siiw( iirmr'v.! w
,. . ,...,... .y ..., m, .fi!w'
.. inmwyjKnW ,iJi.i.khm;-"'" ""
fflTffiff
'V :
" if r'imorimKi
thouglit of referring to the administration as
the "government."
Tho fathers taught their children that the
peoplo and their constitution constituted tho
government, and that tho men in immediate
authority were hut the servants of tho people.
A Supreme Court decision antagonistic to a
policy of imperialism might upset the admin
istration hut would not upset the government.
A decision supporting the administration's pol
icy of imperialism would in truth and in fact
upset tho government. Not that there would
ho any dishanding of authority or crumbling
of tho national structure, hut such a decision
would upset the government as it was founded
by tho Washingtons and preserved by the Lin
colns. It would upset the government as tho
American people have understood the govern
ment. We have been taught that every man of
whom this government requires allegiance, ob
tains in return the same privileges and immu
nities guaranteed to every other citizen.
We have been taught that there cannot bo
under our system of government any such a
thing as a subject.
Wo have been taught that the constitution
is tho fundamental law of the land; that in.it
tho men in authority find their powers, and
that where no powers are granted, no powers
can exist.
We have been taught that there are three
distinct branches of government, the executive,
legislative and judicial, and that one should
not encroach upon the other.
We have been taught that tariff duties
must be uniform throughout the United States
and all places subject to their jurisdiction.
Wo have been taught that it is impossible
for congress to lay an export tax.
A decision upholding tho administration's
policy would mean that tho American people
must learn their lessonB over again.
It would mean that tho government as we
have learned it, and as the fathers founded it,
would be completely upset and that a new gov
ernment fashioned on imperialistic lines would
take its place, it would bo a government in
which the executive possesses whatever arbi
trary powers ho may chooBO to assume; a gov
ernment in which the congress iB not controlled
by the constitution; a government in which the
judiciary is not bound by the fundamental law
of tho land; a government which may mean lib
erty to one man and despotism to another; a
government which may give to one territory free
trade with the Btatcs, and erect between tho
states and another territory a high protective
wall; a government wherein citizens may be
burdened with a tax upon tho goods they ox
port; a government which assumes authority
over tho peoplo of Porto Rico while declining
to recognize them as citizens of tho United
States and designating them as "Citizens of
Porto Rico;" a government in which slavery
may, at the pleasure of tho executive, thrive
and flourish beneath a flag that has been dedi
cated and re-dedicated to tho absolute freedom
of men; a government, part of whoso peoplo
are citizens and part of whose people arc sub
jects; a government that is part slave and part
The Commoner.
free; a government comprising not a union of
indestructible states and territories, each terri
tory enjoying the hope of ultimately becoming
a state, but a government comprising somo
states and somo territories enjoying tho privi
lege of ultimately becoming states, and some
colonics specifically denied tho right of enter
taining such a hope or realizing such an ambi
tion. This is tho government as it would exist if
the Supreme Court upheld the administration's
policy of imperialism. The old government
would in fact be "upset;" the old constitution,
the old notions, the traditions of a century, the
sentiments of an age, tho lessons of genera
tions would all be "upset," and in their place
the notions of kings, the sentiment of mon
archs and a government of imperialism would
be enthroned. Are not the American people
justified in believing that Senator Spooner un
wittingly told the truth when he said, "The
Supreme Court will not dare to 'upset' the
government."
w
The World Loves a Lover.
Recently the newspapers have been filled
with an "English" woman's love letters. These
have been widely read, not, it must be con
fessed, because they were particularly attrac
tive, but for. the reason that "all the world
loves a lover" and there is no lover whom tho
world loves so much as tho devoted husband or
wife.
Bismarck, "The man, of iron' was the kind
of lover whom tho world delights to honor.
