SMTSX3
,wmwmmfm'i,i
ki!rmw&
F?
Av
The Commoner
14
VOL. 16, NO. 8
m
Hughes's Speech of Acceptance
Charles Evans Hughes nccopted tho repub
lican presidential nomination in a speoch deliv
ered in Carnegie hall, Now York city, Monday
night, July 81.. Tho comploto text of tho ad
dre8, hh printed in tho Congressional Record, In
reproduced bolow. Ed.
Mr. Hughes said:
Senator Harding, memboro of tho notification
ommittoo, and follow citizens, this occasion is
more than a moro coromony of notification. Wo
are not hero to indulgo in formal expressions.
We come to state in a plain and direct manner
our faith, our purpose, and our pledge. This
representative gathering Is a happy augury. It
moans tho strength of reunion. It means that
the party of Lincoln is restored, alert, offectivo.
It means tho unity of a common perception of
paramount national noods. It means that wo
are nolthor deceived nor benumbod by abnormal
conditions.
Wo know that wo arc in a critical period, per
haps moro critical than any poriod since the
Civil war. Wo need a dominant sense of na
tional unity; tho exorclso of our best construc
tive powers; tho vigor and rosourcofulness of a
quickened America. We desire that tho repub
lican party ad a great Hboral party shall bo tho
agoncy of national achievement, the organ of
tho offectivo expression of dominant American
lam. What do I mean by that?
TPIE EXPRESSION OF AMERICANISM
I mean America conscious of power, awake to
obligation, eroct In self-respect, prepared for ev
ery omorgoncy, dovotod to tho Ideals of peace,
Instinct with tho spirit of human brotherhood,
safeguarding both Individual opportunity and
tho public lntorcst, maintaining a well-ordorcd
constitutional system adapted to local self-government
without tho sacrifice of essential na
tional authority, appreciating tho necessity of
stability, export knowledge, and thorough or
ganization as tho indispensable condition of se
curity and progress; a country loved by its cit
izens with a patriotic fervor permitting no di
vision in their allegiance and no rivals in thoir
affection I mean Amorica first and America
ofllclont. It is In this spirit that I respond' to
your summons. J
Our foroign relations have assumed grave im
portance in tho last threo years. The conduct of
diplomatic intercourse is in the keeping of tho
Exocutivo. It rests chiefly with hira whether wo
shall show competence or incompetence; whether
tho national honor shall bo maintained; whether
our preBtigo and Influence shall bo lowered or
advanced. What is tho record of tho adminis
tration? Tho first duty of tho Executive was to
command tho respect of the world by the per
sonnel of our state department and our repre
sentation abroad. No party exigency could ex
cuso tho nonperformance of this obvious obliga
tion. Still, after making every allowance for
certain commendable appointments, it is appar
ent that this obligation was not performed.
WEAKNESS AND INEXPERTNESS
At tho very beginning of the present admin
istration, where in tho direction of diplomatic
intercourse there should have boen conspicuous
strength and exportness, wo had weakness and
inexpertness. Instead of assuring respect we
Invited distrust of our competence and specula
tion as to our capacity for firmness and decision,
thus entailing many difficulties which otherwise
easily could have been escaped. Then in nu
merous instances, notably in Latin America,
whore such a courso was particularly reprehen
sible and whore wo desire to encourage the most
friendly relations, men of long diplomatic ex
perience whoso knowledge and training were of
especial valu to tho country woro retired from
tho service narontly for no othor reason than
to meet parti an domands in the appointment of
inexperienced porsons.
Where, a3 in Santo Domingo, we had assumed
an important special truBt in tho interest of its
people, that trust was shockingly botrayed in
order to satisfy "deserving democrats." The
record showing the administration's disregard of
its responsibilities with respect to our represen
tation in diplomacy is an open book, and the
specifications may easily bo had. It is a record
revealing professions belied. It is a dismal rec
ord to those boliovlng in Americanism. Take for
example, the withdrawal of Ambassador Horrick
from Franco. There he stood, In the midst of
alarms, tho very embodiment of courage of
polso, of executive capacity, universally trusted
and beloved. No diplomat erer won moro com
pletely tho affections of a foreign people; and
thcro was no better fortune for this country than
to have at the capital of any one of the belllg
eront nations a representative thus esteemed.
