A COUPLE OF UNCLEAN COYOTES.

There are times when language seems made, as Talleyrand would

say, to conceal thought; times when in no known tongue can one

body forth his indignation or express a tithe of his contempt--he

gropes in vain for invectives that bear upon their sulphurous

wings an adumbration of his anger. One must sometimes stand

speechless before a subject, else burn his lips with blasphemy or

befoul them with billingsgate. Two months ago my attention was

called to a precious pair of attorneys at San Antonio, Texas, who

seem to have not only touched the profoundest depths of

subter-brutish degradation, but to have wallowed there like swine

in an open sewer, proud of their own dishonor, infatuated with

their rank disgrace. Time and again I have been requested to hold

them up to the scorn of human-kind, and time and again I have

essayed the subject only to find the product of my pen

unprintable--it would have melted the type and burned a hole in

an asbestos mailbag. But indignation cools as the days run,

philosophy asserts itself, and perchance I can speak of these

offenders in language sufficiently polite to escape the attention

of the police. The facts may be summarized as follows: A modest,

well-behaved German girl named Wulff was brutally assaulted and

raped on a lonely road by a negro named Robinson, who decoyed her

to the place of her undoing by telling her mother that he had

been commissioned by a reputable white woman to secure a

serving-maid. His victim dragged herself back to her mother's

door, and, half dead with grief and fright, related the awful

story of her despoilment. The lying coon was apprehended and

tried for his hellish crime. There could not be the slightest

doubt regarding his guilt. He was fully identified. His general

bad character was amply proven. The doctors declared that the

child had been forcibly despoiled. The neighbors testified that

she had returned to her home with torn and muddy clothing, half

strangled and crying. The good character of plaintiff was

demonstrated beyond peradventure of a doubt. Yet in San Antonio,

that Mecca of Southern chivalry, there stood forth two

white-skinned lawyers to defend the lecher. These were McAnderson

and E. D. Henry. Do not forget these names--they represent the

sum and crown of infamy. They are names with which to conjure

evil spirits. By one shameful act they have been "damned to

everlasting fame." Henceforth when babes are naughty their

mothers will affright them with these foul bogey-men. In almighty

Milton's catalogue of unclean demons there is naught so damnable.

These two champions of a rape-fiend first attempted to establish

an alibi, to prove that the girl was lying about their

sweet-scented protege--that she was laying claim to a sexual

distinction which she did not deserve. That having failed

miserably, the attorneys changed their tactics. They knew that

their client was guilty, yet were anxious to turn the black son

of Perdition loose upon society. They admitted that he had

debauched the girl, but insisted that it was with her

consent--that this modest little German maid was the black

brute's mistress. They scared up a brace of worthless brutes who

testified to having seen plaintiff bathing naked in a creek with

the prisoner at the bar. It was quickly demonstrated that these

fellows were guilty of deliberate falsehood. The perjured

witnesses were impeached. To say that defendant's attorneys did

not know when they placed these witnesses on the stand that they

would exploit a foul calumny cooked up for the occasion, were to

brand them as hopeless fools. If they did know it they were

knaves--and they are welcome to impale themselves on either horn

of the dilemma they like. They next attempted to badger and

browbeat the poor girl into an admission that she had made an

assignation with the Senegambian. The local papers in reporting

the case said the language used by these chivalrous (?) Southern

gentlemen to the plaintiff was unprintable. They secured no

admission of guilt--not one word that could be distorted to her

discredit; but they did succeed in driving the child into

hysterics with their brutal insults and damnable innuendos.

Remember that this was not Muckle-Mouth Meg who was thus publicly

accused of criminal intimacy with a coon, but a 16-year old maid

of respectable family who was seeking a situation as housemaid to

assist her mother. But the foul-mouthed and foul-minded creatures

who had undertaken to save the neck of the ravisher cared naught

for a young girl's reputation. The villain Robinson was given a

life-term in the penitentiary--and his attorneys expressed

themselves as "satisfied with the verdict." Why were they

satisfied? Because they knew that their client deserved to hang

like a sheep-stealing hound. It was a brutal confession that in

questioning the good name of Miss Wulff, in branding her as the

mistress of a black, they were guilty of a more heinous crime

than the beast who defiled her body. And this actually happened

in San Antonio, a city whose very name thrills every fibre of

American manhood--a city from whose turrets the flags of five

nations have proudly fluttered--a city whose every foot of soil

has been time and again baptised with the blood of the brave--a

city that twice within the century has put Thermopylae to shame!

