There is we believe a reason of con
siderable weight aside from the c\ne us
ually recognized—that of subserviency
to powers which have within their gift,
things to which a public man aspires
and it is found in the attitude of the
strong men in the district who, for
reasons best Known to themselves—of
ten personal subserviency to the public
man, with hope of reward, or indiffer
ence to public opinion based on distrust
of their own. Were the leading men
among a congressional constituency
wise enough to locate the drift of pub
lic sentiment, and true enough to their
congressman to insist on his recogniz
ing that sentiment in his public acts
and utterances, it would not be neces
sary to discuss the advisibility of sup
erseding such men as McCleary and
Tawney with men willing to do the
will of the people nor would we have
examples of McClearys and Tawneys
"ganging their gait" until, together
with their selfseeking or weak-kneed
advisors, they fall into the ditch which
they have persistently and industrious
ly digged for themselves and for each
other. It is always safe for a congress
man to distrust the advice of a man
who is expecting something of him,
when that advice if freely and honestly
given would be distasteful to him.
For the same reason it is also safe for
a congressman in estimating the vol
ume of a public sentiment, running
counter to his known attitude on a pub
lic question, to multiply generously
what is visible and direct his course
accordingly.