WHAT REMOVING HERRICK MEANT
Yet the administration permitted itself to su
persede him. The point is not that the man was
Ambassador Herrick, or that tho nation was
Franco, but that we invited the attention of tho
world to the inexcusable yielding of national in
terest to partisan expediency. It was a lament
ablo sacrifice of international repute. If wo
would have the esteem of foreign nations, wo
must desorve it. We must show our regard for
special knowledge and experience I propose
that wo shall make the agencies of our diplo
matic intercourse in every nation worthy of the
American name. The dealings of the adminis
tration with Mexico constitute a confused chap
ter of blunders. We have not helped Mexico.
She lies prostrate, impoverished, famine strick
en, overwhelmed with the woes and outrages of
internecine strife, the helpless victim of a con
dition of anarchy which the course of tho ad
ministration only served to promote. For our
selvos, we have witnessed the murder of our cit
izens and tho destruction of their property. We
have made enemies, not friends. Instead of
commanding respect and deserving good will by
sincerity, firmness, and consistency, we provoked
misapprehension and deep resentment.
In tho light of tho conduct of the administra
tion no one could understand its professions. De
crying interference, wo interfered most exasper
atingly. Wo have not even kept out of actual
conflict, and the soil of Mexico is stained with
tho blood of our soldiers. We have resorted to
physical invasion, only to retire without gaining
tho professed object. It is a record which can
not bo examined without a profound sense of
humiliation.
THE CASE OF HUERTA
When the administration came into power
Huerta was exercising authority as provisional
president of Mexico. Ho was certainly in fact
tho head of tho government of Mexico. Whether
or not ho should be recognized was a question to
be determined in tho exercise of sound discre
tion, but according to correct principles. Tho
President was entitled to be assured that there
was at least a de facto government; that inter
national obligations would be performed; that
tho lives and property of American citizens
would have proper protection. To attempt, how
ever, to control the domestic concerns of Mexico
was simply intervention, not" less so because dis
claimed. The height of folly was to have a vacillating
and ineffective intervention, which could only
ovoko bitterness and contempt, which would fail
to pacify the country and to assure peace and
prosperity under a stable government. If crimes
were committed, wo do not palliate them. We
make no defense of Huerta. But the administra
tion had nothing to do with the moral character
or Huerta, if in fact ho represented the govern
ment of Mexico. We shall never worthily pros
ecute our unselfish aims or serve humanity by
wrong headedness. So far as tho character of
Huerta Is concerned, the hollowness of the pre
tensions on this score is revealed by the admin
istrations subsequent patronage of Villawhose
qualifications as an assassin are indisputable
whom apparently the administration was ready
to recognize had ho achieved his end and ful
filled what then seemed to be its hope.
JOHN LIND'S MISSION
The question is not as to the nonrecognition
? ?.uo!'ta- ThG administration did not content
iSSf witVSfU8iDS t0 recenizo Huerta who was
recognized by Great Britain, Germany, France
Russia, Spain, and Japan. The administration
undertook to destroy Huerta, to conSoT Mexican
pollt cs even to deny Huerta the right to be a
?SS.dlfi,ate ?V?e 0fliC0 of ident at the elec
,!ie administration demanded. With what
bewilderment must the Mexicans have warded
our assertion of their right to manage tSown
lTJ? ff 5? ; . hn Lind wis
wV' ..;" ;" ; VI " J.? mexico the Presl
ministration continued tn (Uram M
.destruction of the only mvomL ,ort.8 at tho
In the Bpring of 1914 occurred the cam?,'
em Crux. Men from on nt v. caPture of
Vera On. Man frnm Z." " caPtU
mZZk rt "T YU BnlPS had Wn
wian 5oloST BVourTdVrdetat
white, which was refused. There X eJ
President went to congress, asking authority ,
ise the armed forces of the United StSwul
out waiting for the passage of the resold
Vera Cms was seized. It appeared thata" BniS'
load of ammunition for Huerta was about t en
ter that port. There was a natural onnosltlni, ?"
this invasion, and a battle occurred, fnwWch A
fticansnd er a hundred Micans were
killed. This, of course, was war. Our dead
aoldiers wore praised for dying like heroes in a
war of service. Later we retired from Vera
Cruz, giving up this noble warfare.