Yet I am told that these unclean birds, who befoul so fair a nest

are allowed to live in San Antonio, to walk her streets, to elbow

her proud sons and look her proud daughters in the face! How have

the mighty fallen! There was a time when to have breathed a word

against the good name of an honest girl, howsoever humble, would

have meant the bowie-knife's fearful plunge and a dead face

staring at the stars. It were curious to reflect what would have

happened had the victim of Ethiopian lust been Lady Vere de Vere

instead of a scullery maid! What would have happened? Why, the

brute would have been torn limb from limb and his carcass fed to

the buzzards, while any man who dared hint that she was his

paramour would have been hanged higher than Haman. "The trail of

the serpent is over us all," the golden calf has become our

supreme god, and even in the South it now matters much whether a

woman seeking justice be clothed in gowns of Worth or

linsey-wolsey.

I once discovered in Massachusetts what I considered to be the

world's meanest man. It was Rev. Spenser B. Meeser, engineer of a

Worcester gospel-mill. He was a beggar's brat who had been

clothed, fed and educated by old Stephen Girard's bounty, but

when he grew to manhood--or doghood--he puked on the grave of his

benefactor because the latter elected to be an Atheist instead of

a bigoted Baptist. I could not at the time conceive of anything

meaner wearing the name of man, of a crime blacker than base

ingratitude, of aught more damnable than calumniation of the

honored dead; but Massachusetts will have to surrender the

pennant of infamy to the South. Texas has succeeded in producing

two men, either of whom is infinitely meaner than Meeser. The

latter did no more than insult the memory of the man whose bread

he had broken, and he did this as an excuse for not contributing

a little money towards building him a monument. The meanness of

Meeser was solely mercenary--he found it easier to slander the

dead than to give up a dollar. The San Antonio lawyers sought to

turn a black rape-fiend loose to defile the women of the South,

to endanger their own daughters; and to perpetrate this crime

strove with tooth and nail to commit one even more damnable.

Fifty years ago Macaulay wrote of Bertrand Barere: "When we put

everything together, poltroonery, baseness, effrontery,

mendacity, barbarity, the result is something which in a novel we

should condemn as caricature, and to which, we venture to say, no

parallel can be found in history." It is indeed a pity the great

essayist did not live to contemplate this pair of Texas

attorneys. He would have learned, doubtless to his surprise, that

"the Anacreon of the guillotine" was a pretty decent fellow--by

comparison. Barere was a monster born of a reign of blood. He

gave the friends of his youth to the guillotine. So terrible was

his savagery that he became known as "the Witling of Terror." He

was an able-bodied and enterprising liar who never told the truth

unless by accident; but in his most demoniac moods it did not

occur to him to prove recreant to his race, to torture children

that he might enjoy their agony, to brand innocent girls, who

could scarce look upon their own budding bosoms without a blush,

as the depraved paramours of syphilitic Senegambians. Ah

Macaulay! from thy Seventh Heaven, reserved for the lords of

intellect--the children of genius, who needs must be the

favorites of Omniscience--shake down a drop of cold water upon

the blistered lips of Bertrand Barere, for they did not frame the

supreme falsehood--nor did he strive to unchain a black lecher

that he might imperil the honor of the ladies of his native land.

Despite all his sin and shame, he would have looked upon that

dishonored daughter of the Caucasian race and cried for

vengeance.

