E-text prepared by the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from digital material generously made available by Internet Archive/American Libraries (http://www.archive.org/details/americana) Note: Images of the original pages are available through Internet Archive/American Libraries. See http://www.archive.org/details/newyorkstockexch00kahnrich THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE AND PUBLIC OPINION by OTTO H. KAHN Remarks at Annual Dinner Association of Stock Exchange Brokers Held at the Astor Hotel, New York January 24, 1917 Published by The New York Stock Exchange The New York Stock Exchange A couple of weeks ago I went to Washington to contradict under the solemn obligation of my oath a gross and wanton calumny which, based upon nothing but anonymous and irresponsible gossip, had been uttered regarding my name. On my way between New York and Washington, thinking that, once on the stand, I might possibly be asked a number of questions more or less within the general scope of the Committee's enquiry, I indulged in a little mental exercise by putting myself through an imaginary examination. With your permission, I will read a few of these phantom questions and answers: Should the Exchange Be "Regulated"? Question: _There is a fairly widespread impression that the functions of the Stock Exchange should be circumscribed and controlled by some governmental authority; that it needs reforming from without. What have you to say on that subject?_ Answer: I need not point out to your Committee the necessity of differentiating between the Stock Exchange as such and those who use the Stock Exchange. Most of the complaints against the Stock Exchange arise from the action of those outside of its organization and over whose conduct it has no control. No doubt there have at times been shortcomings and laxity of methods in the administration of the Stock Exchange just as there have been in every other institution administered by human hands and brains. [Sidenote: _Should the Exchange be regulated?_] Some things were, if not approved, at least tolerated in the past which are not in accord with the ethical conception of to-day. The same thing can be said of almost every other institution, even of Congress. Until a few years ago, the acceptance of campaign contributions from corporations, the acceptance of railroad passes by Congressmen and Senators were regular practices which did not shock the conscience either of the recipients or of the public. Now they have rightly been made and are looked upon as crimes. Ethical conceptions change; the limits of what is morally permissible are drawn tighter. That is the normal process by which civilization moves forward.