a 5 87 ^^/^; = ITS RECORD ?;irom January to July, 1916 r^.. W.7^ ^■?^/ 'w«>^ 'f!^h '' ^^.yLA 'H-mi)i^^^. CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY GIFT OF Susan H, Douglass Cornell University Library JK2387 .AS The Progressive Party 3 1924 030 487 486 olin DATE DUE rji^y ^ !JC.« 3 ■C^wii ^^ n JUL S'lylSU? Ifrjjfc* MAE-8-<5^f*«Tff|l i:;^ I n 1^70 : r SEfU- m^EZ \iiiiWiiilln»"''*'W>flW""flT"" PRINTED IN U.S.A. Cornell University Library The original of tiiis bool< is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030487486 THE PROGRESSIVE PARTY ITS RECORD FROM JANUARY TO JULY, 1916 INCLUDING STATEMENTS AND SPEECHES OF THEODORE ROOSEVELT COMPILED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL COMMITTEE Press of The Mail and Express Job Print 9-15 Murray St., N. Y. r3>/-f'S. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introductory Note 5 A Statement Unanimously Adopted at a Meeting of the Progressive National Committee at Chicago, on Janu- ary 11, 1916 7 Statement of Theodore Roosevelt Issued on March 9, 1916, at Port-of -Spain, Trinidad, B. W. 1 11 National Duty and International Ideals. Speech of Theo- dore Roosevelt before the Illinois Bar Association at Chicago, April 29, 1916 14 Righteous Peace and National Unity. Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at Detroit, May 19, 1916 32 National Preparedness. Military — Industrial — Social. Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at Kansas City, May 30, 1916 58 The Weasel Words of Mr. Wilson. Morning Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at St. Louis, May 31, 1916 71 America for Americans. Afternoon Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at St. Louis, May 31, 1916 77 Letter from Theodore Roosevelt to Charles J. Bonaparte . 86 Telegram from Theodore Roosevelt to ex-Senator W. P. Jackson on June 8, 1916 88 Progressive National Platform 91 Resolution Adopted by the Progressive National Conven- tion, June 10, 1916 95 Letter (dated June 22, 1916) from Theodore Roosevelt to the Progressive National Committee 96 Speech of Raymond Robins in the Meeting of the Progres- sive National Committee, June 26, 1916 105 Speech of James R. Garfield at the Meeting of the Progres- sive National Committee, June 26, 1916 112 Resolutions Adopted by the Progressive National Commit- tee, June 26, 1916 117 Mr. Hughes' Telegram to the Progressive National Com- mittee 121 Mr. Hughes' Letter to Colonel Roosevelt 124 Statement of Raymond Robins to the Progressive of the Country 125 INTRODUCTORY NOTE THE documents contained in this volume give the reasons why the great majority of the mem- bers of the Progressive Party regard it as their high and solemn duty, as patriots, to support Mr. Hughes and oppose Mr. Wilson in the Presidential contest. They give the positions taken by the Na- tional Committee and by Colonel Roosevelt during the five months immediately preceding the meeting of the conventions at Chicago; positions which necessarily meant that their support would be given to Mr. Hughes under the conditions which actually arose; for only by supporting him can they, at this moment, serve the two vital causes of Americanism and Preparedness. This pamphlet is compiled by the Executive Com- mittee of the Progressive National Committee in order that the record may be accurately set forth for the information of all members of the party. A STATEMENT Unanimously Adopted at the Meeting of the Pro- gressive National Committee at Chicago, Jan. 11, 1916. THE Progressive Party began its existence, as did the Bepub- lican Party, as a party of moral conviction and national pur- pose. The Progressive platform of 1912 was of necessity a composite of National and State issues, for the party vf&a a new organization and had to speak at once for both nation and state. Since then the State issues, such as the short ballot, initiative, referendum and recall, have been taken up in various platforms. The National issues presented by our platform of 1912 and those for, which we now stand represent the vital needs of our National life. They are in substance: A broader Nationalism, to make possible an effective pro- gramme of social and industrial justice at home and the protec- tion of American citizens and rights abroad; The dethronement of the invisible government; The constructive Federal regulation rather than the destruc- tive disruption of efficient business organizations — behavior and not size being the test; The introduction of business efficiency into the government by the budget system and the co-ordination of departments ; A permanent, non-partisan tariff commission to make possible the scientific revision of tariff schedules on protective lines. Also, a pledge for the immediate revision of such schedules as the con- ditions of world war have made unjust or as are necessary for the preservation, after the war, of industries newly established here whose necessity the war has demonstrated; A provision for equal suffrage; A provision for an adequate merchant marine. To the Progressive platform of 1912 as above summarized and amplified we pledge our continued allegiance; both of the 7 8 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July old parties have failed to make serious effort to enact these Na- tional principles into law. Because of the failure of the Wilson administration to deal adequately with National honor and industrial welfare, this coun- try faces problems of a graver and more far-reaching consequence than any since the Civil War. International law is humanity's final safeguard and civiliza- tion's last bulwark. Its recognition and observance by the na- tions is the true measure of the world's progress. It is our high duty to do our utmost to uphold it for the advancement of higher civilization. It is likewise our supreme duty to protect American institutions and American standards of justice. This momentous hour therefore demands a complete preparedness, not merely in military armament, but preparedness that will mobilize our economic resources, agricultural, industrial and financial, a pre- paredness that will unify American citizenship and create a loyalty to our institutions such as peoples of other na- tions have so patriotically shown since the terrible test of war; the preparedness of self-defense, that preparedness which creates a spirit, unalterably opposed to militarism, and the ultimate ob- ject of which is universal peace, but a national spirit and soul which views the doctrine of peace-at-any-price as futile, coward- ly and unrighteous and which will unhesitatingly make any needed sacrifice to uphold American standards of humanity and justice. Only that spirit will put this Nation where it can move effectively for the world peace which we desire. The Wilson administration has repudiated the faith of our forefathers which made the American flag the sufficient protec- tion of an American citizen around the world. It has suffered American men, women and children to be slaughtered in Mexico and on the high seas, American property to be destroyed and American liberty to travel and trade to be subject to the arbitrary and lawless coercion of foreign belligerents. It has stood by, while the law of nations disappeared from the earth, without ade- quate protect or effective resistance. It first among American ad- ministrations has shown the supine spirit, whose sure consequence is the contempt of the world. Our people are becoming impatient of leaders who hold that comfort, prosperity and material welfare are above honor, self- sacrifice and patriotism. We need a reawakening of our elder Americanism, of our belief in those things that our country and statement of Progressive National Cofnmittee at Chicago 9 our flag stand for. Our people are seeking leadership — leadership of the highest order and most courageous character; leadership that will draft to itself for the country's benefit the unselfish and patriotic services of its ablest citizens. They are demanding that principles and policies shall be proclaimed and carried out by a man who has the wisdom to formulate them and the manhood to fight for them. Keenly alive to this, we call the National Convention of the Progressive Party to assemble in Chicago at the same time the National Convention of the Republican Party is to assemble there. We take this action, believing that the surest way to secure for our country the required leadership will be by having, if possible, both the Progressive and Republican Parties choose the same standard-bearer and the same principles. We are confident that the rank and file of the Republican Party and the very large independent vote of this country will support such an effort. We pledge ourselves, to approach the consideration of the issues, involved in such an effort without any desire to revive partisan bitterness. If the Republican Convention is responsive to the patriotic spirit that brought the Republican Party into being and that made it dominant for half a century; if it meets this crisis in the spirit of broad patriotism that rises above par- tisanship, the effort for a common leadership will be successful. As a result, when the conventions of the two parties adjourn, the spirit of confidence in victory for the leader thus selected and the principles to which he is committed will in itself go far to- wards insuring victory in November. Should the effort fail, the responsibility for the result will not rest on the Progressive Na- tional Convention or on the four million voters who supported Progressive candidates in 1912. They, when called upon again to do so, will as firmly refuse to surrender to party machines. The responsibility will rest on other shoulders than ours, and this will be so apparent to the voters of the country as to result in victory for the National Pro- gressive Party in next Fall's election. In this turning-point in world history, we will not stick on details; we will lay aside partisanship and prejudice. But we will never surrender these principles for which we stand and have stood. We will follow only a leader who, we know, stands for them and is able to put them through. 10 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July COMMENT The above statement was given wide publicity by the news- papers of the country. It was printed by the Executive Com- mittee of the Progressive Party and circulated widely. All mem- bers of the organization and, so far as the Executive Committee knows, all members of the party were aware of the National Committee's action as above set forth, and heartily concurred therein. No State organization or individual members of the party, so far as the Executive Committee is aware, ever protested against the position taken in the above statement by the National Committee. STATEMENT OF THEODORE ROOSEVELT Issued on March 9, 1916, at Port-of -Spain, Trinidad, British West Indies I AM deeply sensible of the honor conferred on me and of the goodwill shown me by the gentlemen who have announced themselves as delegates to be elected in. my interest in the Massachusetts presidential primary. Nevertheless I must request, and I now do request and insist, that my name be not brought into the Massachusetts primaries, and I emphatically decline to be a candidate in the primaries of that or of any other State. Months ago I formally notified the authorities of Nebraska, Minnesota and Michigan to this effect. "I do not wish the nomination. "I am not in the least interested in the political fortunes either ot myself or any other man. "I am interested in awakening my fellow countrymen to the need of facing unpleasant facts. I am interested in the triumph of the great principles for which with all my heart and soul I have striven and shall continue to strive. "I will not enter into any fight for the nomination and I will not permit any factional fight to be made in my behalf. Indeed, I will go further and say that it would be a mistake to nominate me unless the country has in its mood something of the heroic — unless it feels not only devotion to ideals but the purpose meas- urably to realize those ideals in action. "This is one of those rare times which come only at long in- tervals in a nation's history, where the action taken determines the basis of the life of the generations that follow. Such times were those from 1776 to 1789, in the days of Washington, and from 1858 to 1865, in the days of Lincoln. "It is for us of to-day to grapple with the tremendous national and international problems of our own hour in the spirit and with the ability shown by those who upheld the hands of Washington and Lincoln. Whether we do or do not accomplish this feat will largely depend on the action taken at the Republican and Pro- gressive conventions next June. 11 12 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July "Nothing is to be hoped for from the present administration, and the struggles between the President and his party leaders in Congress are to-day merely struggles as to whether the nation shall see its governmental representatives adopt an attitude of a little more or a little less hypocrisy and follow a policy of slightly greater or slightly less