Carlyle, greatest of critics, the supreme lord of

literature--that Scottish Arcturus before whom even Shakespeare's

glorious star pals its ineffectual fires--awards the palm of

correlated cussedness to Cagliostro; yet the "count" was merely a

successful swindler and professional pander. He plucked rich

dupes, but I find not in his long catalogue of crime that he

slandered youthful serving maids--for a consideration. He was

advocate for many an unclean thing, but it is not recorded that

he ever took a fee from a negro rape-fiend--that he ever defended

a lecherous son of Ham who had dared raise his wolfish eyes to

the fair face of Japhet's humblest daughter. Even when put on

trial for his own worthless life he did not seek to save himself

by the perjured testimony of the sons of slaves.

Cagliostro, Barere and Meeser--the positive, comparative and

superlative of infamy hitherto! but we must turn to "Grand old

Texas" to find unblushing effrontry and irremediable rascality.

Some months ago a creature named Otis, who conducts somewhere in

Southern California a putrid abortion miscalled a newspaper,

declared in his columns that Southern women are often paramours

of black bucks, and that the frequent lynching of so-called

rape-fiends are due to discovery of these unnatural liaisons. But

as Otis commanded a company of coons during the war--a job which

no gentleman would have accepted to save his immortal soul--and

as he has a head shaped like a gourd and a face strongly

suggestive of a degenerate simian, his foolish lies only produced

a general laugh; yet here are two alleged Southern gentlemen,

certifying in open court that Otis' cowardly falsehoods have a

broad foundation of fact! In the whole world's history there is

but one other instance of such shameless infamy, and that too

belongs to Texas. When the 14-year old "ward of the Baptist

church" was debauched at its chief storm center of bigotry and

bile, Baylor University, the sweet scented son-in-law of

President Burleson tried to make it appear that she was enciente

by a Senegambian--that young and innocent girls committed to its

care were so poorly guarded that it was possible for them to have

nigger babies!--Yet this defamer of Baptist womanhood has not yet

been introduced to a rope by the male students, attacked from the

rear by Baylor trustees, or told to leave town! Fortunately the

young lady was able to refute this slander of the University and

its inmates by putting a white baby in evidence--the pickaninny

specialty having been reserved by Providence for the manager of

the Baptist missionary board.

One cannot help asking if Miss Wulff has no male relatives, or if

gunpowder is no longer sold in the Alamo City. As I understand

it, her people are late from the Fatherland--have yet to learn

that in some cases society expects a man to overlook the law, to

kill as unclean curs those who thus defame a female member of

their family. It is possible that there are other shyster lawyers

as mean, other bipedal coyotes as contemptible as those under

consideration; but if so they have not yet been called to the

attention of the ICONOCLAST. True it is, however, that the

average attorney cares more for victory than for virtue.

Howsoever honest and upright he may be in private life, the

moment he enters the court-room he becomes an unnatural monster,

willing to accept the devil as client and win his case at any

cost. It is likewise true that the courts allow too large a

liberty to lawyers in the examination of witnesses for the

opposition, permitting them to call in question the honor of men

of well-known probity and cast suspicion on the character of

women full as good as their wives in order to make an impression

on the jury that will redound to the interest of cut-throat

clients. It has come to such a pass in this so-called chivalrous

country that sensitive women will submit to almost any wrong

rather than seek redress in our courts of law, where they are

liable to be subjected to studied insult by unconscionable

shysters. It were well for the people to take this matter in hand

and make it plain to all concerned that courts do not exist for

the express purpose of enabling blackguard lawyers to pocket fat

fees for aiding professional criminals to escape the legitimate

consequence of their crimes, but to secure even and exact

justice--to insist that henceforth these legal parasites be

compelled to treat them with common courtesy. It might be well

for the South to vary the program by lynching fewer rape-fiends

and more shysters lawyers.

* * *

COINING BLOOD INTO BOODLE.

