Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 3, 1905)
NOVEMBER S, 1905 The Commoner. WISE VICIOUSLY ATTACKS HIS BENEFACTOR John S. Wise, a member of the distinguished Virginia family of that name, is writing for the Saturday Evening Post a series of articles en titled "Echoes of Greatness." In a recent num ber Mr. Wise demotes his attention to William McKinley. While Mr. Wise descriDes Mr. McKin ley as having been, personally, a very attractive man, he makes it plain that ho was greatly dis appointed because Mr. McKinley did not appoint him to the office of United States attorney for the southern district of New York. According to the story told in the Saturday Evening Post, Mr. Wise frankly told Mr. McKin ley that he would like the New York position. Mr. McKinley suggested that he obtain the in dorsement of Senator Piatt who, as is well known to men generally, opposed Mr. McKlnloy's nom ination and who, as evidently well known to Mr. Wise, was not friendly to the ambitions of the latter gentleman. But, to make a long story short, Mr. Wise could not secure Senator Piatt's endorsement, and later Mr. McKinley told Mr. Wise that he could not jeopardize the party by antagonizing the New York senator. Mr. Wise says that as he rose to go he ad dressed Mr. McKinley thus: Mr. President your decision is not a sur prise to me. I release you from all obliga tions. I have long since learned how frlend ' ship is sacrificed in the game of politics. Piatt has something you want. You have something Piatt wants. Go ahead with the arrangement. Next time I want something and you and Piatt are wrangling I will sup port Piatt if I prize what I want more than I do your friendship. A man is a fool who is sentimental in politics. Mr. McKinley gave a sort answer to Mr. Wise's heated remarks, but it evidently did not turn away the Wise wrath. Then Mr. Wise says: Piatt's man received the appointment. Some time afterward McKinley gaye me a very handsome special appointment, but ho lmew just' what I thought of him. It was this: He was naturally an amicable man, but exceedingly ambitious so ambitious that he . had no idea of Imperiling any personal inter est for friendly inclinations. If it was neces sary to sacrifice a weak frfend to propitiate a powerful enemy, he would .not hesitate for one moment to sacrifice the friend. To his powerful friends, on whom he was dependent, he was loyal to the point of doing anything they required, even things which his judg ment or bjis conscience did not approve, but that was only another form of selfishness. His natural inclination to weaker friends was kindly, and when ho might assist them , without danger to himself ho did so with a show of great generosity. But when doing so called on him to imperil any selfish in terest ho did not hesitate to leave them in the lurch. Secretary Alger himself experi enced this. No man was over more loyal to McKinley, and ho was an excellent secretary of war, but when McKinley found that thorc was a public clamor against Alger ho did not stand by his secretary as he should havo done; he sacrificed him for his own benefit without a qualm. In a word, McKinley was nothing like as unselfish a man as ho has the reputation of having been; ho was much more of a trading politician than he has the repu tation of having been; he was not so high as the public estimate places him. Although ho was a kind-hearted man, he was a very timid, calculating person, and although, per sonally, not corrupt, he was under many bad and venal influences. What saved McKinley and will pass his name down to history as a much greater man than ho really was is that ho had a singularly able coterie of men about him, and presided over the destinies of this nation when our people were more pros perous, more virile, more ready to work out their own destiny and achieve their own glory, than they ever had been before or may ever bo again. It will occur to a great many people, that even according to Mr. Wise's own statement ho was pretty well treated by Mr. McKinley. In Mr. Wise's own language: Mr. McKinley gave mo a very handsome special appointment. When the war broke out my three boys went wild. The oldest was in the army, and the next two were grad uates of the Virginia Military Institute. Mc Kinley promptly commissioned the two lat ter as captain and first lieutenant In Colonel Pettit's Fourth regiment of Volunteer Infantry. My oldest son he made an assistant adjutant general with the rank of captain, after San tiago, and afterward major in the Forty seventh Infantry Volunteers. My second son - he made major In the Fourth. Ho oven offered me a brigadier-general's commission. It would seem that that portion of the Wiso family which had "gone republican" was pretty well treated under the McKinley administration. There was no overwhelming popular demand that John S. Wise be made United States attorney for the southern district of New York. To be sure, he had turned his back upon the tradi tions of an honored family; perhaps not that ''thrift might follow fawning," but he certainly placed a high prico upon his dovotlon to tlio re publican causo when,- after having received all of these favors at tho hands of William McKin ley ho stoops to hurl a dart at tho memory of hi bonofnetor. It seemB that whon John S. Wlso turned hla back upon his peoplo and his party ho abandoned somo other Wise characteristics. One could hardly lmagiuo any other inomhor of Virginia's Wise family presenting for tho cold gaze of iho world tho bitter romnrks which John S. Wiso says ho made t6 tho man who conferred upon him and his so many kindnesses. According to Mr Wise's own statement, Mr. McKinley gave "a very handsomo special ap pointment" to tho father and othor important commissions to three of hjs sons. Yet to his groat benefactor, now dead, John S. Wiso pays such "lofty tributes" as these: "Ho had no idea of imperilling any personal interest for friendly inclinations.". "If it was necessary to sacrifice a