baseness. All that they offer us is a choice between degrees of hypocrisy and degrees of infamy. "But disgust with the unmanly failure of the present admin- istration, I believe, does not, and I know ought not to, mean that the American people will vote in a spirit of mere protest. They ought not to, and I believe they will not, be content merely to change the present administration for one equally timid, equally vacillating, equally lacking in vision, in moral integrity and in high resolve. They should desire, and I believe they do desire, public servants and public policies signifying more than adroit cleverness in escaping action behind clouds of fine words, in re- fusal to face real internal needs, and in complete absorption of every faculty in devising constantly shifting hand-to-mouth and day-to-day measures for escape from our international duty by the abandonment of our national honor — ^measures due to sheer dread of various foreign powers, tempered by a sometimes harmonizing and sometimes conflicting dread of various classes of voters, es- pecially hyphenated voters, at home. "We must clarify and define our policies, we must show that our belief in our governmental ideals is so real that we wish to make them count in the world at large and to make the necessary sacrifice in order that they shall count. Surely we, of this great republic, have a contribution to make to the cause of humanity and we cannot make it unless we first show that we can secure prosperity and fair dealing among our own men and women. I believe that in a crisis so grave it is impossible too greatly to magnify the needs of the country or too strongly to dwell on the necessity of minimizing and subordinating the desires of indi- viduals. "The delegates who go to Chicago will have it in their power to determine the character of the administration which is to do or leave undone the mighty tasks of the next four years. That administration can do an incalculable amount to make or mar our country's future. The men chosen to decide such a question ought not to be politicians of the average type and parochial outlook; still less should they be politicians controlled by sinister influence statement of Theodore Roosevelt at Trinidad 13 from within or without. They should be the very best men that can be found in our country, whose one great mission should be to declare in unequivocal terms for a programme of clean-cut, straight-out, national Americanism, in deeds not less than in words, and in internal and international matters alike, and to choose as their candidate a man who will not merely stand for such a programme before election, but will resolutely and in good faith put it through if elected. "These men should be men of rugged independence, who pos- sess the broadest sympathy with and understanding of the needs and desires of their fellows; their loyalty should be neither to classes nor to sections, but to the whole of the United States and to all the people that dwell therein. They should be controlled by no man and no interest and their own minds should be open. "June is a long way off. Many things may occur between now and then. It is utterly impossible to say now with any degree of certainty who should be nominated at Chicago. The crying, the vital need now is that the men who next June assemble at Chicago from the forty-eight States and express the view of the entire country shall act with the sane and lofty devotion to the interest of our nation as a whole which was shown by the original Con- tinental Congress. They should approach their task unhampered by any pledge except to bring to its accomplishment every ounce of courage, intelligence and integrity they possess. (Signed) "Theodore Roosevelt." NATIONAL DUTY AND INTERNATIONAL IDEALS Speech of Theodore Roosevelt Before the Illinois Bar Association at Chicago, April 29, 1916 A YEAR and three-quarters have passed since the opening of the great war. At the outset our people were stunned by the vastness and terror of the crisis. We had been assured by naany complacent persons that the day of great wars had ended, that the reign of violence was over, that the enlightened public opinion of the world would prevent the oppression of weak na- tions. To be sure, there was ample proof that none of these as- surances were true, and far-seeing men did not believe them. But there was good excuse for the mass of the people being misled. Now, however, there is none. War has been waged on a more colos- sal scale than ever before in the world's history; and cynical in- difference to international morality and willingness to trample on inoffensive peace-loving peoples who are also helpless or timid have been shown on a greater scale than since the close of the Napoleonic Wars over a century ago. Alone of the great powers, we have not been drawn into this struggle. A two-fold duty was imposed upon us by the fact of our pros- perity and by the fact of our momentary immunity from danger. This two-fold duty was, first, to make our voice felt for the weak who had been wronged by the strong, and for international hu- manity and honor, and for peace on terms of justice for all con- cerned; and, second, immediately and in thorough-going fashion to prepare ourselves so that there might not befall us on an even greater scale such a disaster as befell Belgium. We have signally failed in both duties. Incredible to relate, we are not in any substantial respect stronger at this moment in soldiers or rifles, in seamen or ships, because of any Governmental action taken in consequence of this war ; and moreover we have Seen every device and provision designed by humanitarians to protect international right against international wrongdoings torn into shreds, and have not so much as ventured to speak effectively one word of protest. 14 National Duty and International Ideals 15 The result is that every nation in the world now realizes our weakness, and that no nation in the world believes in either our disinterestedness or our manliness. The effort to placate outside nations by being neutral between right and wrong, and to gain good will along professional pacifist lines by remaining helpless for self-defense, has resulted, after two fatuous years, in so shap- ing affairs that the nations either already feel, or are rapidly growing to feel, for us, not only dislike but contempt. This is not a pleasant truth; but it is the truth; and as a people we will do well to remember Emerson's saying that in the long run the most unpleasant truth is a safer traveling companion than the pleasantest falsehood. Our duty is to face the facts and then to take the thorough-going action necessary in order to meet the situation that these facts disclose. We Must Prepare in Advance. Our prime duty, infinitely our most important duty, is the duty of preparedness. Unless we prepare in advance we cannot when the crisis comes be true to ourselves. If we cannot be true to our- selves, it is absolutely certain that we shall be false to every one else. If we are not able to safeguard our own national honor and interest, we shall make ourselves an object of scorn and derision if we try to stand up for the rights of others. We have been sink- ing into the position of the China of the Occident; and we will do well to remember that China — pacificist China — has not only been helpless to keep its own territory from spoliation and its own peo- ple from subjugation but has also been helpless to exert even the most minute degree of influence on behalf of right dealing among other nations. There are persons in this country who openly advocate our taking the position that China holds, the position from which the best and wisest Chinamen are now painfully trying to raise their land. Nothing that I can say will influence the men and women who take this view. The holding of such a view is entirely incom- patible with the right to exercise the privileges of self-government in a democracy, for self-government cannot permanently exist among people incapable of self-defense. But I believe that the great majority of my fellow-countrymen, when they finally take the trouble to think on the problem at all, will refuse to consent to or acquiesce in the Chinafication of this 16 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July country. I believe that they will refuse to follow those who would make right helpless before might, who would put a pigtail on Uncle Sam, and turn the Goddess of Liberty into a pacificist fe- nlale huckster, clutching a bag of dollars which she has not the courage to guard against aggression. It is to these men and women that I speak. I speak to the mass of my fellow-country- men. I speak to all men and women who are loyal to the prin- ciples of those who in the Eevolutionary War made us a nation, and who have in their souls the high qualities possessed by the men who in the iron days of the Civil War followed the banners of Grant and of Lee, and of the mothers and wives of these men. My appeal may not be heeded; if so, then either our people will pay heed in time to the appeal of some other man, able to speak more strongly and more convincingly, or else they will when it is too late learn the lesson from some terrible gospel in which it is written by an alien conqueror in letters of steel and of flame. Appeal to North, South, West and East. The first necessity is that we shall in good faith and without reservation undertake to be a nation, and not merely to call our- selves a nation. I make my especial appeal to the national spirit here in Chicago, here in the great Middle West, here in the ter- ritory stretching from the Alleghanies to the Rockies. The prophets of gloom have said that the West, prosperous and indif- ferent, secure in her fancied safety because she is in the middle of the continent, cares nothing for the dangers that might befall the cities on the Atlantic or the Pacific Coast, cares nothing for what has befallen the dwellers along the Mexican boundary, and is as indifferent to what befalls elsewhere as Peking once was to what befell its outlying Chinese provinces — ^to the ultimate ruin of Peking, by the way. This I do not for one moment believe. If I did, I should despair of the republic. This is to a peculiar de- gree the democratic, the intensely and characteristically Ameri- can, section of our land. The West produced for the service ot the whole nation Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Jackson; and 1 know that their spirit is still the spirit of her sons. I appeal to the men of the West to take the lead in the move- ment for the genuine nationalization of our people. If the re- public founded by Washington and saved by Lincoln is to be turned into a mere polyglot boarding-house, where dollar-hunters of twenty different nationalities scramble for gain, each nation- National Duty and International Ideals 17 ality bearing no real allegiance except to the land from which it originally came, then we may as well make up our minds that the great experiment of democratic government on this continent will have failed. No less will it have failed if each section thinks only of the welfare of that section, and with crass blindness believes that disaster to some other section will not affect it. And the failure will be the greatest of all if foolish men are persuaded by wicked men that one caste or class is the prime enemy of some other class or caste. I appeal to the men of the East to prepare so that the men of the Pacific Slope shall be free from all menace of danger. I appeal to the men of the West to prepare so that the men of the Atlantic Coast shall be free from all danger. 