The Atlanta constitution., 1900-04-30
a Question of Morality,

Massachusetts statesman anu W P0i
ceive that there is something wrohs
somewhere. Thereupon the editor slts
down after dinner and writes an essay
on Taking Politics Seriously.
This ESSAY we have read with some
care and we cannot but feel that the
editor misses the real point at issue
between Hoar the patriot, and fioaf
the politician. OF Mr.. Mckinley poi
lev Senator Hoar remarked that IL
means "the abandonment OF the prln-
ciples upon which our government is
founded" OF the arguments and rea-
sons which the president has from
time to time put forth in support OF
his policy. the Massachusetts senator
declares that they represent tine doc-
trine of unrest rufiianism and tyran-
nv" Moreover, the senator announced
that Mr.. McKinley's reasoning on the
consent OF tho governed would have
been received with a burst OF derislve
laughter in hell, and Satan himself
would have led the chorus
Now what The Evening Post COM
plains of is that in spite of this merry
breathing. Mr.. Mckinley retains his
place in the senator's disturbed mind
as tho great president" who holds a
place in the affections of the people at
large which none of his predecessors
ever attained in his lifetime This,
the editor OF The Evening Post 'can
but think is an example of the Amer
lean want of high seriousness in poll
tics" Furthermore, lit lends point to
the charge of foreign critics that Amer
leans are lowered with too fatal gift
OF good nature to keep their political
life pure"
The editor then refers to t. rupture
between Burke and Fox, and to the at
titude of Calhoun, who refused to as
sociate with men whom he believed to
be plotting the ruin of the country,
and finally asks if nothing should be
said of the growth of tolerance. Some
thing. certainly, he admits, and this
everybody will admit; but he goes on
to say that offensive personalities in
politics are the only sure means of es-
tablishing responsibility, and RESPONSE
bility is the breath of life of free gov
ernment."
We have tried III Vain to hitch this
essay OF the editor OF The Evening
Post to the attitude Of Senator Hoar.
The hook is there, but no hasp is visi-
bic. Our conclusion therefore is that
our contemporary has felt it necessary
TO his comfort TO ignore the really vi
tai meaning OF Senator Hoars speech
when compared with his attitude. The
suggestion in regard to offensive per-
sonalities in politics" has nothing
hn mo
fensive personalities" are not argu-
ments. They are as foolish and as dis
tasteful in politics as they are In pri-
vate life They advance no cause and
are usually symptom of weakness
and folly.
Senator Hoar could not possibly
prove that he is right and the presi-
dent wrong by indulging in personal
abuse. Such an exhibition on the part
of a man of his years and experience
would create amusement where 1T dld
not give rise to disgust. No; the editor
Of The Evening Post is miles away
from the real weakness OF Senator
IIoar's speech. and from the real pesti-
lence that infects republican politics.
The one thing necessary for man.
either in public or in private life, to
achieve respect for his convictions and
q thoughtful consideration OF his VIEWS
is to act upon them. That is not only
the supreme test of his honesty and
earnestness. but it is the gauge by
which his utterances will be measured.
The speech OF Senator HOar. we do
not hesitate to say, Is one of the most
domoraliZing and immoral addresses
that has ever been delivered in TINS
country. 1t is calculated TO SOW dead
ly poison in the minds OF the young
men in New England, where the name
OF the senator stands for the highest
ideals in what may be called partisan
politics.
This speech. then, is worse than de-
moraliZing, and, to the extent Oh the
impression it makes on the minds OF
young men, the senator has delivered
a deadlier blow at 'the principles on
which our government is founded
than ANYTHING that Mr.. Mckinley has
done or possibly can do. The presl-
dents efforts can be counteracted by
the peopla or corrected by the supreme
court: the poison that Senator ioar
has sown in the minds Of those who
look up to him as an exemplar can
never ba completely eradicated.
And this is true. not because senator
Hoar has failed to make the president
the object OF his personalities, but be-
cause he has denounced a certain line
OF policy and in the same breath mas
made it clear that that policy is good
enough for him. 1t is "ruffianism and
tyranny" but these things are not suf-
ficient to drive him to act upon his
convictions and oppose the "rufiians
and "tyrants." on the contrary, he will
act with them. and by giving them his
support will enable them to carry out
their "ruffianism and tyranny" as far
as they can.
This is the poison that Senator Hoar
spreads all about him; that convic-
tions no matter how firmly held, or
how important they may be, are not
to be acted on if there are any serious
obstacles in the way. They may be
publicly advertised; they may be EN-.
Moved as the basis of defamation, or
they NAV serve as the framework of
SNOWY rhetoric; but farther than this
they need not carry man. What par
ticular lesson does the speech Of the
Massachusetts senator teach the young
r,an of tho country who are amenable