weak friend to propitiate a powerful enemy ho would not hesitate for ono moment to sacrifice tho friend." "To his powerful friends on whom he was do pendent ho was loyal to tho point of doing any thing they required, oven things which his Judg ment or his conscience did not approve." - "When ho might assist his weaker friends without danger to himself, ho did r with a show of great generosity, but when doing so required of him to imperil any selfish Interest ho did not hesitate to leave them in tho lurch." "Ho sacrificed Alger for his own boneflt with out a qualm." "McKinley was nothing llko as unselfish a man as he has tho reputation of having been." "Ho was much more of a trading politician than ho has tho reputation of having boon." "Ho was a very timid, calculating person, and although personally not corrupt, ho was under many bad and venal Influences." It would be diulcult for any man to say any thing meaner of another man than John S. Wiso has said of William McKinley, tho man to whom ho was so heavily Indebted. It was a wretched undertaking when engaged in by a man whoso entire family seoms to have been provded for by the dead president, now so bitterly assailed. Many democrats havo thought that their party did not greatly suffer when John S. Wlso went over to the republicans. Since he has mado such vicious thrusts at his dead friend, many of them will conclude that when John S. Wlso turned his back upon the party or his fathers ho might have sung, in all propriety, in paraphrase of the "patriots" of old: "Truo democrat am I, for be it understood, I left my party Tor ray party's good." ORIGIN OF "PUBLIC OFFICE IS A PUBLIC TRUST" The editor of Harper's Weekly is in a peck of trouble, and all because he undertook to locate the originator of the phrase "A public office is a public trust." Harper's 'identified the name of the late Dan iel S. Lamont with the phrase under discussion, but being called to accoun- by one of its readers, said: We did not say that Colonel Lamont was the author of the phrase "Public office is a public trust" only that he adapted it to fit ting use in a Cleveland campaign The orig inator, we believe, was the late Governor Hugh S. Thompson, of South Carolina, who first employed the expression in his Inaugu ral address in 1882. A St. Paul, Minn., reader of Harper's, re plying to this latest editorial declaration, says: Daniel Webster, in a speech in the Odeon, Bos'ton, seventy years ago, said: "It is time to declare that offices created for tho people are public trusts, not private spoils." Volume 1, Works of Daniel Webster, p. 335. It may be that the governor of South Carolina and Colonel Lamont drew their inspiration from the same source. The man who undertakes to name the orig inator of the, phrase "Public office is a public trust" has assumed a large task. In attributing the origin to Governor Thompson, of South Caro lina, Harper's Weekly does not touch the mark. Governor Thompson used it in 1882, perhaps just as Abram S. Hewitt did in 1883 or Daniel S. La- mont in 1884, as a phrase which had become so general as to justify its use without quotation marks. Dorm an B. Eaton, a New York lawyer, who became widely known by his advocacy of civil service reform, said in 1881: "The public offices are a public trust." But as long ago as May, 1872, Charles Sumner said: "The phrase ' public office is a public trust' has of lato become com mon property." The St. Paul reader of Harpers' correctly says that Daniel Webster declare!, "It is time to declare that offices created for the people are public trusts, not private spoils." Mr. Web ster delivered that speech October 12, 1835. But on February 13, 1835, John C. Calhoun said: "The very essence of a free government consists in considering offices as public trusts bestowed for the good of the country, and not for the benefit of an individual" or a party." So the phrase cer tainly did not originate with Webster. Neither did it originate with Calhoun, be cause years before Burke, in his address on the French Revolution, said: "To execute laws is a royal office; to execute orders is not to be a king. However, a political executive magistracy, though merely such, is a great trust" In tho same ad dress Burke said: "All persons possessing any portion of power ought to be strongly and awfully impressed with an idea that they act in trust, and that they are to account for their conduct In that trust to the one great Master, Author and Founder of society." In the same address Burke said: "In their nomination to office they will not point to the exercise of authority as to a pitiful job, but as to a holy function." Thomas Jefferson in 1807 said: "When a man assumes a public trust ho should consider himself as public property." But among the claims with respect to tho origin of this phrase, those of irat " ew Henry are not to be entirely Ignored. Matthew Henry was a British divine, who died In 1714. He pub lished a commentary upon the old and new Testa ments. In the third chapter of tlio first Epistle to Timothy, referring to tho qualifications of dea cons, as well as of bishops, it is said, "and let these, also, first be proved." Commentihg on this Matthew Henry said: "It Is not fit that tho public trusts should be lodged in the hands of any, till they have been first proved and found fit for the business they are to be entrusted with." Clearly, the phrase did not originate, as Har per's Weekly says it did, with the governor ofi South Carolina, nor as tho St. Paul reader says, with Webster. Of course, the exact origin Is not of the great est importance, but It Is a good sign that public interest has been aroused In phrases of this sorta and whether It comes In the words of Matthew Henry, of Jefferson, of Burke, of Calhoun, of Web ster or men of more recent days It is particularly important at this time that elector and elected; understand that, as Disraeli put It, "All power is a trust, and we are accountable for its' exercise." i i r. ;: "x-....