1 appeal to the North, South, West and East alike, to hold the life of every man and the honor of every woman on the most remote ranch on the Mexican border as a sacred trust to be guaranteed by the might of our entire nation — and the life of every man, woman and child who should be protected by the United States on the high seas likewise. I appeal to every good American, whether farmer or merchant, business man or professional man, whether he works with brain or hand. Anything of disgrace or dishonor that befalls our people anywhere is of vital moment to all of us wherever we live; and any deed that reflects credit on the American name is a subject of congratulation for every Amer- ican of every section of this country. America First and Last. I speak of the United States as a whole. Surely it ought to be unnecessary to say that it spells as absolute ruin to permit divi- sions among our people along the lines of creed or of national ori- gin as it does to permit division by geographical section. We must not stand merely for America first. We must stand for America first and last; and for no other nation second — except as we stand for fair play for all nations. There can be no divided loyalty in this country. The man who tries to be loyal to this country and also to some other country is certain in the end to put his loyalty to the other country ahead of his loyalty to this, The politico-racial hyphen is the breeder of moral treason. We are a new nation, by blood akin to but different from all the na- tions of Europe. In the veins of our people runs the blood of German, Englishman and Irishman, of Scandinavian, Slav and Latin. Any one of these people can bring something of value to 18 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July our common national life. Each can contribute social and cul- tural traditions and customs of value ; and all must join in cordial mutuality of respect for whatever is valuable that each brings; but each must put the contribution at the service of our common and unified citizenship, and by utilizing all that is thus contrib- uted, and by adapting and developing it so that it shall meet and express our common needs, we shall build our own distinctive national culture. There is no room in this country for German-Americans or Eng- lish-Americans, Irish-Americans or French- Americans ; just as there is no room in this country for a political party based upon fealty or opposition to any particular creed, whether Protestant, Catholic or Jew. There is just one way to be a good citizen of the United States, and that is to be an American and nothing else. This is not a question of birthplace or national origin or creed. Any big group of loyal and patriotic Americans will in- clude men of many creeds and many different race strains and birthplaces. But they will not be loyal and patriotic Americans at all unless they are Americans and nothing else. The first step in preparedness is dependent upon our common and exclusive American nationality. The Lesson from Belgium and Switzerland Preparedness must be both of the soul and of the body. It must be not only military but industrial and social. There can be no eflicient preparedness against war unless there is in time of peace, economic and spiritual preparedness in the things of peace. Well-meaning men continually forget this interdependence. Well- meaning men continually speak as if efficient military prepared- ness could be achieved out of industrial and social chaos, whereas such military preparedness would represent merely a muscular arm on a withered body. Other well-meaning people speak as if industrial preparedness, social preparedness, would by itself solve the problem. This is worse folly than the first. Let these men look at Belgium and compare her fate with that of Switzerland. Belgium was one of the countries in Europe in which the greatest advance had been made in industrial efficiency, and as regards social justice she was at least well ahead of us. But there had been no corresponding military preparedness. There had been great success along the lines of business materialism, great success along the lines of humanitarianism, but no develop- National Duty and International Ideals 19 ment of military efficiency. The result is that both the materialist and the humanitarian have been ground into the dust together, simply because the men so successful in peace had not in peace trained themselves so as to be able to defend themselves in war, and to make other nations realize in advance that they were able to do so. The Fate of China. If our people are not willing to study the lessons of history, let them look at what has gone on before their eyes in China. For centuries China has looked down on the military caste, and has discouraged the development of the fighting spirit. The vaga- ries and dreams and blindness of her pacificist leaders and paci- ficist statesmen have paralleled those of our own. Her people have been peaceful and industrious; they have put peace above honor, above justice, above national self-respect. As a conse- quence, China, the most populous empire on the earth, sees half her territory under the control of alien powers, and in the remain- der holds what precarious independence remains at the mercy of whichever one of these alien powers for the time being able to nullify the influence of the others. If the short-sighted pacifi- cist and the short-sighted materialist have their way, the same fate will overtake us; and it would be hastened, not averted, by business prosperity and efficiency and harmlessness. To mobil- ize our resources, and introduce efficiency everywhere in busi- ness, would merely make us a more attractive and a more helpless prey unless we in similar fashion develop our power and purpose for self-defense. I stand heartily for protection. By that I mean not only protection to American industries and to the mate- rial interests of American workingmen, farmers and business men. I also mean, and with even greater emphasis, protection for the whole American nation, protection for American honor, pro- tection for America's self-respect, protection for America's posi- tion among the nations, protection for her when she strives, as she ought to strive, to bring peace to the rest of the world. And there can be no such protection without thorough-going prepara- tion — military, social and industrial. America Still Unprepared. I have before used the effect of non-preparedness on China as an argument for preparedness. Really the events of the last 20 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July twenty-one months, including especially the events of the last month, show that no argument is needed save our own history during these past twenty-one months. On August 1, 1914, the great war began ; and it had already become clear that the already dreadful situation in Mexico was going steadily from bad to worse. It should have been perceptible to any nation — and it is not to our credit as a nation that it was not evident to us — that there was the gravest danger of our being involved at some point with the European belligerents and the almost certainty that we would have to take action sooner or later as regards Mexico. Even the first few weeks of the great war made it evident that the prime factor in success in war was preparedness in ad- vance, and that it was impossible adequately to prepare after war hg,d begun. Yet our well-meaning, foolish, peace-at-any-price people clamored so loudly that we must not prepare because pre- paredness would increase the chances of war, that we followed their advice. Six months went by without one particle of prepara- tion by us. Our army and navy remained as weak as ever. Noth- ing of any sort was done to help put our industries in shape to help us in the event of war. The professional pacificists hailed this refusal to exercise precaution in the face of the hurricane as an evidence of virtue on our part. It was merely an evidence of blind and timid weakness. Then, after six months, Germany an- nounced that she would conduct a submarine blockade of England under circumstances which rendered inevitable the loss of Ameri- can lives. We sent her an ultimatum announcing that in such case we would hold her to a strict accountability. I use the word "ultimatum" for it is the only word to describe the document containing the words "strict accountability," if these words mean anything. When we took that action we placed ourselves in a posi- tion where it became a crime against ourselves not immediately to prepare. Fourteen months have passed since. Germany has again and again done what we said she should not do. We have protested, sometimes strongly, sometimes weakly, against what has been done; but we never took a single step in the way of preparation to enforce our words if unhappily it should become necessary to do so. At present we have sent another ultimatum to Germany no stronger than the one sent fourteen months ago; but the circumstances of its delivery are such as to seem to indi- cate that more weight must be attached to it. Yet we are still not preparing in any way. The Lower House National Duty and International Ideals 21 of Congress has taken what measures it could to interfere with the organizations on which we should have to rely in any belated and hurried efforts to meet our needs should we have to act in support of our note, and has passed legislation excellently de- signed to prevent all efficiency from the military standpoint. Sub- stantially we are not in the smallest degree better prepared in the army or in the navy than we were twenty-one months ago, and instead of endeavoring to secure industrial preparedness Congress has done everything it could to interfere with it. At this moment, after nearly six weeks of effort we have been unable to scrape together an army sufficient to capture the bandit Villa. We have not an efficient body of troops of a size that would make it a tangible asset in the huge death-wrestle that is going on around Verdun. We have not in these twenty-one months pre- pared in any shape or way to make good on any field of action any demand we might make for our own rights or the rights of humanity. Our words have been like a check issued by a man on a bank in which he has no funds but expects that somehow or other he will get them by the time the check comes around. Bare- ly indeed does such a man have the funds there on time, and desperately humiliating indeed are his experiences meanwhile. If we meant what we said in our strict accountability note lourteen months ago, then we have followed a policy both wicked and cruel in its neglect of the lives of our men, women and chil- dren by deliberately refusing to follow up any program of pre- paredness, whether with our army, our navy or our industries. Now, if under these circumstances war does come, all of the men who think as I do will stand promptly by the country. We will go to the war but we shall expect to pay a heavy penalty with our own blood and the blood of those dearest to us for the failure to prepare during the past twenty-one months. And what I ask now of our professional peace-at-any-price friends, of the pro- fessional pacificists, is that they get clearly in mind the fact that the preparedness I, whom they call a militarist, have unceasingly advocated for so many years and above all the preparedness that I have advocated with all my strength since this great war be- gan, would in all probability have averted all need of our sending the strict-accountability note fourteen months ago. If now there is no war, it will be proof positive that if four- teen months ago we had made it evident that we meant what we said Germany would have abandoned her submarine policy and 22 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to' July the lives of thousands of non-combatants, including liianj hun- dreds of women and children, would have been saved, so that their blood is at our doors because we failed, when we sent that note, to show that we meant what we said. If on the other hand, war does come, it will be a cruel and a dreadful thing that, having had the amplest opportunity and time to prepare for it on the largest scale, we drifted into it stern foremost, having shown ourselves helplessly unable to provide in the smallest degree to make our vast strength effective. A First Class Navy Needed. We need beyond everything else a first-class Navy. We can- not possibly get it unless the naval program is handled with steady wisdom from the standpoint of a nation that accepts the upbuilding and upkeep of such a navy as cardinal points of con- tinuous policy. There should be no party division along these lines. A party which, whatever its views are on other subjects, stops the upbuilding of the Navy or lets it be impaired in effi- ciency, should be accepted as false to the vital interests of the American people. The Navy should be trained in deep water, in salt water; and it should be trained always with one end in view, to increase its fighting efficiency. It is not an educational institu- tion. It is Uncle Sam's right arm of defense; and that arm is meant to hold the sword and not the pen. The minute the effort is made to turn a battleship into an ambulatory school house, we spoil the battleship without getting the school house. The minute we fail to treat the Navy as the one most vitally important inter- national asset of the nation, which it is imperatively necessary to keep to the highest standard of efficiency, disregarding all other matters in connection therewith, that very minute we lay the seeds for the conditions which result in submarines that cannot go under water and aeroplanes that do not fly. The Navy is by no means all-sufficient; but the special part" it plays is of more importance even than the very important parts to be played by other arms. It is a prime necessity for any great nation which expects to be taken seriously always to correlate policy and armament. There never should be a treaty made or a policy announced save after careful consideration whether our prepared strength is sufficient to make that treaty respected or that policy observed. The Mon- roe Doctrine will never be one particle stronger than the Navy. National Duty and International Ideals ' 23 Our hold on the Canal, our power of protecting our own citizens abroad and defending our own coasts, all these depend upon other considerations also; but among the various vital factors, none of which can be neglected, the Navy stands foremost. The Navy stands foremost. But to rely only on the Navy would be as foolish as in a battle to rely only upon infantry or only upon artillery