Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (July 19, 1901)
The Commoner. i without any security for the' payment of those notes is "sound money." It cannot bo doubted that the tendoncy among our great financiers is toward the estab lishment of just such a bank as is proposed by Mr. Morgan. Such a bank would be able to control not only the purse strings of the na tion but the purse strings of the people. Be cause of this enormous power, such, a bank would be able to control elections, dictate gov ernment policies, crush great principles, and shape the business of the country according to the ends and advantages of those in authority in this central bank. Such a bank, if these men had their way, would be endowed with money issuing powers "without the pre-requisite of bond deposits." There are many things nowadays which threaten the welfare of the people, but ot all of the propositions so far made none promise greater detriment than the suggestion that there be established in this country a Nick Biddle institution. And yet it may be that out of the threat ened disaster great good will come. The crea tion of another Nick Biddle may thus provide a call for another Andrew Jackson; and at no time in its history has this country been so sadly in need of a man of Jackson's mould as it is today : f ' W Holding, to a Part. Among the strange things about the impe rialist's position is that while discarding the constitution as a guide for congress in its deal ings with our new possessions, he justifies his position by one clause in the constitution. This clause provides: "The congress shall' have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory and other property belonging to the "United States." . ,,;" It is not claimed that the words "dispose of" give congress the authority to sell terri tory. On the contrary it has long been the claim of the imperialist that once' we are in possession of territoiy there iB no authority for getting rid of it. With this understanding we may read this constitutional clause and better understand by comparing its powers and authorities with the powers and authorities possessed by the agent, say, of a piece of real estate. The land owner who does not care to give personal attention to his property might retain an agent to transact this business for him. He wouid give to that agent power to make all "needful rules and regulations" respecting the property entrusted to his care. Would the agent have authority to do any thing which, his client did not authorize? Would he not be prohibited from doing, with that property, anything in contravention of the policies and principles of his em ployer? If his employer was a man of high moral ideas, would the agent dare to rent a piece of that employer's "property for iiiimoral pur poses r . The people of tho United States have given to their agent, congress, certain ' powers with respect to tho property of tho United States. This property does not embrace peoples be cause there is no property in peoples in tho contemplation of the law in this country. But so far as tho right to make "needful rules and regulations' respecting the territory or other property belonging to tho United States, con gress is in the attitude of tho agent of a care ful, high-minded client, who is so jealous as to the rules and regulations to be made respecting his property that ho has formulated certain fixed rules and plans by Which, the agent must be guided and governed. Outside of thoso plans the agent has no authority. If the exi gencies of the time require new and enlarged authority, it is in tlio agent's province to apply to his client for new powers. No intelligent agent would contend for a moment that he could do anything with respect to that prop erty simply because tho thing sought to bo done was not prohibited in tho rules given him by his client. He would know that whatever power he possessed was a grant of power from the man whom he was presumed to servo and if he wanted additional authority ho must ap ply to the only source of power. .U-t 'v;i w.. :'i -ru. j?:" 'l I -, Mr. Schurman's Lament. Mr. Schurman, President ; o Cornell col lege, claims that during our history as a nation covering a century and a quarter we have pro duced no one to rank with Shakspearo and "Goethe. This much was said by way of mild criticism of tho accomplishments of this na tion. This point is worthy of careful examin ation. It may bo admitted that we have pro duced no poets that may rank with Shakspearo and Goethe, but it must be some consolation at least to Mr. Schurman that England has pro duced no other to rank with Shakspearo and that Germany has produced no other to rank with Goethe. England may boast of its Shakspeare and Germany may boast of its Goethe, both enjoy ing that fullness of fame that comes to things and men, time-honored as well as deserving on their merits, but the United States during its century and a quarter is to be credited with a large number of poets whose writings will be read so long as time shall laBt, and' whoso standing will, like wine, improve, with age. There 'are Bryant, Longfellow, Whittier, Foe, Lowell, Holmes, and many others,,, whose splendid verses have endeared, the memory of their authors to men and women who love real poetry., Mr. Schurman should, also find consolation in the reflection that the people of the United States have no cause to. be ashamed of their literature. To be sure there is a vast amount of useless stuff written and holding a place as literature in this country, but it is true that the orators and the authors of America have had much to do with inspiring their fellows . toward the erection and maintenance of a na tion, dedicated under God to liberty. While it is true we have no Shakspeare and no Goethe, it is likewise true that our history is filled with tho writings and tho utterances of men and women who have contributed to tho Bum of human happiness more than tho contributions of a thousand Shakspearcs and Gocthcs would have done. Our poets havo been poets of tho people. Our orators havo boon champions of liborty. Our writers of fiction and our writers of fact who havo taken recognized positions have done so because their work has aided in tho up building of a poople's nation and contributed to tho general welfare. Wo are a nation of writers and a nation of poets. There iB hardly a state in thiB union but what may count among its citizens several poets of recognized standing, and some of tho humblest of these have produced some of tho most beautiful of verses. From our revolutionary period to the pres ent day our public men havo excelled the pub lic men of all other nations in their writings. Tho Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson, has properly been referred to as "a stately and- passionate chant of human freedom," "the most pathetic utteranco of any age," and the best written public document eVer issued by any people. Thomas Jefferson himself was a star in tho literary firmament. Tho Federalist, written by Hamilton, Madison and Jay, might with great - advantage serve as a text book for anyone in England or America who sought to state simple truths in tho most brief and yet most effective way. Our revolu tionary record is filled with writings whiclr will compare more than favorably with tho writings of any other men of any other period. Take a glance through American history and see tho contributions made to literature by Americans, which contributions would grace a collection of the very best literature of tho world. Read Benjamin Franklin, that prince of letter writers; read Henry Adams, John Adams and John Quincy Adams; read Lincoln and Douglas, Phillips and Channing; read Prentiss and Yancey, Blaine and Stevens, Conk ling and Cox. Better things in better way were never said than were said by these men. We need not refer to our Henrys, our Websters, our Clays, our Calhouns, our Gradys men whoso voice and pen contributed much to the pro gress not only of this people, but of liberty throughout the world. America's books are filled with the valu able writings of America's men and' women,, and if we must accept Mr. Schurman's conclu sion that we have produced no one to rank with Shakspeare and Goethe, we may have the pleasure of knowing that in this weak, incom petent world there can be but ono Shakspeare and but one Goethe, exactly as there can be but ono Thomas Jefferson, but ono Abraham Lincoln, but one Henry Wadsworth Long fellow, and we have the further consolation that the contributions of tho Jeffersons, the Lincolns and the Longfellows have been as valuable to humanity as the contributions of the Shakspearcs and the Goethes. -'