, 1878-05-24
The Men Who Discredit Character.

II is useless TO seek excuses and eNten-
uatiOus for the crimes in unexpected
quarters that have shocked the public
sentiment, The way TO prevent them is
TO show possible offenders of this kind
that no gloling or theorizing or explana-
ton will avail 10 conceal the fact of vul.
gar swindling The career of James
Fisk was an illustration of the condition
of the public mind that encourages
frauds and dishonesty of every kind. He
was known reprobate, but he was treat
ed with perfect good humor. His say
ings and doings were gaily reported. He
was, as Cicero described Catline, cor
ruptor Of youth, but he was treated as u
Joke. Now, If people, under sore stress
Of temptation TO steal, see that the mere
reputation Of great riches secures kind
of jesting immunity from censure, they
will probably steal.
The more intelligent man is, and the
more familiar with pure aud refined intlu-
ence, thegreater is his guilt when he yields
to the sophistry that ruins him. Heatleast
can measure not only the gross outward
consequences of his otfense, the unspeak.
able sorrow and shame of his family, the
loss and embarrassment and disaster of
his friends and those who have trusted
him, but the moral results, the loss of
faith and honesty, and the suspicion that
almost threatens the best character, the
cyncism that sneers at all effort toward
cleaner ways of life, and even at all
praise Of it. This is, perhaps, the worst
effect of these frequent frauds among in
telligent and respectable persons, that
they sharpen sneer at virtue itself.
Scotfers are emboldened to stigmstize all
good endeavor as hypocrisy; and to call
a man a goody- -goody, or to sneer at him
as reformer, too good for this world,
and so pure that even the heavenly Iave-
ment would smirch his garments, is sc-
tually to discredit him in many minds.
A late estimate of Sir Robert Walpole
says, shrewdly, in estimating his intiu.
ence over the men of his time: "He pre-
tended to no elevation Of character; there
was no sentiment in his politics; but his
contemporaries snecred at elevation of
character, and were cynically contemptu-
GUS of sentiment. Except at those Pc
riods of history when the influence of
great ideas has raised men for time
above the common level of humanity, as
was the case in the Puritan period, moral
tlatness is positive recommendation
with the great body of practical men,"
This feeling and tendency are promoted
by nothing more than by the crimes and
fall of men Of the highest standing.
Their fate fosters distrust of the express
sion of noble ideas as cant, and of heroic
endeavor as sentimental folly. The same
critic Of Walpole says, felicitously, that
in his time ian honest man meant one
who honestly disclaimed elevation of
purpose"
We are familiar in our day with the
standard. We all know the man who
does not pretend to be any better than
other men, who hopes that he is as honest
as his fellows, and who is satisfied with
something less than the millennium. His
sneer Is gratifying to the great mass of
men who accept the common standards
of conduct and the usual practices of
those around them, and who do so be-
cause stepping up is always more difficult
than slipping along. The suggestion Of
progress is always disagreeable to those
who are content to stand still, especially
if conscience re enforces the argument of
progress. And such people welcome
eagerly sneer which implies that the
advocate Of progress is selfish Nav
worm. "Jm Fisk" could have turned
tie laugh of his comrades on John Mil
ton. But that was of little Importance
until John Milton should justify the
sneer Then it would become general
calamity, And this is precisely what the
respectable criminals Of the last year have
done. They have discredited character
itself, and made the appeal to it feebler
- Harper'S Magazine.