Governors, Mayors, and Community Ethics
| Author | William H. Young |
| DOI | 10.1177/000271625228000107 |
| Published date | 01 March 1952 |
| Date | 01 March 1952 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
46
Governors,
Mayors,
and
Community
Ethics
By
WILLIAM
H.
YOUNG
IFE
is
just
a
bowl
of
Seaburys,&dquo;
L quipped
debonair
Jimmie
Walker
after
spending
several
difficult
days
un-
der the
searching
and
relentless
cross-
examining
of
the
judge
who
sought
to
restore
some
sense
of
righteousness
to
the
government
of
the
greatest
city
of
America.
The
New
Yorkers,
although
far
gone
in
the
nation’s
worst
slump
and
smitten
by
a
succession
of
shocking
revelations
about
the
kind
of
govern-
ment
the
Mayor’s
friends
had
been
pro-
viding,
applauded
their
playboy
idol.
Even
after
the
experience
of
several
years
of
a
very
different
kind
of
rule
by
the
upright,
although
flamboyant,
&dquo;Lit-
tle
Flower,&dquo;
a
poll
by
one
of
the
New
York
papers
showed
that
Walker’s
popularity
still’
exceeded
that
of
La
Guardia
and
of
the
man
who
next
be-
came
mayor,
William
O’Dwyer.
The
ethics
of
the
officials
of
our
cities
and
states
is
rarely
far
removed
from
that
of
the
communities
which
they
are
elected
to
direct.
Lincoln
Steffens,
probably
the
most
searching
analyst
of
the
morals
of
local
government
that
this
nation
has
produced,
concluded
after
firsthand
studies
of
the
major
cities
that
the
politics
of
&dquo;boodle&dquo;
was
not
the
re-
sult
of
the
wicked
machinations
of
a
few
soulless
bosses,
but
rather
the
re-
flection
of
the
mores
of
the
community
or
at
least
the
&dquo;better&dquo;
part
thereof.
It
is
the
price
we
pay,
he
implied,
for
our
individualistic,
self-centered,
and
com-
petitive
society.
Lest
this
be
interpreted
as
the
coun-
sel
of
lofty
indifference
or
of
cynical
despair,
let
me
hasten
to
add
that
our
cities
and
states
are
for
the
most
part
incomparably
better
governed
and
more
honestly
governed
today
than
when
Steffens
wrote
or
even
than
when
Jimmie
Walker
charmed
New
York’s
millions.
It
is
nevertheless
true
that
the
development
and
recognition
of
standards
of
public
propriety
have been
a
slow
and
difficult
task
in
a
country
which
is
as
highly
individualistic
as
the
United
States
and
which
at
least
since
1830
has
been
so
imbued
with
the
identity
of
private
and
public
interest.
Our
current
preoccupation
with
the
ethics
of
public
administration
is
a
con-
vincing
demonstration
that
we
are
no
longer
willing
to
rely
on
&dquo;the
invisible
hand&dquo;
to
promote
public
welfare.
We
now
expect
our
public
officials
to
per-
form
this
office.
EFFECT
OF
PUBLIC
OFFICIALS
ON
PUBLIC
ETHICS
Although
political
leaders
at
the
state
and
local
levels,
in
their
conceptions
of
public
right,
usually
reflect
the
concep-
tions
of
their
respective
constituencies,
they
are
never
perfect
mirrors.
What
is
more,
it
lies
within
their
power
to
mold
the
popular
notions
and
to
add
something,
however
small,
to
them.
In
this
sense,
governors
and
mayors
may
be
grouped
into
three
classes:
(1)
those
who
by
exhortation
and
precept
raise
the
general
level
of
community
ethics;
(2)
those
who
by
consorting
with
men
of
easy
virtue
and
by
rewarding
them
seem
to
dignify
misconduct
and
thus
lower
the
general
standards
of
the
com-
munity ;
and
(3)
those
who
so
com-
pletely
reflect
prevailing
sentiment
and
whose
careers
are
so
undistinguished
for
either
good
or
ill
that
they
leave
no
impression
whatever
either
on
the
gov-
ernment
or
on
the
community.
The
To continue reading
Request your trial