See (in this volume)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1896-1898

The provisions and the effect of the Act were summarized at

the time by the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Gage, in a

published statement, as follows:

"The financial bill has for its first object what its title

indicates, the fixing of the standard of value and the

maintaining at a parity with that standard of all forms of

money issued or coined by the United States. It reaffirms that

the unit of value is the dollar, consisting of 25.8 grains of

gold, nine tenths fine, but from that point it goes on to make

it the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to maintain all

forms of money issued or coined at a parity with this

standard. It puts into the hands of the Secretary ample power

to do that.

{640}

For that purpose, the bill provides in the Treasury bureaus of

issue and redemption and transfers from the general fund of

the Treasury's cash $150,000,000 in gold coin and bullion to

redemption fund, that gold to be used for the redemption of

United States notes and Treasury notes. That fund is

henceforth absolutely cut out of and separated from the cash

balance in the Treasury and the available cash balance will

hereafter show a reduction of $150,000,000 from the figures

that have heretofore prevailed. This $150,000,000 redemption

fund is to be used for no other purpose than the redemption of

United States notes and Treasury notes and those notes so

redeemed may be exchanged for the gold in the general fund or

with the public, so that the reserve fund is kept full with

gold to the $150,000,000 limit. If redemptions go on so that

the gold in this reserve fund is reduced below $100,000,000,

and the Secretary is unable to build it up to the $150,000,000

mark by exchange for gold in the general fund or otherwise, he

is given power to sell bonds and it is made his duty to

replenish the gold to the $150,000,000 mark by such means.

"The 'endless chain' is broken by a provision which prohibits

the use of notes so redeemed to meet deficiencies in the

current revenues. The act provides for the ultimate retirement

of all the Treasury notes issued in payment for silver bullion

under the Sherman act. As fast as that bullion is coined into

silver dollars Treasury notes are to be retired and replaced

with an equal amount of silver certificates. The measure

authorizes the issue of gold certificates in exchange for

deposits of gold coin, the same as at present, but suspends

that authority whenever and so long as the gold in the

redemption fund is below $100,000,000 and gives to the

Secretary the option to suspend the issue of such certificates

whenever the silver certificates and United States notes in

the general fund of the Treasury exceed $40,000,000. The bill

provides for a larger issue of silver certificates, by

declaring that hereafter silver certificates shall be issued

only in denominations of $10 and under except as to 10 per

cent. of the total volume. Room is made for this larger use of

silver certificates in the way of small bills by another

provision which makes it necessary as fast as the present

silver certificates of high denominations are broken up into

small bills to cancel a similar volume of United States notes

of small denominations and replace them with notes of

denominations of $10 and upward. Further room is made for the

circulation of small silver certificates by a clause which

permits national banks to have only one third of their capital

in denomination under $10.

"One clause of the bill which the public will greatly

appreciate is the right it gives to the Secretary to coin any

of the 1890 bullion into subsidiary silver coins up to a limit

of $100,000,000. There has for years been a scarcity of

subsidiary silver during periods of active retail trade, but

this provision will give the Treasury ample opportunity to

supply all the subsidiary silver that is needed. Another

provision that the public will greatly appreciate is the

authority given to the Secretary to recoin worn and uncurrent

subsidiary silver now in the Treasury or hereafter received.

"A distinct feature of the bill is in reference to refunding

the 3 per cent. Spanish war loan, the 2 per cent. bonds

maturing in 1907 and the 5 per cent. bonds maturing in 1904, a

total of $839,000,000, into new 2 per cent. bonds. These new 2

per cent. bonds will not be offered for sale, but will only be

issued in exchange for an equal amount, face value, of old

bonds. This exchange will save the Government, after deducting

the premium paid, nearly $23,000,000, if all the holders of the

old bonds exchange them for the new ones. National banks that

take out circulation based on the new bonds are to be taxed

only one half of 1 per cent. on the average amount of

circulation outstanding, while those who have circulation

based on a deposit of old bonds will be taxed, as at present,

1 per cent. There are some other changes in the national

banking act. The law permits national banks with $25,000

capital to be organized in places of 3,000 inhabitants or

less, whereas heretofore the minimum capital has been $50,000.

It also permits banks to issue circulation on all classes of

bonds deposited up to the par value of the bonds, instead of

90 per cent. of their face, as heretofore. This ought to make

an immediate increase in national bank circulation of

something like $24,000,000, as the amount of bonds now

deposited to secure circulation is about $242,000,000. If the

price of the new 2s is not forced so high in the market that

there is no profit left to national banks in taking out

circulation, we may also look for a material increase in

national bank circulation based on additional deposits of

bonds. National banks are permitted under the law to issue

circulation up to an amount equal to their capital. The total

capital of all national banks is $616,000,000. The total

circulation outstanding is $253,000,000. There is, therefore,

a possibility of an increase in circulation of $363,000,000,

although the price of the 2 per cent. bonds, as already

foreshadowed by market quotations in advance of their issue,

promises to be so high that the profit to the banks in taking

out circulation will not be enough to make the increase

anything like such a possible total."

Upon the working of the Act, during the first nine months of

its operation, Secretary Gage remarked as follows, in his

annual report dated December 14, 1900:

"The operation of the act of March 14 last with respect to

these two important matters of our finances has well

exemplified its wisdom. Confidence in the purpose and power of

the Government to maintain the gold standard has been greatly

strengthened. The result is that gold flows toward the

Treasury instead of away from it. At the date of this report

the free gold in the Treasury is larger in amount than at any

former period in our history. Including the $150,000,000

reserve, the gold in the Treasury belonging to the Government

amounts to over $242,000,000, while the Treasury holds,

besides, more than $230,000,000, against which certificates

have been issued. That provision of the act which liberalized

the conditions of bank-note issue was also wise and timely.

Under it, … there has been an increase of some $77,000,000 in

bank-note issues. To this fact may be chiefly attributed the

freedom from stress for currency to handle the large harvests

of cotton, wheat, and corn. In this respect the year has been

an exception to the general rule of stringency which for

several years has so plainly marked the autumn season.

{641}

"Nevertheless, the measures referred to, prolific as they have

been in good results, will yet need re-enforcement in some

important particulars. Thus, as to the redemption fund

provided for in said act, while the powers conferred upon the

Secretary are probably ample to enable a zealous and watchful

officer to protect fully the gold reserve, there appears to be

lacking sufficient mandatory requirement to furnish complete

confidence in the continued parity, under all conditions,

between our two forms of metallic money, silver and gold. Upon

this point further legislation may become desirable. As to the

currency, while the liberalizing of conditions has, as previously

noted, found response in a necessary increase of bank-note

issues, there is under our present system no assurance

whatever that the volume of bank currency will be continuously

responsive to the country's needs, either by expanding as such

needs require or by contracting when superfluous in amount.

The truth is that safe and desirable as is our currency system

in many respects, it is not properly related. The supply of

currency is but remotely, if at all, influenced by the ever

changing requirements of trade and industry. It is related

most largely, if not entirely, to the price of Government

bonds in the market."

_Annual Report of the Secretary of the Treasury, 1900,

pages 72-73._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900 (April).

Speech of Senator Hoar in denial of the right of the

government of the United States, under the Constitution, to

hold the Philippine Islands as a subject state.

On the 17th of April, the following joint resolution was under

consideration in the Senate: "Be it resolved by the Senate and

House of Representatives of the United States of America in

Congress assembled, that the Philippine Islands are territory

belonging to the United States; that it is the intention of

the United States to retain them as such and to establish and

maintain such governmental control throughout the archipelago

as the situation may demand." Senator Hoar, of Massachusetts,

spoke in opposition to the resolution, and some passages from

his speech are quoted here, because they are notably

representative of the ground and spirit of an opposition which

existed within the party controlling the government to the war

of subjugation in the Philippine Islands, to which the party

and the government were finally committed by the adoption of

this Congressional declaration. The attitude and argument of

parties on the question are set forth below, in the platforms

and manifestos of the presidential election. This speech

exhibits a feeling on that question which was overridden in

the winning party, and it has an importance both forensic and

historical:

"The American people, so far as I know, were all agreed that

their victory [in the Spanish American war] brought with it

the responsibility of protecting the liberated peoples from

the cupidity of any other power until they could establish

their own independence in freedom and in honor. I stand here

to-day to plead with you not to abandon the principles that

have brought these things to pass. I implore you to keep to

the policy that has made the country great, that has made the

Republican party great, that has made the President great. I

have nothing new to say. But I ask you to keep in the old

channels, and to keep off the old rocks laid down in the old

charts, and to follow the old sailing orders that all the old

captains of other days have obeyed, to take your bearings, as

of old, from the north star,

Of whose true fixed and resting quality

There is no fellow in the firmament,

and not from this meteoric light of empire.

"Especially, if I could, would I persuade the great Republican

party to come back again to its old faith, to its old

religion, before it is too late. There is yet time. The

President has said again and again that his is only an ad

interim policy until Congress shall act. It is not yet too

late. Congress has rejected, unwisely, as I think, some

declarations for freedom. But the two Houses have not as yet

committed themselves to despotism. The old, safe path, the

path alike of justice and of freedom, is still easy. It is a

path familiar, of old, to the Republican party. If we have

diverged from it for the first time, everything in our

history, everything in our own nature calls us back. The great

preacher of the English church tells you how easy is the

return of a great and noble nature from the first departure

from rectitude:—

'For so a taper, when its crown of flame is newly blown off,

retains a nature so symbolical to light,

that it will with greediness reenkindle and snatch a ray

from the neighbor fire.'

"I, for one, believed, and still believe that the pathway to

prosperity and glory for the country was also the pathway to

success and glory for the Republican party. I thought the two

things inseparable. If, when we made the treaty of peace, we

had adhered to the purpose we declared when we declared war;

if we had dealt with the Philippine Islands as we promised to

deal, have dealt, and expect to deal with Cuba, the country

would have escaped the loss of 6,000 brave soldiers, other

thousands of wrecked and shattered lives, the sickness of many

more, the expenditure of hundreds of millions, and, what is

far worse than all, the trampling under foot of its cherished

ideals. There would have been to-day a noble republic in the

East, sitting docile at our feet, receiving from us

civilization, laws, manners, and giving in turn everything the

gratitude of a free people could give-love, obedience, trade.

The Philippine youth would throng our universities; our

Constitution, our Declaration, the lives of Washington and

Lincoln, the sayings of Jefferson and Franklin would have been

the textbooks of their schools. How our orators and poets

would have delighted to contrast America liberating and

raising up the republic of Asia, with England subduing and

trampling under foot the republic of Africa. Nothing at home

could have withstood the great party and the great President

who had done these things. We should have come from the next

election with a solid North and have carried half the South.

You would at least have been spared the spectacle of great

Republican States rising in revolt against Republican

policies. I do not expect to accomplish anything for liberty

in the Philippine Islands but through the Republican party.

Upon it the fate of these Islands for years to come is to

depend. If that party can not be persuaded, the case is in my

judgment for the present hopeless. …

{642}

"The practical question which divided the American people last

year, and which divides them to-day, is this: Whether in

protecting the people of the Philippine Islands from the

ambition and cupidity of other nations we are bound to protect

them from our own. … In dealing with this question, Mr.

President, I do not mean to enter upon any doubtful ground. I

shall advance no proposition ever seriously disputed in this

country till within twelve months. … If to think as I do in

regard to the interpretation of the Constitution; in regard to

the mandates of the moral law or the law of nations, to which

all men and all nations must render obedience; in regard to

the policies which are wisest for the conduct of the State, or

in regard to those facts of recent history in the light of

which we have acted or are to act hereafter, be treason, then

Washington was a traitor; then Jefferson was a traitor; then

Jackson was a traitor; then Franklin was a traitor; then

Sumner was a traitor; then Lincoln was a traitor; then Webster

was a traitor; then Clay was a traitor; then Corwin was a

traitor; then Kent was a traitor; then Seward was a traitor;

then McKinley, within two years, was a traitor; then the

Supreme Court of the United States has been in the past a nest

and hotbed of treason; then the people of the United States,

for more than a century, have been traitors to their own flag

and their own Constitution.

"'We are presented with an issue that can be clearly and

sharply stated as a question of constitutional power, a

question of international law, a question of justice and

righteousness, or a question of public expediency. This can be

stated clearly and sharply in the abstract, and it can be put

clearly and sharply by an illustration growing out of existing

facts.

"The constitutional question is: Has Congress the power, under

our Constitution, to hold in subjection unwilling vassal

States?

"The question of international law is: Can any nation

rightfully convey to another sovereignty over an unwilling

people who have thrown off its dominion, asserted their

independence, established a government of their own, over whom

it has at the time no practical control, from whose territory

it has been disseized, and which it is beyond its power to

deliver?

"The question of justice and righteousness is: Have we the

right to crush and hold under our feet an unwilling and

subject people whom we had treated as allies, whose

independence we are bound in good faith to respect, who had

established their own free government, and who had trusted us?

"The question of public expediency is: Is it for our advantage

to promote our trade at the cannon's mouth and at the point of

the bayonet?

"All these questions can be put in a way of practical

illustration by inquiring whether we ought to do what we have

done, are doing, and mean to do in the case of Cuba; or what

we have done, are doing, and some of you mean to do in the

case of the Philippine Islands.

"It does not seem to me to be worth while to state again at

length the constitutional argument which I have addressed to

the Senate heretofore. It has been encountered with eloquence,

with clearness and beauty of statement, and, I have no doubt,

with absolute sincerity by Senators who have spoken upon the

other side. But the issue between them and me can be summed up

in a sentence or two, and if, so stated, it can not be made

clear to any man's apprehension, I despair of making it clear

by any elaboration or amplification. I admit that the United

States may acquire and hold property, and may make rules and

regulations for its disposition. I admit that, like other

property, the United States may acquire and hold land. It may

acquire it by purchase. It may acquire it by treaty. It may

acquire it by conquest. And it may make rules and regulations

for its disposition and government, however it be acquired.

When there are inhabitants upon the land so acquired it may

make laws for their government. But the question between me

and the gentlemen on the other side is this: Is this

acquisition of territory, of land or other property, whether

gained by purchase, conquest, or treaty, a constitutional end

or only a means to a constitutional end? May you acquire,

hold, and govern territory or other property as an end for

which our Constitution was framed, or is it only a means

toward some other and further end? May you acquire, hold, and

govern property by conquest, treaty, or purchase for the sole

object of so holding and governing it, without the

consideration of any further constitutional purpose? Or must

you hold it for a constitutional purpose only, such as the

making of new States, the national defense and security, the

establishment of a seat of government, or the construction of

forts, harbors, and like works, which, of course, are

themselves for the national defense and security?

"I hold that this acquisition, holding and governing, can be

only a means for a constitutional end—the creation of new

States or some other of the constitutional purposes to which I

have adverted. And I maintain that you can no more hold and

govern territory than you can hold and manage cannon or fleets

for any other than a constitutional end; and I maintain that

the holding in subjection an alien people, governing them

against their will for any fancied advantage to them, is not

only not an end provided for by the Constitution, but is an

end prohibited therein. … It is an end which the generation

which framed the Constitution and the Declaration of

Independence declared was unrighteous and abhorrent. So, in my

opinion, we have no constitutional power to acquire territory

for the purpose of holding it in subjugation, in a state of

vassalage or serfdom, against the will of its people.

