ft
8
MAT, 1916
The Commoner
The Munitions-Militarist
Conspiracy
The real fight before the country at this time
is to defeat the munitions-militarist conspiracy
a conspiracy which has -for its object a revolu
tionary change in the nation's character and pol
icy. It is a conspiracy organized with deliber
ation and supported by unlimited means. The
conspirators are men of prominence and influ
ence. The manufacturers of munitions are soil
ing war supplies to Europe at the rate of more
than three hundred millions worth a year, and
they are selling at an enormous profit. The Du
Pont company recently declared a dividend of
23 per cent on powder, and the stock in the
Bethlehem steel company has risen beyond the
dreams of the speculators. Among the stock
holders in the munition companies are many of
our big financiers, and these men largely con
trol the metropolitan press. These manufac
turers and their influential stockholders know
tliat their dividends will dwindle when this war
is over unless they can fasten themselves upon
tho taxpayers of the country, and grow fat
as the people grow poor. Hence the newspaper
crusade for frenzied preparedness, such a cru
sade as we have not seen in a generation.
The second group in the conspiracy is made
up of professional soldiers militarists who
stand with the militarists of other countries.
And the militarists of all countries stand today
where the militarists stood two thousand years
ago; they know no way of correcting a mistake
of the mind except td cut off the head no way
of curing an error of the heart except to stop its
beating no way to settle a dispute between na
tions except to take human life.
To judge the militarists of the world by their
program, they have never learned that nineteen
hundred years ago a Prince of Peace was born
and brought into the world a gospel of love
which is destined ",,to supplant the bloody doc
trine of force and violence..
These two groups, one working for money
and the other magnifying the profession of
arms, have joined their forces in an effort to
commit this government to the European plan
of trying to preserve peace by terrorism. Al
though the plan has written history in charac
ters of blood and has led the warring nations
into the present conflict, we are asked to adopt
this policy and join the "pistol toting" nations
in the worship Of brute force.
The big corporate employers of labor are aid
ing and abetting the conspiracy because they
want a large army not made up of state militia
but of regulars to keep their workmen under
subjection.
And how much are we asked to invest in this
false philosophy? Two billions to "get ready"
with and one thousand and seventy-nine mil
lions a year to keep ready! We are now spend
ing two hundred and fifty millions a year on the
army and navy the most we have ever spent
in time of peace. During the past fifteen years
we have spent more on our navy than any other
country in the world except Great Britain. "We
are now spending on the army and navy more
than ten times as much as we are spending on
the department of agriculture, and yet the army
and navy experts, taking advantage of the ex
citement oFa foreign war, demand that we mul
tiply our war appropriations by four. The navy
experts want A BILLION AND A HALF for
new ships and SEVEN HUNDRED AND SIXTY
MILLIONS a yea,r thereafter to keep the navy in
fighting trim. The army experts want FIVE
HUNDRED MILLIONS to put the army in a re
spectable condition and THREE HUNDRED and
nineteen millions annually to keep it up to the
requirements of their program.
Eight hundred and twenty-nine million
dollars per year, the sum which the
army and navy experts ask us to add to the an
nual appropriations for the army and navy, is
eo large that the mind can not comprehend it.
'As the body becomes insensible to pain after a
certain degree is reached, so the mind becomes
insensible to ciphers after it hap taken in a cer
tain number. We can only understand large
sums by comparison. Here are four compar
isons: 1st. The farmers of the nation collected a
little more than FIVE AND A HALF BILLIONS
jfrom all their crops last year the banner year
In our history. If we compute the farmers
NET income at 8 per cent of his grogs income
we find that the net income of All the farmers
from all their crops was about $440,000,000.
THE ARMY AND NAVY EXPERTS WANT TO
ADD TO WHAT WE ARE NOW SPENDING ON
THE ARMY AND NAVY NEARLY TWICE THE
ANNUAL NET CROP INCOME OF ALL OUR
FARMERS. And they question tho patriotism
of those who protest against tho demand.
2nd. The cost of a macadam road, 16 feet
wide and 6 inches thick is, according to agricuL
Jural department statistics, a little more than
six thousand dollars per mile. If wo cstlmato
the average length of tho United States at thrco
thousand miles, and its average width at twelve
hundred miles, it can be gridironed with ma
cadam roads twelve miles apart, eastand west,
north and south, for less than $4,145,000,000
tho amount which the army and navy experts
would, IN FIVE YEARS, add to the army and
navy appropriations.
3d. This sum, eight hundred and twenty-nine
millions per year, would, in five years, duplicate
every bank in tho country, capital and surplus,
and thus double the amount of bank capital and
surplus available for borrowing.
4th. It costs the nation about $800,000,000
a year to educate the 25,000,000 school children"
of the land. Think of making an ANNUAL in
crease in our army and navy appropriations
equal to tho ENTIRE ANNUAL COST OF ED
UCATION, FROM KINDERGARTEN TO UNI
VERSITY! And yet tho army and navy experts,
backed by the munition manufacturers, demand
this and resent any opposition as if they had a
vested right to decide for the people the amount
to be expended. They are attempting to per
petrate an outrage upon the taxpayers of the
country, and their conspiracy, if successful,
would menace tho peace of tho world. No party
can afford to stand for such a policy least of
all the democratic party, tho champion of the
masses and the friend of peace.
