i-
iM
The Commoner
VOLUME 7, NUMBER 3
ft!!'
Mil
$
Hi !
fliW.1
wra
i.ii
Hi-TV i J
iiiKiv .,
' i i
L'A
t ,
M T
1 u
i it
.1
i
. i "it" i
; -Tit' ;
is
J t l
I.
!
Jr.i1 " ''
IUI ,',!
4, ll,'"
3i i J' fV,
,
S' ;
.tf
V.
, V,
tt .lit
i nt '.'
tho fullness of time Porto Rico can be prepared
for statehood as dur territories have been pro
pared. In the case of Cuba, wo secured her In
dependence, declaring at tho time that wo had
no desire to annex her territory. We aro now
simply assisting her In tho establishing of self
government. It is hardly fair to limit her at
tempts too strictly or to say that she shall have
only ono trial. If Cuba becomes a part of tho
Amorican union, it ought to bo with the consent
"oTTior people and with tho understanding that
they como in as citizens and npt as subjects,
and tho same may bo said of Sih Domingo or
any othor country that Is added to ours. There
is no objection to annexation when annexation
is mutually desired and means tho extension of
our institutions, as well as our sovereignty. Ex
pansion, whero our government undergoes no
change in its character, is not imperialism. Im
perialism is tho name applied to a government
whero different forms of government are em
ployed in tho governing of dlfferont parts. Eng
land, for instance, is an empire. The people of
England and Scotland live under one form of
government, the people of Ireland live under a
different form of government, tho people of Can
ada, Australia and New Zealand live under a
third form of government, and the people of
India aro subjected to a government based upon
a still different theory. If tho Philippine islands
contained but a few people and thoy were near
to us and wanted to come in, they would pre
sent a different problem, but tho islands are
not a part of the western hemisphere; they are
closo to the continent of Asia. Thte people are
not few, but number something lilce eight mil
lions; and they are opposed to annexation. They
differ from us in race characteristics and in his
tory, and tho intercourse between our country
and tho islands is not intimate enough to give
any assurance that thoy could bo brought into
harmonious co-operation with us. -'It would not
be wise to admit the Filipinos to citizenship and
orect their community into states. Their in
dustrial conditions are so different from ours
that they could not intelligently participate in
the making of our laws, and wo can not Intelli
gently make theirs.
If they aro to be hold at all they are to be
held as colonics, and a colonial policy is entirely
inconsistent with the theory of our government.
Our government b based upon the doctrine tha
iMwirmnenjxtankw
consent of the governed, and this doctrine is
eitlior true or false. If it is true, then we can
not exercise a colonial policy and permanently
administer over the Filipinos a government to
which they object. To do so is inconsistent with
our own theories, and wo could not defend our
colonial policy without attacking the basis upon
which our own government rests. We can not
afford as a people to surrender our political
principles, our political axioms apd our position
as a world teacher in order to adopt a colonial
policy.
Senator Bevoridge insists that "every rea
son of history, nature and the character of our
race supports this policy" (the policy of per
manent occupation,). He declares that "through
out all ages administrative people have devel
oped and have extended their customs and their
cultures by tho administration of government
to less developed people." Ho finds a second
reason "in the character of our race." He al
leges that "the people oi our blood and we our
solves have always been restless expansionists."
A third: "We must have more foreign trade."
His reasons aro not sufficient. Moral prin
ciples can not be so easily ignored. It is true
that history has given us many illustrious ex
amples of nations which have extended their
governments over weaker nations, but history
has also shown us the final overthrow of these
conquering nations which substituted might for
right and ignored the claims of justice
"For the God who reigried over Babylon
Is the God who is reigning yet."
Neither is It sufficient to say ihat servient
nations have beeiV'helped by the dominant ones.
