I suppose it depends on if a man is loyal to his conscience, or loyal to his pocketbook. It wouldn't necessarily be a "moral crime" to have kept the money, but

I suppose it depends on if a man is loyal to his conscience, or loyal to his pocketbook. It wouldn't necessarily be a "moral crime" to have kept the money, but it might have been one of "personal value." I'm sure that many of us set personal values that are more or less progressive than society's moral foundations, and that's a reasonable reason to not keep the money. And donating $100k to charity does not necessarily mean it will go to a good cause. Not all charities materialize "good effect" on society with cash contributions, even if advertised. It may have helped a charity, but it could have also been swallowed away into beauracracy. It doesn't make him a wuss to have returned the cash.