3
k ir
is whether wo shall have a republic or an
empire. If the south was held in the Union
"by force it mnstho remembered that the peo
ple wcro held as citizens and not as sub
jects. The people of the south have their
members of congress, their senators and their
presidential electors, as -well as their local self-.
government; they share in the destiny of the
nation and in the guarantees of the constitu
tion. The administration wants to hold the
Filipinos under the flag but outside the consti
tution they are to bo subjects, amenable to
our laws, not citizens who participate in the
making of laws. The south suffered from car
pet bag rule ; it knows what injustice can bo
wrought by an irresponsible government ad
ministered from without and it can guess what
sort of treatment will be accorded the Fili
pinos. The people of the south know some1
thing, too, of the race question which wo
already have, and their experience teaches
them that it is not wise to add another
raco question of still greater magnitude.
The editor of the Telegraph would do
his people a greater Borvice if he would join
with the democrats of the north in saving from
overthrow the principles of a republic. The
dangers of the present are too serious to per
mit us to quarrel over things which took place
a third of a century ago.
W
Herron Attacks Marriage System.
Prof. Herron has committed an unpardon
able sin he has attacked the marriage system.
So long "as be confined his efforts to theamel
ioration'of social :conditions his onotjves werp
respected whatever criticism may have been di
rected against his methods or his theories. But
when he rebels, against a marriage system
which requires a husband to care for his wife and
perform a father's duty, ho forfeits public es
teem. In his letter to the Congregational
church, replying to an invitation which had
been extended to him to join in calling a coun
cil to inquire into his ministerial standing and
church membership, he took occasion to con
demn the entire system of marriage as immoral
and blasphemous. The following extract is
sufficient .to set forth his views on the subject:
"I do not believe 'that the present marriage
system is sacred or good, it rather seems to me
the destruction of the liberty and love and truth
which make saqred and worth while. If love and
truth are the basis of morality, then a marriage
system which makes one human being the prop
erty of another, without regard to the well-being
o either the owned or the owner, seems lo me o
bo the very soul of blasphemy and immorality.
"The family founded on force is a survival of
slavery and one of the expressions of the slave
principles on which our whole slave civilization is
built. It is made of the superstition which thinks
it good for human beings to own each other and
good for the raco to have all the sources and tools
of life owned by the few who are strong and cun
ning and unscrupulous to possess them."
' Mr. Herron made no defense to the suit for
divorce instituted by his wife, and in his'letter
ho announced his purpose to marry a Miss Rand
(whom he has since married). Ho is not tho
first man to become alienated from his wife by
falling in love with another woman, but ho
differs from others in attempting to exonerate
himself by assailing the most sacred human
institution. He endeavors to spiritualize and
The Commoner.
idealize a new attachment which is neither
spiritual nor ideal. It is only charitablo to
suppose that ho .loved his first wifo when ho
promised to love and care for her ; it is only
charitable to assume that this love was present
when his home was blessed with tho children
whom ho now abandons. But he allowed his
heart to stray away from his own homo to the
homo of another ; he allowed an acquaintance
to usurp his wife's place in his affections. Ho
calls the new attachment "comradeship," but
that does not sanctify or excuse his conduct.
So far as the evidence shows his wife was a
comrade before his affections were withdrawn
and did what she could to continue the com
radeship. He deliberately chose to repudiate his
marriage vows, and now, rather than admit that
he has fallen from the path of honor and up
rightness, he cries out against domestic virtue
and conjugal happiness.
Marriage is not slavory ; neither the hus
band nor the wife owns tho other. They are
joint occupants of earth's holiest tenement.
One may so act as to forfeit the confidence of the
other and it may be even wise, under some cir
cumstances, for them to separate, but such ex
ceptions do not justify a wholesale condemna
tion of tho marriage system. The christian
home is not a prison ; there is room enough
and freedom enough in it for the development
of all that is pure and noble. Its character
would not bo improved by a free and frequent
change of partners. Children should bo pro
tected from the results of a "freedom" which
would lead to the disruption of the family ev
ery time a person appeared who seemed to
husband or wife .more congenial than the other!