W. J. BRYAN.
MA1CING "WAR PROFITABLE
The following from Washington recently ap
peared in the press dispatches:
"Europe's purchase of war materials
in the United States totaled $340,000,000
at the -end of the first twenty months
of war. Figures assembled in tho bureau
of foreign and domestic commerce show the
heaviest month was March, last, when more
than $50,000,000 worth of munitions left Amer
ican ports. April totals have not been compiled.
"Shipments of high explosivo shells and shrap
nel are crossing the Atlantic now at the rate of
a million dollars' worth daily and vessels are
carrying half a million dollars' worth of powder
a day. Fire arms and cartridges valued at jnoro
than five millions went to Europe during
March."
This may explain why the subsidized metro
politan papers are so anxious for the war to
continue, and so quick to ridicule any one who
talks of peace. Blood has its price.
WHY NOT THE MASTER?
There is some talk of Fred Lynch, of Minne
sota, for democratic national chairman, and it
is even whispered that Arthur Mullen, the new
member from Nebraska, has his eye on the po
sition. But surely the committee would not
select either of theso novices in machine poli
tics when it can command the services of Roger
Sullivan, past master in the art of corporate
domination, fresh from his victories in the great
state of Illinois. If the party is to be officered
by Wall street, the best that Wall street has is
none too good. W. J. BRYAN.
PETIT LARCENY,
The jingoes in the democratic party are urg
ing the President to "steal Roosevelt's thunder."
Stealing THUNDER seldom pays it is LIGHT
NING that does the work. There is nothing
grand about the Roosevelt thunder to steal
it would be petit larceny at most.
The men who loaned $500,000,000 to the
allies seem to think it the duty of the United
States to go to war with Germany to protect
the loan. It would be cheaper to guarantee
them against loss by resolution of congress. Will
they consent to peace on these terms, or are
they for war at any price?
"Honor" and "Hi
manity : ;
Within the last few weeks tho President .has
suggested three considerations that may require
us to go to war. In his recent speech to the
girls' camp ho asks "Did any man deom that he
could tamper with tho honor or integrity of the
United States?" Just before that In a speeck
to women in Washington ho volunteered the
statement that tho United States might go to
war for "humanity" but not for herself.
Passing over the significance of his frequent
references to tho conditions under which it may
become necessary to go to war, let us Inquire
how our honor or Integrity could be protected or
humanity served by going to war at this time?
No nation is unfriendly to us; no nation has
manifested any desire to violate our rights. We
have suffered Injuries at tho hands of BOTH
sides, but theso Injuries have been INCIDENTAL
to their attacks on each other, not injuries IN
TENDED against us. What honor could be
guarded or defended by compelling a nation to
go to war with us when it Is not an enemy, and
does not want war with us? What glory could
be won by attacking a nation on either side
whllo it is In a death grapple with other na
tions? Would not fair play, not to speak of
honor, require us to wait until the nation could
glvo Its undivided attonlon to us? It Is the
small dog, not the mastiff, that attacks tho big
dog when it is too busy to fight back. And
what would history say of us if wo wont into
such a war as this to vindicate the right of an
American citizen to safeguard a contraband
cargo on a belligerent ship a war which we
can easily avoid by keeping our citizens off
such ships.
And what about going to war for "humanity?"
The President may feel It his constitutional
duty to lead the nation Into a war if tho war is
necessary, to defend its rights or protect its
honor, but by what authority can the President
commit the nation to a war for "humanity"?
In olden time, the knight errant used to go
about armed, and take up the cause of tho weak
and the Injured, but ho did this at tho risk of
his own life. The case is quite different when
the executive wins tho glory while others make
the sacrifices. If the President thinks this na
tion should enlist as a champion of cither side,
let him state the case to tho public, glvo his
reasons, and then leave the decision to those
who are to do the fighting and tho dying. As
he believes in woman suffrage, ho might even
suggest that women be allowed to vote also, for
they bear the largest part of tho burden In time
of war. Why not a referendum on war? The
vote might be taken at this fall's election; if
the candidates ask for votes, why not accept in
structions? WAR IS TOO SERIOUS A THING TO BE UN
DERTAKEN, EXCEPT FOR THE MOST IM
PERATIVE REASONS, AFTER EVERY OTHER
REMEDY IS EXHAUSTED, AND THEN ONLY
WHEN THE PEOPLE DESIRE IT.
W. J. BRYAN.
A ONE-SIDED CAMPAIGN
Would it not bo a one-sided campaign if the
subsidized press were permitted to misrepresent
public sentiment every day, and no one was per
mitted to expose their fallacies or givo voice to
tho real sentiment of the people? And yet this
is tho terrorism that has been attempted for
moro than a year.
The reactionaries, who tried their best to pre-,
vent President Wilson's nomination -and ttfem
tried to prevent the passage of the remedial
measures which ho urged, are now going to the
convention with brass bands. Are they hoping
to regain control of the democratic organization,
or are they really converted to reform?
0 m
There will be more honor In mediation ,
than can bo won by going to war. Blessed i 0
are the peacemakers. t 0
0 " 0
0 0
v
'
a