WHEN FAITHFULNESS IS EXPECTED.
By G.
It is a standing admission in political circles that political ambition unfits a public official for impartial discharge of his public duties. In almost every instance where the incumbent of an important executive office is not a candidate for re-election, he is deemed to be free in the matter of zealous execution of his trust. The logical inference is that otherwise he is not supposed to be free. The latest instance that we have noted is the case of the San Francisco district attorney, who is not at present a candidate for office. Referring to grave charges against a noted leader in city politics, a daily paper says that “the grand jury is in session, and San Francisco has a district attorney who is free from the trammels of office-seeking. He is footloose and free to act.” This statement is made with the air of a matter-of-course admission that an official is not expected to be impartial in his duty if that kind of devotion would tend to estrange any influential support of his future political designs. The leading journals are both the moulders and the reflectors of public sentiment, and when they tacitly admit that an important public servant is hardly to be expected to injure his chances for further political position, it would seem that the people have come to look upon the situation in about the same light. The Lord said of the Israelites, in the days of their backsliding, it was “like people, like priest;” so it is in modern politics, like people, like office-holder. The spirit of the times is self-serving, and the representatives of the people, carrying the spirit of the times with them, are apt to find their opportunities while nominally serving the people. Verily the way of the office-seeker is a dangerous way; for a political ambition is covetousness personified. And this is conceded where the office-seeking official is hardly expected to be true to his trust if such faithfulness stand in the way of his future success. G.