human
I had this question referred to me the other day, he said.
gpt
A gambler --not a petty cheater in cards, but a man who has a splendid establishment in which he has amassed a fortune, a man known for his liberality and good-fellowship and his interest in politics--offered the president of a leading college a hundred thousand dollars to endow a professorship. Ought the president to take the money, knowing how it was made?
human
Wouldn't the money do good--as much good as any other hundred thousand dollars?
gpt
Perhaps. But the professorship was to bear his name, and what would be the moral effect of that?
human
Did you recommend the president to take the money, if he could get it without using the gambler's name?
gpt
I am not saying yet what I advised. I am trying to get your views on a general principle.
human
But wouldn't it be a sneaking thing to take a man's money, and refuse him the credit of his generosity?
gpt
But was it generosity? Was not his object, probably, to get a reputation which his whole life belied, and to get it by obliterating the distinction between right and wrong?
human
But isn't it a compromising distinction, my wife asked,
gpt
The public effect of connecting the gambler's name with the college would be debasing, said Morgan;
human
That is a question, I said,
gpt
I suppose, of course, Margaret replied,
human
Wouldn't he be satisfied with an LL.D.?
gpt
I don't see, my wife said,