Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 21.pdf/412

 The Ethics of Solicitation money as we would not have them use it, and some who use it as all sensible people would agree that they should not use it. When this is carried to such a point, by excessive drinking, gaming, idleness, etc., that the person is liable to become a public charge, the law steps in and puts a stop to it by appointing a guardian. Short of this point, however, the theory of the law is that a man has the right to dispose of his property as he chooses, and that would seem to be common sense. To use your money, your talents, your influence, your time in the most judi cious way is one of the most difficult things in the world; no man has ever accomplished it; every one would do it differently; to accomplish it would re quire omniscience. We must certainly acknowledge that it is not always the most deserving things that succeed, but those that are taken up and pushed by men of the greatest brains, will, energy, influence and perseverance. Unfortu nately such men do not always recognize the great responsibility upon them to use their power and influence fairly. Solicitation of any sort is permissible only on the ground that the person to be approached is not aware of what you intend to propose or of the arguments in its favor. If he knows as much about it as you do, and does not choose to act, solicitation at once becomes improper. The moment pressure or importunity of any sort is brought to bear, you have crossed the limits of propriety and your conduct cannot be justified, and it must not be forgotten that the proper time and place for bringing forward your proposition and arguments must be care fully sought or else you may properly be classed among the bores. Many a busy' man has yielded to a temporary weakness and given, bought or sub scribed, contrary to his conscience, and

385

will, in order to get rid at once of an importunate visitor. Indeed, this un due advantage is often deliberately counted upon and practised by those who make a business of solicitation, and unblushing impudence and artifices of all sorts to gain admission are resorted to. Such practices of themselves disen title the solicitor to a hearing. It is certainly a sound ethical rule that solici tation should never become importunity or coercion of the free will of the person approached. Yet it must be admitted by those who know, that a good many of the most laudable objects, and par ticularly in the line of philanthropy and religion, have been attained by methods hardly less reprehensible, excepting the motive, than those of the "stand and deliver" of the old-fashioned highway man. There are many persons in the highest positions in the community who use their influence and position without compunction, as a means of obtaining money for what they consider good objects, which they know would not be forthcoming if asked for merely on the merits of the object itself apart from their personal solicitation. Americans from their political system are very bright in finding out how to approach a person and in sending one to ask whom it will be difficult, if not impossible, to refuse. To use the very expressive slang, they know how "to pull" the wires and how to make a man "cough." A committee of gentlemen to some of whom, perhaps, you are under obliga tions of some sort, and who are highly respectable in the community, and to whom you have no alternative but to give a respectful hearing, walks into your office and, showing you a list of your friends and neighbors whom they have already intimidated and corraled, wishes