DID NOT GET THE SALUTE
Wo had not obtained tho salute which was d.
manded. ' We had not obtained reparation to
affronta. The ship with ammunition which could
not land at Vera Cruz had soon landed at an
other port, and its cargo was delivered to
Huerta without interference. Recently the naked
truth was admitted by a cabinet officer. We are
now informed that "we did not go to Vera Cruz
to force Huerta to salute the flag." We are
told that we went there "to, show Mexico that we
were in earnest in our demand that Huerta must
go." That is, we seized Vera Cruz to depose
Huerta. The question of the salute was a mere
pretext.
Meanwhile the administration utterly failed
to perform its obvious duty to secure protection
for the lives and property of our citizens. It is
most unworthy to slur those who have invest
ments in MexicG in order to escape a condem
nation for the nonperformance of this duty.
There can be no such escape, for we have no de
bate, and there can be no debate, as to the ex
istence of this duty on the part of our govern
ment. Let me quote the words of the demo
cratic platform of 1912:
"The constitutional rights of American cit
izens should protect them on our borders and
go with them throughout the world, and every
American citizqn residing or having property in
any foreign country is entitled to and must be
given the full protection of the United State;
government, both for himstlf and his property."
The bitter hatred aroused by the course of
tho administration multiplied outrages, while
our failure to afford protection to our citizens
evoked the scorn and contempt of Mexicans.
Consider the ignominious incident at Tampico in
connection with the capture of Vera Cruz. In
tho midst of the greatest danger to the hundreds
of Americans congregated at Tampico our ships
which were in the harbor were withdrawn and
our citizens were saved only by the intervention
of German officers and were taken away by Brit
ish and German ships. The official excuse of
tho secretary of the navy is an extraordinary
commentary.
NAVAL COMMANDER'S DILEMMA
Our ships, it seems, had been ordered to Vera
Cruz, but as it appeared, that they .were not
needed tho order was rescinded. Then, wo aro
told, our admiral was faced with this remark
able dilemma: If he attempted to go up the river
at Tampico and take our citizens on board, the
word of "aggressive action," as the secretary
called it, "would have spread to the surround
ing country," and it was "almost certain that
reprisals on American citizens would have fol
lowed and lives Would have been lost." Wo had
so incensed the Mexicans that we could not res
cue our own citizens at Tampico, save at the risk
of the murder of others. We must take Vera
Cruz to get Huerta out of office and trust to
other nations to get our own citizens out of
peril. What a travesty of international policy.
Destroying the government of Huerta, wo left
Mexloto the ravages of revolution. I shall not
attempt to narrate the sickening story of the
barbarities committed, of the carnival of mur
der and lust. We were then told that Mexico
was entitled to spill as much blood as she pleased
to settle her own affairs. Tho administration
vacillated with respect to the embargo on the
export of arms and munitions to Mexico. Under
the resolution of 1912 President Taft had laid
such an embargo. In August, 1913, President
that neither side to the struggle in Mexico
slimilrl rnrolvo nn nr.n!t ., f. flifo Ride Ot
w ,-" T r;:' "t."0 a8 e Jfrcsi-
to the unrecognized Huerta toJSJV11'! r-f!ld recei any assistance from this side ot
that the itMMmTA?lin deraand rder' and that the export of all arms and
Justifiable mission, most offensive to a sensitive
people. John Lind lingered Irritating!?. The ad-
munitions tfvMfMnn -nrrkillrl fnrhirMnn.
But in February, 1914, the embargo was lift
ed. In April, 1914, the embargo was restored.