According to Prof. Herron's theory, tho
highest virtue is to live the truth to be one's
self. He says :
"Civilization, with its network of falsehood
and suspicion, of retribution arid revenge, is a sort
of world conspiracy against tho soul's integrity
and individuality. Yet the right of a single soul to
fully and freely express itself, to live out and show
forth all the truth about itself, so that it need have
within itself no hidden things, but be naked before
tho universe an not bo ashamed, Is infinitely
more important than the whole fabric of civiliza
tion." There are times when to be without a sense
of shame indicates an absence of conscience.
It iB not sufficient that "one should reveal his
inmost self to the world ; if that were all tho
vilest sinner couhLbecome a saint by confessing
his wickedness. Something more is necessary ;
there should be repentance and works meet for
repentance. It is more important that one im
prove himself than that he exhibit himself ; it
is more virtuous to resist temptation than to
,boldly admit having yielded to it. The mar
riage system will survive this attack, as it has
survived others, but Mr. Herron will' not add
to his usefulness by the position which he has
taken.
Is Watterson a Plagiarist?
-Tub Commoner is indebted to one of its
readers for calling attention to the similar
ity between Mr. Watterson's definition of a
statesman and the views expressed by Hon.
Preserved Doe in the Bigelow papers.
Mr. Watterson says: "He is no statesman who
has not learned to detach his policies from his
visions." Mr. Doo presents the same idea in
verso when ho says:
That truth, to dror kindly in all sorts of harness,
Must bo kop' in tho abstract for como to apply it,
You're apt to hurt some folks' interlsts by it.
And folks don't want Fourth o' July t' Interfere
"With tho business consarns o' tho rest o'-tho year,
No moro'n they want Sunday to, pry an' to peek
Into wut they aro doln' tho rest o' tho week.
.
A ginooine statesman should bo on his guard,
Ef ho must hev beliefs, not to b'lievo 'em to hard;
.
No, never say nothin' without you'rd compelled to,
And then don't say nothin' that you can bo held tu,
Nor don't leave no friction idecs layin' loose
For the ign'ant to put to Inccnd'ary usol
Of course the language is sufficiently dif
ferent to protect Mr. Watterson from the
charge of borrowing the phraseology with
which he clothed his idea, but the idea itself is
so like Mr. Doc's conception of statesmanship
as to suggest that both drew their inspiration
from a common source, even if the former did
not imitate tho latter. It is bad enough if Mr.
Watterson originated tho idea what shall we
say of him if he borrpwed so poor a definition
without giving proper credit?
No Third Term.
President McKinley has issued a statement
completely setting at rest the discussion of a
possible third term. Ho says:
"Executive Mansion, Washington, June 11. 1
regret; that the suggestion of a third term has 'been
made.. I. doubt whether I am called upon -to give
it notice. But thortf arc now questions' of the
gravost importance before the administration and
tho country and thoir just consideration should not
be prejudiced in tho public mind by oven the sus
picion of tho thought of a third term. In view,
therefore, of tho reiteration of tho suggestion of it
I will say now, once for all, expressing a long-settled
conviction, that I not only am not and aever
will be a candidate for a third term, but would not
accept a nomination for it if it were tendered me.
"My only ambition is to servo through my
second term to the acceptance of my countrymen,
whoso generous confidence I so deeply appreciate,
and then with them to do my duty In the ranks of
private citizenship.
'villiam Mckinley."
The field is now open for a new candidate
and already a number of names have been en
tered. The third term discussion served a use
ful purpose, however, in that it bronght out
the fact that the imperialistic sentiment rampant-among
republican leaders is ready to over
ride traditions as well as the constitution.
Congressman Grosvenor was the last promi
nent man to espouse the third term idea ber
fore the President put a quietus npon it. He
not only declared it time to "demolish the fic
tion" that there should be no third term, but
went so far as to slander Washington. Hii
interview reads:'
McKinley is personally tho mod popular
president we have had in a long time, and ho has
certainly most creditably performed the duties
of his high office. I think it is time, furthermore,
to demolish tho fiction that there is an unwritten
law established by Washington that no president,
of the United States may accept a third term. The
facts are, as any student of the times may dis-
i
i
4
.11
wll
f
i
il