to stand in popular use for the duties of man to man,
let us refuse to accept as moral the contractor who
enriches himself by using large machinery to make
pasteboard soles pass as leather for the feet of unhappy
conscripts fighting at miserable odds against invaders:
let us rather call him a miscreant, though he were
the tenderest, most faithful of husbands, and contend
that his own experience of home happiness makes his
reckless infliction of suffering on others all the
more atrocious. Let us refuse to accept as moral
any political leader who should allow his conduct
in relation to great issues to be determined by egoistic
passion, and boldly say that he would be less immoral
even though he were as lax in his personal habits
as Sir Robert Walpole, if at the same time his sense
of the public welfare were supreme in his mind, quelling
all pettier impulses beneath a magnanimous impartiality.
And though we were to find among that class of journalists
who live by recklessly reporting injurious rumours,
insinuating the blackest motives in opponents, descanting
at large and with an air of infallibility on dreams
which they both find and interpret, and stimulating
bad feeling between nations by abusive writing which
is as empty of real conviction as the rage of a pantomime
king, and would be ludicrous if its effects did not
make it appear diabolical—though we were
to find among these a man who was benignancy itself
in his own circle, a healer of private differences,
a soother in private calamities, let us pronounce him
nevertheless flagrantly immoral, a root of hideous
cancer in the commonwealth, turning the channels of
instruction into feeders of social and political disease.
In opposite ways one sees bad effects likely to be
encouraged by this narrow use of the word morals,
shutting out from its meaning half those actions of
a man’s life which tell momentously on the wellbeing
of his fellow-citizens, and on the preparation of
a future for the children growing up around him.
Thoroughness of workmanship, care in the execution
of every task undertaken, as if it were the acceptance
of a trust which it would be a breach of faith not
to discharge well, is a form of duty so momentous
that if it were to die out from the feeling and practice
of a people, all reforms of institutions would be helpless
to create national prosperity and national happiness.
Do we desire to see public spirit penetrating all
classes of the community and affecting every man’s
conduct, so that he shall make neither the saving of
his soul nor any other private saving an excuse for
indifference to the general welfare? Well and
good. But the sort of public spirit that scamps
its bread-winning work, whether with the trowel, the
pen, or the overseeing brain, that it may hurry to
scenes of political or social agitation, would be
as baleful a gift to our people as any malignant demon
could devise. One best part of educational training
is that which comes through special knowledge and