or only upon trench digging. Back of the Navy must stand the regular army; and back of the regular army must stand the trained strength of the nation. The Regular Army Indispensable. The regular army is indispensable. Here again, gentlemen, let me ask you to do your part in seeing that our people under- stand the utte:): folly of embarking on a policy unless we have the means to enforce that policy. A treaty has recently been pro- posed by the Government authorities at Washington under which we would guarantee the territorial integrity of all the South American republics, with, as a quid pro quo, the assurance of these republics (Honduras, Nicaragua and Ecuador for instance) that they will guarantee our territorial integrity. Translate this into terms of fact. If the treaty does not mean what it purports to mean, it is insincere, and worse. If it does mean what it pur- ports to mean, then we are to guarantee that we will go to war to defend, say, Tierra del Fuego on behalf of somebody else. Yet the upholders of this proposal in the same breath announce that we are not to go to war for our own rights or our own citizens. It is possible to defend either proposition with sin- cerity (although not with wisdom) but it is not possible to defend both propositions with either sincerity or wisdom. Well-meaning people propose that we shall enter into an International League to Enforce Peace, by making treaties under which we would pledge ourselves, if for instance Belgium were invaded, to back Belgium in war by the two or three million men without whom our unsupported backing would amount to little. Before going into any more grandiose promises, let us keep the moderate promises we made in the Hague Conventions; and before we promise ac- tion on behalf of others which might necessitate an army of two or three million men being sent abroad to fight in a quarrel in which our interest was purely altruistic, let us ponder the fact that in order to send an army after a Mexican bandit, although this army was operating in company with the forces of the de facto 24 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July government of Mexico, we had to strip our country of regular soldiers until we did not have enough left to patrol the border. Mexico and Villa. The Mexican affair, by the way, offers the best possible example of the need that this country should deal with things and not merely with words. For some years Mexico has stood to us much as the Balkan Peninsula with its weak and turbulent states once stood to Europe. Success or failure in our Mexican policy is no mere local matter; if in this place our foreign policy fails, it means general failure. The problem is not primarily a military one, although now unfortunately our failure to grapple with it intelligently and in terms of fact may well mean that there may have to be a military prelude to the real settlement. The settlement itself will come only when we make up our minds to render constructive and disinterested service on a common sense basis, as we so successfully did in Cuba. We are continually told that we have kept out of war with Mexico, that we have been at peace with Mexico. Yet the total number of Americans killed in Mexico, whose names have been pub- lished, leaving out of consideration the large number whose names have not been published, exceeds the number of Americans killed in the war with Spain. I do not care by what name they call this. Perhaps we have not been at war with Mexico; but twice we have been at war in Mexico; and the Mexicans have been industriously at war with us to the extent of repeatedly killing our men, women and children and repeatedly insulting our flag. Under these cir- cumstances any one can, of course, if it is any comfort, say that we waged peace with Mexico, whereas we waged war with Spain. But the net result has been that the war with Spain cost less in life and in property to both sides than our peace with Mexico has been costing, and that when the war with Spain was through it was settled, and as a result greater peace and prosperity came to Cuba, the Philippines and Port Rico than they had ever in all their previous history known; whereas the "peace" with Mexico con- tinues to rage with unabated ferocity and with all the accompani- ments of murder and violence. No solution is in sight and things have steadily grown worse instead of better. Surely the utter inadequacy of our army must have been made evident to every thinking man by what has occurred on the Mexican border. After tame submission to innumerable injuries, one bandit raid was so flagrant that our army followed the raiders. The army National Duty and International Ideals 25 was in such condition that the immediate pursuit which would have insured prompt success could not be undertaken, and after over a month had passed by and after well nigh our entire mobile army had been called upon, we were still entirely unable to deal adequately with the situation. Remember that a month covered the time from the opening of the great European war to the Battle of the Marne. Kemember that if a disaster happened to our Navy a month would be sufficient for any one of several of the great old-world military powers, without subtracting from its army a force whose loss would be in any way felt at home, to land in San Francisco or New York a force five times as great as our mobile army. In actual practice we have been unable within six weeks to gather enough troops to cope with the situation created by Villa's raid. Think, deeply, friends, what this means and the impotence it reveals for meeting any kind of serious assault made on our shores by any military power of the old world; and remember that this war has shown that save in the teeth of a navy of great size and at the highest point of efficiency the ocean is a highway for the rapid transport of troops. It is short-sighted folly of the most sinister kind not to provide at once, immediately, for a regular army of a quarter of a million men, in order that we shall have within our own limits a mobile army of 125,000 men so constantly trained and maneuvered that inside of a week they could be concentrated in the highest condition of fighting efficiency at any point of our border or coast line. Relatively to the population of the country this army would be no larger than the Chicago police force is to the City of Chicago. My proposition no more smacks of militarism than does the Chicago police force. I am asking only for a small regular army which shall be first class in point of efficiency. No Real Value in Half Preparedness. Remember always that there is no real value in half preparedness. To prepare a little but not very much is just like trying to put out a fire a little but not a great deal. If you want to build a bridge across a river, you build it for the whole distance. If you only build it half way, you might as well leave it unbuilt. To increase the armed forces of the nation a little, but not much, leaves the situation, from the standpoint of national defense, practically un- changed. The advocates of half -preparedness are no more loyal to the interests of this country than are the advocates of unpre- 26 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July paredness. As for the statement that preparedness incites war, it ranks on a par with that hoary falsehood which says that it takes two to make a quarrel. With the fate of Belgium before our eyes no man, not willfully blind to the truth, can question that abso- lutely good conduct, absolute peacefulness, absolute devotion to industry, and the possession of a good government and the doing of justice at home and abroad, all put together, do not by one moment delay or in the smallest degree work to prevent an attack from a powerful militaristic nation outside, if there has been failure of military preparedness on the part of the attacked nation and if the militaristic nation thinks it advantageous to make the attack. Preparedness is like fire insurance. There are individuals so wicked that they insure their houses for the purpose of setting fire to them. Likewise there are nations which prepare in order to commit aggres- sions on other nations. But the first fact does not alter the desira- bility of fire insurance for honest men, nor does the second fact alter the desirability of preparedness for self-defense on the part of peaceful and well-behaved nations. The preparedness of a big, highly efficient navy and a small, highly efficient regular army will meet our immediate needs and can be immediately undertaken. But ultimately and to meet our per- manent needs I believe with all my heart in universal training and universal service on some modification of the Swiss and Australian systems adapted to the needs of our American life. Such training would not merely, indeed perhaps not primarily be of benefit from the military standpoint, although the good from this standpoint would be inestimable; it would not take our young men away from their life-work; it would, on the contrary, help to fit them for their life-work, make them more valuable socially and industrially, train them to order, discipline, the power to enjoy and make use of self- respecting liberty, the power to co-operate with their fellows. It would be an antiseptic to militarism ; for Switzerland and Australia are the least mihtaristic and most democratic of commonwealths. It would be done in the schools and then by four to six months' work in the field when they leave the schools. It would mean only ex- tending the system already admirably applied in Wyoming. With such a system we should be guaranteed forever against the kind of conflict which is known as a rich man's war and a poor man's fight. We should never have a war unless the people who were to fight it deliberately determined upon it. It would be a war waged by the people for the people. National Duty and International Ideals 27 Preparedness a Means to Secure Peace. As I have said again and again, and as I cannot too often repeat, 1 advocate this preparedness as a means to secure peace and to avoid war. A good mother wrote me the other day that she feared pre- paredness because she did not wish her boys "to go up against the cannon." Now, the one perfectly certain method of insuring that her boys and all the other boys in this country shall "go up against the cannon" is to persuade foreign powers that they can attack us with impunity, because our mothers have refused to let their boys be trained efficiently. I abhor unjust and wanton war. More than that ; if there were a great war my sons would go, and probably all my young kinsfolk would go. If the war became serious enough I would have to go. It would be the bitterest grief to me to see my sons go, as every father here will understand. All that I honorably could do would be done to help keep this country out of war, so that my sons would not have to go. But I would far rather have them go than have them stay at home under conditions which would make their children ashamed of them and ashamed of being Americans. Our foreign policy should be managed on the basis of showing courteous regard for the rights and the feelings of others and a refusal to be irritated over or take offense at trifles; but at the same time an equally courteous but resolute insistence upon our own rights. Insolence and disregard of the rights and feelings of others may embroil us in war; but weakness, and conveying the impression that we fear others, are even more certain to do so in the long run. Strength, courage and the courteous doing of justice tend to avert war ; weakness, and above all weakness combined with bluster, tend in the long run to make it inevitable. We stand for the peace which comes as a matter of right to the just man armed, and not for the peace which is purchased by the coward at the cost of abject submission to wrong. The peace of cowardice ultimately leads to war as the end of a record of shame. Industrial Preparation. Industrial service is essential. There can be no full preparation for military service unless there is industrial preparation. Few of our people have even the slightest idea of the enormous amount of supplies of every kind necessary to carry on modern war; the quanti- ties of food, clothing, rifles, cannon, shells, cartridges, medical sup- plies, automobiles, railway cars, high explosives. If the supply of 28 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July raw material gives out, if skilled laborers fitted for manufacture are not to be found, if the deliveries of goods are not made with the promptness and certainty only to be obtained through perfectly organized industrial machinery, the result is that the loss would have to be made good by an incalculable wastage of life among our soldiers. Unless our industries are highly efficient, and moreover are trained for this particular work in advance, the penalty will inevitably be paid in the shape of dreadful loss of life among our soldiers. Such a need cannot be met by government-owned and man- aged plants, although there should be some such to serve as checks and regulators. The need is to train, to