Some months ago the ICONOCLAST paid its respects to the old line

insurance companies. It demonstrated beyond the peradventure of a

doubt that they are but so many cut-throat gambling concerns. It

proved that they are consuming the substance of the people by

returning in satisfaction of matured policies about one-third

what they collect in premiums. Of course, the expose aroused the

ban-dogs of Dives, and they made the welkin ring from Tadmor in

the wilderness to Yuba Dam. The ICONOCLAST became a target for

oodles of cheap wit and barrels of black-guardism by the

journalistic organ-grinders for the insurance buccaneers; but as

yet none of the megalophanous-mouthed micrococci have attempted

to answer its arguments or to demonstrate that the indictment was

too drastic. A gentleman who has made an exhaustive study of the

insurance problem sends me some valuable data which I propose to

draw upon from time to time, not with the expectation of making

high-toned thieves ashamed of themselves and thereby effecting

their reformation, but to keep their newspaper panders and

potwallopers snarling and snapping until general attention is

attracted to the consummate meanness of their masters and thereby

curtail somewhat their powers of despoilation. The old line life

insurance fake is the most colossal scheme of predacity known to

human history. Enough money is annually filched from the people

to clothe every pauper like unto Solomon in all his glory and

feed him upon the fat of the land. Millions of Americans are

today denying themselves creature comforts to pay premiums on

policies that will never yield their dependents one penny. The

old line fraud flourishes simply because, in the language of the

erstwhile P. T. Barnum, the American people love to be hood-dooed

and humbugged. I do not by this mean to reflect upon the

commercial integrity of all men soliciting old line insurance.

Many of them are elegant gentlemen who have engaged, quite

unconsciously, in very bad business. The Deity should forgive

them for they know not what they do. They really believe that

they are engaged in a work of philanthropy, while devoting their

best energies to the promotion of a fraud. The average

policy-holder knows little or nothing about life- insurance. He

desires to provide for his dependants; but being unable to

accumulate much property, he scrapes and saves and pays to some

remorseless robber all his surplus money. He wants to be doubly

sure that the company is solvent and will remain so, hence he

selects one boasting enormous "assets." It does not once occur to

him that the aforesaid assets have been accumulated in a very few

years by bumping the heads of other suckers. He pays the rate

prescribed without considering whether it be high enough to keep

the company solvent or low enough to stamp his investment as

commercial sanity. He is little concerned about "dividends," but

wants to be assured that at the time of his death his heirs will

be paid a certain number of dollars. So he goes up against a

mammoth slot-machine which absorbs dollars while it rolls out

dimes. He knows that the widow so-and-so was paid so much

insurance, and takes it for granted that it is a good thing. He

sees the little pile of coin poured into her lap, but he does not

see the greedy hands of the corporation despoiling a hundred

pockets to make up treble the amount. He hears much about what

the Flim- Flam Life Insurance Co. has paid on policies, but

nothing about what it has collected in premiums. So he makes his

old threadbare coat do for another decade, lets his wife go

without a new gown, feeds his children on slapjacks and sop and

surrenders for life insurance the surplus thus saved. No "cheap

insurance" for him!--he wants to get into a "time-tried"

financial Gibralter. He is told by the agent of an old liner of

its enormous "legal reserve," and innocently supposes this to be

a portion of its available assets--the one thing which makes it

"solid." He contemplates a long array of figures and assumes that

Old Mortality might sweep the land with War or pestilence without

affecting the solvency of his patron saint. The agent neglects to

inform him that the "legal reserve," which looms up like a

seventy four in a fog, cannot be utilized in the discharge of

death-claims, that insofar as the average policy holder is

concerned it is simply a beautiful legend on an advertising

blotter. When I was editor of the San Antonio Express the

philanthropic proprietor gave me a block of land in the city of

Laredo in lieu of a raise of salary, but neglected to supply me

with a deed to same. The land is mine, all right enough, but is

no part of my available assets--it's my "legal reserve." Like its

insurance namesake, it's a liability to the exact extent that

it's an asset. It is an awfully nice thing to have, but adds

never a cent to my solvency. My correspondent points out that it

costs policy holders in old line companies more to maintain the

legal reserve than it does to provide for losses by death, and

adds that this is proven by the fact that all such companies

doing business in the State of New York must have on hand in

cash, or in invested assets approved by the insurance department,

the reserve belonging to all the policies which they have in

force. This means that they must retain or keep invested a sum

equal to about two-thirds of all the premiums paid on all

existing policies. The moment they part with any portion of this

reserve for any purpose whatsoever, they are declared insolvent

and wound up by a receiver. In other words, the corporation is

d----d if it does and the policy holder is d----d if it doesn't.