"It is to be noted just here that we have acquired no

territory or other property in the Philippine Islands, save at

few public buildings. By every other acquisition of territory

the United States became a great land owner. She owned the

public lands as she had owned the public lands in the

Northwest ceded to her by the old States. But you own nothing

in the Philippines. The people own their farms and dwellings

and cities. The religious orders own the rest. The Filipinos

desire to do what our English ancestors did in the old days

when England was Catholic. The laity feared that the Church

would engross all the land. So they passed their statute of

mortmain. You have either got to let the people of the

Philippine Islands settle this matter for themselves, or you

must take upon you the delicate duty of settling it for them.

{643}

Your purchase or conquest is a purchase or conquest of nothing

but sovereignty. It is a sovereignty over a people who are

never to be admitted to exercise it or to share it. In the

present case we have not, I repeat, bought any property. We

have undertaken to buy mere sovereignty. There were no public

lands in the Philippine Islands, the property of Spain, which

we have bought and paid for. The mountains of iron and the

nuggets of gold and the hemp-bearing fields—do you purpose to

strip the owners of their rightful title? We have undertaken

to buy allegiance, pure and simple. And allegiance is just

what the law of nations declares you can not buy. …

"I have been unable to find a single reputable authority more

than twelve months old for the power now claimed for Congress

to govern dependent nations or territories not expected to

become States. The contrary, until this war broke out, has

been taken as too clear for reasonable question. I content

myself with a few authorities. Among them are Daniel Webster,

William H. Seward, the Supreme Court of the United States,

James Madison.

"Daniel Webster said in the Senate, March 23, 1848: 'Arbitrary

governments may have territories and distant possessions,

because arbitrary governments may rule them by different laws

and different systems. We can do no such thing. They must be

of us, part of us, or else strangers. I think I see a course

adopted which is likely to turn the Constitution of the land

into a deformed monster, into a curse rather than a blessing;

in fact, a frame of an unequal government, not founded on

popular representation, not founded on equality, but on the

grossest inequality; and I think that this process will go on,

or that there is danger that it will go on, until this Union

shall fall to pieces. I resist it to-day and always! Whoever

falters or whoever flies, I continue the contest!'

"James Madison said in the Federalist: 'The object of the

Federal Constitution is to secure the union of the thirteen

primitive States, which we know to be practicable; and to add

to them such other States as may arise in their own bosoms, or

in their neighborhood, which we can not doubt will be

practicable.'

_James Madison,

Federalist, Number 14._

"William H. Seward said: 'It is a remarkable feature of the

Constitution of the United States that its framers never

contemplated colonies, or provinces, or territories at all. On

the other hand, they contemplated States only, nothing less

than States, perfect States, equal States, as they are called

here, sovereign States. … There is reason—there is sound

political wisdom in this provision of the Constitution

excluding colonies, which are always subject to oppression,

and excluding provinces, which always tend to corrupt and

ultimately to break down the parent State.'

_Seward's Works

Volume 1, page 122._

'By the Constitution of the United States, there are no

subjects, Every citizen of any one State is a free and equal

citizen of the United States. Again, by the Constitution of

the United States there are no permanent provinces or

dependencies.'

_Seward's Works

Volume 4, page 167._

"The Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of

Fleming vs. Page, said: 'The genius and character of our

institutions are peaceful; and the power to declare war was

not conferred upon Congress for the purposes of aggression or

aggrandizement, but to enable the Government to vindicate by

arms, if it should become necessary, its own rights and the

rights of its citizens. A war, therefore, declared by

Congress, can never be presumed to be waged for the purpose of

conquest or the acquisition of territory; nor does the law

declaring the war imply an authority to the President to

enlarge the limits of the United States by subjugating the

enemy's country.'

"Our territories, so far, have all been places where Americans

would go to dwell as citizens, to establish American homes, to

obtain honorable employment, and to build a State. Will any

man go to the Philippine Islands to dwell, except to help

govern the people, or to make money by a temporary residence?

…

"When hostilities broke out, February 5, 1899, we had no

occupancy of and no title of any kind to any portion of the

Philippine territory, except the town and bay of Manila.

Everything else was in the peaceful possession of the

inhabitants. In such a condition of things, Mr. President,

international law speaks to us with its awful mandate. It

pronounces your proposed action sheer usurpation and robbery.

You have no better title, according to the law of nations, to

reduce this people to subjection than you have to subjugate

Mexico or Haiti or Belgium or Switzerland. This is the settled

doctrine, as declared by our own great masters of

jurisprudence. You have no right, according to tho law of

nations, to obtain by purchase or acquisition sovereignty over

a people which is not actually exercised by the country which

undertakes to convey it or yield it. We have not yet completed

the acquisition. But at the time we entered upon it, and at

the time of this alleged purchase, the people of the

Philippine Islands, as appears by General Otis's report, by

Admiral Dewey's report, and the reports of officers for whom

they vouched, held their entire territory, with the exception

of the single town of Manila. They had, as appears from these

reports, a full organized government. They had an army

fighting for independence, admirably disciplined, according to

the statement of zealous advocates of expansion.

"Why, Mr. President, is it credible that any American

statesman, that any American Senator, that any intelligent

American citizen anywhere, two years ago could have been found

to affirm that a proceeding like that of the Paris treaty

could give a just and valid title to sovereignty over a people

situated as were the people of those islands? A title of

Spain, originally by conquest, never submitted to nor admitted

by the people of the islands, with frequent insurrections at

different times for centuries, and then the yoke all thrown

off, a constitutional government, schools, colleges, churches,

universities, hospitals, town governments, a legislature, a

cabinet, courts, a code of laws, and the whole island occupied

and controlled by its people, with the single exception of one

city; with taxes lawfully levied and collected, with an army

and the beginning of a navy.

{644}

"And yet the Senate, the Congress enacted less than two years

ago that the people of Cuba—controlling peaceably no part of

their island, levying no taxes in any orderly or peaceable

way, with no administration of justice, no cabinet—not only of

right ought to be, but were, in fact, a free and independent

State. I did not give my assent to that declaration of fact. I

assented to the doctrine that they of right ought to be. But I

thought the statement of fact much calculated to embarrass the

Government of the United States, if it were bound by that

declaration; and it has been practically disregarded by the

Administration ever since. But the question now is a very

different one. You not only deny that the Filipinos are, but

you deny that they of right ought to be free and independent;

and you recognize Spain as entitled to sell to you the

sovereignty of an island where she was not at the time

occupying a foot of territory, where her soldiers were held

captives by the government of the island, a government to

which you had delivered over a large number of Spanish

prisoners to be held as captives. And yet you come here to-day

and say that they not only are not, but they of right ought

not to be free and independent; and when you are pressed you

answer us by talking about mountains of iron and nuggets of

gold, and trade with China.

"I affirm that you can not get by conquest, and you can not

get by purchase, according to the modern law of nations,

according to the law of nations as accepted and expounded by

the United States, sovereignty over a people, or title to a

territory, of which the power that undertakes to sell it or

the power from whom you undertake to wrest it has not the

actual possession and dominion. … You cannot buy a war. More

than this, you cannot buy a tyrant's claim to subject again an

oppressed people who have achieved their freedom. …

"Gentlemen tell us that the bill of the Senator from Wisconsin

is copied from that introduced in Jefferson's time for the

purchase of Louisiana. Do you claim that you propose to deal

with these people as Jefferson meant to deal with Louisiana?

You talk of Alaska, of Florida, of California; do you mean to

deal with the Philippines as we mean to deal with Alaska and

dealt with Florida or California?

"I have spoken of the Declaration of Independence as a solemn

affirmation of public law, but it is far more than that. It is

a solemn pledge of national faith and honor. It is a baptismal

vow. It is the bedrock of our republican institutions. It is,

as the Supreme Court declared, the soul and spirit of which

the Constitution is but the body and letter. It is the light

by which the Constitution must be read. … There is expansion

enough in it, but it is the expansion of freedom and not of

despotism; of life, not of death. Never was such growth in all

human history as that from the seed Thomas Jefferson planted.

The parable of the mustard seed, than which, as Edward Everett

said, 'the burning pen of inspiration, ranging heaven and

earth for a similitude, can find nothing more appropriate or

expressive to which to liken the Kingdom of God,' is repeated

again. 'Whereunto shall we liken it, or with what comparison

shall we compare it? It is like a grain of mustard seed,

which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the

seeds that be in the earth. But when it is sown, it groweth

up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out

great branches, so that the fowls of the air may lodge under

the shadow of it.' This is the expansion of Thomas Jefferson.

It has covered the continent. It is on both the seas. It has

saved South America. It is revolutionizing Europe. It is the

expansion of freedom. It differs from your tinsel, pinchbeck,

pewter expansion as the growth of a healthy youth into a

strong man differs from the expansion of an anaconda when he

swallows his victim. Ours is the expansion of Thomas

Jefferson. Yours is the expansion of Aaron Burr. It is

destined to as short a life and to a like fate. …

"There are 1,200 islands in the Philippine group. They extend

as far as from Maine to Florida. They have a population

variously estimated at from 8,000,000 to 12,000,000. There are

wild tribes who never heard of Christ, and islands that never

heard of Spain. But among them are the people of the island of

Luzon, numbering 3,500,000, and the people of the Visayan

Islands, numbering 2,500,000 more. They are a Christian and

civilized people. They wrested their independence from Spain

and established a republic. Their rights are no more to be

affected by the few wild tribes in their own mountains or by

the dwellers in the other islands than the rights of our old

thirteen States were affected by the French in Canada, or the

Six Nations of New York, or the Cherokees of Georgia, or the

Indians west of the Mississippi. Twice our commanding

generals, by their own confession, assured these people of

their independence. Clearly and beyond all cavil we formed an

alliance with them. We expressly asked them to co-operate with

us. We handed over our prisoners to their keeping; we sought

their help in caring for our sick and wounded. We were told by

them again and again and again that they were fighting for

independence. Their purpose was as well known to our generals,

to the War Department, and to the President, as the fact that

they were in arms. We never undeceived them until the time

when hostilities were declared in 1899. The President declared

again and again that we had no title and claimed no right to

anything beyond the town of Manila. Hostilities were begun by

us at a place where we had no right to be, and were continued

by us in spite of Aguinaldo's disavowal and regret and offer

to withdraw to a line we should prescribe. If we crush that

republic, despoil that people of their freedom and

independence, and subject them to our rule, it will be a story

of shame and dishonor. …

"But we are told if we oppose the policy of our imperialistic

and expanding friends we are bound to suggest some policy of

our own as a substitute for theirs. We are asked what we would

do in this difficult emergency. It is a question not difficult

to answer. I for one am ready to answer it.

"1. I would declare now that we will not take these islands to

govern them against their will.

"2. I would reject a cession of sovereignty which implies that

sovereignty may be bought and sold and delivered without the

consent of the people. Spain had no rightful sovereignty over

the Philippine Islands. She could not rightfully sell it to

us. We could not rightfully buy it from her.

"3. I would require all foreign governments to keep out of

these islands.

"4. I would offer to the people of the Philippines our help in

maintaining order until they have a reasonable opportunity to

establish a government of their own.

{645}

"5. I would aid them by advice, if they desire it, to set up a

free and independent government.

"6. I would invite all the great powers of Europe to unite in

an agreement that that independence shall not be interfered

with by us, by themselves, or by any one of them with the

consent of the others. As to this I am not so sure. I should

like quite as well to tell them it is not to be done whether

they consent or not.

"7. I would declare that the United States will enforce the

same doctrine as applicable to the Philippines that we

declared as to Mexico and Haiti and the South American

Republics. It is true that the Monroe Doctrine, a doctrine

based largely on our regard for our own interests, is not

applicable either in terms or in principle to a distant

Asiatic territory. But, undoubtedly, having driven out Spain,

we are bound, and have the right, to secure to the people we

have liberated an opportunity, undisturbed and in peace, to

establish a new government for themselves.

"8. I would then, in a not distant future, leave them to work

out their own salvation, as every nation on earth, from the

beginning of time, has wrought out its own salvation. Let them

work out their own salvation, as our own ancestors slowly and

in long centuries wrought out theirs; as Germany, as

Switzerland, as France, in briefer periods, wrought out

theirs; as Mexico and the South American Republics have

accomplished theirs, all of them within a century, some of

them within the life of a generation. To attempt to confer the

gift of freedom from without, or to impose freedom from

without, on any people, is to disregard all the lessons of

history. It is to attempt

'A gift of that which is not to be given

By all the blended powers of earth and heaven.'

"9. I would strike out of your legislation the oath of

allegiance to us and substitute an oath of allegiance to their

own country."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900 (April).

Act temporarily to provide revenues and a civil

government for Porto Rico.

See (in this volume)

PORTO RICO: A. D. 1899-1900; and 1900 (APRIL).

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900 (April).

Appointment of Second Commission to the Philippines.

The President's instructions.

Steps toward the establishment of civil government and

the principles to be observed.

See (in this volume)

PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1900 (APRIL).

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900 (May-October).

The Twelfth Census of the Republic.

The Twelfth Census of the United States was taken between May

1 and November 1, 1900, with general results reported on the

latter date by the Director, William R. Merriam, as

follows:—The following statement … gives the population of the

United States in detail for each State and organized Territory

and for Alaska and Hawaii as finally revised. The figures

purporting to give the number of "persons in the service of

the United States stationed abroad" include an estimated

population of 14,400 for certain military organizations and

naval vessels stationed abroad, principally in the

Philippines, for which the returns have not yet been received.

The total population of the United States in 1900, as shown by

the accompanying statement, is 76,304,799, of which 74,610,523

persons are contained in the 45 States, representing the

population to be used for apportionment purposes. This

statement also shows a total of 134,158 Indians not taxed, of

which 44,617 are found in certain of the States and which are

to be deducted from the population of such States for the

purpose of determining the apportionment of Representatives.

The total population in 1890, with which the aggregate

population at the present census should be compared, is

63,069,756, comprising 62,622,250 persons enumerated in the

States and organized Territories at that census, 32,052

persons in Alaska, 180,182 Indians and other persons in the

Indian Territory, 145,282 Indians and other persons on Indian

reservations, etc., and 89,990 persons in Hawaii, this

last-named figure being derived from the census of the

Hawaiian Islands taken as of December 28, 1890. Taking this

population for 1890 as a basis, there has been a gain in

population of 13,235,043 during the ten years from 1890 to

1900, representing an increase of very nearly 21 per cent. No

provision was made by the census act for the enumeration of

the inhabitants of Porto Rico, but a census for that island,

taken as of October 16, 1899, under the direction of the War

Department, showed a population of 953,243.

STATES AND Indians not

TERRITORIES 1900 1890 taxed 1900

The United States. 76,304,799 63,009,756 134,158

STATES.