educate many business firms by means of giving them small orders in time of peace for the various things which the Government would need in enormous quantities in time of war. There should be a survey of the producing resources of the country and the development and practical working-out in time of peace of plans for minimum annual educational orders to be placed by the Army and the Navy with thousands of firms widely dis- tributed geographically, and the enrollment in time of peace of the skilled labor which it is necessary to keep on the job in time of war. We shall need organized business in time of war just as in time of peace. Our duty is to encourage it, but also to see that its activities are for the benefit of the whole country. The government should provide against excessive profit making in time of war; and it can only do this as a sequence to reasonable encouragement of the many private plants which in the event of war could be trusted to do public business. These plants, through some such systems as the annual educational orders above referred to, could be made ready for ef- ficient munitions work in time of war. The Government encourage- ment could be also used to secure as one of its features those things for labor which it is most necessary to secure; proper working and living conditions, and provision for insurance compensation against sickness, accident and old age. Not one step has been taken by Congress to help secure these industrial conditions. Not one step has been taken to secure the nationalization of industry in time of war. The railroad business in particular, in so far as interstate commerce and everything directly or indirectly connected with it is concerned, should be made a na- tional matter, with a national incorporation law, and the whole power of regulation (which should itself be part of a process of encouragement) lodged in the Federal Commission, the purpose National Duty and International Ideals 29 being to encourage the business in every legitimate way, while also seeing that it is managed in the interest of the public, no less than of the investors, managers and wage-workers. We can have no national economic program until we make ourselves really a nation. National needs cannot be met by conflicting locality actions. This is the age of co-operation. Surely if we really are a business people this means that there should be co-operation and not hostility be- tween the Government and the mighty agencies through which alone modern business, especially international business, can be managed. Let the Government regulate the corporations; but let this regula- tion be an incident of hearty co-operation with them, to secure their well-being and also the well-being of those who work for them and of those for whom they work. Capital must be organized on a large scale just as labor must be organized on a large scale; but, both forms of organization must justify themselves by showing that they are not only beneficial to themselves but to the people as a whole. ' No form of government will survive unless it can justify its ex- istence. Boasting about democracy won't make democracy succeed. We are the greatest democratic republic and we are false not only to our own country but to democracy everywhere if we do not seriously endeavor to show, by our actions and success, that with us the many men can make a nation as efficient as elsewhere nations have been made efficient by a few men. We must make America efficient within its own borders, efficient to repel attack from beyond its own borders, and yet a friend and not a menace to other peoples. We must make ourselves serviceable to democracy, to the cause of popular rights and popular duties in national and also in international matters. A happy go-lucky belief that we can become serviceable by combining sentimental speeches with selfish actions will bring us to futility. Serviceableness comes only through pre- paredness ; and both the training and the service— through economic, social and military efficiency — imply courage, sustained effort, clear vision, and the power for self-sacrifice. An Efficient Democracy Wanted. I speak for military preparedness. I speak for industrial pre- paredness. I speak for the performance of international duty, which can only come when we fit ourselves to do our duty to ourselves, and when we have made up our minds never to make a promise to any other nation which cannot be kept, which ought not to be kept, and which will not be kept. I speak of all this in the interest of 30 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July national unity and manhood, of international peace, and of the service of our country and of the world at large. It is our duty to secure justice and well-being at home; but we live in a fool's para- dise if we think that we shall be permitted to secure such justice and well-being, as the world now is, unless we are prepared to hold our own against all alien enemies. I appeal to the men of the West ; I appeal to Americans everywhere to stand against the crass ma- terialism which can show itself just as much in peace as in war. I appeal to our people to prepare in advance so that there shall be no hideous emergency which renders it necessary to submit to in- ordinate profit-making by the few simply because, when the emer- gency comes, we must improvise at whatever cost the things that for our sins we have failed to provide beforehand. We cannot afford to leave this democracy of ours inefficient. If we do it will assuredly some day go down in ruin. We cannot afford to tolerate with cynical indifference the pork-barrel theories of government so dear to the hearts of politicians of the baser sort. With a wealth of billions of dollars, and a population of one hundred million, we cannot afford to be in a condition of utterly unstable social and industrial equilibrium, nor to see our sons grow up steeped in a spirit of mere selfish individualism, without self-control or discipline or sense of co-operation, or firmness of purpose. We have great individual capacity. This we must keep. But we must train it so that we shall have great collective capacity, so that there may be that collective democratic power and discipline without which no great modern democracy can permanently subsist. We must not only do away with sectionalism but we must see that our land really is a melting-pot of citizenship and that all peoples who come here become Americans and nothing else. We have equally to dread the sleek, well-fed materialist whose be-all and end-all in life are ease and comfort; and the base, selfish man who thinks only of his individual aggrandizement; and the foolish, boastful, wordy sentimentalist who with amazing ignorance fancies that Americans armed only with words can successfully oppose strong and brutal men with rifles. Peace of Righteousness and Justice. Our national character is in the balance. Americanism is on trial. If we produce merely the self-seeking, ease-loving, duty- shirking man, whether he be a mere materialist or a mere silly sentimentalist; if we produce only the Americanism of the grafter National Duty and International Ideals 31 and the mollycoddle and the safety-first, get-rich-quick, peace-at- any-price man, we will have produced an American faithful only to the spirit of the Tories of 1776 and the Copperheads of 1861, and fit only to vanish from the earth. Love of ease, shirking of effort and duty, unwillingness to face facts, the desire to comfort our- selves by words that mean nothing — all these spell worthlessness while our civilization lasts, and spell also a speedy and an ignoble end of that civilization. In this tremendous crisis of the world, if we think we can sit apart, do nothing, utter lofty platitudes, and devote ourselves only to money-making, we shall surely go down with a crash. I ask you of the West to take the lead in the effort for a robust and virile nationalism, fit and ready to cope with all possible dangers at home and abroad. I appeal to the spirit of sane, common sense which faces things as they practically are, and 1 appeal also to that spirit of idealism which sees a great goal and struggles toward that goal. I ask for military preparedness as an arm to help the soul of the nation. I ask for it to quicken the national conscience, to help the national discipline. , I ask that we prepare ourselves within ; and we cannot prepare ourselves within unless we also prepare against danger from with- out. You hate the waste and blood-spilling of war. So do I. You cannot hate such waste and such blood-spilling more than I do. The most lamentable of all the tragedies connected with blood-spilling is the spilling of the blood of brave men too late to secure the end 'for which the blood is spilt. Under such conditions there is no chance of triumph; the dreadful choice is between dying hopelessly for the right and yielding abjectly to triumphant iniquity. May we so act in the present that neither we ourselves nor our children's children shall ever in the future have to face so evil an alternative. We wish to secure peace both for ourselves and for others. To do so we must be both strong and just ; for weakness invites injustice at its own expense and is powerless to ward off injustice from others. I ask you to prepare so that we may secure peace for our- selves and for others, not the peace of cowardice nor the peace of selfishness, but the peace of righteousness and of justice, the peace of brave men pledged to the service of this mighty democratic republic, and through that service pledged also to the service of the world at large. RIGHTEOUS PEACE AND NATIONAL UNITY Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at Detroit, May 19, 1916 I HAVE been very reluctant to make speeches during these weeks immediately preceding the National Nominating Conventions, because it is very diiRcult to make people understand that speeches at such a time are not of the ordinary political type made in the interest of some particular individual's candidacy. But I finally determined that I would come here to Michigan to say certain things which I believe should be said at this time. What I have to say to you will not be in the interest of any man, and least of all, of myself. It will not refer to the candidacy of any individual. It will not refer to the policy of any party, save as such party policy may, and ought to, vitally concern the welfare of the nation. My speech will be devoted exclusively to certain great principles which should be fundamental in this giant democratic commonwealth of ours. Wherever I touch on an individual, it will be because I cannot make my meaning clear, save by speaking of individuals who embody or typify certain movements. I come here to Michigan because in the primary for the selection of delegates to the Eepublican National Convention, Mr. Ford was victorious, and following on his victory here, he showed a marked popular strength in Nebraska and Pennsylvania. The effect of this showing has been immediately visible upon many of the politicians within and without Congress. One of the leading anti-preparedness, or peace-at-any-price papers in New York recently commented with great satisfaction upon the defeat in the lower house of Congress of the proposal to increase our regular army to 250,000 men. This paper stated that originally the proposal was defeated by only 22 votes, but when the vote came up again ten days ago, it was de- feated by 79 votes. It continues (I condense) "Of these 221 nega- tive votes, 51 were cast by Republicans, 49 being from the Central West, what has come to be known as the Henry Ford Territory. These included 6 of the 11 from Michigan — a notable change since it was proposed in the House. Since then Mr. Ford's large votes in Michigan and Nebraska have been recorded. All three Republican 32 Righteous Peace and National Unity 33 congressmen from Nebraska were opposed. If this is not a pretty- clear indication as to prevailing anti-militarist temper in the Mid- dle West, what can be? It is as well refreshing proof that there will be strong forces in both party conventions to throw their influence against the militarist planks of Mr. Roosevelt." This situation makes it advisable to speak with courtesy but with entire frankness of what the success of Mr. Ford means, and is taken to mean, and of the forces that have given Mr. Ford his strength. It is in Michigan, Mr. Ford's own State, where the Ford movement began, that I wish to say what I have to say on the subject. Tories and Pacifists. For Mr. Ford personally, I feel not merely friendliness, but in many respects a very genuine admiration. There is much in the methods and very much in the purposes, with which he has con- ducted his business, notably in his relations to his working people, that commands my hearty sympathy and respect. Moreover, there is always something attractive to an American in the career of a man who has raised himself from the industrial ranks, until he is one of the captains of industry. But all that I have thus said, can with truth be said of many, perhaps of most of the Tories of the Revolutionary War and of many or most