Good comes out pt everything;,;, There is no
doubt that the black race brought. to this country
by the- slave-traders has advanced, 'far beyond
what it would have done had t&e slave-trader
been unknown, and yet, back about a century
ago, our people decided that the slave trade
should be prohibited. There is .no doubt that
the man who canio, ;up from slavery i& farther
advanced than his collateral relatives who re
mained in Africa, and yet pulHc, sentiment
reached a point where slavery gave way to free
dom; "
It is true that there has been a good deal
.of the spirit of adventure in our race, and it
Is true that our ancestors have done many things
that wo will never attempt to justify. It is
doubtless true that some good has often como,
from things wickedly designed, but we can not
justify the doing of evil that good may come,
nor can we excuse a criminal act on the ground
that an overruling Providence will convert our
sin into a blessing. If wo have any tendencies
to oxtond our possessions by ignoring tho moral
law, it is better to correct such tendencies than
to encourage them. The doctrine that wo just
can not help doing wrong "because it is nat
ural" is not considered a sufficient defense in
court, and it should not be so considered among
nations merely because there is no nation great
enough to punish the nation that yields to an
irresistible impulse to do evil. .
To be sure, It is called "destiny" when a
nation does wrong, but destiny has been defined
as "the dark apology for error." It is the plea
of the weak, who, lacking the moral courage to
withstand temptation, seek to load their sins
upon the Almighty. The third reason is the real
one. In presenting history and race characteris
tics the senator has simply fallen unconsciously
into the use of terms which others have em
ployed as a subterfuge, but in suggesting the
expansion of our commerce as a reason for im
perialism he is putting forth the argument which
really has been most potential, in the making of
imperialists. But the purchase of trade with
human blood, tho sacrifice of rights and prin
ciples of government in order to obtain a mar
ket what is this but putting the dollar above
the man? It was Lincoln's boast in 1854 that
his party believed in both the dollar and the
man, but that in case of conflict it believed in
the man before the dollar. What would he
say now if he could reply to Indiana's illustrious
republican senator, who justifies the bartering
away of the fundamental principles o'f free gov
ernment in order to make a market for our
merchandise?
As a matter of fact, no argument is more
unsubstantial than the trade argument. More
than a century ago Franklin pointed out to the
representatives of the English government that
no one could justify the purchase of trade with
blood, and that, as a matter of dollars and cents,
trade purchased at the cannon's mouth was
dearly bought. Our own experience proves that
there is a financial loss in an attempt to extenxU
ourtrade by forcer We have not only been
willing to sell our birthright for a mess of pot
tage, but we have failed to get the pottage.
The senator gives us but one side of. the
account; he magnifies our trade and ignores the
cost to us. We are appropriating for the army
and navy more than one hundred millions a
year in excess of our army and navy appropria
tions ten years ago. Our increased expendi
tures far exceed our increased trade, and all of
the people pay the expenses, while a few get
the benefit of the trade.
' ' . oooo
THE HAYWOOD TRIAL
Now that the trial of William D. Haywood
is over, The Commoner can without impropriety
comment on tho case. In the last issue satisfac
tion was expressed at the verdict, but as the
acquittal was announced just as we were going
to press we could do no more than record the
result.
The case deserves a place among the cele
brated trials of the nation, and it is not too
much to say that both sides were presented with
consumate care and ability. The arguments
made, by Senator Borah for the t state, and by
Clarence Darrow for the defense, could scarcely
be surpassed in force and eloquence; all was
done that earnestness or talent could suggest
to impress the evidence upon the jury and the
judge's instructions were clear and to the
point. That the jury should have so speedily
acquitted was a triumph which even the defense
could hardly expect. When the feeling exist
ing in Idaho is considered a feeling causing
an unconscious bias for or against the miners
in the minds of honest men it would not have
been surprising if the jury had disagreed. That
the opinion among the juror's was almost unani
mous pn tho first, ballot makes the vindication
more noteworthy.
It must be romembered tha'. the state not
only chose the place of trial, but kidnapped the
defendants in ftnother state, anil hurried them
to Idaho without opportunity to contest the
extradition. While the United States supreme
court held the kidnapping legal the decision can
not relieve the authorities of the charge of en
gaging in a conspiracy unworthy of Btate offi
cials, But Haywood may well rejoice that he
was kidnapped for. the clandestine deportation
adds completeness to his triumph. .