Alabama 1,828,697 1,513,017

Arkansas 1,311,564 1,128,179

California 1,485,053 1,208,130 1549

Colorado 539,700 412,198 597

Connecticut 908,355 746,258

Delaware 184,735 168,493

Florida 528,542 391,422

Georgia 2,216,331 1,837,353

Idaho 161,772 84,385 2,297

Illinois 4,821,550 3,826,351

Indiana 2,516,462 2,192,404

Iowa 2,231,853 1,911,896

Kansas 1,470,495 1,427,096

Kentucky 2,147,174 1,858,635

Louisiana l,381,625 1,118,587

Maine 694,466 661,086

Maryland 1,190,050 1,042,390

Massachusetts 2,805,346 2,238,943

Michigan 2,420,982 2,093,889

Minnesota 1,751,394 1,301,826 1,768

Mississippi 1,551,270 1,289,600

Missouri 3,106,665 2,679,184

Montana 243,329 132,159 10,746

Nebraska 1,068,539 1,058,910

Nevada 42,335 45,761 1,665

New Hampshire 411,588 376,530

New Jersey 1,883,669 1,444,933

New York 7,268,012 5,991,353 4,711

North Carolina 1,893,810 1,617,947

North Dakota 319,146 182,719 4,692

Ohio 4,157,145 3,672,316

Oregon 413,536 313,767

Pennsylvania 6,302,115 5,258,014

Rhode Island 428,556 345,506

South Carolina 1,340,316 1,151,149

South Dakota 401,570 328,808 10,932

Tennessee 2,020,616 1,767,518

Texas 3,048,710 2,235,523

Utah 276,749 207,905 1,472

Vermont 343,641 332,422

Virginia 1,854,184 1,655,980

Washington 518,103 349,390 2,531

West Virginia 958,800 762,704

Wisconsin 2,069,042 1,686,880 1,657

Wyoming 92,531 60,705

Total for

45 States 74,610,523 62,116,811 44,617

{646}

STATES AND TERRITORIES 1900 1890 Indians

not taxed 1900

TERRITORIES

Alaska 63,441 32,052

Arizona 122,931 59,620 24,644

District of Columbia 278,718 230,392

Hawaii 154,001 89,900

Indian Territory 391,960 180,182 56,033

New Mexico 195,310 153,593 2,937

Oklahoma 398,245 61,834 5,921

Total 1,604,606 807,663 89,541

Persons in the service

of the United States

stationed abroad 89,670

Indians, etc.,on

Indian reservations,

except Indian Territory 145,282

_Report of the Director of the Census,

November 1, 1900._

"By the twelfth census the center of population

in 1900 was in the following position:

Latitude 39° 9' 36"; longitude 85° 48' 54".

In ten years the center of population has moved westward 16'

1", or about fourteen miles, and southward 2' 20", or about

two and one half miles. It rests now in Southern Indiana, at a

point about six miles southeast of Columbus, the county seat

of Bartholomew county, Indiana. The center of population is

the center of gravity of the country, each individual being

assumed to have the same weight. … The center of area of the

United States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii and other recent

accessions, is in northern Kansas, in approximate latitude 39°

55', and approximate longitude 98° 50'. The center of

population is therefore about three-fourths of a degree south

and more than 13 degrees east of the center of area."

_United States, Twelfth Census,

Bulletin Number 62._

UNITED STATES: A. D. 1900 (May-November).

The Presidential election.

Party platforms and nominations.

The issues on which the presidential election of 1900 would

naturally and logically have turned were those growing out of

the Spanish-American War, relative to principles and policy in

dealing with the colonial possessions that were taken from

Spain. But circumstances forced those most important political

questions into the background of consideration, so far as

concerned the opinion of a large part of the American people.

The monetary question, which might have been supposed to be

settled by the election of 1896 and by the Congressional

legislation of March, 1900, was brought forward again with a

persistency that caused uneasy feeling in the commercial and

industrial world. The party which had fought the battle for a

silver monetary standard in 1896, and been beaten, seemed

willing to abandon that "lost cause," but the candidate to

whose fortunes the party had become committed would not

consent. His will prevailed, and the old issue came into the

canvass again, with such confusing effects that the real

meaning of the votes that were cast, as an expression of the

judgment and will of the American people, can by no

possibility be known. Men dreaded a disturbance of the

conditions under which the business of the country was active

and prosperous. How far their wish to preserve those

conditions coincided, as a motive in voting, with their

judgment on other issues, and how far it overcame dispositions

that urged them contrariwise, are puzzling questions which the

election of 1900 has left behind.

UNITED STATES:

United Christian Party Platform and Nominations.

The first candidates to be set in the field of the

presidential campaign were put forward by a convention held at

Rock Island, Illinois, May 1, representing a small combination of

voters styled the United Christian Party. It named, in the

first instance, the Reverend S. C. Swallow, of Pennsylvania,

for President, and John G. Woolley, of Illinois, for Vice

President, both of whom declined the nomination. Jonah F. R.

Leonard, of Iowa, and David H. Martin, of Pennsylvania, were

subsequently made the candidates of the party, and received a

few hundred votes at the ensuing election, mostly, it would

seem, in Illinois. The "Declarations" of the United Christian

Party were as follows:

"We, the United Christian party, in National Convention

assembled in the city of Rock Island, Illinois, May 1 and 2,

1900, acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all power

and authority, the Lord Jesus Christ as the sovereign ruler of

nations, and the Bible as the standard by which to decide moral

issues in our political life, do make the following

declaration:

"We believe the time to have arrived when the eternal

principles of justice, mercy, and love, as exemplified in the

life and teachings of Jesus Christ should be embodied in the

Constitution of our nation, and applied in concrete form to

every function of our Government.

"We maintain that this statement is in harmony with the

fundamental principles of our National common law; our

Christian usages and customs; the declaration of the Supreme

Court of the United States that 'This is a Christian nation,'

and the accepted principle in judicial decisions that no law

should contravene the Divine law.

"We deprecate certain immoral laws which have grown out of the

failure of our nation to recognize these principles, notably

such as require the desecration of the Christian Sabbath,

authorize unscriptural marriage and divorce, and license the

manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors as a beverage.

"The execution of these immoral laws above mentioned we hold

to be neither loyalty to our country nor honoring to God;

therefore it shall be our purpose to administer the

Government, so far as it shall be intrusted to us by the

suffrages of the people, in accordance with the principles

herein set forth, and, until amended, our oath of office shall

be to the Constitution and laws as herein explained, and to no

other, and we will look to Him who has all power in Heaven and

in earth to vindicate our purpose in seeking His glory and the

welfare of our beloved land.

"As an expression of consent or allegiance on the part of the

governed, in harmony with the above statements, we declare for

the adoption and use of the system of legislation known as the

'initiative and referendum,' together with 'proportionate

representation' and the 'imperative mandate.'

"We hold that an men and women are created free and with equal

rights, and declare for the establishment of such political,

industrial, and social conditions as shall guarantee to every

person civic equality, the full fruits of his or her honest

toil, and opportunity for the righteous enjoyment of the same;

and we especially condemn mob violence and outrages against

any individual or class of individuals in our country.

{647}

"We declare against war, and for the arbitration of all

National and international disputes.

"We hold that the legalized liquor traffic is the crowning

infamy of civilization, and we declare for the immediate

abolition of the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors

as a beverage.

"We are gratified to note the widespread agitation of the

cigarette question, and declare ourselves in favor of the

enactment of laws prohibiting the sale of cigarettes or

tobacco in any form to minors.

"We declare for the daily reading of the Bible in the public

schools and institutions of learning under control of the

State.

"We declare for the Government ownership of public utilities.

"We declare for the election of the President and

Vice-President and United States Senators by the direct vote

of the people.

"We declare for such amendment of the United States

Constitution as shall be necessary to give the principles

herein set forth an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental

law of our land.

"We invite into the United Christian party every honest man

and woman who believes in Christ and His golden rule and

standard of righteousness. We say especially to the sons of

toil: Jesus, the carpenter's son, is your true friend. In His

name and through the practice of His principles you may obtain

your rights long withheld and long outraged. You have the

votes necessary to enthrone Him. His love and principles,

politically applied, will lift you up and give you true civic

liberty forever."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

People's or Populist Party Platforms and Nominations.

The second of the political parties to appear in the field of

the national contest was the People's, known more commonly as

the Populist Party, the division in which, shown in 1896, had

become separation, complete. The two wings of the party held

distinct conventions, in different places, but on the same

day, May 10. Those known as the Middle-of-the-Road Populists

assembled at Cincinnati and named Wharton Barker, of

Pennsylvania, for President, with Ignatius Donnelly, of

Minnesota for Vice President. The convention representing

those who wished to act in co-operation with the Democratic

Party, and known as the Fusion wing, met at Sioux Falls, South

Dakota, and anticipated the action of the Democracy by

nominating William J. Bryan for President, with Charles A.

Towne, of Minnesota, for Vice President.

See, also, (in this volume)

FARMERS' ALLIANCE.

The platform declarations of the two wings were substantially

the same on main questions; but those of the Fusionists

covered several subjects which the Cincinnati convention

passed by. They were as follows:

"The People's party of the United States, in convention

assembled, congratulating its supporters on the wide extension

of its principles in all directions, does hereby reaffirm its

adherence to the fundamental principles proclaimed in its two

prior platforms and calls upon all who desire to avert the

subversion of free institutions by corporate and imperialistic

power to unite with it in bringing the Government back to the

ideals of Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, and Lincoln. It

extends to its allies in the struggle for financial and

economic freedom, assurances of its loyalty to the principles

which animate the allied forces and the promise of honest and

hearty cooperation in every effort for their success. To the

people of the United States we offer the following platform as

the expression of our unalterable convictions:

"Resolved, That we denounce the act of March 14, 1900, as the

culmination of a long series of conspiracies to deprive the

people of their constitutional rights over the money of the

nation and relegate to a gigantic money trust the control of

the purse and hence of the people. We denounce this act,

First, for making all money obligations, domestic and foreign,

payable in gold coin or its equivalent, thus enormously

increasing the burdens of the debtors and enriching the

creditors.

Second—For refunding 'coin bonds' not to mature for years into

long-time gold bonds so as to make their payment improbable

and our debt perpetual.

Third—For taking from the Treasury over $50,000,000 in a time

of war and presenting it, as a premium, to bondholders to

accomplish the refunding of bonds not due.

Fourth—For doubling the capital of bankers by returning to

them the face value of their bonds in current money notes so

that they may draw one interest from the Government and

another from the people.

Fifth—For allowing banks to expand and contract their

circulation at pleasure, thus controlling prices of all

products.

Sixth—For authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to issue

new gold bonds to an unlimited amount whenever he deems it

necessary to replenish the gold hoard, thus enabling usurers

to secure more bonds and more bank currency by drawing gold

from the Treasury, thereby creating an 'endless chain' for

perpetually adding to a perpetual debt.

Seventh—For striking down the green back in order to force the

people to borrow $346,000,000 more from the banks at an annual

cost of over $20,000,000. While barring out the money of the

Constitution this law opens the printing mints of the Treasury

to the free coinage of bank paper money, to enrich the few and

impoverish the many.

"We pledge anew the People's party never to cease the

agitation until this great financial conspiracy is blotted

from the statute books, the Lincoln greenback restored, the

bonds all paid, and all corporation money forever retired. We

affirm the demand for the reopening of the mints of the United

States for the free and unlimited coinage of silver and gold

at the present legal ratio of 16 to 1, the immediate increase

in the volume of silver coins and certificates thus created to

be substituted, dollar for dollar, for the banknotes issued by

private corporations under special privilege granted by law of

March 14, 1900, and prior National banking laws, the remaining

portion of the banknotes to be replaced with full legal-tender

Government paper money, and its volume so controlled as to

maintain at all times a stable money market and a stable price

level.

"We demand a graduated income and inheritance tax, to the end

that aggregated wealth shall bear its just proportion of

taxation.

"We demand that postal savings banks be established by the

Government for the safe deposit of the savings of the people

and to facilitate exchange.

{648}

"With Thomas Jefferson we declare the land, including all

natural sources of wealth, the inalienable heritage of the

people. Government should so act as to secure homes for the

people and prevent land monopoly. The original homestead

policy should be enforced, and future settlers upon the public

domain should be entitled to a free homestead, while all who

have paid an acreage price to the Government under existing

laws should have their homestead rights restored.

"Transportation being a means of exchange and a public

necessity, the Government should own and operate the railroads

in the interests of the people and on a non-partisan basis, to

the end that all may be accorded the same treatment in

transportation, and that the extortion, tyranny, and political

power now exercised by the great railroad corporations, which

result in the impairment, if not the destruction, of the

political rights and personal liberties of the citizen, may be

destroyed. Such ownership is to be accomplished in a manner

consistent with sound public policy.

"Trusts, the overshadowing evil of the age, are the result and

culmination of the private ownership and control of the three

great instruments of commerce—money, transportation, and the

means of transmission of information—which instruments of

commerce are public functions, and which our forefathers

declared in the Constitution should be controlled by the

people through their Congress for the public welfare. The one

remedy for the trusts is that the ownership and control be

assumed and exercised by the people. We further demand that

all tariffs on goods controlled by a trust shall be abolished.

To cope with the trust evil, the people must act directly

without the intervention of representatives who may be

controlled or influenced. We therefore demand direct

legislation, giving the people the lawmaking and veto power

under the initiative and referendum. A majority of the people

can never be corruptly influenced.

"Applauding the valor of our army and navy in the Spanish War,

we denounce the conduct of the Administration in changing a

war for humanity into a war of conquest. The action of the

Administration in the Philippines is in conflict with all the

precedents of our National life; at war with the Declaration

of Independence, the Constitution, and the plain precepts of

humanity. Murder and arson have been our response to the

appeals of the people who asked only to establish a free

government in their own land. We demand a stoppage of this war

of extermination by the assurance to the Philippines of

independence and protection under a stable government of their

own creation.

"The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the

American flag are one and inseparable. The island of Porto

Rico is a part of the territory of the United States, and by

levying special and extraordinary customs duties on the

commerce of that island the Administration has violated the

Constitution, abandoned the fundamental principles of American

liberty, and has striven to give the lie to the contention of

our forefathers that there should be no taxation without

representation.

"Out of the imperialism which would force an undesired

domination on the people of the Philippines springs the

un-American cry for a large standing army. Nothing in the

character or purposes of our people justifies us in ignoring

the plain lesson of history and putting our liberties in

jeopardy by assuming the burden of militarism, which is

crushing the people of the Old World. We denounce the

Administration for its sinister efforts to substitute a

standing army for the citizen soldiery, which is the best

safeguard of the Republic.

"We extend to the brave Boers of South Africa our sympathy and

moral support in their patriotic struggle for the right of

self-government, and we are unalterably opposed to any

alliance, open or covert, between the United States and any

other nation that will tend to the destruction of liberty.

"And a further manifestation of imperialism is to be found in

the mining districts of Idaho. In the Cœur d'Alene soldiers

have been used to overawe miners striving for a greater

measure of industrial independence. And we denounce the State

Government of Idaho and the Federal Government for employing

the military arm of the Government to abridge the civil rights

of the people, and to enforce an infamous permit system which

denies to laborers their inherent liberty and compels them to

forswear their manhood and their right before being permitted

to seek employment.

"The importation of Japanese and other laborers under contract

to serve monopolistic corporations is a notorious and flagrant

violation of the immigration laws. We demand that the Federal

Government shall take cognizance of this menacing evil and

repress it under existing laws. We further pledge ourselves to

strive for the enactment of more stringent laws for the

exclusion of Mongolian and Malayan immigration.

"We indorse municipal ownership of public utilities, and

declare that the advantages which have accrued to the public

under that system would be multiplied a hundredfold by its

extension to natural interstate monopolies.

