fTTWflfgrni-';
. t'k
4
Y
1 f
r
What Docs
A Pledge
Imply?
employed as an argument by republican orators
and newspapers In every locality where there was
unsubstantial sliver element In the party Is one of
the best-known facts of the campaign of 189C. That
It Influenced a sufllciont number of votes in the
close states of the middle west and the Pacific slope
to be decisive in McKinley's favor is so extremely
probable as fairly to justify the declaration that
ho owed his first election to the promise to pro
moto the free coinage of silver by international
agreement. That there never was the slightest pur
pose on the part of tho republican leaders to carry
out that pledge In good faith was even then ap
parent to those who fully realized the extent to
which the republican party was dominated by tno
great moneyed interests of tho country. It has
sinco been proved with a certainty that amounts
to a mathematical demonstration."
"What does a pledge 'to promote' a certain
thing mean? Clearly to use all proper efforts to
bring about the end in view.
Such a pledge is not- satisfied by
a single attempt, but the party
promising to promote must keep
on trying until it becomes evi
dent that all effort In that direction is bound to bo
fruitless. This is the principle that would govern-in
private affairs, and it is one that should
commend itself to every right-thinking person.
Still less is the moral obligation of such a pledge
removed by a single effort, not made in good faith,
and never intended to succeed.
"If anything in our political history is perfectly-
clear, then is it clear that tho sending of the
Wolcott commission to Europe was a farce and a.
fraud a mere perfunctory and colorable carrying
out of a campaign pledge made to catch votes, and
for no other purpose. It was so regarded in Eu
rope, and Senator Wolcott's statement in the sen
.Jata virtually laying the blame of failure at tho
door of Secretary Gage showed plainly that tho
chairman of the commission had reached the samo
conclusion himself.
. "And. this conclusion was a just one; for while
the Wolcott commission was laboring to convince
England and Franco that the
.'stranRo United States government earn-
riethods of estly desired a return to bimetal-
Promotlom Usui on the basis of tho free
coinage of both gold and silver
at an agreed ratio, the chief financial officer of. tho
government was making gold standard speeches to
boards of trade, chambers of commerce, and other
associations of business men in various parts of
tho country. Not only this, but he actually formu
lated a gold standard bill, which was laid before
the cabinet and approved. More important still,
before the Wolcott commission had fairly com
pleted its labors, the president sent a special
message to congress urging legislation along tho.
lines of the plan of the Indianapolis monetary con
vention, which, as everybody knows, was for the
gold standard without reservation.
"With tho return of tho Wolcott commission,
tho administration assumed that its duty under
the pledge to promote bimetal
Faithfui lism had been performed, and
Performance proceeded to 'commit tho coun-
Indeed. try more thoroughly to the gold
standard' by procuring tho en
actment of a measure which, besides greatly en
larging the privileges and profits of the national
banks, in effect reduces the silver dollarto tho
grade of a greenback by making it redeemable in
gold. It is this 'faithful performance' of a solemn
pledge by which Mr. McKInley was twice elected
president that Mr. Chandler refers to with stinging
irony in the closing paragraph of his letter.
"This, bo it remembered, is not a democratic
onslaught. The charge of bad faith comes from
an ironclad republican, who was
From an almost ono of the founders of
ironclad the party; a man who was flght-
", Republican. ing Its battles when the most of
its latter day champions wore
.cither in their cradles or not yet born. When such
The Commoner.
a man publicly declares that the fraudulent use of
six words has twice in succession elected Mr. Mc
KInley president of the United States it presents a
startling fact for tho consideration of tho Ameri
can pflople a fact that cannot and should not bo
blinked by the fortuitous return of a prosperity
with which the republican party had no more to do
than it has with the ebbing and flowing of the
tides."
A Stigma Upon National Honor.
The Chicago Kcoord-IIerald is rapidly ap
proaching the copperhead column. In a recent
ibsuo thiB republican newspaper had an edi
torial entitled: "Cuba Swallows Dependency."