of the pacifists of the Civil War, the extremists among whom were popularly known as Copper- heads. Many of these Tories and Civil War pacifists were men of fine character and upright purpose, who sincerely believed in the cause they advocated. They included all the men who were the pacifists of their day. These pacifists who formed so large a pro- portion of the old-time Tories and Copperheads abhorred and de- nounced the militarism of Washington in 1776 and of Lincoln in 1861. They were against all war and all preparedness for war. In the Revolutionary contest they insisted that Washington was the embodiment of anarchic militarism. Their purpose was to get the "boys" of Bunker Hill and Valley Forge "out of the trenches" and bring them back to their homes and make them quit fighting. In 1864 they denounced Lincoln as a military dictator. They praised peace as the greatest of all earthly blessings. They demanded that the war should cease, and they wished to get the "boys" of the Army of the Potomac "out of the trenches" before Christmas and bring them back to the farm, the shop, and the counting house. If these pacifists of the Revolution and Civil War had had their way, they would have put an immediate stop to much suffering and much loss 34 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July of life. They would have secured immediate peace. They would have averted some years of war. They would have turned men away from military training into the path of ordinary civil occupation. They would have secured the applause of every peace-at-any-price man at home and abroad. And unwittingly they would have utterly ruined this nation. They would have prevented its being a nation. They would have made the countrymen of Washington and the coun- trymen of Lincoln objects of scorn and derision, and they would have made of this great Eepublic a hissing and a bs^word among the nations of the earth. They would have purchased peace at the moment by ignoble submission to wrong, by ignoble cowardice. They would have rendered it certain in each case that, for the one war they averted at the moment, ten were ensured for the years to come. They would have piled up an immeasurable load of shame and suffering for their children, and their children's children, not merely unto the third and fourth, but unto the ninth and tenth generations that were to come after them. This is what these good well meaning pacifists of those days would have done if they had achieved their purpose. This is what the pacifists of our day, the neo-Tories, the neo-Copperheads, will do if they achieve their purpose. Remember that the pacifists of to-day, the peace at any price men, however well meaning, are the spiritual and moral heirs of the men who denounced and opposed Washington; of the men who de- nounced and voted against Abraham Lincoln. We can only be loyal to the souls of Washington and Lincoln, and to the soul of the great people that caught flame from their teachings if we set our face like flint against the unworthy spirit which to-day would teach us that peace stands above righteousness, and that this unrighteous peace can be secured by the refusal to prepare to defend our just rights. Either we must surrender our rights, and at the same time our self-respect, or else we must be ready to defend our rights with a hand trained to exercise the weapons of free men, and with a heart steeled to that stern courage for the lack of which the possession of the softer virtues can never atone. The Issue Clear-Cut. Such is the issue. It is as clear cut in this year 1916 as it was in 1861 or 1776. In the history of this country this is the third great crisis and it coincides with a tremendous world crisis. The issue is: are we prepared with a sane and lofty idealism to fit our- Righteous Peace and National Unity 35 selves to render great service to mankind by rendering ourselves fit for our own service, or are we content to avoid effort and labor in the present by preparing to tread the path that China has trodden? We must choose one course or the other. We shall gain nothing by making believe that we can avoid choosing either course. At present the attitude of many of our politicians in Congress and out- side strongly resembles the attitude of many of the politicians in the gold and silver controversy of twenty years ago. At that time the free silver men were bold and insistent, just as the professional pacifists are to-day. At that time, as to-day, the great bulk of the politicians, not only in the Democratic Party but in the Republican Party, were at first mortally afraid to offend the free silver men. They made every effort to compromise, and to take some position that should not be either for gold or for silver. Above all they strove to avoid the use of the world "gold." The fifty-one Republi- cans who, the other day, voted against an adequate Army are the spiritual successors of the Republicans who, twenty years ago, in Congress voted for all kinds of half measures which they hoped would convince the free silver people that we were to have the un- limited coinage of silver, and would convince the other people that we were not to have it. The older among you of course remember how at that day the politicians squirmed in their effort to prevent the Republican National Convention from using the word "gold;" how they demanded that instead we should use some such expression as "having each dollar equally as good as every other dollar;" how they sought to evade facing the issue. But when the time came, when the lines were dravra, and the battle was on, it became perfectly evident that the only way to beat the free silver people was to come straight out for the gold standard without equivocation or timidity. The effort to avoid a fight on the currency, and make the fight only on the tariff was a failure. The gold men stood for a high tariff; but first and foremost they made the fight on the issue of maintaining and securing the gold standard, the sound money standard ; and if they had tried double dealing and hesitation and equivocation they would have lost, and they would have deserved to lose. Let us to-day profit by their example. In any serious crisis there are always men who try to carry water on both shoulders. These men try to escape the hard necessity of choice between two necessarily opposite alternatives, by trying to work up some compromise. In actual practice, this compromise 36 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July usually proves to combine with exquisite nicety all the defects and none of the advantages of both courses. It is true that in ordinary political matters compromise is essential. It is true that in ordinary times it is essential. But there come great crises when compro- mise is either impossible or fatal. This is one of those crises. There is no use in saying that we will fit ourselves to defend our- selves a little, but not much. Such a position is equivalent to an- nouncing that, if necessary, we shall hit, but that we shall only hit soft. The only right principle is to prepare thoroughly or not at all. The only right principle is to avoid hitting if it is possible to do so, but never under any circumstances to hit soft. To go to war a little, but not much, is the one absolutely certain way to ensure disaster. To prepare a little but not much, stands on a par with a city develop- ing a fire department which, after a fire occurs, can put it out a little, but not much. The People to Blame. Yet at this moment the majority of our political leaders either keep silent on the vital issues before our people, or else engage in conflicts which are almost meaningless because the men ranged on one side advocate total unpreparedness and the men ranged on the other side nervously deny that they desire any real and thorough- going preparedness. Such a condition of affairs speaks badly for this nation. I say "this nation" advisedly. I mean you and me, my fellow countrymen. The Executive and Legislative agents of the Government at Washington ought, of course, to lead in the right direction. But ultimately we, the people, have only ourselves to blame if they do not; for it is our fault if we permit them to lead us wrong. Therefore, I wish you to understand that I am putting the blame primarily on us, the people, on us ourselves ; although it is necessary, in order to avoid circumlocution, that I speak at times of our Governmental agents. We, through our representatives at Washington, have absolutely refused in the smallest degree to prepare during these twenty-two months of world cataclysm. We have refused to learn the smallest part of the lesson being written on the scroll of torment in Europe. We have fatuously refused to take the smallest step, either to do our duty to ourselves or to do our duty to others. We have en- deavored to deceive ourselves by announcing that in this policy of supine inaction and of failure to perform duty, we are actuated by the loftiest motives. I doubt whether we have really deceived our- Righteous Peace and National Unity 37 selves, and most certainly we have not deceived others. There is not a nation in the world which believes that our course of conduct has been dictated by anything save timidity, unworthy shrinking from effort and responsibility, and cold and selfish love of money making and of soft ease. We first hysterically announced that we would not prepare because we were afraid that preparation might make us lose our vantage ground as a peace-loving people. Then we became fright- ened and announced loudly that we ought to prepare ; that the world was on fire; that our own national structure was in danger of catching flame; and that we must immediately make ready. Then we turned another somersault and abandoned all talk of prepared- ness ; and we never did anything more than talk. The net result is that there has been no preparation so far because of what has hap- pened in the great war. Congress is still in the conversational stage on the matter. There is no sign, as far as governmental action goes, that we have any appreciation of our danger, or of the needs of the country. No action has been taken to meet these needs. No action adequately to meet them is even contemplated. It has been announced in vindication of the political wisdom of those declining to take such action that thereby they would favora- bly impress our home pacifists. This hope has been only partially justified by the result. The ultra-pacifists, as represented by Mr. Ford, have made their great showing precisely because there has been no real and resolute opposition to them. The Administration at Washington, backed by the majority of Congress, has taken no step for preparedness, and has done nothing efficient to sustain our national rights. It has stood for applied pacifism, as far as deeds are concerned. But because, although it has not acted, it has, at intervals, ventured feebly to speak in contradiction of its non-action, the ultra-pacifists and their allies have refused it any whole-hearted support. They object even to make-believe preparedness. They insist on even more thorough-going helplessness than that which we had so amply provided at Washington. Although our governmental representatives have been 96 per cent, feeble, the ultra-pacifists have demanded a clear 100 per cent, of futility and feebleness, and have conducted their campaigns under various banners to achieve this purpose. Immorality of Pacifist Position. Hitherto most of our prominent political leaders have not ven- tured to take any thorough-going and clean-cut position in this mat- 38 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July ter. They have not ventured to expose the essential immorality of the ultra-pacifist or peace-at-any-price position. They stand exactly as 20 years ago the political leaders stood who desired to avoid flat-footedly taking sides for or against either silver or gold. Such a policy is probably futile from the party standpoint. It is certainly mischievous from the national standpoint. There is only one way to oppose a policy that is inherently wrong and that is by opposing it with every ounce of earnestness, every ounce of energy the man possesses. The only kind of faith to have in any policy is 100 per cent, faith ; if the opposition is 96 per cent, wrong, very little is to be gained by trying to persuade people that we are only 93 per cent, wrong. The difference between being 4 per cent, right and 7 per cent, right is not enough to arouse much fervor. If we believe that the most certain way for us to insure peace is to be prepared for war, and to have it known that we are prepared for war, then let us whole heartedly advocate such a policy, not a little, not with tremors and gaspings, but fully and absolutely. The old Whig Party was beaten by the Pro-Slavery democracy, and finally went out of existence, because it endeavored to be both for slavery and against it, and not too much of either. The party that won was the party that dared fearlessly to say that it was against slavery and for the Union and that stood aggressively by its principles. The party that has full confidence in its own