"We denounce the practice of issuing injunctions in the cases

of dispute between employers and employés, making criminal

acts by organizations which are not criminal when performed by

individuals, and demand legislation to restrain the evil.

"We demand that United States Senators and all other officials

as far as practicable be elected by direct vote of the people,

believing that the elective franchise and untrammelled ballot

are essential to a government for and by the people.

"The People's party condemns the wholesale system of

disfranchisement by coercion and intimidation, adopted in some

States, as un-republican and un-democratic. And we declare it

to be the duty of the several State Legislatures to take such

action as will secure a full, free, and fair ballot, and an

honest count.

"We favor home rule in the Territories and the District of

Columbia, and the early admission of the Territories as

States.

"We denounce the expensive red-tape system, political

favoritism, cruel and unnecessary delay and criminal evasion

of the statutes in the management of the Pension Office, and

demand the simple and honest execution of the law, and the

fulfilment by the nation of its pledges of service pension to

all its honorably discharged veterans."

{649}

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

Socialist Labor Party Platform and Nominations.

The convention of the Populists was followed next by that of

the Socialist Labor Party, which met in New York City, on the

2d of June, and put in nomination Joseph P. Maloney, of

Massachusetts, and Valentine Remmel, of Pennsylvania. Its

Platform was as follows:

"The Socialist Labor party of the United States, in convention

assembled, reasserts the inalienable right of all men to life,

liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

"With the founders of the American Republic we hold that the

purpose of government is to secure every citizen in the

enjoyment of this right; but in the light of our social

conditions we hold, furthermore, that no such right can be

exercised under a system of economic inequality, essentially

destructive of life, of liberty, and of happiness.

"With the founders of this Republic we hold that the true

theory of politics is that the machinery of government must be

owned and controlled by the whole people; but in the light of

our industrial development we hold, furthermore, that the true

theory of economics is that the machinery of production must

likewise belong to the people in common.

"To the obvious fact that our despotic system of economics is

the direct opposite of our democratic system of politics can

plainly be traced the existence of a privileged class, the

corruption of government by that class, the alienation of

public property, public franchises, and public functions to

that class, and the abject dependence of the mightiest of

nations upon that class.

"Again, through the perversion of democracy to the ends of

plutocracy, labor is robbed of the wealth which it alone

produces, is denied the means of self-employment, and, by

compulsory idleness in wage slavery, is even deprived of the

necessaries of life. Human power and natural forces are thus

wasted, that the plutocracy may rule. Ignorance and misery,

with all their concomitant evils, are perpetuated, that the

people may be kept in bondage. Science and invention are

diverted from their humane purpose to the enslavement of women

and children.

"Against such a system the Socialist Labor party once more

enters its protest. Once more it reiterates its fundamental

declaration that private property in the natural sources of

production and in the instruments of labor is the obvious

cause of all economic servitude and political dependence.

"The time is fast coming when, in the natural course of social

evolution, this system, through the destructive action of its

failures and crises on the one hand, and the constructive

tendencies of its trusts and other capitalistic combinations

on the other hand, shall have worked out its own downfall.

"We, therefore, call upon the wage workers of the United

States, and upon all other honest citizens, to organize under

the banner of the Socialist Labor party into a class-conscious

body, aware of its rights and determined to conquer them by

taking possession of the public powers; so that, held together

by an indomitable spirit of solidarity under the most trying

conditions of the present class struggle, we may put a summary

end to that barbarous struggle by the abolition of classes, the

restoration of the land and of all the means of production,

transportation, and distribution to the people as a collective

body, and the substitution of the Cooperative Commonwealth for

the present state of planless production, industrial war, and

social disorder—a commonwealth in which every worker shall

have the free exercise and full benefit of his faculties,

multiplied by all the modern factors of civilization."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

Republican Party Platform and Nominations.

On the 19th of June the national convention of the Republican

Party began its session at Philadelphia; adopted its platform

on the following day, and nominated President William McKinley

for re-election ou the 21st, naming Theodore Roosevelt, then

Governor of New York, for Vice President, in opposition to his

earnestly expressed wish. The adopted platform of principles

was as follows:

"The Republicans of the United States, through their chosen

representatives, met in National Convention, looking back upon

an unsurpassed record of achievement and looking forward to a

great field of duty and opportunity, and appealing to the

judgment of their countrymen, make these declarations:

"The expectation in which the American people, turning from

the Democratic party, intrusted power four years ago to a

Republican Chief Magistrate and a Republican Congress, has

been met and satisfied. When the people then assembled at the

polls, after a term of Democratic legislation and

administration, business was dead, industry paralyzed, and the

National credit disastrously impaired. The country's capital

was hidden away and its labor distressed and unemployed. The

Democrats had no other plan with which to improve the ruinous

conditions which they had themselves produced than to coin

silver at the ratio of 16 to 1. The Republican Party,

denouncing this plan as sure to produce conditions even worse

than those from which relief was sought, promised to restore

prosperity by means of two legislative measures—a protective

tariff and a law making gold the standard of value.

"The people, by great majorities, issued to the Republican

party a commission to enact these laws. This commission has

been executed, and the Republican promise is redeemed.

Prosperity more general and more abundant than we have ever

known has followed these enactments. There is no longer

controversy as to the value of any government obligations.

Every American dollar is a gold dollar, or its assured

equivalent, and American credit stands higher than that of any

nation. Capital is fully employed, and labor everywhere is

profitably occupied. No single fact can more strikingly tell

the story of what Republican government means to the country

than this—that while during the whole period of 107 years from

1790 to 1897 there was an excess of exports over imports of

only $383,028,497, there has been in the short three years of

the present Republican Administration an excess of exports

over imports in the enormous sum of $1,483,537,094.

{650}

"And while the American people, sustained by this Republican

legislation, have been achieving these splendid triumphs in

their business and commerce, they have conducted and in

victory concluded a war for liberty and human rights. No

thought of National aggrandizement tarnished the high purpose

with which American standards were unfurled. It was a war

unsought and patiently resisted, but when it came the American

Government was ready. Its fleets were cleared for action, its

armies were in the field, and the quick and signal triumph of

its forces on land and sea bore equal tribute to the courage

of American soldiers and sailors and to the skill and

foresight of Republican statesmanship. To ten millions of the

human race there was given 'a new birth of freedom,' and to

the American people a new and noble responsibility.

"'We indorse the Administration of William McKinley. Its acts

have been established in wisdom and in patriotism, and at home

and abroad it has distinctly elevated and extended the

influence of the American nation. Walking untried paths and

facing unforeseen responsibilities, President McKinley has

been in every situation the true American patriot and the

upright statesman, clear in vision, strong in judgment, firm

in action, always inspiring and deserving the confidence of

his countrymen. In asking the American people to indorse this

Republican record and to renew their commission to the

Republican party, we remind them of the fact that the menace

to their prosperity has always resided in Democratic

principles, and no less in the general incapacity of the

Democratic party to conduct public affairs. The prime

essential of business prosperity is public confidence in the

good sense of the Government, and in its ability to deal

intelligently with each new problem of administration and

legislation. That confidence the Democratic party has never

earned. It is hopelessly inadequate, and the country's

prosperity when Democratic success at the polls is announced

halts and ceases in mere anticipation of Democratic blunders

and failures.

"We renew our allegiance to the principle of the gold

standard, and declare our confidence in the wisdom of the

legislation of the Fifty-sixth Congress by which the parity of

all our money and the stability of our currency upon a gold

basis has been secured.

"We recognize that interest rates are potent factors in

production and business activity, and for the purpose of

further equalizing and of further lowering the rates of

interest, we favor such monetary legislation as will enable

the varying needs of the seasons and of all sections to be

promptly met in order that trade may be evenly sustained,

labor steadily employed, and commerce enlarged. The volume of

money in circulation was never so great per capita as it is

to-day.

"We declare our steadfast opposition to the free and unlimited

coinage of silver. No measure to that end could be considered

which was without the support of the leading commercial

countries of the world. However firmly Republican legislation

may seem to have secured the country against the peril of base

and discredited currency, the election of a Democratic

President could not fail to impair the country's credit and to

bring once more into question the intention of the American

people to maintain upon the gold standard the parity of their

money circulation. The Democratic party must be convinced that

the American people will never tolerate the Chicago platform.

"We recognize the necessity and propriety of the honest

cooperation of capital to meet new business conditions, and

especially to extend our rapidly increasing foreign trade, but

we condemn all conspiracies and combinations intended to

restrict business, to create monopolies, to limit production,

or to control prices, and favor such legislation as will

effectively restrain and prevent all such abuses, protect and

promote competition, and secure the rights of producers,

laborers, and all who are engaged in industry and commerce.

"We renew our faith in the policy of protection to American

labor. In that policy our industries have been established,

diversified, and maintained. By protecting the home market

competition has been stimulated and production cheapened.

Opportunity to the inventive genius of our people has been

secured and wages in every department of labor maintained at

high rates, higher now than ever before, and always

distinguishing our working people in their better conditions

of life from those of any competing country. Enjoying the

blessings of the American common school, secure in the right

of self-government, and protected in the occupancy of their

own markets, their constantly increasing knowledge and skill

have enabled them finally to enter the markets of the world.

"We favor the associated policy of reciprocity so directed as

to open our markets on favorable terms for what we do not

ourselves produce in return for free foreign markets.

"In the further interest of American workmen we favor a more

effective restriction of the immigration of cheap labor from

foreign lands, the extension of opportunities of education for

working children, the raising of the age limit for child

labor, the protection of free labor as against contract

convict labor, and an effective system of labor insurance.

"Our present dependence upon foreign shipping for nine-tenths

of our foreign carrying is a great loss to the industry of

this country. It is also a serious danger to our trade, for

its sudden withdrawal in the event of European war would

seriously cripple our expanding foreign commerce. The National

defence and naval efficiency of this country, moreover, supply

a compelling reason for legislation which will enable us to

recover our former place among the trade carrying fleets of

the world.

"The nation owes a debt of profound gratitude to the soldiers

and sailors who have fought its battles, and it is the

Government's duty to provide for the survivors and for the

widows and orphans of those who have fallen in the country's

wars. The pension laws, founded in this just sentiment, should

be liberal, and should be liberally administered, and

preference should be given wherever practicable with respect

to employment in the public service to soldiers and sailors

and to their widows and orphans.

"We commend the policy of the Republican party in maintaining

the efficiency of the Civil Service. The Administration has

acted wisely in its effort to secure for public service in

Cuba, Porto Rico, Hawaii and the Philippine Islands only those

whose fitness has been determined by training and experience.

We believe that employment in the public service in these

territories should be confined as far as practicable to their

inhabitants.

"It was the plain purpose of the Fifteenth Amendment to the

Constitution to prevent discrimination on account of race or

color in regulating the elective franchise. Devices of State

governments, whether by statutory or constitutional enactment

to avoid the purpose of this amendment are revolutionary and

should be condemned.

{651}

"Public movements looking to a permanent improvement of the

roads and highways of the country meet with our cordial

approval and we recommend this subject to the earnest

consideration of the people and of the Legislatures of the

several States. We favor the extension of the rural free

delivery service wherever its extension may be justified.

"In further pursuance of the constant policy of the Republican

party to provide free homes on the public domain, we recommend

adequate National legislation to reclaim the arid lands of the

United States, reserving control of the distribution of water for

irrigation to the respective States and Territories.

"We favor home rule for and the early admission to Statehood

of the Territories of New Mexico, Arizona and Oklahoma.

"The Dingley act, amended to provide sufficient revenue for

the conduct of the war, has so well performed its work that it

has been possible to reduce the war debt in the sum of

$40,000,000. So ample are the Government's revenues and so

great is the public confidence in the integrity of its

obligations that its newly funded 2 per cent bonds sell at a

premium. The country is now justified in expecting, and it

will be the policy of the Republican party to bring about, a

reduction of the war taxes.

"We favor the construction, ownership, control and protection

of an isthmian canal by the Government of the United States.

"New markets are necessary for the increasing surplus of our

farm products. Every effort should be made to open and obtain

new markets, especially in the Orient, and the Administration

is warmly to be commended for its successful effort to commit

all trading and colonizing nations to the policy of the open

door in China.

"In the interest of our expanding commerce we recommend that

Congress create a department of commerce and industries in the

charge of a secretary with a seat in the Cabinet. The United

States consular system should be reorganized under the

supervision of this new department, upon such a basis of

appointment and tenure as will render it still more

serviceable to the Nation's increasing trade. The American

Government must protect the person and property of every

citizen wherever they are wrongfully violated or placed in

peril.

"We congratulate the women of America upon their splendid

record of public service in the volunteer aid association, and

as nurses in camp and hospital during the recent campaigns of

our armies in the Eastern and Western Indies, and we

appreciate their faithful co-operation in all works of

education and industry.

"President McKinley has conducted the foreign affairs of the

United States with distinguished credit to the American

people. In releasing us from the vexatious conditions of a

European alliance for the government of Samoa his course is

especially to be commended. By securing to our undivided

control the most important island of the Samoan group and the

best harbor in the Southern Pacific, every American interest

has been safeguarded. We approve the annexation of the

Hawaiian Islands to the United States. We commend the part

taken by our Government in the Peace Conference at The Hague.

We assert our steadfast adherence to the policy announced in

the Monroe Doctrine. The provisions of The Hague Convention

were wisely regarded when President McKinley tendered his

friendly offices in the interest of peace between Great

Britain and the South African republics. While the American

Government must continue the policy prescribed by Washington,

affirmed by every succeeding President and imposed upon us by

The Hague Treaty, of non-intervention in European

controversies, the American people earnestly hope that a way

may soon be found, honorable alike to both contending parties,

to terminate the strife between them.

"In accepting by the Treaty of Paris the just responsibility

of our victories in the Spanish war the President and the

Senate won the undoubted approval of the American people. No

other course was possible than to destroy Spain's sovereignty

throughout the West Indies and in the Philippine Islands. That

course created our responsibility before the world, and with

the unorganized population whom our intervention had freed

from Spain, to provide for the maintenance of law and order,

and for the establishment of good government and for the

performance of international obligations. Our authority could

not be less than our responsibility, and wherever sovereign

rights were extended it became the high duty of the Government

to maintain its authority, to put down armed insurrection and

to confer the blessings of liberty and civilization upon all

the rescued peoples. The largest measure of self-government

consistent with their welfare and our duties shall be secured

to them by law.

"To Cuba independence and self-government were assured in the

same voice by which war was declared, and to the letter this

pledge will be performed.

"The Republican party upon its history, and upon this

declaration of its principles and policies, confidently

invokes the considerate and approving judgment of the American

people."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900

Prohibition Party Platform and Nominations.

In the next week after the meeting of the Republican national

convention, that of the Prohibition Party was held at Chicago,

opening on the 27th of June. It chose Mr. John G. Woolley, of

Chicago (already named by the United Christian Party for Vice

President—see above) to be its candidate for President, with

Mr. Henry B. Metcalfe, of Rhode Island, for Vice President.

