. If we wero discussing the question of taxation In a funda mental way, wo would havo to consider the claims of all systems, existing and proposed, but I am not now considering new systems but rather tho Injustice connected with tho systems in operation. In local taxation wo aro constant ly confronted with the question "Shall personal property bo taxed?" and there are many who arguo that because personal property Is difficult to locate, it should be exempt. This argument Is based upon the theory that it Is better not to attempt to collect a tax upon personal property than to make an unsuccessful attempt. While I recognize that it is easier to collect taxes on visible than on Invisible property, I am con vinced that tho owners of visible property should not pay their own taxes and in addition thereto t i J ft ttjllfr MAki&tiitffV-.Jiti'A tfih rfil ,V MHni'V, iff fojforfHtg riajrt:3jgggjfofc yii-A g If jjfti ft j uyf & ' j , - luto r - &4 ' .- Mj 4- 4iA j aj fi. .