the franchise-seeking companies; that he guarantees to steer dubious measures through the council, for which he demands liberal pay; that he is, in short, a successful “boodler.”  When, however, there is intellect enough to get this point of view, there is also enough to make the contention that this is universally done, that all the aldermen do it more or less successfully, but that the alderman of this particular ward is unique in being so generous; that such a state of affairs is to be deplored, of course; but that that is the way business is run, and we are fortunate when a kind-hearted man who is close to the people gets a large share of the spoils; that he serves franchised companies who employ men in the building and construction of their enterprises, and that they are bound in return to give work to his constituents.  It is again the justification of stealing from the rich to give to the poor.  Even when they are intelligent enough to complete the circle, and to see that the money comes, not from the pockets of the companies’ agents, but from the street-car fares of people like themselves, it almost seems as if they would rather pay two cents more each time they ride than to give up the consciousness that they have a big, warm-hearted friend at court who will stand by them in an emergency.  The sense of just dealing comes apparently much later than the desire for protection and indulgence.  On the whole, the gifts and favors are taken quite simply as an evidence of genuine loving-kindness.  The alderman is really elected because he is a good friend and neighbor.  He is corrupt, of course, but he is not elected because he is corrupt, but rather in spite of it.  His standard suits his constituents.  He exemplifies and exaggerates the popular type of a good man.  He has attained what his constituents secretly long for.

At one end of the ward there is a street of good houses, familiarly called “Con Row.”  The term is perhaps quite unjustly used, but it is nevertheless universally applied, because many of these houses are occupied by professional office holders.  This row is supposed to form a happy hunting-ground of the successful politician, where he can live in prosperity, and still maintain his vote and influence in the ward.  It would be difficult to justly estimate the influence which this group of successful, prominent men, including the alderman who lives there, have had upon the ideals of the youth in the vicinity.  The path which leads to riches and success, to civic prominence and honor, is the path of political corruption.  We might compare this to the path laid out by Benjamin Franklin, who also secured all of these things, but told young men that they could be obtained only by strenuous effort and frugal living, by the cultivation of the mind, and the holding fast to righteousness; or, again, we might compare it to the ideals which were held up to the American youth fifty years ago, lower, to be sure, than the revolutionary ideal, but still fine