The Record-Herald said:
"At last the Cuban constitutional convention
has. accepted tho Piatt amendment, which robs
Cuba of the pretense of being an independent and
sovereign state. It was what is known throughout
America as a ground-hog case. The amendment,
which was a direct violation of our national prom
ise of independence to Cuba, was forced down the
Cuban throats with tho threat that unless it was
swallowed verbatim et literatum there would bo
no withdrawal of the American army of occupa
tion. "The very fact that the United States made
the inclusion of the Piatt amendment in the Cuban
constitution a condition precedent to the with
drawal of its troops wrote travesty across the face
of that constitution as, the fundamental law of a
people whp 'are and of. right ought to be free and
independent.'
"We aro now the paramount power in Cuba by
the act of tho Cuban convention under duress.
"As The Independent says, this coercion of
Cuba into acceptance of the Piatt amendment 'puts
a stain upon the honor of the United States which
cannot be effaced by Cuba's unwilling submission.'
"The suzerainty of Cuba under all the circum
stances of pretense, perfidy and compulsion is a
stigma upon the honor and good faith of the United
States which will yet return to plague our poli
ticians." Trade Relations With Cuba.
Senator Aldrich of Connecticut, whom so
high a .republican authority as W illiam E.
Curtis of the Chicago llecord-Herald refers to
as "the representative of the sugar trust,"' re
cently called upon the president to protest
against reciprocal trade relations between tho
United States and Cuba. Senator Aldrich in
sisted that Cuba must occupy the same rela
tion to tho United States as any other foreign
power, and that her products must be subject
to the Dingley tariff law.
Unquestionably so far as concerns the Ding
ley tariff law Senator Aldrich is correct. It
is strange, however, that this senator was
among those who supported the Piatt amend
ment and who insisted, that the United States
had the authority to frame the constitutional
law for a country which he now insists to be
extremely "foreign."
The question of reciprocal trade relations
between tho United States and Cuba is ono
that should be determined on common senso
lines. So long as ours is a high tariff policy
with reciprocity possibilities under certain con
ditions, it would scorn the part of wisdom to
determine whether it was not to our interest to
. encourage theeo reciprocal trade relations.
If wo insist upon such a high tariff rate as
to practically prohibit tho importation of sugra.
and other Cuban products, what will wq do
when it comes to exporting to Cuba our own
producta and particularly our manufactures?
As soon as Cuba takes on the form of a na
tion vast improvements will be made there.
Undoubtedly there will be an enormous de
mand for manufactured articles from the
United States as well as or many of our other
products.
The word "reciprocal" explains itself. If
we refuse favors to Cuba, we have no right to
expect favors from Cuba. It may be, how
everthat Senator Aldrich intends that on our
part Cuba shall be denied any approach to free
trade with the United States, and that then
some ingenious plan will be devised whereby,
under the authorities of a world power, we
may insist upon Cuba giving free entry to our
products and our manufactures.
If the administration insists upon accommo
dating the sugar trust at the expense of the
rest of the country it will be confronted with
the largest problem that has yet arisen in the
Cuban situation. The administration has well
nigh exhausted the list of plausible excuses in
its impositions upon the people of Cuba, and it
would Jind it difficult to devise an apology for
a decree that the United States would make'
tariff rules, not only for the United States, but
also for the little republic on the south.
W
The Star-Spangled Banner.
. '. (Francis Scott Key.)
0, say, can you see, by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last
gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the
perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly
streaming;
And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in
air,
Cave proof through the night that our Hag was
still there.
O, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and home of the brave?
On the shore, dimly seen through tho mists of the
deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence
reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering
steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first
beam, -In
full glory reflected now shines on the stream.
'Tis the star-spangled banner! O, long may it
wavo
O'er the land of he free and the home of tne
brave!
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the 'havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A homo and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps'
pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of death and tho gloom of tho
grave. . -
And tho star-spangled banner in triumph shall
wave
O'er the land of tho free and the home of tho
brave!
0, thus bo it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's deso
lation; Blest with victory and peace, may tho heaven
rescued land
Praise tho power that made and preserved us a
nation.
Then conquer we must, for our cause it is just,
And this bo our motto; "In. God Is our trust;"
And the sar-spangled banner In triumph shall
wave
O'er the land of tho free and" the homo of th'
brave!