Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 1, 1916)
" f-V TtyWr W h The Commoner OCTOBER, 191G 15 that only the first ono. Three votes were cast against the' second, and only one against the third; the rest went through without opposi tion. And yet, I remind you, that the republican candidate for President has had no timo to in dorse a peace policy that goes farther than any other peaco policy has gone. Now, this is the record that you repudiate if you vote the republican ticket. Will you weigh these splendid achievements and then say to the Fresident: We are not satisfied with what you have done. We want to go back into the mire with the reactionary party that had control he fore your administration began? THE MEXICAN QUESTION But, even if you were disposed to repudiate everything President Wilson has. done in the matter of domestic policies, you must remem ber that your votes decide another questiop, and that is your attitude toward his dealings with, foreign nations. I call your attention first to the Mexican situation, and ask you to remem ber that that, did riot commenccrunder this ad ministration. It came as an inheritance from the Taft administration. Huerta seized control o the government of Mexico in February, before the President took the oath of office In March, and there is on file at Washington a telegram that was sent by Huerta to President Taft, saying "I have over thrown this government." When Mr. Taft writes his recollections he will not put that down as a high compliment paid to him by the executive of another nation, The very fact that Mr. Huerta sent such a telegram to the President of this nation is an. indication that we had an am bassador there who ought never to have been appointed to such an. office. Huerta would hardly have sent that telegram if he had not had some assurance that it would be cordially received at Washington Who was Huerta? He was head of the army under President Madero, and, while the trusted subordinate of the president, he turned traitor and, by an act of high treason that would have justified his" execution in any civilized country in the world, made a prisoner of his president. Then, while he was in his custody as prisoner, Huerta either caused him to be assassinated or permitted his assassination. Huerta then seized the government, dissolved congress and proceed ed to establish a despotism. And the President was asked to recognize this man as president of Mexico! Republican leaders Insisted that he ought to be recognized, and the first speech Mr. Hughes made bears no other interpretation so well as that he intended to say that Huerta ought to have been recognized. Since then he has explained that he did not mean to say whether he ought to be recognized or not. If he wants an issue, a sure enough one, just let him say that the President ought to have recog nized Huerta! Why, my friends, if the Pres ident has only done, one good thing in all his administration, that one good thing was his re fusal to give sanction to the claims of this man who secured his office by treason, if. not by murder. Recognition would have set a premium on assassination throughout Latin America. Had Huerta secured the recognition of Presi dent Wilson he could, have gone into the mar kets of the world, and borrpwed the money necessary to. equip, .an,, amy ; with -which to kill off anybody, whpwanjed' tQinjprove conditions in Mexico. A vast majority of the American people ap prove of President Wilson's refusal to recognize Huerta as president of Mexico. Mr. Hughes says that the President interfered In the politics of Mexico when he told Huerta that he could not run for president. That is not what the President said; what the President said was that it would not do him any good to run, be cause he would not be recognized as President, even if he did elect himseir at a sham election controlled by his soldiers. What else could the President have sahl? If he could not recognize him when he seized the government, he could hardly recognize him as the result of an election such as he held. While Mr. Hughes charges the President with interferine ri the politics of Mexico, he has nev er said a word about the republican ambassador who permitted Huerta and Diaz to use the American embassy to form a conspiracy to over throw a government to which our ambassador was accredited. We found in the papers of the embassy a copy of the contract made in the embassy, by which Mr. Huerta was to "be pro visional president, upon tho overthrow of tho government, and then Diaz was to have the privilege of running for president. If Mr. Hughes is really in earnest in not want ing us to interfere in Mexican politics, ho should criticise the republican ambassador instead of tho President. INTERVENTION IX MEXICO But the recognition of Huerta is no longer an issue; Huerta is dead. Mr. Hughes, oven if elected, could not call him back and support him in the exercise of arbitrary authority. But intervention is a continuing menace, and the people are more interested in deciding whether this government should intervene in Mexico. To act intelligently on this subject we must know, first, what intervention would mean and, second, the real force behind tho demand for intervention. Intervention would mean a war with Mexico, the end of which no one could see, the cost of which no one could calculate, and a sacrifice of human life no one could estimate. It would also mean the sowing of the seeds of hatred in a sister republic, which would live for an hun dred years, and the loss of the fruits of half a century's effort to establish confidence and friendship between us and the republics of Cen tral and South America. And who asks for in tervention? The real force behind this demand is the capital invested in mines and ranches and other development work in Mexico. Mr. Hughes will not dare to declare openly for intervention, but he uses language which the advocates of intervention construe to support their demand. Iiet me state the objection to intervention. Intervention would mean a resort to war THE KILLING OF HUMAN BEINGS ON BOTH SIDES to advance the fortunes of speculators who, not satisfied with returns on investments in the United States, go abroad in search of larger profits. They buy property AT A PRICE WHICH 4TAKES JtALL THE UNCERTAINTIES INTO CONSIDERATION and then ask this gov ernment to draw on the people who ARE con tent to invest In this country, for the blood and money necessary to guarantee speculative profits under other flags. Intervention would be fol lowed by a demand for annexation