The Washington times., 1908-09-20
with a Rake in His Hand.

Muck-rakers have their champions at
last. Within the month two persuasive
articles in their behalf have appeared
one from an outside source, John O'Hara
Cosgrave; the other from truly an in
side source Dton Utopia Sinclair For
the first, the serious reader will say
"Aluch thanks" The second is not so
easy to classify.
Says Mr.. Sinclair of the NIuck-raker:
He believes that he serves a vital
function IN society; that he Is no less
than the faculty Of recollection in
the growing social mind. He is the
particular nerve-ceN IN the burned
child which cries out to the child, DO
not put your finger into the IRE again!
He represents the effort Of the race to
profit by experience. and TO do other
wise than repeat indefinitely the blum
ders which have proved fatal in the
past
The danger of agitatiOns like that
which produced the Presidents caution
at the laying of the cornerstone of the
House Office building does not lie in
purpose to expose wrongdoing. I'm
pleasant as that task may be, dis
tasteful as it nearly always Is, easier
as it would be to be Optimistic" and
smile vacuously while the CRATER sits
stoIidly in his seat, the man who rouses
his fellows to the punishment of their
faithless servants does an important
and manifest public service.
This was evidently the purpose Of
Lincoln StefTens, Ray Stannard Baker,
Samuel Hopkins Adams, Charles Z.
Russell, VIII Irwin, William Hard,
Henry Beach Needham-yes and David
Graham Phillips and Mr.. Sinclair. There
was much material at their elbows.
Hardly any Of them went out on
hunt for it. Each, with some special
source of information, had the con-
seriousness of a trust betrayed borne
in upon him until his search was not
for information but for editors sympa-
thetic to expose the wrong. The good
they helped to do is proof that the
field was only too ready for their Ia
bors. As Mr.. Cosgrave states it, they
have been the greatest single factor in
tLe awakening of the national con-
science"
But such of them as have merited
the title "muck-raker" did not stop
with condemning the things men did.
They condemned the men. They in
fused a certain kind of "reminiscences
into their writings. They gave sig
nificanee where none belonged and lifted
acts-in themselves either not clearly
wrong OF comparatively unimportaat-
into offenses of the deepest dye All
this might be done, and often was done,
without the misstatement of single
item of information, but rather by
means of overemphasis, or wrong en-
phasis, or simple disproportion, as An
tony did it when he iterated and re-
iterated, so were they all: honorable
men,"
In the list of such offenders it Is only
fair to name Mr.. Sinclair and Mr..
Phillips. Similarly it is but simple JUS
tice to exclude Mr.. Adams, Mr.. Baker,
and Mr.. Needham, and to say that if
there was offending by Mr.. Steffens and
Mr.. Hard it was not often such as gave
the wrongdoer courage to hope for re-
vulsion of public feeling. undertaking
in the sense that the public has con-
demned it Is well enough illustrated by
a book called The Metropolis" which
has lately appeared from the pen of
Mr.. Sinclair himself, and the whole
danger Of the process will be manifest
to everyone from this one fact-that
this defender of muck -raking designed
it as an understanding broadside
against the body of our rich who are
also socially distinguished.