“It will be observed that there were two Goulds--Gould the man of affairs and Gould the man of family. In all his domestic relations his life was pure, his nature affectionate. No criticism can touch him in his home life. There he was above reproach. Toward the end of his life his dual nature seemed to blend into one. He became more conservative in business, more solicitous, apparently, of the good will and good opinion of his fellowmen, more careful to keep within the bounds of strict business morality, less audacious in his methods. For should it be forgotten that however much Gould’s public career may be justly subject to criticism, much that he did was indirectly for the public benefit? For instance, he developed properties that enriched wide sections of the country. No review of his career would be complete without this acknowledgement.” Jay Gould will be remembered not for the good that he has done, not for the happiness he has given, but for the enormity of the fortune that he acquired. If his heirs apply to better ends than he did, the wealth that they have received from him, they may be better remembered. If they should dissipate the fortune, it might then fall into the possession of those who would do good with it. As it has been before, the life and fortune of Jay Gould have been a constant example always in readiness to be brought forward by those who find evil in our financial system. It is to be hoped that better things will now come from it. FINIS. Transcriber’s Notes Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in the original book; otherwise they were not changed. Simple typographical errors were corrected; unbalanced quotation marks were remedied when the change was obvious, but several remain unbalanced. Illustrations in this eBook have been positioned between paragraphs and outside quotations. In versions of this eBook that support hyperlinks, the page references in the List of Illustrations lead to the corresponding illustrations. Page 68: “The ‘legal account, was of an india-rubber character” was printed that way, with a single quote mark and a comma. Transcriber believes the comma may be a misaligned closing single quote mark.