because an nexation Avould multiply the value of American investments in Mexico. Those who have invest ments in Mexico and who, THINKING MORE OF THEIR OWN ENRICHMENT THAN THEY DO OF THE WELFARE OF THEIR COUNTRY, are willing to plunge this nation into war with Mexico, may feel justified In voting for Hughes, but the rest of the people ought to vote for Wil son and be grateful that the President, in this as in other matters, has taken the side of the many against the selfish demands of the few. In the position, taken the President has not disregarded the rights qf Americans having in vestments in Mexico. War is not the only way to protect investments in a foreign land. We do not resort to killing to determine property rights in this country. Americans whose hold ings in Mexico have suffered because of internal disorders in that country will have redress when order is restored just as citizens in this coun try have redress at law. What more can right fully be demanded? Are speculators entitled to more consideration abroad than they would have at home? Our government is still paying for damage caused by our Civil war, although It ended over fifty years ago; why should Mexico be expected to pay all damages within three or four years? The republican who criticizes the President for not dragging the country into war with Mex ico ought to furnish a list of the sons he Is will ing to sacrifice for the enrichment of American speculators. THE WAR IN EUROPE And now let us consider the remaining inter national question. Some demand that this gov ernment take part in the European war. - Mr. Roosevelt seems to think, AFTER REFLEC TION, that we ought to do so. He did not think so at the time, but the more he thinks about Belgium the madder he gets. When the question first arose he did not protest against the Presi dent's course, but he may not have understood then the political advantage to be gained. Now he is very much inflamed about Belgium. Well, if any one tells you we ought to have gone to war over the violation of Belgium's neutrality, ask him when ho reached this conclusion. If he says just recently, you might quote to him a part of Demosthenes' oration on tho crown. You know the greatest blow Demosthenes struck AeschinoB in that wonderful oration was: "You were there when I proposed theso things, did you know THEN that my proposals were not wise? If so, why were you not patriotic enough to speak out and propose wiser things? If you did not know then that theso things were not wise, why do you speak now?" Mr. Roosevelt was alive then and in politics. He know what was done. If thefPresident was wrong then, why did he not speak out? And if ho did not know then, that the President was wrong, why does he not keep still now? Some want us to go into this war. They had a meeting in Boston not long ago, and another meeting in New York. Speakers at these meet ing said It was our duty to enter this war. Well, if Mr. Hughes thinks so, ho should announco his opinion and we will have another live issue upon which the people can pass Judgment. What Is this war: This is a war without a parallel, without a precedent in all history. They have killed three milllows in this war. FlvemlL Hons have been taken prisoners; ten millions have been wounded. That Is what this war haB cost In life and suffering. And In money? They are spending every week four hundred millions, that is-what it cost us to build tho Panama canal. Since this war began they have spent enough killing each other to build an hundred Panama canals, and they have added more than forty billions of dollars to tho world's Indebted ness. The new war debts contracted to carry on this war are now greater than all the war debts that had come down from all the wars of history to the beginning of thlH war! Five hun dred years from now little children will be born into Europe with their necks under a yoke of debt that this generation has fastened on pos terity! And yet some people say wo ought to go into this war! They tell us that our honor requires it. Oh, my countrymen, there Is no honor that we can preserve or secure, by going into this war that is comparablo with the honor to which we can attain if we can but porsuado these warring nations to turn like prodigal sons from the husks on which they have fed; if we can but lift them out of the bloody mire in which they are fighting, up to a plane where thoy can join us in building a peace that will endure on love and brotherhood! We are the greatest of the neutral nations, and the world is looking to us to act as media tors when the time for mediation comes; but if we go into this war, no matter what the .reason, no matter what the excuse, we must turn over to some other nation an opportunity that never before came to any nation since time began. And we are the next of kin to all the nations that are at war; they are bone of our bone and blood of our blood. Not a soldier falls on any battlefield of Europe but that the wall of sor-. row In his home finds an echo at some American fireside, and these people havq a right to expect that we will remain the friend of all, and in God's good time play the part of friend. Soma nation must lift the world out of this black night or war, and that honor should come to our na tion. More glorious than any page of history that has yet been written will be that page that will record our nation's claim to the promise made to the peacemakers. u The world Is waiting for us to lead the way from the blood-stained precedents of the past out into the larger and the brighter day, and If I know the heart of the American people they are not willing that this supreme opportunity shall pass by unimproved. This, I believe, l the task that God, in his wisdom, has reserved for the United States. When this opportunity comes, and God grant that its coming may not long be delayed, some president is to be tho world's mediator. Seme president will write his name in letters of living light across the pages of history; Is it fair to call in a new man who has not borne the burden or felt the responsibility? Is it fair to give this honor to one who has not had a word of com mendation or encouragement for the President, but, instead, only scolditfe, fault-finding and criticism? The American people feel that they owe it to this President to reward him with this great honor for hafcng preserved peace in the western hemisphere while the old world' I drenched In human blood. We present him as our candidate, WOODROW WILSON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. i & r' SL - ,". ' I ,