That the latter gets the sulphur bath goes without saying. The

four largest old system companies doing business in New York had,

on Jan. 1, 1893, $48,265,798 more in legal reserve than the total

amount which they have paid in death losses and endowments during

their entire existence! With this fact before him, how in the

name of heaven any sane man can be induced by an old system

company to enact the role of sucker surpasses my comprehension.

Five years ago the net assets of the largest old line life

insurance company in the world amounted to $165,000,000, of which

more than $158,000,000 was legal reserve. Had a shrinkage of 10

per cent occurred in the value of its investments its reserve

would have been impaired and the corporation declared insolvent.

So long ago as 1878 the Union Mutual Life Insurance Co.

acknowledged over the signatures of its general officers that it

had collected from its policy holders more than $45,000,000

"beyond the necessities of our business." It felt so badly about

this that it proceeded to raise the cost of management from $5 to

$11.57 on the $1,000 and shove up the premium something more than

20 per cent! It is believed that the gutta percha conscience of

the general officers is now reasonably easy--that "the

necessities of our business" are not on a parity with the ability

of the corporation to yank the legs of the guileless yap. In 1873

this company paid in dividends $29 on each $1,000 insurance in

force; in 1895 it paid--despite the increased cost of

premiums--but $2.16. All the old line companies, so far as I

know, have been increasing premiums and cost of management while

decreasing dividends. "Loading" is another scheme by which all

old line or legal reserve companies rob the people. "Loading"

means simply the placing of a sufficient burden on the patron to

freeze him out before maturity of his policy and enable the

company to pocket all he has paid in premiums. The idea of the

old liners is to squeeze a victim dry and get rid of him--to

"load" him until his financial back is broken. That the system is

proven by the fact that only one policy in seven is ever paid.

Six out of every seven people who insure in the old line

companies pay heavy premiums for a longer or shorter period and

never receive back a cent. They lie down under their "load." By

such methods these systematic blood-suckers acquire those vast

assets that make them so "solvent." By such practices they are

enabled to pay $75,000 salaries to their presidents while the

chief magistrate of the Republic must worry along on less money.

By the pernicious system of "loading" a patron is charged four

times as much for operating expenses at 60 years of age as he is

charged at 25, although it costs the same to collect his premiums

and furnish a receipt therefor. The idea is that the older he

grows the more likely he is to prove a loss to the company,

hence his burden is made too grievous to be borne. Life insurance

should be a public blessing instead of a bane. Properly applied

it would well-nigh eliminate pauperism. As matters now stand it

is too often a promoter of poverty instead of a preventative. To

shelter one family the old line companies turn two or more into

the street. To feed the few they starve the many. They coldly

speculate in the holiest affections of the human heart. They

remorselessly coin blood into boodle. They wring the last

farthing from the thin purse of labor for their own enrichment.

They obtain patronage of the ignorant by false pretenses. They

permit the people to regard their legal reserve as available for

all purposes. They parade eight and nine-figure assets as things

to be proud of, when they are in reality the fruits of shameless

despoiliation of the poor. They pose as benevolent institutions

while the land is filled with those whom they have robbed and

wrecked. The government should suppress these eminently

respectable gambling games. They have caused more sorrow,

destitution and crime than all the cards and dice this side of

the dark dominion of the devil. The horse-leech's daughters

should be pulled off the body politic. Not only should the

government suppress these shameless skin games which collect gold

and distribute copper, but it should supply life insurance to

heads of families at cost and make it compulsory. It should be an

offense against the law, punishable by imprisonment for a man to

bring a child into the world without first providing for its

support in case of his death or disability, and in no other way

can the poor so easily make such provision as by a system of life

insurance conducted for the benefit of the many instead of the

enrichment of the few.

The Complete Works of Brann, the Iconoclast — Volume 10 · 第 23 / 24 题