Setting aside all political issues save those connected with

the liquor traffic, its declarations were confined to that

subject alone, and were as follows:

"The National Prohibition party, in convention represented at

Chicago, June 27 and 28, 1900, acknowledged Almighty God as

the supreme source of all just government. Realizing that this

Republic was founded upon Christian principles, and can endure

only as it embodies justice and righteousness, and asserting

that all authority should seek the best good of all the

governed, to this end wisely prohibiting what is wrong and

permitting only what is right, hereby records and proclaims:

{652}

"First.—We accept and assert the definition given by Edward

Burke, that a party is 'a body of men joined together for the

purpose of protecting by their joint endeavor the National

interest upon some particular principle upon which they are

all agreed.'

"We declare that there is no principle now advocated, by any

other party, which could be made a fact in government with

such beneficent moral and material results as the principle of

prohibition applied to the beverage liquor traffic; that the

National interest could be promoted in no other way so surely

and widely as by its adoption and assertion through a National

policy and a cooperation therein by every State, forbidding

the manufacture, sale, exportation, importation, and

transportation of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes;

that we stand for this as the only principle proposed by any

party anywhere for the settlement of a question greater and

graver than any other before the American people, and

involving more profoundly than any other their moral future

and financial welfare; and that all the patriotic citizenship

of this country agreed upon this principle, however much

disagreement there may be as to minor considerations and

issues, should stand together at the ballot-box from this time

forward until prohibition is the established policy of the

United States, with a party in power to enforce it and to

insure its moral and material benefits.

"We insist that such a party agreed upon this principle and

policy, having sober leadership, without any obligation for

success to the saloon vote and to those demoralizing political

combinations, can successfully cope with all other and lesser

problems of government, in legislative halls and in the

executive chair, and that it is useless for any party to make

declarations in its platform as to any questions concerning

which there may be serious differences of opinion in its own

membership and as to which, because of such differences, the

party could legislate only on a basis of mutual concessions

when coming into power.

"We submit that the Democratic and Republican parties are

alike insincere in their assumed hostility to trusts and

monopolies. They dare not and do not attack the most dangerous

of them all, the liquor power. So long as the saloon debauches

the citizen and breeds the purchasable voter, money will

continue to buy its way to power. Break down this traffic,

elevate manhood, and a sober citizenship will find a way to

control dangerous combinations of capital. We purpose, as a

first step in the financial problem of the nation, to save

more than a billion of dollars every year, now annually

expended to support the liquor traffic and to demoralize our

people. When that is accomplished, conditions will have so

improved that with a clearer atmosphere the country can

address itself to the questions as to the kind and quantity of

currency needed.

"Second.—We reaffirm as true indisputably the declaration of

William Windom, when Secretary of the Treasury in the Cabinet

of President Arthur, that 'considered socially, financially,

politically, or morally, the licensed liquor traffic is or

ought to be the overwhelming issue in American politics, and

that the destruction of this iniquity stands next on the

calendar of the world's progress.' We hold that the existence

of our party presents this issue squarely to the American

people, and lays upon them the responsibility of choice

between liquor parties, dominated by distillers and brewers,

with their policy of saloon perpetuation breeding waste,

wickedness, woe, pauperism, taxation, corruption, and crime,

and our one party of patriotic and moral principle, with a

policy which defends it from domination by corrupt bosses, and

which insures it forever against the blighting control of

saloon politics.

"We face with sorrow, shame, and fear the awful fact that this

liquor traffic has a grip on our Government, municipal, State,

and National, through the revenue system and a saloon

sovereignty, which no other party dare to dispute; a grip

which dominates the party now in power, from caucus to

Congress, from policemen to President, from the rum shop to

the White House; a grip which compels the Executive to consent

that law shall be nullified in behalf of the brewer, that the

canteen shall curse our army and spread intemperance across

the seas, and that our flag shall wave as the symbol of

partnership, at home and abroad, between this Government and

the men who defy and defile it for their unholy gain.

"Third.—We charge upon President McKinley, who was elected to

his high office by appeal to Christian sentiment and

patriotism almost unprecedented and by a combination of moral

influences never before seen in this country, that by his

conspicuous example as a wine-drinker at public banquets and

as a wine-serving host in the White House, he has done more to

encourage the liquor business, to demoralize the temperance

habits of young men, and to bring Christian practices and

requirements into disrepute than any other President this

Republic has had. "We further charge upon President McKinley

responsibility for the Army canteen, with all its dire brood

of disease, immorality, sin and death, in this country, in

Cuba, in Porto Rico and the Philippines; and we insist that by

his attitude concerning the canteen, and his apparent contempt

for the vast number of petitions and petitioners protesting

against it, he has outraged and insulted the moral sentiment

of this country in such a manner and to such a degree as calls

for its righteous uprising and his indignant and effective

rebuke. We challenge denial of the fact that our Chief

Executive, as commander in chief of the military forces of the

United States, at any time prior to or since March 2, 1899,

could have closed every Army saloon, called a canteen, by

executive order, as President Hayes in effect did before him,

and should have closed them, for the same reason that actuated

President Hayes; we assert that the act of Congress passed

March 2, 1899, forbidding the sale of liquor, 'in any post

exchange or canteen,' by any 'officer or private soldier' or

by 'any other person on any premises used for military

purposes in the United States,' was and is as explicit an act

of prohibition as the English language can frame; we declare

our solemn belief that the Attorney-General of the United

States in his interpretation of that law, and the Secretary of

War in his acceptance of that interpretation and his refusal

to enforce the law, were and are guilty of treasonable

nullification thereof, and that President McKinley, through

his assent to and indorsement of such interpretation and

refusal on the part of officials appointed by and responsible

to him, shares responsibility in their guilt; and we record

our conviction that a new and serious peril confronts our

country, in the fact that its President, at the behest of the

beer power, dare and does abrogate a law of Congress, through

subordinates removable at will by him and whose acts become

his, and thus virtually confesses that laws are to be

administered or to be nullified in the interest of a

law-defying business, by an Administration under mortgage to

such business for support.

{653}

"Fourth.-We deplore the fact that an Administration of this

Republic claiming the right and power to carry our flag across

seas, and to conquer and annex new territory, should admit its

lack of power to prohibit the American saloon on subjugated

soil, or should openly confess itself subject to liquor

sovereignty under that flag. We are humiliated, exasperated

and grieved by the evidence painfully abundant that this

Administration's policy of expansion is bearing so rapidly its

first fruits of drunkenness, insanity and crime under the

hothouse sun of the tropics; and when the president of the

first Philippine Commission says 'It was unfortunate that we

introduced and established the saloon there, to corrupt the

natives and to exhibit the vices of our race,' we charge the

inhumanity and un-Christianity of this act upon the

Administration of William McKinley and upon the party which

elected and would perpetuate the same.

"Fifth.—We declare that the only policy which the Government

of the United States can of right uphold as to the liquor

traffic under the National Constitution upon any territory

under the military or civil control of that Government is the

policy of prohibition; that 'to establish justice, insure

domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote

the general welfare, and insure the blessings of liberty to

ourselves and our posterity,' as the Constitution provides,

the liquor traffic must neither be sanctioned nor tolerated,

and that the revenue policy, which makes our Government a

partner with distillers and brewers and barkeepers, is a

disgrace to our civilization, an outrage upon humanity, and a

crime against God.

"We condemn the present Administration at Washington because

it has repealed the prohibitory law in Alaska, and has given

over the partly civilized tribes there to be the prey of the

American grogshop, and because it has entered upon a license

policy in our new possessions by incorporating the same in the

revenue act of Congress in the code of laws for the government

of the Hawaiian Islands.

"We call general attention to the fearful fact that

exportation of liquors from the United States to the

Philippine Islands increased from $337 in 1898 to $167,198 in

the first ten months of the fiscal year ended June 30, 1900;

and that while our exportations of liquor to Cuba never

reached $30,000 a year previous to American occupation of that

island, our exports of such liquors to Cuba during the fiscal

year of 1899 reached the sum of $629,655.

"Sixth.—One great religious body (the Baptist) having truly

declared of the liquor traffic 'that it has no defensible

right to exist, that it can never be reformed, that it stands

condemned by its unrighteous fruits as a thing unchristian,

un-American, and perilous utterly to every interest in life';

another great religious body (the Methodist) having as truly

asserted and reiterated that 'no political party has the right

to expect, nor should it receive, the votes of Christian men

so long as it stands committed to the license system or

refuses to put itself on record in an attitude of open

hostility to the saloons'; other great religious bodies having

made similar deliverances, in language plain and unequivocal,

as to the liquor traffic and the duty of Christian citizenship

in opposition thereto, and the fact being plain and undeniable

that the Democratic party stands for license, the saloon, and

the canteen, while the Republican party, in policy and

administration, stands for the canteen, the saloon, and

revenue therefrom, we declare ourselves justified in expecting

that Christian voters everywhere shall cease their complicity

with the liquor curse by refusing to uphold a liquor party,

and shall unite themselves with the only party which upholds

the prohibition policy, and which for nearly thirty years has

been the faithful defender of the church, the State, the home,

and the school against the saloon, its expanders and

perpetuators, their actual and persistent foes.

"We insist that no differences of belief, as to any other

question or concern of government, should stand in the way of

such a union of moral and Christian citizenship as we hereby

invite for the speedy settlement of this paramount moral,

industrial, financial, and political issue which our party

presents; and we refrain from declaring ourselves upon all

minor matters as to which differences of opinion may exist

that hereby we may offer to the American people a platform so

broad that all can stand upon it who desire to see sober

citizenship actually sovereign over the allied hosts of evil,

sin, and crime in a government of the people, by the people,

and for the people.

"We declare that there are but two real parties to-day

concerning the liquor traffic—Perpetuationists and

Prohibitionists—and that patriotism, Christianity, and every

interest of genuine republicanism and of pure democracy,

besides the loyal demands of our common humanity, require the

speedy union, in one solid phalanx at the ballot-box, of all

who oppose the liquor traffic's perpetuation, and who covet

endurance for this Republic."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

Democratic Party Platform and Nominations.

The delegates of the Democratic Party met in national

convention at Kansas City, on the Fourth of July. By unanimous

vote, on the following day, they again nominated William J.

Bryan, of Nebraska, for President, and subsequently associated

with him ex-Vice President Adlai E. Stevenson, of Illinois,

for Vice President. The platform, adopted on the same day,

reiterating the demand of 1896 for a free and unlimited

coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, but emphasizing the

question of colonial expansion as the "paramount issue of the

campaign," was as follows: "'We, the representatives of the

Democratic party of the United States, assembled in national

convention on the anniversary of the adoption of the

Declaration of Independence, do reaffirm our faith in that

immortal proclamation of the inalienable rights of man, and

our allegiance to the constitution framed in harmony therewith

by the fathers of the Republic. We hold with the United States

Supreme Court that the Declaration of Independence is the spirit

of our government, of which the constitution is the form and

letter.

{654}

We declare again that all governments instituted among men

derive their just powers from the consent of the governed;

that any government not based upon the consent of the governed

is a tyranny; and that to impose upon any people a government

of force is to substitute the methods of imperialism for those

of a republic. We hold that the constitution follows the flag

and denounce the doctrine that an executive or congress,

deriving their existence and their powers from the

constitution, can exercise lawful authority beyond it, or in

violation of it. We assert that no nation can long endure half

republic and half empire, and we warn the American people that

imperialism abroad will lead quickly and inevitably to

despotism at home.

"Believing in these fundamental principles, we denounce the

Porto Rico law, enacted by a Republican Congress against the

protest and opposition of the Democratic minority, as a bold

and open violation of the Nation's organic law and a flagrant

breach of National good faith. It imposes upon the people of

Porto Rico a government without their consent, and taxation

without representation. It dishonors the American people by

repudiating a solemn pledge made in their behalf by the

commanding general of our Army, which the Porto Ricans

welcomed to a peaceful and unresisted occupation of their

land. It dooms to poverty and distress a people whose

helplessness appeals with peculiar force to our justice and

magnanimity. In this, the first act of its imperialistic

programme, the Republican party seeks to commit the United

States to a colonial policy inconsistent with republican

institutions and condemned by the Supreme Court in numerous

decisions.

"We demand the prompt and honest fulfilment of our pledge to

the Cuban people and the world, that the United States has no

disposition nor intention to exercise sovereignty,

jurisdiction, or control over the island of Cuba, except for

its pacification. The war ended nearly two years ago, profound

peace reigns over all the island, and still the Administration

keeps the government of the island from its people, while

Republican carpetbag officials plunder its revenue and exploit

the colonial theory to the disgrace of the American people.

"We condemn and denounce the Philippine policy of the present

Administration. It has embroiled the Republic in an

unnecessary war, sacrificed the lives of many of its noblest

sons, and placed the United States, previously known and

applauded throughout the world as the champion of freedom, in

the false and un-American position of crushing with military

force the efforts of our former allies to achieve liberty and

self-government. The Filipinos cannot be citizens without

endangering our civilization; they cannot be subjects without

imperilling our form of government; and as we are not willing

to surrender our civilization, or to convert the Republic into

an empire, we favor an immediate declaration of the Nation's

purpose to give to the Filipinos, first, a stable form of

government; second, independence; and third, protection from

outside interference such as has been given for nearly a

century to the republics of Central and South America. The

greedy commercialism which dictated the Philippine policy of

the Republican Administration attempts to justify it with the

plea that it will pay, but even this sordid and unworthy plea

fails when brought to the test of facts. The war of 'criminal

aggression' against the Filipinos, entailing an annual expense

of many millions, has already cost more than any possible

profit that could accrue from the entire Philippine trade for

years to come. Furthermore, when trade is extended at the

expense of liberty the price is always too high.

"We are not opposed to territorial expansion, when it takes in

desirable territory which can be erected into States in the

Union, and whose people are willing and fit to become American

citizens. We favor trade expansion by every peaceful and

legitimate means. But we are unalterably opposed to the

seizing or purchasing of distant islands to be governed

outside the Constitution and whose people can never become

citizens. We are in favor of extending the Republic's

influence among the nations, but believe that influence should

be extended not by force and violence, but through the

persuasive power of a high and honorable example.

"The importance of other questions now pending before the

American people is in nowise diminished and the Democratic

party takes no backward step from its position on them; but

the burning issue of imperialism, growing out of the Spanish

war, involving the very existence of the Republic and the

destruction of our free institutions, we regard as the

paramount issue of the campaign.

"The declaration of the Republican platform adopted at the

Philadelphia Convention, held in June, 1900, that the

Republican party 'steadfastly adheres to the policy announced

in the Monroe Doctrine,' is manifestly insincere and

deceptive. This profession is contradicted by the avowed

policy of that party, in opposition to the spirit of the

Monroe Doctrine, to acquire and hold sovereignty over large

areas of territory and large numbers of people in the Eastern

Hemisphere. We insist on the strict maintenance of the Monroe

Doctrine in all its integrity, both in letter and in spirit,

as necessary to prevent the extension of European authority on

these continents and as essential to our supremacy in American

affairs. At the same time we declare that no American people

shall ever be held by force in unwilling subjection to

European authority.

"We oppose militarism. It means conquest abroad and

intimidation and oppression at home. It means the strong arm

which has ever been fatal to free institutions. It is what

millions of our citizens have fled from in Europe. It will

impose upon our peace loving people a large standing army, an

unnecessary burden of taxation, and would be a constant menace

to their liberties. A small standing army and a well

disciplined State militia are amply sufficient in time of

peace. This Republic has no place for a vast military

establishment, a sure forerunner of compulsory military

service and conscription. When the Nation is in danger the

volunteer soldier is his country's best defender. The National

Guard of the United States should ever be cherished in the

patriotic hearts of a free people. Such organizations are ever

an element of strength and safety. For the first time in our

history and coeval with the Philippine conquest has there been

a wholesale departure from our time honored and approved

system of volunteer organization. We denounce it as

un-American, undemocratic and unrepublican and as a subversion

of the ancient and fixed principles of a free people.

