There are communities of poor men, whose lives are hard, in which the boss, though he would be out of place in a more advanced community, if fundamentally an honest man, meets a real need which would otherwise not be met.  Because of his limitations in other than purely local matters it may be our duty to fight such a boss; but it may also be our duty to recognize, within his limitations, both his sincerity and his usefulness.

Yet again even the boss who really is evil, like the business man who really is evil, may on certain points be sound, and be doing good work.  It may be the highest duty of the patriotic public servant to work with the big boss or the big business man on these points, while refusing to work with him on others.  In the same way there are many self-styled reformers whose conduct is such as to warrant Tom Reed’s bitter remark, that when Dr. Johnson defined patriotism as the last refuge of a scoundrel he was ignorant of the infinite possibilities contained in the word reform.  Yet, none the less, it is our duty to work for the reforms these men champion, without regard to the misconduct of the men themselves on other points.  I have known in my life many big business men and many big political bosses who often or even generally did evil, but who on some occasions and on certain issues were right.  I never hesitated to do battle against these men when they were wrong; and, on the other hand, as long as they were going my way I was glad to have them do so.  To have repudiated their aid when they were right and were striving for a right end, and for what was of benefit to the people—­no matter what their motives may have been—­would have been childish, and moreover would have itself been misconduct against the people.

My duty was to stand with every one while he was right, and to stand against him when he went wrong; and this I have tried to do as regards individuals and as regards groups of individuals.  When a business man or labor leader, politician or reformer, is right, I support him; when he goes wrong, I leave him.  When Mr. Lorimer upheld the war for the liberation of Cuba, I supported him; when he became United States Senator by improper methods, I opposed him.  The principles or methods which the Socialists advocate and which I believe to be in the interest of the people I support, and those which I believe to be against the interest of the people I oppose.  Moreover, when a man has done evil, but changes, and works for decency and righteousness, and when, as far as I can see, the change is real and the man’s conduct sincere, then I welcome him and work heartily with him, as an equal with an equal.  For thirty years after the Civil War the creed of mere materialism was rampant in both American politics and American business, and many, many strong men, in accordance with the prevailing commercial and political morality, did things for which they deserve blame and condemnation; but if they now sincerely change, and strive for better things,