Nevertheless, a man must always hold to that which to him seems right, and fight hard against the wrong, tolerantly and with charity, but with unclouded purpose.  In politics there are still in this country many occasions when the only argument possible is based on moral right.  The debauching of public servants by favors or bribes, whether open or indirect, injustice of all sorts, putting men who are mentally or morally unfit into public office, oppression of the poor or unjust bleeding of the rich, stirring up class or race hatred, are all evils from which good citizens must help to save the republic; and wherever such evils are found the moral argument is the only argument worthy of a decent citizen.

By far the most numerous of arguments of policy, however, are those which do not rise above the level of practical interests.  The line between these and arguments of moral right is not always easy to draw, for in the tangle of life and character right and advantage often run together.  The tariff question is a case in point.  Primarily it turns on the practical material advantage of a nation; but inevitably in the settling of individual schedules the way opens for one industry or branch of business to fatten at the expense of another, and so we run into the question of the square deal and the golden rule.

In general, however, the great questions on which political parties divide are questions of practical expediency.  Shall we, as a nation, be more comfortable and more prosperous if the powers of the federal government are strengthened and extended?  Shall we have better local government under the old-fashioned form of city government, or under some form of commission government?  Should we have more business and more profitable business if we had free trade with the Dominion of Canada?  Shall we be better off under the Republican or the Democratic party?  All these are questions in which there is little concern with right and wrong:  they turn on the very practical matter of direct material advantage.  In some of these cases most men vote on one side or the other largely through long habit; but there constantly arise, especially in local matters, questions which cross the usual lines of political division, so that one, willingly or unwillingly, must take the trouble of thinking out a decision for himself.  Not infrequently one is a good deal puzzled to decide on which side to range himself, for the issues may be complex; then one reads the arguments or goes to meetings until one side or the other seems to present the most and the most important advantages.  When one is thus puzzled, an argument which is clear and easy to understand, and which makes its points in such a way that they can be readily carried in mind and passed on to the next person one meets, has a wonderful power of winning one to its side.