{655}

"Private monopolies are indefensible and intolerable. They

destroy competition, control the price of raw material and of

the finished product, thus robbing both producer and consumer.

They lessen the employment of labor and arbitrarily fix the terms

and conditions thereof; and deprive individual energy and

small capital of their opportunity for betterment. They are

the most efficient means yet devised for appropriating the

fruits of industry to the benefit of the few at the expense of

the many, and, unless their insatiate greed is checked, all

wealth will be aggregated in a few hands and the Republic

destroyed. The dishonest paltering with the trust evil by the

Republican party in its State and National platforms is

conclusive proof of the truth of the charge that trusts are

the legitimate product of Republican policies, that they are

fostered by Republican laws, and that they are protected by

the Republican Administration in return for campaign

subscriptions and political support. We pledge the Democratic

party to an unceasing warfare in Nation, State and city

against private monopoly in every form. Existing laws against

trusts must be enforced and more stringent ones must be

enacted providing for publicity as to the affairs of

corporations engaged in interstate commerce and requiring all

corporations to show, before doing business outside of the

State of their origin, that they have no water in their stock,

and that they have not attempted and are not attempting to

monopolize any branch of business or the production of any

articles of merchandise; and the whole constitutional power of

Congress over interstate commerce, the mails and all modes of

interstate communication shall be exercised by the enactment

of comprehensive laws upon the subject of trusts.

"Tariff laws should be amended by putting the products of

trusts upon the free list, to prevent monopoly under the plea

of protection. The failure of the present Republican

Administration, with an absolute control over all the branches

of the National Government, to enact any legislation designed

to prevent or even curtail the absorbing power of trusts and

illegal combinations, or to enforce the anti-trust laws

already on the statute books, proves the insincerity of the

high sounding phrases of the Republican platform. Corporations

should be protected in all their rights and their legitimate

interests should be respected, but any attempt by corporations

to interfere with the public affairs of the people or to

control the sovereignty which creates them should be forbidden

under such penalties as will make such attempts impossible. We

condemn the Dingley tariff law as a trust breeding measure

skilfully devised to give to the few favors which they do not

deserve, and to place upon the many burdens which they should

not bear. We favor such an enlargement of the scope of the

Interstate Commerce law as will enable the Commission to

protect individuals and communities from discrimination and

the public from unjust and unfair transportation rates.

"We reaffirm and indorse the principles of the National

Democratic platform adopted at Chicago in 1896 and we

reiterate the demand of that platform for an American

financial system made by the American people for themselves,

which shall restore and maintain a bimetallic price level, and

as part of such system the immediate restoration of the free

and unlimited coinage of silver and gold at the present legal

ratio of 16 to 1, without waiting for the aid or consent of

any other nation.

"We denounce the currency bill enacted at the last session of

Congress as a step forward in the Republican policy which aims

to discredit the sovereign right of the National Government to

issue all money, whether coin or paper, and to bestow upon

National banks the power to issue and control the volume of

paper money for their own benefit. A permanent National bank

currency, secured by Government bonds, must have a permanent

debt to rest upon, and, if the bank currency is to increase

with population and business, the debt must also increase. The

Republican currency scheme is, therefore, a scheme for

fastening upon the taxpayers a perpetual and growing debt for

the benefit of the banks. We are opposed to this private

corporation paper circulated as money, but without legal

tender qualities, and demand the retirement of National bank

notes as fast as Government paper or silver certificates can

be substituted for them. We favor an amendment to the Federal

Constitution providing for the election of United States

Senators by direct vote of the people, and we favor direct

legislation wherever practicable. We are opposed to government

by injunction; we denounce the blacklist, and favor

arbitration as a means of settling disputes between

corporations and their employés.

"In the interest of American labor and the upbuilding of the

workingman as the cornerstone of the prosperity of our

country, we recommend that Congress create a Department of

Labor, in charge of a Secretary, with a seat in the Cabinet,

believing that the elevation of the American laborer will

bring with it increased production and increased prosperity to

our country at home and to our commerce abroad. We are proud

of the courage and fidelity of the American soldiers and

sailors in all our wars; we favor liberal pensions to them and

their dependents; and we reiterate the position taken in the

Chicago platform in 1896, that the fact of enlistment and

service shall be deemed conclusive evidence against disease

and disability before enlistment.

"We favor the immediate construction, ownership and control of

the Nicaraguan canal by the United States, and we denounce the

insincerity of the plank in the Republican national platform

for an Isthmian canal, in the face of the failure of the

Republican majority to pass the bill pending in Congress.

"We condemn the Hay-Pauncefote treaty as a surrender of

American rights and interests, not to be tolerated by the

American people.

"We denounce the failure of the Republican party to carry out

its pledges to grant statehood to the territories of Arizona,

New Mexico and Oklahoma, and we promise the people of those

territories immediate statehood, and home rule during their

condition as territories; and we favor home rule and a

territorial form of government for Alaska and Porto Rico.

"We favor an intelligent system of improving the arid lands of

the West, storing the waters for the purposes of irrigation,

and the holding of such lands for actual settlers.

{656}

"We favor the continuance and strict enforcement of the

Chinese exclusion law and its application to the same classes

of all Asiatic races.

"Jefferson said: 'Peace, commerce and honest friendship with

all nations, entangling alliances with none.' We approve this

wholesome doctrine and earnestly protest against the

Republican departure which has involved us in so-called world

politics, including the diplomacy of Europe and the intrigue

and land-grabbing in Asia, and we especially condemn the

ill-concealed Republican alliance with England, which must

mean discrimination against other friendly nations, and which

has already stifled the nation's voice while liberty is being

strangled in Africa.

"Believing in the principles of self-government and rejecting,

as did our forefathers, the claims of monarchy, we view with

indignation the purpose of England to overwhelm with force the

South African Republics. Speaking, as we believe, for the

entire American nation, except its Republican officeholders,

and for all free men everywhere, we extend our sympathy to the

heroic Burghers in their unequal struggle to maintain their

liberty and independence.

"We denounce the lavish appropriations of recent Republican

congresses, which have kept taxes high and which threaten the

perpetuation of the oppressive war levies. We oppose the

accumulation of a surplus to be squandered in such barefaced

frauds upon the taxpayers as the shipping subsidy bill, which,

under the false pretense of fostering American ship-building,

would put unearned millions into the pockets of favorite

contributors to the Republican campaign fund.

"We favor the reduction and speedy repeal of the war taxes,

and a return to the time-honored Democratic policy of strict

economy in governmental expenditures.

"Believing that our most cherished institutions are in great

peril, that the very existence of our constitutional Republic

is at stake, and that the decision now to be rendered will

determine whether or not our children are to enjoy those

blessed privileges of free government which have made the

United States great, prosperous and honored, we earnestly ask

for the foregoing declaration of principles the hearty support

of the liberty-loving American people, regardless of previous

party affiliations."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

Silver Republican Platform and Nominations.

The Republicans who broke from their party in 1896 on the

silver question, and supported Mr. Bryan for the presidency,

were still in affiliation with him and his party, but

preserving a distinct organization, assuming the name of

Lincoln Republicans. Simultaneously with that of the Democrats

(July 6), they held a convention at Kansas City, and named Mr.

Bryan as their candidate for President. The nomination for

Vice President was referred to the national committee, which

ultimately placed Mr. Stevenson's name on the Silver

Republican ticket. The platform adopted differed little in

leading principles from that of the Democratic party, except

in the greater emphasis put on the monetary doctrines that

were common to both. It was as follows:

"We, the Silver Republican party, in National Convention

assembled, declare these as our principles and invite the

cooperation of all who agree therewith:

"We recognize that the principles set forth in the Declaration

of Independence are fundamental and everlastingly true in

their applications of governments among men. We believe the

patriotic words of Washington's farewell to be the words of

soberness and wisdom, inspired by the spirit of right and

truth. We treasure the words of Jefferson as priceless gems of

American statesmanship.

"We hold in sacred remembrance the broad philanthropy and

patriotism of Lincoln, who was the great interpreter of

American history and the great apostle of human rights and of

industrial freedom, and we declare, as was declared by the

convention that nominated the great emancipator, that the

maintenance of the principles promulgated in the Declaration

of Independence and embodied in the Federal Constitution,

'that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by

their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among

these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to

secure these rights governments are instituted among men,

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,'

is essential to the preservation of our republican

institutions.

"We declare our adherence to the principle of bimetallism as

the right basis of a monetary system under our National

Constitution, a principle that found place repeatedly in

Republican platforms from the demonetization of silver in 1873

to the St. Louis Republican Convention of 1896. Since that

convention a Republican Congress and a Republican President,

at the dictation of the trusts and money power, have passed

and approved a currency bill which in itself is a repudiation

of the doctrine of bimetallism advocated theretofore by the

President and every great leader of his party.

"This currency law destroys the full money power of the silver

dollar, provides for the payment of all government obligations

and the redemption of all forms of paper money in gold alone;

retires the time-honored and patriotic greenbacks,

constituting one-sixth of the money in circulation, and

surrenders to banking corporations a sovereign function of

issuing all paper money, thus enabling these corporations to

control the prices of labor and property by increasing or

diminishing the volume of money in circulation, thus giving

the banks power to create panics and bring disaster upon

business enterprises. The provisions of this currency law

making the bonded debt of the Republic payable in gold alone

change the contract between the Government and the bondholders

to the advantage of the latter, and is in direct opposition to

the declaration of the Matthews resolution passed by Congress

in 1878, for which resolution the present Republican

President, then a member of Congress, voted, as did also all

leading Republicans, both in the House and Senate. We declare

it to be our intention to lend our efforts to the repeal of

this currency law, which not only repudiates the ancient and

time-honored principles of the American people before the

Constitution was adopted, but is violative of the principles

of the Constitution itself, and we shall not cease our efforts

until there has been established in its place a monetary

system based upon the free and unlimited coinage of silver and

gold into money at the present legal ratio of 16 to 1 by the

independent action of the United States, under which system

all paper money shall be issued by the Government and all such

money coined or issued shall be a full legal tender in payment

of all debts, public and private, without exception.

{657}

"We are in favor of a graduated tax upon incomes, and if

necessary to accomplish this we favor an amendment to the

Constitution.

"We believe that United States Senators ought to be elected by

direct vote of the people, and we favor such amendment of the

Constitution and such legislation as may be necessary to that

end.

"We favor the maintenance and the extension wherever

practicable of the merit system in the public service,

appointments to be made according to fitness, competitively

ascertained, and public servants to be retained in office only

so long as shall be compatible with the efficiency of the

service.

"Combinations, trusts, and monopolies contrived and arranged

for the purpose of controlling the prices and quantity of

articles supplied to the public are unjust, unlawful, and

oppressive. Not only do these unlawful conspiracies fix the

prices of commodities in many cases, but they invade every

branch of the State and National Government with their

polluting influence and control the actions of their employés

and dependents in private life until their influence actually

imperils society and the liberty of the citizen. We declare

against them. We demand the most stringent laws for their

destruction and the most severe punishment of their promoters

and maintainers and the energetic enforcement of such laws by

the courts.

"We believe the Monroe doctrine to be sound in principle and a

wise National policy, and we demand a firm adherence thereto.

We condemn acts inconsistent with it and that tend to make us

parties to the interests and to involve us in the

controversies of European nations and to recognition by

pending treaty of the right of England to be considered in the

construction of an interoceanic canal. We declare that such

canal, when constructed, ought to be controlled by the United

States in the interests of American nations.

"We observe with anxiety and regard with disapproval the

increasing ownership of American lands by aliens and their

growing control over our international transportation, natural

resources, and public utilities. We demand legislation to

protect our public domain, our natural resources, our

franchises, and our internal commerce and to keep them free

and maintain their independence of all foreign monopolies,

institutions, and influences, and we declare our opposition to

the leasing of the public lands of the United States whereby

corporations and syndicates will be able to secure control

thereof and thus monopolize the public domain, the heritage of

the people.

"We are in favor of the principles of direct legislation. In

view of the great sacrifice made and patriotic services

rendered we are in favor of liberal pensions to deserving

soldiers, their widows, orphans, and other dependents. We

believe that enlistment and service should be accepted as

conclusive proof that the soldier was free from disease and

disability at the time of his enlistment. We condemn the

present administration of the pension laws.

"We tender to the patriotic people of the South African

Republics our sympathy and express our admiration for them in

their heroic attempts to preserve their political freedom and

maintain their national independence. We declare the

destruction of these republics and the subjugation of their

people to be a crime against civilization. We believe this

sympathy should have been voiced by the American Congress, as

was done in the case of the French, the Greeks, the

Hungarians, the Poles, the Armenians, and the Cubans, and as

the traditions of this country would have dictated. We declare

the Porto Rican Tariff law to be not only a serious but a

dangerous departure from the principles of our form of

government. We believe in a republican form of government and

are opposed to monarchy and to the whole theory of

imperialistic control.

"We believe in self-government—a government by the consent of

the governed—and are unalterably opposed to a government based

upon force. It is clear and certain that the inhabitants of

the Philippine Archipelago cannot be made citizens of the

United States without endangering our civilization. We are,

therefore, in favor of applying to the Philippine Archipelago

the principle we are solemnly and publicly pledged to observe

in the case of Cuba.

"There no longer being any necessity for collecting war taxes,

we demand the repeal of the war taxes levied to carry on the

war with Spain.

"We favor the immediate admission into the union of States the

Territories of Arizona, New Mexico, and Oklahoma.

"We demand that our nation's promises to Cuba shall be

fulfilled in every particular.

"We believe the National Government should lend every aid,

encouragement, and assistance toward the reclamation of the

arid lands of the United States, and to that end we are in

favor of a comprehensive survey thereof and an immediate

ascertainment of the water supply available for such

reclamation, and we believe it to be the duty of the General

Government to provide for the construction of storage

reservoirs and irrigation works so that the water supply of

the arid region may be utilized to the greatest possible

extent in the interests of the people, while preserving all

rights of the State.

"Transportation is a public necessity and the means and

methods of it are matters of public concern. Railway companies

exercise a power over industries, business, and commerce which

they ought not to do, and should be made to serve the public

interests without making unreasonable charges or unjust

discriminations.

"We observe with satisfaction the growing sentiment among the

people in favor of the public ownership and operation of

public utilities.

"We are in favor of expanding our commerce in the interests of

American labor and for the benefit of all our people by every

honest and peaceful means. Our creed and our history justify

the nations of the earth in expecting that wherever the

American flag is unfurled in authority human liberty and

political liberty will be found. We protest against the

adoption of any policy that will change in the thought of the

world the meaning of our flag.

"We are opposed to the importation of Asiatic laborers in

competition with American labor, and favor a more rigid

enforcement of the laws relating thereto.

"The Silver Republican party of the United States, in the

foregoing principles, seeks to perpetuate the spirit and to

adhere to the teachings of Abraham Lincoln."

{658}

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

Platform of the American League of Anti-Imperialists.

