Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1884-09-21
Moral Character in Politics

Professor SEgLYE, Of Amherst College,
was one OF the first Republicans to bolt the
nomination Of Mr. BLAINE and declare his
intention 10 support Mr.. CLEVELAND.
Subsequently. when the " CLEVELAND scan
dal" was published, he retracted bis sup
Port Of that gentleman, and when the New
York Independents held their meeting he
made an earnest effort 10 induce them TO
nominate a candidate Of their own. In
this be sigually failed, yet he has not given
up the fight. In the October number OF
the North american Reviep he explains
his position and presents his views on the
Political situation In an eight-page article
entitled "Moral Character In Politics"
Under the Tri6une's classification OF the
different political elements Of the country
that journal would. we suppose, term Pro.
lessor SgELYE a balf-breed Phsrisee or q
semi.dude; as il regards every one that
does not deem Mr.. BLAINE immaculate
fit subject for some spprobrlous epithet.
However. Professor SEELYE is nothing OF
the kind. He Is political purist, and
though we have not seen his entire article,
excerpt from 1t bsve come under our OBJ
sefyatlon that convince us he Is coDscien-
tious. The only trouble about Professor
SEELYE Is that like most theorists bis
ideas are not practical. While star
gszing be has fallen into ditch. When
We consider the political situation prsc-
ticaIIy his general argument for reform
Is a special argument against Mr.. BLAINE
and IN favor OF Mr.. CLEVELAND. Professor
sEELYE starts out with the postulate that
there Ia no real issue between the two great
PARTIES. This is palpably wrong unless
Professor SEELYg considers nothing but
great economic question an issue. The
issue is simply honesty or dishonesty, which
from his standpoint should be aparanount
issue. The question is whether the Adj
ministration shall go into the hands OF q
party which gives every guarantee OF
reform or be retained by party which for
twenty years has been rioting in corrup-
ton. But this IS not the especial point in
Professor SEELYE's article to which we
would call attention. "The first qualityof
craftsmanship he says, lis moral. The
statesman needs first of all that he himself
tie upright. A good will, clear and firm. il
his best endowment. lie needs. of course.
high gifts OF intellect--understand Of his
times, like the men Of Issacher, that be may
know what the people ought to do.' Pro-
fessor SEELYE then goes on TO say that il is
not safe suo confer great trust on an i'm
pure man." "A man." he adds, "cannot
lie unqualifedly trusted with anything II
bis virtue cannot be trusted" He believes,
says Republican contemporary. in the
doctrine Of tdlSuS in unO faiSus in omnibus.
As we have stated on several occasions
we tske no heart in the scandals OF the cam
paign affecting the private character OF the
candidates. But, admitting that CLEyE-
LANDS private life has not been pure, and
remembering that either CLEVELAND or
BLAINE must be elected. we would
ask which comes nearest to Professor
SEKLYE's standard. Nay, to so fur
Their, and for the sake OF argu.
ment, admit that the situation presents a
choice OF evils, what does Professor SEELYE
say TO the honest man We think that in
the hight of MIR. BLAINE's whole public
record, and particularly in the light Of the
new MULLIGAN letters, there can be but
one answer to that question. II Professor
SEELYE's idea was practicable his argument
might be all right, but in this instance
ali" is mighty big word, and turns the
whole course OF his logic to strengthen the
Democratic party. Mr.. CLEVELAND can
well afford opposition that takes the shape
Of Professor SEBLYE's il Mr.. BLAINE can.