The Presidency as Moral Leadership

• Author: Eric F. Goldman
• Published date: 01 March 1952
• Date: 01 March 1952
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/000271625228000106
• Subject Matter: Articles

37

The

Presidency

as

Moral

Leadership

By

ERIC

F.

GOLDMAN

EVERY

so

often the

big

black

lim-

ousine

would

roll

out

of

the

White

House,

and

Mrs.

Harding,

the

empty

whisky

bottles

tucked

under

the

lap

robe,

would

give

instructions

to

head

for

a

remote

ravine.

It

was

all

right

for

Warren

Harding,

the

businessman

and

editor,

even

the

Senator,

to

be

casual

about

his

habits.

It

was

de-

cidedly

wrong

for

Warren

Harding,

President

of

the

United

States.

There

is

something

very

special

about

the

Presidential

office,

no

doubt,

and

that

something

has

often

produced

no-

table

changes

in

its

occupants.

Some-

times

the

change

has

been toward

a

mere

surface

respectability,

as

in

the

case

of

Harding;

more

often,

it

has

rep-

resented

a

growth

in

courage,

breadth

of

thinking,

and

vision.

Men

of

con-

siderable

dimensions

take

on

an

awe-

some

bigness

once

they

assume

the

office.

The

biography

of

Abraham

Lin-

coln,

for

example,

is

essentially

the

story

of

a

somewhat

aimless,

shifty

politician

who

became

a

President

of

iron

purpose

and

profound

humanity.

Average

men

discover

unexpected

wis-

dom

and

strength

within

themselves.

The

classically

mediocre

Chester

Arthur,

for

years

a

routine

politician

who

was

little

disturbed

by

grafting,

suddenly

emerged

a

stanch

champion

of

clean

government.

The

most

inadequate

men

find

at

least

the

discernment

to

recog-

nize

their

inadequacy.

&dquo;I

am

not

fit

for

this

office ...

,&dquo;

Warren

Harding

would

tell

intimates

as

he

roamer,

the

house

where

Abraham

Lincoln

had

lived.’

The

feeling

that

the

Presidency

is

a

post

far

removed

from

workaday

thought

and

action

has

been

so

fixed

in

the

public

mind

that

millions

have

demanded

of

the

Chief

Executive

stand-

ards

which

they

never

would

have

thought

of

exacting

from

themselves

or

from

their

own

circle.

An

acutely

snob-

bish

eighteenth

century

never

quite

for-

gave

John

Adams

for

allegedly

sug-

gesting

that

the

President

be

called

&dquo;His

Excellency.&dquo;

A

generation

which

winked

when

businessmen

said

&dquo;Noth-

ing

is

lost

save

honor&dquo;

wondered

darkly

why

Ulysses

Grant

accepted

the

gift

t

of

an

expensive

home.

And

thou-

sands

were

so

shocked

by

Harry

Tru-

man’s

reference

to

an

&dquo;s.o.b.&dquo;

column-

ist

that

they

announced

the

country

should

get

&dquo;that

s.o.b&dquo;

out

of

the

White

House.

American

Presidents

have

often

tried

to

define

this

peculiar

aspect

of

their

office.

&dquo;The

White

House,&dquo;

said

Theo-

dore

Roosevelt,

&dquo;is

a

bully

pulpit.&dquo;

The

Chief

Executive,

Woodrow

Wilson

put

it,

&dquo;is

at

liberty,

both

in

law

and

conscience,

to

be

as

big

a

man

as

he

can.&dquo;

Probably

Franklin

Roosevelt

came

closest

to

the

heart

of

the

mat-

ter.

The

Presidency,

Roosevelt

declared

shortly

after his

original

election,

&dquo;is

not

merely

an

administrative

office.

That

is

the

least

part

of

it.

It

is

pre-

eminently

a

place

of

moral

leader-

ship.&dquo;

2

1

Quoted

in

Arthur

M.

Schlesinger,

Paths

to

the

Present

(New

York:

Macmillan,

1949),

p.

99.

2

New

York

Times,

Nov.

13,

1932.

The

Theodore

Roosevelt

quotation

is

from

Edward

S.

Corwin,

The

President,

Office

and

Powers

(New

York:

New

York

University

Press,

1941),

p.

267;

the

Wilson

quotation,

from

Woodrow

Wilson,

The

President

of

the

United

States

(New

York:

Harper

&

Bros.,

1926),

p.

43.