Republicans and others opposed to a policy of conquest, and to

the government of people, not as citizens, but as subjects of

the Republic of the United States, and who wished to make that

opposition distinct and emphatic in the presidential canvass,

met in convention at Indianapolis, on the 16th of August, as

the "Liberty Congress of the American League of

Anti-Imperialists." One party among them thought the best

demonstration of public opinion on this issue could be

obtained by the nomination of a third ticket; while another

and larger party deemed it expedient to indorse the candidacy

of William J. Bryan, as a pronounced opponent of the imperial

policy. The views of the latter prevailed, and the indorsement

of Mr. Bryan was carried in the convention; but many of the

former refused submission to the vote of the majority, and

subsequently held a Third Party convention at New York (see

below). The Indianapolis Declaration was as follows:

"This Liberty Congress of Anti-Imperialists recognizes a great

National crisis, which menaces the Republic, upon whose future

depends in such large measure the hope of freedom throughout

the world. For the first time in our country's history the

President has undertaken to subjugate a foreign people and to

rule them by despotic power. He has thrown the protection of

the flag over slavery and polygamy in the Sulu Islands. He has

arrogated to himself the power to impose upon the inhabitants

of the Philippines government without their consent and

taxation without representation. He is waging war upon them

for asserting the very principles for the maintenance of which

our forefathers pledged their lives, their fortunes and their

sacred honor. He claims for himself and Congress authority to

govern the territories of the United States without

constitutional restraint.

"We believe in the Declaration of Independence. Its truths,

not less self-evident to-day than when first announced by our

fathers, are of universal application and cannot be abandoned

while government by the people endures.

"We believe in the Constitution of the United States. It gives

the President and Congress certain limited powers and secures

to every man within the jurisdiction of our Government certain

essential rights. We deny that either the President or

Congress can govern any person anywhere outside the

Constitution.

"We are absolutely opposed to the policy of President

McKinley, which proposes to govern millions of men without

their consent, which in Porto Rico establishes taxation

without representation, and government by the arbitrary will

of a legislature unfettered by constitutional restraint, and

in the Philippines prosecutes a war of conquest and demands

unconditional surrender from a people who are of right free

and independent. The struggle of men for freedom has ever been

a struggle for constitutional liberty. There is no liberty if

the citizen has no right which the Legislature may not invade,

if he may be taxed by the Legislature in which he is not

represented, or if he is not protected by fundamental law

against the arbitrary action of executive power. The policy of

the President offers the inhabitants of Porto Rico, Hawaii and

the Philippines no hope of independence, no prospect of

American citizenship, no constitutional protection, no

representation in the Congress which taxes them. This is the

government of men by arbitrary power without their consent.

This is imperialism. There is no room under the free flag of

America for subjects. The President and Congress, who derive

all their powers from the Constitution, can govern no man

without regard to its limitations.

"We believe the greatest safeguard of liberty is a free press,

and we demand that the censorship in the Philippines, which

keeps from the American people the knowledge of what is done

in their name, be abolished. We are entitled to know the

truth, and we insist that the powers which the President holds

in trust for us shall not be used to suppress it.

"Because we thus believe, we oppose the reelection of Mr.

McKinley. The supreme purpose of the people in this momentous

campaign should be to stamp with their final disapproval his

attempt to grasp imperial power. A self-governing people can

have no more imperative duty than to drive from public life a

Chief Magistrate who, whether in weakness or of wicked

purpose, has used his temporary authority to subvert the

character of their government and to destroy their National

ideals.

"We, therefore, in the belief that it is essential at this

crisis for the American people again to declare their faith in

the universal application of the Declaration of Independence

and to reassert their will that their servants shall not have

or exercise any powers whatever other than those conferred by

the Constitution, earnestly make the following recommendations

to our countrymen:

"First, that, without regard to their views on minor questions

of domestic policy, they withhold their votes from Mr.

McKinley, in order to stamp with their disapproval what he has

done.

"Second, that they vote for those candidates for Congress in

their respective districts who will oppose the policy of

imperialism.

"Third, while we welcome any other method of opposing the

re-election of Mr. McKinley we advise direct support of Mr.

Bryan as the most effective means of crushing imperialism. We

are convinced of Mr. Bryan's sincerity and of his earnest

purpose to secure to the Filipinos their independence. His

position and the declarations contained in the platform of his

party on the vital issue of the campaign meet our unqualified

approval.

"We recommend that the Executive committees of the American

Anti-Imperialist League and its allied leagues continue and

extend their organizations, preserving the independence of the

movement; and that they take the most active part possible in

the pending political campaign.

"Until now the policy which has turned the Filipinos from warm

friends to bitter enemies, which has slaughtered thousands of

them and laid waste their country, has been the policy of the

President. After the next election it becomes the policy of

every man who votes to re-elect him and who thus becomes with

him responsible for every drop of blood thereafter shed.

"In declaring that the principles of the Declaration of

Independence apply to all men, this Congress means to include

the negro race in America as well as the Filipinos. We

deprecate all efforts, whether in the South or in the North,

to deprive the negro of his rights as a citizen under the

Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United

States."

{659}

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

The "Third Party" Anti-Imperialist Platform and Nominations.

The Anti-Imperialists who desired a Third Party ticket in the

field, called a convention which met in the city of New York,

September 5, and put in nomination for President and Vice

President Senator Donelson Caffery, of Louisiana, and

Archibald Murray Howe, of Massachusetts. The name "National

Party" was assumed, and its "aims and purposes" were thus

declared:

"We find our country threatened with alternative perils. On

the one hand is a public opinion misled by organized forces of

commercialism, that have perverted a war intended by the

people to be a war of humanity into a war of conquest. On the

other is a public opinion swayed by demagogic appeals to

factional and class passions, the most fatal of diseases to a

republic. We believe that either of these influences, if

unchecked, would ultimately compass the downfall of our

country, but we also believe that neither represents the sober

conviction of our countrymen. Convinced that the extension of

the jurisdiction of the United States for the purpose of

holding foreign people as colonial dependents is an innovation

dangerous to our liberties and repugnant to the principles

upon which our Government is founded, we pledge our earnest

efforts through all constitutional means:

"First, to procure the renunciation of all imperial or

colonial pretensions with regard to foreign countries claimed

to have been acquired through or in consequence of military or

naval operations of the last two years.

"Second, we further pledge our efforts to secure a single gold

standard and a sound banking system.

"Third, to secure a public service based on merit only.

"Fourth, to secure the abolition of all corrupting special

privileges, whether under the guise of subsidies, bounties,

undeserved pensions or trust breeding tariffs."

Within a few weeks after the holding of this convention,

Senator Caffery and Mr. Howe withdrew their names from the

canvass, and it was decided to appoint electors-at-large in as

many states as possible, to receive the votes of those

supporting the movement.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

Social Democratic Party Platform and Nominations.

The last distinct movement of organization for the

presidential election was that of a "Social Democratic Party,"

whose convention, at Chicago, September 29, placed Eugene V.

Debs, of Illinois, in nomination for President, and Job

Harriman, of California, for Vice President, on principles

declared as follows:

"The Social Democratic party of America declares that life,

liberty, and happiness depend upon equal political and

economic rights.

"In our economic development an industrial revolution has

taken place, the individual tool of former years having become

the social tool of the present. The individual tool was owned

by the worker, who employed himself and was master of his

product. The social tool, the machine, is owned by the

capitalist, and the worker is dependent upon him for

employment. The capitalist thus becomes the master of the

worker, and is able to appropriate to himself a large share of

the product of his labor.

"Capitalism, the private ownership of the means of production,

is responsible for the insecurity of subsistence, the poverty,

misery, and degradation of the ever-growing majority of our

people; but the same economic forces which have produced and

now intensify the capitalist system will necessitate the

adoption of Socialism, the collective ownership of the means

of production for the common good and welfare.

"The present system of social production and private ownership

is rapidly converting society into two antagonistic classes—i.

e., the capitalist class and the propertyless class. The

middle class, once the most powerful of this great nation, is

disappearing in the mill of competition. The issue is now

between the two classes first named. Our political liberty is

now of little value to the masses unless used to acquire

economic liberty. Independent political action and the

trade-union movement are the chief emancipating factors of the

working class, the one representing its political, the other

its economic wing, and both must cooperate to abolish the

capitalist system.

"Therefore, the Social Democratic party of America declares

its object to be:

"First—The organization of the working class into a political

party to conquer the public powers now controlled by

capitalists.

"Second—The abolition of wage-slavery by the establishment of

a National system of cooperative industry, based upon the

social or common ownership of the means of production and

distribution, to be administered by society in the common

interest of all its members, and the complete emancipation of

the socially useful classes from the domination of capitalism.

"The working class and all those in sympathy with their

historic mission to realize a higher civilization should sever

connection with all capitalist and reform parties and unite

with the Social Democratic party of America. The control of

political power by the Social Democratic party will be

tantamount to the abolition of all class rule. The solidarity

of labor connecting the millions of class-conscious

fellow-workers throughout the civilized world will lead to

international Socialism, the brotherhood of man.

"As steps in that direction, we make the following demands:

"First-Revision of our Federal Constitution, in order to

remove the obstacles to complete control of government by the

people irrespective of sex.

"Second—The public ownership of all industries controlled by

monopolies, trusts, and combines.

"Third—The public ownership of all railroads, telegraphs, and

telephones; all means of transportation and communication; all

water-works, gas and electric plants, and other public

utilities.

"Fourth—The public ownership of all gold, silver, copper,

lead, iron, coal, and other mines, and all oil and gas wells.

"Fifth—The reduction of the hours of labor in proportion to

the increasing facilities of production.

{660}

"Sixth—The inauguration of a system of public works and

improvements for the employment of the unemployed, the public

credit to be utilized for that purpose.

"Seventh—Useful inventions to be free, the inventor to be

remunerated by the public.

"Eighth—Labor legislation to be National instead of local, and

international when possible.

"Ninth—National insurance of working people against

accidents, lack of employment, and want in old age.

"Tenth—Equal civil and political rights for men and women, and

the abolition of all laws discriminating against women.

"Eleventh—The adoption of the initiative and referendum,

proportional representation, and the right of recall of

representatives by the voters.

"Twelfth—Abolition of war and the introduction of

international arbitration."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

The Canvass and Election.

The canvass preceding the election was much less excited than

that of 1896. The confusion of issues greatly lessened the

intensity with which they were discussed. Mr. Bryan again took

the field in person, travelling widely through all parts of

the country, making great numbers of speeches to immense

audiences everywhere; and Governor Roosevelt did the same on

the Republican side, to a somewhat less extent.

The election, which occurred on the 6th of November, was

conducted with the quiet order that is rarely broken at such

times in America. About fourteen millions of votes were cast,

of which, according to the returns compiled for the Tribune

Almanac,

President McKinley received 7,214,027,

and Bryan, 6,342,514.

For the Prohibition ticket, 197,112 votes were cast;

for the Socialist Labor ticket, 32,433;

for the Social Democratic ticket, 82,904;

and 78,444 votes were scuttered among other candidates.

The States carried for McKinley were:

California, giving 9 electoral votes;

Connecticut, 6;

Delaware, 3;

Illinois, 24;

Indiana, 15;

Iowa, 13;

Kansas, 10;

Maine, 6;

Maryland, 8;

Massachusetts, 15;

Michigan, 14;

Minnesota, 9;

Nebraska, 8;

New Hampshire, 4;

New Jersey, 10;

New York, 36;

North Dakota, 3;

Ohio, 23;

Oregon, 4;

Pennsylvania, 32;

Rhode Island, 4;

South Dakota, 4;

Utah, 3;

Vermont, 4;

Washington, 4;

West Virginia, 6;

Wisconsin, 12;

Wyoming, 3;

Total, 292.

For Bryan, the electoral votes of the following States

were given:

Alabama, 11;

Arkansas, 8;

Colorado, 4;

Florida, 4;

Georgia, 13;

Idaho, 3;

Kentucky, 13;

Louisiana, 8;

Mississippi, 9;

Missouri, 17;

Montana, 3;

Nevada, 3;

North Carolina, 11;

South Carolina, 9;

Tennessee, 12;

Texas, 15;

Virginia, 12;

Total, 155.

President McKinley was re-elected by a majority of 137 votes

in the Electoral College, and by a majority of nearly half a

million of the popular vote.

" The popular vote for President shows three interesting

things:

"(1) Many men of each party abstained from voting, for the

total was only 45,132 greater than in 1896, whereas the

increase in population adds about a million to the electorate

every four years. The total vote last year was 13,970,234. Mr.

McKinley received only about 100,000 more than in 1896, and

Mr. Bryan 130,000 less. Many men in each party, then, were

dissatisfied with their candidate and platform.

"(2) Mr. Bryan's largest gains were in New England, because of

the anti-Imperialistic feeling, and in New York and New Jersey

and Illinois, because of a milder fear of financial

disturbance; and his losses were greatest in Utah, in

Colorado, and in the Pacific States, an indication of better

times and of less faith in free silver.

"(3) Twelve Southern States cast a smaller vote than in 1896,

partly because of the elimination of the Negroes, and partly

because many Gold Democrats abstained from voting."

_The World's Work, February, 1901._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1900.

The Democratic candidate on "Imperialism."

The issue which ought to have been supreme in the Presidential

election, because fundamental principles of government and

lasting consequences of policy were bound up in it, but which

was unhappily confused by prevailing anxieties in the

sensitive region of commercial and industrial affairs, is more

broadly and adequately defined in the declarations of the two

leading candidates, on their formal acceptance of nominations

by the Democratic and Republican parties, than it is in the

party platforms quoted above. The first to speak was Mr.

Bryan. Responding to the committee which notified him of his

nomination, at Indianapolis, ou the 8th of August, he devoted

the greater part of his remarks to the policy of colonial

acquisition on which the government had been embarked. The

following passages are fairly representative of the view taken

by those who condemned what they termed "imperialism," in the

undertaking of the government of the American Republic to

impose its sovereignty upon the people of the Philippine

Islands, and to hold their country as a "possession:"

"When the president, supported by a practically unanimous vote

of the House and Senate, entered upon a war with Spain for the

purpose of aiding the struggling patriots of Cuba, the

country, without regard to party, applauded. Although the

Democrats realized that the administration would necessarily

gain a political advantage from the conduct of a war which in

the very nature of the case must soon end in a complete

victory, they vied with the Republicans in the support which

they gave to the President. When the war was over and the

Republican leaders began to suggest the propriety of a

colonial policy, opposition at once manifested itself.

"When the President finally laid before the Senate a treaty

which recognized the independence of Cuba, but provided for

the cession of the Philippine Islands to the United States,

the menace of imperialism became so apparent that many

preferred to reject the treaty and risk the ills that might

follow rather than take the chance of correcting the errors of

the treaty by the independent action of this country. I was

among the number of those who believed it better to ratify the

treaty and end the war, release the volunteers, remove the

excuse for war expenditures, and then give the Filipinos the

independence which might be forced from Spain by a new treaty.

… The title of Spain being extinguished we were at liberty to

deal with the Filipinos according to American principles. The

Bacon resolution, introduced a mouth before hostilities broke

out at Manila, promised independence to the Filipinos on the

same terms that it was promised to the Cubans.

