?t
5
February 28, 190a .
A wealthy woman in Chicago offered to Mrs.
Uary Carlyle, a washerwoman, the sum of $5,000
if Mrs. Carlyle would give her
seven-year-old son to the wom
an of wealth. Mrs. Carlyle in
dignantly declined the offer, and
now ' some newspaper para
graphed are referring to the Chicago, washer
woman as a heroine. In refusing to part with
her beloved for gold, Mrs. Carlyle showed herself
to he a real mother and all real mothers are
heroines.
All Real
Mothers
are Heroines.
A newspaper dispatch says: "Senator Patter
eon of Colorado has also defied the tradition which
decrees that a senator must not
An make a speech for two years
Absurd after his installation. As a mem-
Tradition. her of the committee on Phil
ippines the Colorado senator
has become an important factor in the debato
upon Senator Lodge's bill, and his incisive, schol
arly method of speaking has won for him a great
deal of admiration." Senator Patterson did well
in defying this absurd tradition, not only be
cause, by his defiance, the senate was given the
privilege of hearing a forceful man upon an im
portant public question, but, now that Senator
Patterson has blazed the way, other new mem
bers may be induced to follow. The idea of a
senator, who is presumed to represent his state,
avoiding a discussion of great public questions
for a period of two years, is too absurd to be
tolerated in a representative government.
cv
Great Britain is having considerable, trouble
about .those horses whose purchase in the United
States has aroused considerable
How the British criticism on this side of the At-
Goose is lantic. In the house of com-
Being Plucked. n mons. it was pointed out that
on one contract for the purchase
of horses amounting to $555,000 'the profit to the
contractor selling them to Great Britain amounted
to $220,000. One member pointed out that a sim
ilar percentage of profit on the $93,000,000 spent
in the purchase of horses would have bestowed on
the contractors a profit amounting to $40,000,000.
Henry Labouchere, famous for his habit of plain
speaking, after listening to this report, declared
that somebody ought to be hanged in connection
with these exposures. And Labouchere certainly
must have expressed the indignation that would
naturally be felt either by the people who were re
quired to pay the bill, or-by men generally who do
not approve of the manner in which unscrupulous
men take advantage of the people during a war
period.
,In .view of the fact that the United States au
thorities have adopted the reconcentration policy
in- the Philippines, some of tho
things which Mr. McKinley .said
on this subject will be interest--ing
and instructive at this time.
In his message of December 6,
1897, referring to the reconcentration policy in
Cuba, Mr. McKinley said: "The cruel policy of
concentration was initiated February 16, 1896.
The productive districts controlled by the Spanish
armies were depopulated. The agricultural in
habitants were herded in and about the garrison
towns, their lands laid waste and their dwellings
destroyed. This policy the late cabinet of Spam
justified as a -necessary measure of war and as a
means of outting off supplies from the insurgents.
It has utterly failed as a war measure. It was not
civilized warfare. It was extermination. Against
this abuse of the rights of war I have felt con
strained on repeated occasions to enter the firm
and earnest protest of this government." In hls
message of April llr 1898, Mr. McKinley saWi
"Reconcentration adopted avowedly as a war meas
ure in order to cut off tho resources of the insure
rir.ricKlnley
on'
Reconcentration.
The Commoner.
gents worked its predestined result. As I said In
my messagq last December, it was not civilized
warfare; it was extermination. The only peace it
could beget, was that of the wilderness and tho
grave." These are stern words and yet they are
as true when applied to the reconcentration policy
in the Philippines or in South Africa as they were
when Mr. McKinley applied them to Spain's policy
in Cuba. If the reconcentration policy of Spain
in Cuba was not civilized warfare, if it was exter
mination, If "the only peace it could beget waa
that of the wilderness and tho grave," what shall
we say of the same policy adopted by Great Brit
ain in South Africa and by the United States In
the Philippine islands?
vvvs
Condemnation
by the
Wholesale.
But It was
"Only
Lafayette."
In a dispatch from Washington under date of
February 20, Walter Wellman, Washington cor
respondent for tho Chicago Rec
ord-Herald, says: "Naval offi
cers were naturally jubilant to
day over Admiral Schley's Bignal
defeat at the hands of the presi
dent. They point out that he has now been cen
sured by his superior 'officer, Admiral Sampson;
by President McKinley, by the navy department,
by the three admirals who composed tho court of
inquiry, again by the navy department, and now
more severely than by any of the foregoing by
President Roosevelt." This does seem to be rather
complete for a man who by nine-tenths of the"
American people is regarded as the hero of one
of the greatest sea battles in history. But it is
significant that after all this condemnation, Ad
miral Schley has not lost his place in the Ameri
can heart.