But the verdict is more than a personal
victory; it is a victory for the labor organiza
tion with which Haywood was connected. It
would have seriously embarrassed the labor
movement if wilful murder could have been
traced to labor officials. The- American people
will not tolerate conspiracies to commit crime
and all friends of labor have reason to rejoiqe
that a jury of disinterested men has rejected
the evidence presented and declared the defend
ant not guilty. The trial, too, while removing
the suspicion cast on Haywood by Orchard's con
fession will be a warning to labor leaders to
avoid association with those who, like Orchard,
discredit the wageearners by suggesting vio
lence as a remedy for their grievances.
The acquittal must also be regarded as a
vindication of the jury system. Here were
twelve disinterested men who bound them
selves by oath to do justice between the state
and the accused; for nearly three months they
listened to witnesses, to lawyers and to the
judge, and then they retired to the jury room
and, recognizing their responsibility, returned
a concrete definition of justice which a nation '
approves. No such confidence could be reposed
in a single judge as is roposed in a jury, and a
judge might well shrink from the discharge of
such a duty as the HayWood jury bravely per
formed. A judge would have former or future trials
to consider, and public opinion might have
weight with him, but tlese men had only this
case to think of and, after administering justice
they retire from public view. They could act
with a freedom which no judge could feel and
it is this very, freedom to consider each case on,
Its merits that furnishes one of the strongest
arguments in favor of the jury system.
The friends of the defendant, the friends
of labor and the friends of trial by jury can
find cause for rejoicing in the acquittal of
William D. Haywood. ;
oooo
OP COURSE W
The Washington! Pn solemnly declares
that Mr. Cortelyouuoes not hunt delegates
tth ajrassjbfla No, indeed; "far be it from
"such." MTC Cortelyou has always worked "dif
ferent scheme when he went out after political
game. Grasping the handle of the superheated
frylngpan, Mr. Cortelyou soon has enough "cam
paign fat in stock, and while this is sizzling hot
he pours it over the caudal appendage of the
game he seeks. This system has the old-fashioned
plan of "putting salt on its tail" beaten
to 'a standstill.
s OOOO ;
THE PRIMARY PLEDGE '7
As this copy of The Commoner may be read
by some one not familiar with the details of, the
primary pledge plan, it is necessary to say that
according to the terms of this plan every demo
crat is asked to pledge himself to attend all of
the primaries of his party to be held between
now and the next democratic national conven
tion unless unavoidably prevented, and to secure
a clear, honest and straightforward declaration
of the party's position on every question upon
which the voters of the party desire to speak.
Those desiring to be enrolled can either write
The Commoner approving the object of the or
ganization and asking to have their names en
tered on the roll, or they can fill out and" mail
the blank pledge, which is printed on page 15.
OOOO
PRAISING ROOSEVELT
Some of the democratic papers criticise "Mr.
Bryan for commending certain of the president's
utterances and efforts but these criticisms will
not prevent an expression of appreciation of the
educational work the chief executive is. doing.
The president is entitled to commendation
even from political opponents when he says or
does anything good.- One must be narrow mind- .
ed indeed to refuse, to do justice to, an official
merely because he belongs to another party.
Then, too, one raises a suspicion as to his own
sincerity if he loses interest in a righteous pol
icy because some one else advocates it. But
there is & good partisan reason why democrats
should commend the president wh,qn, he urges
the adoption of democratic doctrine.
President Roosevelt advocates, trajlroad reg-!
ulation, trust prosecution, the income tax and
arbitration of labor troubles. All of these were
demanded by democratic platforms when repubr
lican platforms were silent on the subject. It
H
irr
l-r' , ft
'"'I Km l"l.l,.l
A, JW.
;.
I)
f , , i
sr
iyMMiw m i jf&,mim
V,
u
