THE EFFECT OF THE OPERATION OF MANHOOD SUFFRAGE HAS BEEN TO GIVE A
LOWER TONE TO AMERICAN PUBLIC LIFE.
There is a quality in an individual, an association of individuals, a
community or a public institution, which though difficult to describe in
exact terms is everywhere well recognized as something valuable and
important, and is often referred to as “tone” or “style” or
“distinction.” A youth who goes to college, travels, and then enters on
a business career acquires in ten years a different “tone” from his
homekeeping brother. It is not merely dress, or manners, or education;
it is separate from all these; it produces an effort comparable to that
of the toning up of a musical instrument, and applies to the man’s acts,
gestures, and thoughts; giving him a different and mayhap higher place
in the world and in the regard of his fellows. So we find clubs,
associations, communities whose tone is higher or lower than others, and
are therefore esteemed or contemned accordingly. The tone of an
institution sensibly affects its character; we feel its influence and
are affected by it. No one for instance, can visit the Supreme Court of
the United States or West Point Academy without immediately appreciating
the superior tone or atmosphere of the institution. And so the
government of a nation, its public life, has a tone, an atmosphere which
all the world recognizes as higher or lower in quality than that found
elsewhere. The tone of the administrations of the early presidents from
George Washington to John Quincy Adams, covering a period of forty
years, was high; all the world recognized the fact; Americans were proud
of it; it was something of a value not to be measured by dollars, nor
by power or cleverness; it was a fine emanation of the lofty ambitions
and high traditions of our governing class; it meant that our country
was ruled and represented by gentlemen. We all somehow realize that that
tone and atmosphere have vanished; they are mere memories, like the old
stage coaches, knee breeches and hoopskirts of our ancestors; and now we
have a low tone in almost every department of public life; in some of
them it is even mean and vulgar. It is not necessary to offer proof of
this statement, the fact is practically involved in much that has been
already presented to the reader in this volume; it is something which
everyone can confirm who has had much contact with public officials, or
who is familiar with the daily current reports concerning their
character and methods. The knavery that has been systematically
perpetrated here, under the name of politics for the last three
generations, could not possibly have gone on, without a distinct
degradation of the moral and social tone of our political life. Lord
Bryce though a liberal in politics has discovered that the attempt of
the multitude to govern involves the danger of “A certain commonness of
mind and tone, a want of dignity and elevation in and about the conduct
of public affairs, and insensibility to the nobler aspects and final
responsibilities of national life” and that such a tendency is more or
less observable in the United States; and he adds, “The tone of public
life is lower than one expects to find it in so great a nation.... In no
country is the ideal side of public life, what one may venture to call
the heroic element in a public career, so ignored by the mass and
repudiated by the leaders. This affects not only the elevation but the
independence and courage of public men; and the country suffers from the
want of what we call distinction in its conspicuous force.” (Bryce,
_American Commonwealth_, Vol. II, pp. 583-585.) The language of this
criticism is mild, in accordance with the style of the book, which is
that of studied friendliness and compliment to the American people and
government; but the plain truth is there, though the accents are
gentle. Lord Bryce was disappointed to find a people whom he elsewhere
describes in this same book as generous, high-minded and patriotic, in
the political control of a lot of low politicians. The learned author,
in common with some American writers, professes to be at a loss to
account for this sad state of things; there has been a remarkable
shutting of eyes to the sins of manhood suffrage. But it is impossible
to deny that the low public tone which we have all observed and all
regret came in with that institution.
This is from another eminent writer:
“There is a risk of vulgarizing the whole tone, method and conduct
of public business. We see how completely this has been done in
North America,--a country far more fitted, at least in the Northern
States, for the democratic experiment than any old country can be.
Nor must we imagine that this vulgarity of tone is a mere external
expression, not affecting the substance of what is thought or
interfering with the policy of the nation; no defect really eats
away so soon the political ability of a nation. A vulgar tone of
discussion disgusts cultivated minds with the subject of politics:
they will not apply themselves to master a topic which besides its
natural difficulties, is encumbered with disgusting phrases, low
arguments, and the undisguised language of coarse selfishness.”
(Bagehot, _Parliamentary Reform_, p. 316.)
Treitschke on this subject utters a despairing note.
“The strongest lungs always prevail with the mob, and there is now
no hope of eliminating that peculiar touch of brutality and that
coarsening and vulgarizing element which has entered into public
life. These consequences are unavoidable, and undoubtedly react
upon the whole moral outlook of the people; just as the unchecked
railing and lying of the platform corrupts the tone of daily
intercourse. Beyond this comes the further danger that the really
educated classes withdraw more and more from a political struggle
which adopts such methods.” (_Politics_, Vol. II, p. 198.)
A low tone is the sign and indication of low ideals, which dwelling with
and in a man or institution influence his or its thought, act and self
manifestation. The ideals of cheap and common men, and of those who
live by catering to them, are alike cheap and common. There is a
politics which consists of a study of principles applied to government;
in that pursuit the ideals are necessarily lofty; it was their presence
which gave the tone to the administrations of the first six presidents.
There is a politics which consists in a systematic pursuit of jobs and
places; it is that which has mainly characterized the administrations
from Jackson downwards. The resultant loss to the nation is additional
to that caused by the waste, inefficiency, mismanagement and political
despotism already described; and though this lowering of tone is of
course implied in the decline of political morals heretofore discussed,
it yet constitutes a separate and additional public misfortune. We can
imagine a moral descent without a corresponding falling off in outward
behavior, as in the French Court of Louis XV; but in our country, the
two declines have been contemporaneous.
Much will have to be done before this can be corrected, but one remedy
is absolutely essential, and that is the elevation and perfection of the
electorate. The degradation of the tone and destruction of the old-time
dignity of American political life which we all so much deplore is the
work of manhood suffrage, immediately followed it, belongs to it and is
inseparable from it. If we would restore tone and dignity to our
politics we must begin with the electorate; we must create a body of
unpurchasable voters; men who have shown that they are free from the
ordinary temptations of corrupt politics by earning a good living in
other ways which they have preferred to politics; men pecuniarily
independent, who have a stake in the country; something, nay much to
lose, and nothing to gain by misgovernment; men, therefore, whose ideals
in government matters are purity and efficiency. By that class of
prosperous middle class men, high ideals may be and always have been
adopted; they are of the proper combination of energy, capacity and
independence. It is impossible for most men to cultivate lofty ideals
when they are hourly struggling for a mere subsistence; one cannot
think philosophically when he is in actual need, nor when in danger of
being in need. No part of the burden of government should be put upon
such shoulders as those of the needy class, the residuum, the derelicts,
the pecuniarily unfortunates or incapables of our civilization. We can
only elevate our political tone to the level of the time of Washington
and John Quincy Adams by elevating our electorate to the plane which it
occupied when it selected them and others of their type to represent it
in the high places of government.