policies and a conceded purpose to put these policies into effect will sooner or later get the people to back it — provided the policies are sound. A party that stutters and stammers, and that tries to be both for and against its own utterances has no right to complain if the people prove hesitant about giving it power. Why give it power when it does not say fearlessly what use it expects to make of the power? Two Great Issues. There are, at this time, two great issues before us, both insepara- bly bound together. They are the issues of Americanism and Pre- paredness. As a people we have to decide whether we are to be in good faith a people and able and ready to take care of ourselves; or whether we doubt our national unity and fear to prepare, and intend instead to trust partly to a merciful Providence and partly to elocutionary ability in high places. Those in power at Washing- ton have taken the latter position. The followers of Mr. Ford in the Righteous Peace and National Unity 39 Republican primaries have taken what is in reality the same posi- tion, what stand do the opponents of this position intend to take? The advocates of unpreparedness, the advocates of sham-prepared- ness, and the peace-at-any-price men all advocate what is in reality the same policy. Those who stand against such a policy are not to be excused if they stand so half-heartedly that the people do not recognize much difference between themselves and their opponents. Why should the people change their government if they are merely to change slightly the degree of unpreparedness? The only suf- ficient reason for a change would be to inaugurate a policy of real and thoroughgoing preparedness from the top to the bottom, pre- paredness to defend ourselves in war, preparedness to do well and justly our normal work of peace. We must make this nation as strong as are its convictions in reference to right and wrong. It little matters what our ideals may be and what achievements we may hope for, if these ideals and achievements cannot be reduced to action. The events of the past, and the events of to-day, show that national ideals amount to nothing if the nation lacks the power to maintain them against opposition. Therefore, if we are to win at home against those of our fellow citizens who believe in the policy of unpreparedness, that is, of national weakness and inefficiency, we must have strong and well reasoned convictions and express them with strength and sincerity. A considerable part of the strength of Mr. Ford in the primaries, and of the strength of the advocates of half -preparedness at Wash- ington, comes from the fact that no real alternative of policy is offered with sincerity and fearlessness. Mr. Ford's supporters in the primaries seemingly come chiefly from three classes — the workingmen, who believe that he represents the desire to do justice to them ; the pacifists who think that a policy of helplessness in the face of other nations will insure our national safety, and the German-Americans, some of them in an honest and sincere mood of protest, and the others under the influence of that portion of the professional German-Americans, who have permitted their devotion to Germany finally to make them antagonistic to the welfare of the United States. We Must Defend Ourselvra. As for the wage workers who support Mr. Ford, I understand entirely their desire to support any man who, in their belief, stands for a more substantial measure of social and industrial justice. 40 The Progressive Party — Its Record from Jamtary to July But I wish, with all the emphasis in my power, to call their attention to the fact that in order for us to work within our own borders for social and industrial justice, it is necessary to secure to ourselves the power to determine these questions for ourselves. If a nation cannot defend itself, then we may rest assured that sooner or later some stronger outside power will impose an alien will upon it and will deprive it of the say as to how it will determine its own desti- nies. It is of not the slightest consequence at this moment what the business men or the wage workers or the farmers of Belgium think should be done in the way of industrial and agricultural development and justice, because they have to do whatever the Germans tell them to do ; and they work and live as they are told by their conquerors. In the same way it is of no consequence what the native Koreans at the moment think should be done to raise themselves upward to- ward civilization, because the determining factor in their future is the Japanese attitude. I believe that the Japanese have done well in Korea. I know that the German invasion has wrought incredible woe in Belgium. But I am not, at the moment, concerned with either fact. I am concerned only with the fact that because Korea did not prepare itself in advance for defense it is now absolutely under the dominion of Japan, and that largely for the same reason Belgium is now under the absolute control of the Germans. I wish the wage workers and the farmers, even more than the business men, of this country, to realize that if we tread the steps of Belgium and Korea in pacifism and unpreparedness, sooner or later the Ger- mans or the Japanese or some other men of virile race will wholly or partially control our destinies and deprive us of the right to control them wholly for ourselves. The workingman, like the farmer and the business man, must be a patriot first or he is unfit to live in America ; and the first duty of all true patriots is to see that we are able to prevent alien conquerors from dictating our home policies. Until this right to decide our home policies for ourselves has been guaranteed to us by our own forethought and exertion, it is idle to talk of the particular methods by which the right shall be exercised. Let me take a concrete illustration: Mr. Ford in his business has, to his great credit, endeavored in his own way to secure the welfare of those who work for him. He also advocates our being helpless as a nation to protect him and his workingmen, and he works to keep himself and themselves helpless to aid in such protection. This is precisely the attitude that was taken in Belgium by many business men of the stamp of Mr. Ford. They were successful Righteous Peace and National Unity 41 business men who tried to do justice to their work people. But they were pacifists who did not believe in thorough-going prepared- ness in military matters. In consequence these Belgian analogues of Mr. Ford now see their business at a standstill ; and their work people are in the direst misery, and do only such work, under such conditions, as their conquerors dictate. Let the business men and workingmen of America who tend to be misled by Mr. Ford's pacifist teachings take warning from what has befallen the business men and workingmen of Belgium because they actually reduced such teachings to practice. Ponder Events in Mexico. Now as to the pacifists. They have told us that if we remain helpless, we shall escape all difficulties with other nations and earn their good will. Let them ponder on what has happened in Mexico to-day. Let them ponder our relations at this moment with Germany and the other great powers engaged in the world war. They will then realize the utter futility of their hopes. For nearly five years we have followed the principles of the pacifists as regards Mexico. We have not ourselves prepared; but we have helped the Mexicans to prepare by furnishing them arms and munitions. We have tamely submitted to the murder of our men and the rape of our women. We have permitted foreigners to be plundered in Mexico and our own people to be plundered in Mexico ; and murder has been added to plunder. Many of our troops have been shot. While we have been nominally at peace with Mexico, the Mexicans have killed more American citizens than the Spaniards killed in the entire Spanish war. Moreover, when the Spanish war was through, it was through ; and Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines were started on a career of peace and prosperity such as had never been known in all their history. But in Mexico, after all the bloodshed, the trouble has only begun, and we are no nearer a solution than we were three years and a quarter ago. I call the attention of the pacifists to the fact that we have not avoided trouble in Mexico. On the contrary, although we are as- sured that we are at peace with Mexico, we have killed and wounded nearly as many Mexicans as were killed and wounded among the Spaniards when our armies in the Spanish War took Santiago and Manila. We have not gained the good will of the Mexicans. They hate us and despise us infinitely more than they hated us five years ago — at which time they did not despise us at all. The policy of 42 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July pacifism has been practically applied in Mexico and it has resulted in incalculable loss of life and property. It has gained us the utter contempt of the people with whom we dealt; and it has brought us to the verge of war with them. Exactly the same thing is true as regards Germany. For sixteen months we have been employed in sending Germany ultimatum after ultimatum in monotonous succession, while Germany in equally monotonous succession sank ship after ship, drowning our men, women and children by the hundreds. (I use the word "ultimatum" in the sense that it has been given by our practice with both Mexico and Germany during the past three years — for under this condition an ultimatum is a note which is not ultimate, but an invitatioa to further correspondence, and is on no account to be translated into action.) We have suffered as a nation from prolonged and exces- sive indulgence in note-writing; and incidentally we have made the discovery that note-writing is not an antidote to murder. The pacifists assured us that note-writing and similar intellectual exer- cises would avert all difficulties and keep foreign nations feeling friendly toward us. As a matter of fact, while we have been writing these notes, the loss of life among non-combatant men, women and children on the ships which were torpedoed and about which we wrote notes, has exceeded the total number of lives lost in both the Union and Confederate navies during the entire Civil War. Think of that, friends! Such has been the net result of our note-writing; and incidentally we have incurred the contemptuous dislike of all the great powers engaged in the war. As regards the loss of American lives, and the sinking of these ships, I hold Germany less responsible than I hold this nation. Germany is engaged in a life and death struggle ; and we need not expect that she will forego any advantage which the weakness or timidity of our nation, of this republic, offers her. I firmly believe that if at the outset we had clearly made it evident that our words would be translated into deeds; that our first ultimatum sixteen months ago was really an ultimatum, Germany would have yielded, the Lusitania and the other ships would not have been sunk, and all the lamentable loss of life would have been avoided. It is our own attitude of culpable weakness and timidity — an attitude assumed under the pressure of the ultra-pacifists — which is primarily responsible for this dread- ful loss of life, and for our national humiliation. We have suffered a loss of friendly feeling with each of the countries at war, and we have been within grave danger of trouble Righteous Peace and National Unity 43 that would eventually lead to our being dragged into war with one or more of them. I would rather go to war than permit our women and children to be killed. But it is a crime against this nation that our own supine folly, our weakness and vacillation, our utter failure to prepare, should expose us to the possibility of war without having made us ready for war. If, as soon as the great war broke out, our navy had been mobilized, and a competent man put at the head of the Navy Department (appointed for national and service reasons, instead of purely political reasons), and if we had begun vigorously to prepare, and had shown that we meant what we said, the Lusi- tania would never have been sunk; no power would have infringed on our rights; and we should to-day be absolutely free from all danger of war. The pacifists have had their way as regards Mexico, and as re- gards our behavior in the great war. Their policy has been prac- tically applied. It has resulted in the loss of thousands of lives and in immeasurable national humiliation. It has rendered war more likely instead of less likely. Preparedness to Avoid War. Let my pacifist friends understand that I am advocating pre- paredness so as to avoid war, and I am advocating preparedness in the work of peace as in military matters. I believe in a thoroughly efficient navy, the second in size in the world. I believe in a small but thoroughly efficient regular army, an army of 250,000 men, with a proper reserve. This would give us a mobile army of 125,000 men. But back of the regular army and navy must stand the strength of the people themselves, and this strength must be prepared