{661}

I supported this resolution and believe that its adoption

prior to the breaking out of hostilities would have prevented

bloodshed, and that its adoption at any subsequent time would

have ended hostilities. … If the Bacon resolution had been

adopted by the Senate and carried out by the President, either

at the time of the ratification of the treaty or at any time

afterwards, it would have taken the question of imperialism

out of politics and left the American people free to deal with

their domestic problems. But the resolution was defeated by

the vote of the Republican Vice-President, and from that time

to this a Republican Congress has refused to take any action

whatever in the matter.

"When hostilities broke out at Manila, Republican speakers and

Republican editors at once sought to lay the blame upon those

who had delayed the ratification of the treaty, and, during

the progress of the war, the same Republicans have accused the

opponents of imperialism of giving encouragement to the

Filipinos. …

"The Filipinos do not need any encouragement from Americans

now living. Our whole history has been an encouragement, not

only to the Filipinos, but to all who are denied a voice in

their own government. If the Republicans are prepared to

censure all who have used language calculated to make the

Filipinos hate foreign domination, let them condemn the speech

of Patrick Henry. When he uttered that passionate appeal,

'Give me liberty or give me death,' he expressed a sentiment

which still echoes in the hearts of men. Let them censure

Jefferson; of all the statesmen of history none have used

words so offensive to those who would hold their fellows in

political bondage. Let them censure Washington, who declared

that the colonists must choose between liberty and slavery.

Or, if the statute of limitations has run against the sins of

Henry and Jefferson and Washington, let them censure Lincoln,

whose Gettysburg speech will be quoted in defense of popular

government when the present advocates of force and conquest

are forgotten. … If it were possible to obliterate every word

written or spoken in defense of the principles set forth in

the Declaration of Independence, a war of conquest would still

leave its legacy of perpetual hatred, for it was God himself

who placed in every human heart the love of liberty. He never

made a race of people so low in the scale of civilization or

intelligence that it would welcome a foreign master.

"Those who would have this nation enter upon a career of

empire must, consider not only the effect of imperialism on

the Filipinos, but they must also calculate its effects upon

our own nation. We cannot repudiate the principle of

self-government in the Philippines without weakening that

principle here. …

"Our opponents, conscious of the weakness of their cause, seek

to confuse imperialism with expansion, and have even dared to

claim Jefferson as a supporter of their policy. Jefferson

spoke so freely and used language with such precision that no

one can be ignorant of his views. On one occasion he declared:

'If there be one principle more deeply rooted than any other

in the mind of every American, it is that we should have

nothing to do with conquest.' And again he said: 'Conquest is

not in our principles; it is inconsistent with our

government.' The forcible annexation of territory to be

governed by arbitrary power differs as much from the

acquisition of territory to be built up into states as a

monarchy differs from a democracy. The Democratic party does

not oppose expansion when expansion enlarges the area of the

Republic and incorporates land which can be settled by

American citizens, or adds to our population people who are

willing to become citizens and are capable of discharging

their duties as such. …

"A colonial policy means that we shall send to the Philippine

Islands a few traders, a few taskmasters and a few

officeholders and an army large enough to support the

authority of a small fraction of the people while they rule

the natives. If we have an imperial policy we must have a

great standing army as its natural and necessary complement.

The spirit which will justify the forcible annexation of the

Philippine Islands will justify the seizure of other islands

and the domination of other people, and with wars of conquest

we can expect a certain, if not rapid, growth of our military

establishment. …

"The Republican platform assumes that the Philippine Islands

will be retained under American sovereignty, and we have a

right to demand of the Republican leaders a discussion of the

future status of the Filipino. Is he to be a citizen or a

subject? Are we to bring into the body politic eight or ten

million Asiatics, so different from us in race and history

that amalgamation is impossible? Are they to share with us in

making the laws and shaping the destiny of this nation? No

Republican of prominence has been bold enough to advocate such

a proposition. The McEnery resolution, adopted by the Senate

immediately after the ratification of the treaty, expressly

negatives this idea. The Democratic platform describes the

situation when it says that the Filipinos cannot be citizens

without endangering our civilization. Who will dispute it? And

what is the alternative? If the Filipino is not to be a

citizen, shall we make him a subject? On that question the

Democratic platform speaks with equal emphasis. It declares

that the Filipino cannot be a subject without endangering our

form of government. A Republic can have no subjects. A subject

is possible only in a government resting upon force; he is

unknown in a government deriving its just powers from the

consent of the governed. "The Republican platform says that

'the largest measure of self-government consistent with their

welfare and our duties shall be secured to them (the

Filipinos) by law.' This is a strange doctrine for a

government which owes its very existence to the men who

offered their lives as a protest against government without

consent and taxation without representation. In what respect

does the position of the Republican party differ from the

position taken by the English government in 1776? Did not the

English government promise a good government to the colonists?

What king ever promised a bad government to his people? Did

not the English government promise that the colonists should

have the largest measure of self-government consistent with

their welfare and English duties? Did not the Spanish

government promise to give to the Cubans the largest measure

of self-government consistent with their welfare and Spanish

duties? The whole difference between a Monarchy and a Republic

may be summed up in one sentence. In a Monarchy the King gives

to the people what he believes to be a good government; in a

Republic the people secure for themselves what they believe to

be a good government. …

{662}

"The Republican platform promises that some measure of

self-government is to be given the Filipinos by law; but even

this pledge is not fulfilled. Nearly sixteen months elapsed

after the ratification of the treaty before the adjournment of

Congress last June, and yet no law was passed dealing with the

Philippine situation. The will of the President has been the

only law in the Philippine Islands wherever the American

authority extends. Why does the Republican party hesitate to

legislate upon the Philippine question? Because a law would

disclose the radical departure from history and precedent

contemplated by those who control the Republican party. The

storm of protest which greeted the Porto Rican bill was an

indication of what may be expected when the American people

are brought face to face with legislation upon this subject.

If the Porto Ricans, who welcomed annexation, are to be denied

the guarantees of our Constitution, what is to be the lot of

the Filipinos, who resisted our authority? If secret

influences could compel a disregard of our plain duty toward

friendly people, living near our shores, what treatment will

those same influences provide for unfriendly people 7,000

miles away? …

"Is the sunlight of full citizenship to be enjoyed by the

people of the United States, and the twilight of

semi-citizenship endured by the people of Porto Rico, while

the thick darkness of perpetual vassalage covers the

Philippines? The Porto Rico tariff law asserts the doctrine

that the operation of the Constitution is confined to the

forty-five States. The Democratic party disputes this doctrine

and denounces it as repugnant to both the letter and spirit of

our organic law. There is no place in our system of government

for the deposit of arbitrary and irresponsible power. That the

leaders of a great party should claim for any President or

Congress the right to treat millions of people as mere

'possessions' and deal with them unrestrained by the

Constitution or the bill of rights, shows how far we have

already departed from the ancient landmarks and indicates what

may be expected if this nation deliberately enters upon a

career of empire.

"The territorial form of government is temporary and

preparatory, and the chief security a citizen of a territory

has is found in the fact that he enjoys the same

constitutional guarantees and is subject to the same general

laws as the citizen of a state. Take away this security and

his rights will be violated and his interests sacrificed at

the demand of those who have political influence. This is the

evil of the colonial system, no matter by what nation it is

applied. …

"Let us consider briefly the reasons which have been given in

support of an imperialistic policy. Some say that it is our

duty to hold the Philippine Islands. But duty is not an

argument; it is a conclusion. To ascertain what our duty is,

in any emergency, we must apply well settled and generally

accepted principles. It is our duty to avoid stealing, no

matter whether the thing to be stolen is of great or little

value. It is our duty to avoid killing a human being, no

matter where the human being lives or to what race or class he

belongs. …

"It is said that we have assumed before the world obligations

which make it necessary for us to permanently maintain a

government in the Philippine Islands. I reply, first, that the

highest obligation of this nation is to be true to itself. No

obligation to any particular nations, or to all the nations

combined, can require the abandonment of our theory of

government, and the substitution of doctrines against which

our whole national life has been a protest. And, second, that

our obligation to the Filipinos, who inhabit the islands, is

greater than any obligation which we can owe to foreigners who

have a temporary residence in the Philippines or desire to

trade there. It is argued by some that the Filipinos are

incapable of self-government and that, therefore, we owe it to

the world to take control of them. Admiral Dewey, in an

official report to the Navy Department, declared the Filipinos

more capable of self-government than the Cubans, and said that

he based his opinion upon a knowledge of both races. …

"Republicans ask, 'Shall we haul down the flag that floats

over our dead in the Philippines?' The same question might

have been asked when the American flag floated over

Chapultepec and waved over the dead who fell there; but the

tourist who visits the City of Mexico finds there a national

cemetery owned by the United States and cared for by an

American citizen. Our flag still floats over our dead, but

when the treaty with Mexico was signed American authority

withdrew to the Rio Grande, and I venture the opinion that

during the last fifty years the people of Mexico have made

more progress under the stimulus of independence and

self-government than they would have made under a carpet-bag

government held in place by bayonets. The United States and

Mexico, friendly republics, are each stronger and happier than

they would have been had the former been cursed and the latter

crushed by an imperialistic policy disguised as 'benevolent

assimilation.'

"'Can we not govern colonies?', we are asked. The question is

not what we can do, but what we ought to do. This nation can

do whatever it desires to do, but it must accept

responsibility for what it does. If the Constitution stands in

the way, the people can amend the Constitution. I repeat, the

nation can do whatever it desires to do, but it cannot avoid

the natural and legitimate results of its own conduct. …

"Some argue that American rule in the Philippine Islands will

result in the better education of the Filipinos. Be not

deceived. If we expect to maintain a colonial policy, we shall

not find it to our advantage to educate the people. The

educated Filipinos are now in revolt against us, and the most

ignorant ones have made the least resistance to our

domination. If we are to govern them without their consent and

give them no voice in determining the taxes which they must

pay, we dare not educate them, lest they learn to read the

Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United

States and mock us for our inconsistency. The principal

arguments, however, advanced by those who enter upon a defense

of imperialism are:

"First—That we must improve the present opportunity to become

a world power and enter into international politics.

{663}

"Second—That our commercial interests in the Philippine

Islands and in the Orient make it necessary for us to hold the

islands permanently.

"Third—That the spread of the Christian religion will be

facilitated by a colonial policy.

"Fourth—That there is no honorable retreat from the position

which the nation has taken.

"The first argument is addressed to the nation's pride and the

second to the nation's pocket-book. The third is intended for

the church member and the fourth for the partisan. It is

sufficient answer to the first argument to say that for more

than a century this nation has been a world power. For ten

decades it has been the most potent influence in the world.

Not only has it been a world power, but it has done more to

affect the politics of the human race than all the other

nations of the world combined. Because our Declaration of

Independence was promulgated others have been promulgated.

Because the patriots of 1776 fought for liberty, others have

fought for it. Because our Constitution was adopted, other

constitutions have been adopted. The growth of the principle

of self-government, planted on American soil, has been the

overshadowing political fact of the nineteenth century. It has

made this nation conspicuous among the nations and given it a

place in history such as no other nation has ever enjoyed.

Nothing has been able to check the onward march of this idea.

I am not willing that this nation shall cast aside the

omnipotent weapon of truth to seize again the weapons of

physical warfare. I would not exchange the glory of this

Republic for the glory of all the empires that have risen and

fallen since time began.

"The permanent chairman of the last Republican National

Convention presented the pecuniary argument in all its

baldness when he said: 'We make no hypocritical pretense of

being interested in the Philippines solely on account of

others. While we regard the welfare of those people as a

sacred trust, we regard the welfare of the American people

first. We see our duty to ourselves as well as to others. We

believe in trade expansion. By every legitimate means within

the province of government and constitution we mean to

stimulate the expansion of our trade and open new markets.'

This is the commercial argument. It is based upon the theory

that war can be rightly waged for pecuniary advantage, and

that it is profitable to purchase trade by force and violence.

… The Democratic party is in favor of the expansion of trade.

It would extend our trade by every legitimate and peaceful

means; but it is not willing to make merchandise of human

blood. But a war of conquest is as unwise as it is

unrighteous. A harbor and coaling station in the Philippines

would answer every trade and military necessity, and such a

concession could have been secured at any time without

difficulty.

"It is not necessary to own people in order to trade with

them. We carry on trade to-day with every part of the world,

and our commerce has expanded more rapidly than the commerce

of any European empire. We do not own Japan or China, but we

trade with their people. We have not absorbed the republics of

Central and South America, but we trade with them. It has not

been necessary to have any political connection with Canada or

the nations of Europe in order to trade with them. Trade

cannot be permanently profitable unless it is voluntary. …

"Imperialism would be profitable to the army contractors; it

would be profitable to the ship-owners, who would carry live

soldiers to the Philippines and bring dead soldiers back; it

would be profitable to those who would seize upon the

franchises, and it would be profitable to the officials whose

salaries would be fixed here and paid over there; but to the

farmer, to the laboring man and to the vast majority of those

engaged in other occupations it would bring expenditure

without return and risk without reward.

"The pecuniary argument, though more effective with certain

classes, is not likely to be used so often or presented with

so much enthusiasm as the religious argument. If what has been

termed the 'gunpowder gospel' were urged against the Filipinos

only, it would be a sufficient answer to say that a majority

of the Filipinos are now members of one branch of the

Christian church; but the principle involved is one of much

wider application and challenges serious consideration. The

religious argument varies in positiveness, from a passive

belief that Providence delivered the Filipinos into our hands

for their good and our glory, to the exultation of the

minister who said that we ought to 'thrash the natives

(Filipinos) until they understand who we are,' and that 'every

bullet sent, every cannon shot and every flag waved, means

righteousness.' … If true Christianity consists in carrying

out in our daily lives the teachings of Christ, who will say

that we are commanded to civilize with dynamite and proselyte

with the sword? …

"Love, not force, was the weapon of the Nazarene; sacrifice

for others, not the exploitation of them, was His method of

reaching the human heart. A missionary recently told me that

the Stars and Stripes once saved his life because his

assailant recognized our flag as a flag that had no blood upon

it. Let it be known that our missionaries are seeking souls

instead of sovereignty; let it be known that instead of being

the advance guard of conquering armies, they are going forth

to help and uplift, having their loins girt about with truth

and their feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of

peace, wearing the breastplate of righteousness and carrying

the sword of the spirit; let it be known that they are

citizens of a nation which respects the rights of the citizens

of other nations as carefully as it protects the rights of its

own citizens, and the welcome given to our missionaries will

be more cordial than the welcome extended to the missionaries

of any other nation.

"The argument made by some that it was unfortunate for the

nation that it had anything to do with the Philippine Islands,

but that the naval victory at Manila made the permanent

acquisition of those islands necessary, is also unsound. We

won a naval victory at Santiago, but that did not compel us to

hold Cuba. The shedding of American blood in the Philippine

Islands does not make it imperative that we should retain

possession forever. American blood was shed at San Juan Hill

and El Caney, and yet the President has promised the Cubans

independence. The fact that the American flag floats over

Manila does not compel us to exercise perpetual sovereignty

over the islands; the American flag waves over Havana to-day,

but the President has promised to haul it down when the flag

of the Cuban Republic is ready to rise in its place. Better a

thousand times that our flag in the Orient give way to a flag

representing the idea of self-government than that the flag of

this Republic should become the flag of an empire.

{664}