Recently the love letters of Prince Bismarck
have been published. The following ai e inter
esting extracts:
"My Love I have just received your letter
with much pleasure, and have read it in a very
tiresome committee meeting held to consider the
punishment of people who try to corrupt the sol
diers. Hair-splitting lawyers and would-be ora
tors enlarge so upon tho simple question that I
can't prevent my thoughts from wandering, and I
give them a free course to you, my angel, whither
your dear little letter points the way."
"You must look with contempt on every ono
who does not know enough to appreciate your
merit; and to every one who has not yet proposed
to you, or would not at least like to, you must say,
'Sir, the fact is that Herr von B. loves me, and this
proves that every male person who does not adore
me is a blockhead without discernment.' Why
should not Lepsius worship you? 'Tis his duty and
obligation. Don't be insultingly modest, as though
I, after wandering around among the rose-gar-dons
of North Germany for ten years, had Anally
grabbed at a buttercup with both hands."
-.
, "I am genuinely homesick and long, to be wita
you quietly in Schoenhausen. Have you received
tho ribbon for Annchen?"
"On reaching the village I felt more distinctly
than over before what a beautiful thing it is to
have a home a home with which one is Identified
by birth, memory and love. Tho sun shone bright
on the trim houses of the villagers, and their port
ly inmates In long coats and the gayly dressed
women in short skirts gave mo a much more
friendly greeting than usual; on every face there
seemed to be a wish for my happiness, which I
invariably converted Into thanks to you."
"My Sweetest, Dearest Heart Why so sad?
for it is pleasant in foreign lands, but I can hardly
restrain my tears when I think of the quiet coun
try life with, you, and all that goes with it; tho
life that will probably bo a thing of distant dreams
to me for some time to come and which just now
appears more charming than ever. Why do you
talk of a long separation, my angel 7 Do accustom
yourself to the idea that you must go out with me
into the winter of the great world; how am I to;
warm myself otherwise?" -
There is nothing more beautiful than the
love between husband and wife, and tho older
they become tho more beautiful seems their
affection. In New York, recently, a couple,
both of whom were more than 90 years of age, -were
in dire financial straits. It was suggested
that they be sent to the poor house, but owing
to the rules of that institution that would have
necessitated a separation. They pleaded to be
permitted to remain in ono another's company
and finally the New York Journal took up tho.
case and made provision for themvso that the,
90 year old lovers will be permitted to remain,
together until their'death.
Such a case as this would offer a great op-,
portunity for men of wealth, who, like Mr
Carnegie, do not want to be disgraced by dying
rich. A littlo- money expended in behalf of.
such peoplo would go very far toward what:
Mr. Carnegie calls "the making of the soul."
W
Progress in Education.
A magazine called ' 'Money," whose efforts
are devoted to the support of the single gold
standard, congratulates Nebraska on tho re
sult of its recent senatorial election. It points.. ..
out that the two Nebraska senators are na
tional bank presidents, and says their election
was not only logical but timely. "Money"
thinks the significance of those elections is "the
more remarkable" because this state is the
home of the editor of The Commoner, and has
for years been "one of the most prominent
states in the forces of populism." It regards
the election of these two gentlemen as an indi-1'
cation of "a progress in education on the money'
question that is exceedingly gratifying, and en
courages those who have been tireless in their
efforts in that direction." "Money" concludes:
"It would have been a bold prophecy, ten years :
ago, to predict that the constituency, which, next '
to Kansas, exhibited the most extreme symptoms
of 'isms would, in the openiLg year of the new
century, select two national b-r.h presidents to
voice its sentiments in the so. jte of the United .
States. Verily time changes and men chango '
with them."
It docs, indeed, seem strange that two na
tional bank president should bo chosen to rep
resent an agricultural state in tho United
States senate. But these gentlemen were not
chosen primarily because they were national
bank presidents. Tho corporations were in
full control in the legislature. For personal -reasons
they were unable to elect their first
choice, and they settled upon tho successful
candidates because each had established by
years of servitude, a claim upon corporation
favor. It would have been difficult indeed to
have found in all the state two men more thor
oughly indontified with corporations or more .
entirely subservient to corporation interests
than the two gentlemen whom the corporations
.