A Waukegan, 111., correspondent of the Chicago
Record-Herald thinks that Mrs. B. M. Briggs of
Rockford, 111., is entitled to dis
tinction because, when a girl,
Mrs. Briggs was kissed by La
fayette. Acording to the Record -Herald's
correspondent, "it was
in 1824, on the occasion of the grand reception
given at Montpelier, Vt., to the general upon the
occasion of his last visit to the United States. She
was one of the thirteen girls representing the
original states and wore a white gown with a blue
sash. She remembers that Lafayette wore a dark
blue coat, cutaway stylo, a low-cut cream-colored
vest, a big ruffled white shirt front and light col
ored trousers. He gave each of the girls a hearty
kiss and shook hands with the boys." Now if it
could be shown that Mrs. Briggs had danced with
George III. or had been saluted by Lord North,
then, indeed, would this good woman be famous
and h2r picture might be given a conspicuous
place in the columns of those papers that show so
much interest in the coronation of Edward VII.
The people who have no personal Interest to
serve and no prejudice to pervert their judgments
will in all probability. accept tho
opinion of Dewey rather than
the opinion of the president. If
Mr. Roosevelt's decision is
based upon testimony already
before the public it will have no influence with
those who have drawn a different conclusion from
the same testimony. If, on the ether hand, the
president bases his decision on new evidence, that
now evidence should be submitted to the public
so that it can be examined and weighed. The
president by clear and unmistakable Implication
renews the charges of falsehood and cowardice
made by Maclay, but rejected by tho commission.
The president speaks of Schley's "disobedience to
orders and misstatements of facts in relation
thereto." What is this if not a charge of false
hood? In discussing the loop he speaks of "dan
gerous proximity" and says: "This kind of dan
ger must not be too nicely weighed by those whose
trade it is to daro greatly for the honor of tho
Roosevelt
Condemns
Sciiiey
Air. Roosevelt's
Peculiar
Plan.
A Republican
Organ's
Prayer.
flag. This means nothing unless it Is construed
as a reflection upon tho courage of Admiral Schley.
Tho Chicago Record4ferald charges that the
president consulted with leading republicans be
fore announcing his decision. If this bo true he
evidently considers tho questions involved as
political rather than judicial.
In a letter to tho New York World, George
Rico of Marietta, O., a gentleman who appears to
be well Informed on tho affairs
Some of the Standard Oil trust, de-
standard oil clarcs that the capitalization of
Figures. the trust, instead of being $100,-
000,000 as popularly supposed Is
$200,000,000; and ho also advances tho informa-
tion that the recent 20 per cent dividend just de
clared, instead of amounting to $20,000,000 as re
ported in tho newspapers, really amounted to $40,
000,000. '
The character of Mr. Roosevelt's search for
the truth is shown by his statement that ho had
summoned before him "tho sur
viving captains of the five ships,
asido from those of tho two ad
mirals, which were actively en
gaged at Santiago." In other
words, in order to do "perfect justice" Mr. Roose
velt swept aside all the testimony of tho men on
tho Brooklyn who were in tho heat of the fight
because in order to do "perfect Justico" ho had
swept asido all tho testimony of tho men on tho
New York who were nearly twelve miles away
and could not tell anything about the fight!
In an editorial entitled "God Give Us Men'
the Chicago Inter-Ocean, republican, says that the
. republican congress "has been
long enough in session to reveal
its tendencies' and to outline its
record." Tho Inter-Ocean ar
raigns the republican congress
men for their sins of omission "and of commission
and concludes: " 'God give us men' prayed a great
American poet in the dark hour of the nation's
life. The republican party of the nation, as they
contemplate the record now making by the' Fifty
seventh congress, may well re-echo that prayer,
'God give us men.' " The American people have
seen a number of changes in the personnel 'of tho
republican congress, and yet it seems that it is
not a question of men so much as it is of prin
ciples and of policies; of sincere profession' and
patriotic practice; and in this view one may he
jardoned for believing that the people's interest
will not be subserved by a mere change In the In
dividual republican office-holder, but that the party
itself must be driven from power and replaced by
a party that is willing to represent the people.
Senator Hoar, in a recent speech in the senate,
referred to the fact that an order had been issued
by tho Philippine commlssidn
" "An ' prohibiting the reading of the
incendiary Declaration of Independence in
Document the Philippine Islands. The sen
ator further pointed out that by
the law promulgated by that commission it was a
penitentiary offense to read the Declaration of
Independence. Tho Declaration is said to ho
barred from the Philippines on the ground that it is
an incendiary document. Is this not a curloUs
charge to make against that document? It sets
forth certain self-evident truths, and discusses the
inalienable rights of man. Are wo asr a nation
in a position to punish people for believing In
that Declaration or in reading It aloud to others?
Imperialism has certainly brought us into a
strange situation, and one Is forcibly reminded of
the time when a Christian monarch felt it neces
sary to suppress a publication which contained ex
tracts from the Bible condemning monarchy, if
we are going to have imperialism we will 'find it
embarrassing to preach free government here while
we practice imperialism elsewhere.
-.
.1
