THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. FRIDAY, MARCH 11, 1910. ROCKEFELLER'S UNLOAD NG.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 9991, 11 March 1910, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. FRIDAY, MARCH 11, 1910. ROCKEFELLER'S UNLOAD NG.

Mr Rockefeller, rich in money, hut somewhat down at heel otherwise if it be true that good repute is golden, contemplates disposing of his fortune "for the benefit of mankind,'' the cable reports, and Congress is asked to pass a Bill providing the necessary machinery. Probably the bill will go through flying. A scheme to divest Mr Rockefeller of his many millions strikes a note wherewith the heart of the 'American people will beat in unison if the dicta of innumerable exacerbated publicists of that country are worth confidence. And certainly this is the best Mr Rockefeller could do with his hoard—give it back. That is to say, such an arrangement is in the nature of making the best of a bad business. Infinitely better it would have been if in the first place he had not been able to grab the 52,000,000 dollars he has "given away" and the many more million) he still possesses, for in that case many a tragedy would not have ' petied at the end of the deadly ten-' tacles of the Standard Oil octopus; while apart from those particular piracies the conditions generally , would have teen unfavourable to ' i individual million-spinning and some thousand} of millions of dollars' worth of property an' possibility

would have been shared among the people instead of being sharked by a scora or so of men with the moral dullness and other faculties incidental to getting a huge fortune together. As it is now, the money will never get back to those who ought to have had it; it would be easier for the American expedition to reach the South Pole than for these particular millions to effect restitution right back along the terrible paths by j which they came to their present owI ner. But taking things as they are it is well that Mr RocKefeller should dispose of his hoard, though there is a grim irony in the statemsnt that he aims "to promote the well-being of the people of the United States" and at "the disaemination of knowledge and relief from suffering." The American millionaire does this sort of thing, and gets praise for it, though the possibility, is that in spite of his spectacular donations he does not do as much good comparatively as the British nobleman, whose daily obligations often include giving a liberal pecuniary interpretation to "noblesse oblige." The consoling thought available to Mr Rockefeller is that he can do some good yet. Money got as his has been is sometimes objected to as "tainted," but that is deplorable fastidiousness. The proper view of the thing is that whatever the owner of the money did in getting it the wealth is his now, and he might do worse still j with it; whereas by taking it from him you ensure that it will be put to I good use.