can withdraw his interests to Mexico, should the suit against Mr. Stanford be successful. Meanwhile, by the way, the question is tested for him at the expense of the Stanford estate, the railroad interests of which are in his hands as president of the road. . . .
It is believed by all jurists whom we have consulted, that the government has no case. The limitation of three years being an integral part of the statute in question, must hold against the government as against others. Furthermore, the aid extended by the government was not a debt incurred in business of the corporation.
However this may be, the courts will decide justly. Our anxiety is that they may decide speedily.
As to the various criticisms which you mention, permit me a word. In all personal matters, Mr. Stanford was perfectly truthful and just. Except in matters pertaining to the division of the earnings and bonds of the Central Pacific and the fact that its affairs were not made public, I have never heard his railroad career seriously criticized. In California, he had a very wide following among the best men, men who liked and respected him, not on account of his wealth and railroad connections, but rather in spite of them. In all the railroad war through which this state is passing, no responsible person has uttered a slur against Mr. Stanford or against the university.
It is not true that Mr. Stanford pretended to give the university a dollar more than he gave. He gave the three farms, formerly valued at $5,000,000, in these times worth much less; all the movable stock upon them, about $1,000,000 more; the university buildings costing $1,250,000; and by will $2,500,000 in cash. It was agreed by Mr. and Mrs. Stanford that each should be the residuary legatee of the other, and that whichever should survive should devote the rest of his or her life and estate to the university. The Stanford estate is therefore the university's endowment. Not in law but in fact the estate is the university. It was Mr. Stanford's feeling, and I was fully aware of it, that should his wife survive him, she should be free to endow the university and to control it as he had done. No one has ever struggled more loyally to do so than Mrs. Stanford. Since her husband died we have not received a dollar of his money, but the university has gone on without check or hindrance, though at times she has been forced to give up luxuries and to limit her expenses in every conceivable way. As a matter of fact, she has each year given me a personal bond for all she thinks that she can raise from the farms and from her own small personal property. Her devotion to the work is absolute and she is giving her life to it. When she loses, she will die.
The lands are unsalable only because the deed of gift prohibits their sale. In Mr. Stanford's lifetime they were conducted as parks. When they came into our hands, their products fell short by $10,000 to $20,000 per month of meeting the pay-rolls. This year under Mrs. Stanford's direction, they have yielded upwards of $150,000 above expenses. The sale of colts is a source of revenue now that the reputation of the Palo Alto stud is made.
No cash has ever been set aside in advance, for very simple reasons. I could not ask for it. Mr. Stanford was not expecting sudden death, financial panics, nor an attack from the government. He paid in cash all salaries and all bills, placed no limits on me, and on his sudden death left no debts against the university. There are now no debts left against his estate, which is appraised at $17,000,000, except the government claim which acts as an injunction tying everything up. It is not true that Mr. Stanford tried to "rear a personal monument by a good use of ill-gotten money." No one ever gave money in a more generous spirit, and there have not been many great givers who placed so