in ad- vance or it will be utterly useless in time of trial. I believe in universal service based on universal training. I believe in this because I think it would be not only of incalculable benefit to the nation in the event of war, but of incalculable benefit to the individuals undergoing it, and therefore to the nation, as regards the work of peace. I believe that the dog-tent would prove a most effective agent for democratizing and nationalizing our life; quite as much so as the public school, and far more so than the American factory and the American city as they are to-day. Pre- paredness through universal service would turn out to be the best possible school of practical civics. In such a school all men who are Americans in spirit would get together and learn to work together, so as to insure co-operation among our people in social and industrial 44 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July life. Such co-operation will secure not merely liberty and oppor- tunity, but also the sense of obligation — ^which is just as important as the other two. The civilian training camp movement started at Plattsburg, and now in session at Fort Oglethorpe, is the great civic movement of Americanism. When crystallized along the lines of universal train- ing for universal service it will become the most powerful agent for national democratic progress in our land. Our young men need discipline. There can be nothing better for them than such training. It would set them up physically. It would give them knowledge of sanitation, of cleanliness. They would learn regularity of habits, abstinence, obedience, self-respect and respect for others. They would learn to handle and command men, and to get along with them. They would become infinitely more competent for the daily tasks of American life. In many respects Germany furnishes us an example we shall do well to heed, for she secures her people good government, orderly government, and substantial eco- nomic justice combined with high industrial efficiency. We of the democracy hold that while good government is essential, what the world needs is to learn to govern itself. The worst men in any civilization are those who neither control themselves nor are con- trolled by others. In the long run lack of self-control means that there must be control from outside. But the best men are the men who exercise self-control. The highest civilization can only exist in the nation that controls itself. Our purpose must be to secure the efficient government of the people that is found in Germany, but to make it spring from the people themselves, by training them in individual and collective self-control, in self-reliance, in power of co-operation for a common end, and ability to develop national unity for the good of the whole nation. Above all, we must insist upon absolute Americanism. If within our own ranks we are split into a dozen jangling nationalities, severed by old world antipathies, our chance for national greatness will vanish. Must Organize Our Industries. We believe in co-operation between the nation and industry ; we wish to help and not to hamper industry. We recognize that in the modern world there can be no great national business success save by the fullest use of the great organizations demanded by modern industry ; but we believe in insisting that these great organizations are used to work for the largest possible means of social and in- Righteous Peace and National Unity 45 dustrial justice for the workers and for the general public. We do not believe that preparedness for national power lies wholly in guns and ships and armed men. We believe that we must organize our industries for defense in time of war as one result of organizing them for the most effective production of the necessities of life in time of peace. Such production must be on the largest scale, with government co-operation and government regulation; there must be organization both of capital and labor. There must be a deliberate purpose to see that the health and well-being of the workers, their standard of wages and of living and of the education of their children, are held up to the level that will insure the greatest na- tional efficiency, not only for the present, but for the future. The first step toward this is unequivocal declaration in favor of the pre- paredness program, which is the essential step for national organi- zation in matters industrial as much as in matters military. There must be readiness to develop, to the utmost and imme- diately, business efficiency in time of war. At present we are as unprepared in industry as in military matters. It would take as long to organize our industries for war as to organize an army for war. Instead of adopting — and adapting — Germany's admirably successful method of dealing with her industries so as to insure their efficiency in time of war, our governmental agents at Wash- ington have taken no step whatever except the thoroughly mis- chievous step of endeavoring to cripple a great private industry by the creation of a government armor plant — whereas, of course, they should encourage and at the same time efficiently regulate and control the private industry in question. To "list" plants is useless when there are no efficient plants to list, and when the efficient plant is promptly selected by the government for destruction. We need a big government munitions plant for regulatory purposes. We do not need a government armor plant, because we can do better by con- trolling and regulating and aiding in the development of the great and efficient plant which already exists. To destroy such an industry is sheer folly. In the event of war it is as impossible to improvise a great industry as to improvise a great army. Abolish Pork-Barrel Methods. We must abolish pork-barrel methods in the army — as regards army posts, navy yards, as regards everything else. Remember that after preparedness has been accepted by the country and the neces- sary funds voted, the real work will have only begun. England's 46 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July navy represents over three centuries and Germany's army over two centuries of development along an unbroken line of tradition and progress to the present stage of efficiency. The first and all im- portant essential is to divorce the army and navy organizations absolutely from politics. Policy must be correlated to armament. To appoint the Secre- tary of State, the Secretary of War, and the Secretary of the Navy, for political reasons only, without regard to the eflSciency of the men for the tasks, should be accepted by this country as being even more iniquitous than to appoint as Secretary of the Treasury a man who knows nothing of banking or currency, and as Secretary of Labor, a man who had never heard of a labor union or of the minimum wage. Pork-barrel graft is a crime against the nation when the army and navy are involved. But honesty and efficiency in managing the army and navy only represent the beginning of military preparedness. We can have no effective army unless business is mobilized and especially unless our transportation system is nationalized. The railroads, whose business is directly or indirectly interstate, must, in all their relations, be regulated by the national Government and not by forty-eight conflicting state governments. The merchant ma- rine must be developed not only for our own purposes of peace, but as a basis for the navy. It must be proportionate to the transpor- tation needs and to the navy of this country. Our merchant fleet must build up a naval reserve. We must safeguard the rights of our sailors, but we can only do so if we upbuild the lines of ships on which they are to serve. The employer of labor must feel that the government is his friend and will help him in every way, especially in international matters, and wishes him to make an ample profit ; but at the same time that the government co-operates with him to secure his profit and his well-being it must also so reg- ulate his activities as to secure the well-being of those who work for him and of the public which he serves. As part of the work of preparedness, as part of the work of Americanism, and of nationalization, we must set our faces like flint against any effort to divide our people along the lines of creed or of national origin. The politico-racial hyphen is the breeder of moral treason. One of the most sinister developments of the last twenty-two months has been the fact that a section of the profes- sional German-Americans has joined the pacifists in the effort to keep America helpless, while this same section of German-Ameri- Righteous Peace and National Unity 47 cans is lauding German militarism to the skies and apologizing for every manifestation of that militarism, even when it is ruthlessly used against the welfare of the weak. One of the great German newspapers of this country — I can not call it a German-American newspaper — the Illinois Staats Zeitung, has been engaged in active propaganda on behalf of both German militarism and American pacifism. It applauds and advocates Germany's embarking upon a career of military strength unconditioned by any other considera- tion, and at the same time backs the movement of the extreme pacifists to keep the United States impotent for self-defense. The men who take such a position are preaching moral treason to the American commonwealth. What they teach tends to keep our people divided. It tends to make our politicians subservient to the agents of an alien militarism. It tends to keep our own country helpless so that when the opportunity offers, it may be a larger Belgium and offer a rich prey to Germany or to Japan or to any other great military power which thinks it worth while to make war upon us. A Word to Americans of German Blood. I wish to say a special word to my fellow Americans who are in whole or in part of German blood. I very heartily admire them. I believe in them. I understand the difficulties under which they have labored during the last twenty-two months. I sympathize with, I feel for, them, even although I feel that many of them are not taking the position they ought to take. I know that what I preach to them is hard doctrine. But I beUeve it to be a doctrine neces- sary for them, and for all their — and my — fellow countrymen. I do not address them as German-Americans, for I hold that here in the United States ruin will come to the country in which our children and children's children are to live — your children's children and mine, friends — if we permit ourselves to be sundered one from the other by the lines either of creed or of national origin. I shall speak a word of my own ancestry to illustrate the points I am about to make. Some two centuries and a half ago there were certain Dutch immigrants, mechanics and small merchants, in New York City, which was then called New Amsterdam. There were in Eastern Pennsylvania two German peasant farmers who were among the founders of Germantown, having been driven out of the Pal- atinate when it was ravaged by the armies of Louis XIV ; and west of them in Pennsylvania lived certain Irish, Welsh and English 48 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July immigrants, the latter being Quakers. In South Carolina and Georgia were certain Scotch and French Huguenot farmers. These men and women left many descendants who intermarried with one another. Of these descendants I am one. My ancestors originally came from different countries, professed different creeds and spoke different tongues. But they became Americans and nothing else; and as the generations succeeded one another they did the ordinary work of American life. These ancestors of mine did the same tasks that fell to the lot of the ancestors of all of us who are of the old colonial stocks. All of these men, your ancestors, friends, and mine, could do their duty only so long as they acted purely as Americans. They fought in the War of the Revolution and again in the War of 1812; and they did not inquire whether the foreign foes whom Washington assailed were Germans, as at Trenton, or British, as at Princeton, or French, like those whom he fought near Pittsburg in his youth. If these old time Americans had kept apart from one another and had made their loyalty a loyalty to the countries from which they came, and not to this new great republic, and if their fellow citizens of that day had done the same thing, there would not be any United States now, and there would be no Americans to feel either pride or shame in what our people do. My plea is that all our citizens to-day shall act in the spirit of the men of many different race strains — the Washingtons, Adamses and Lees, the Schuylers and Sullivans; the CarroUs and Muhlen- bergs, the Marions and Herkimers — ^who disregarded all questions of national origin and became Americans and nothing else when they founded this country. Divided National Allegiance Impossible. It is not possible permanently to possess a divided national al- legiance. If men are not whole hearted in their Americanism, if they try to combine loyalty to this land with loyalty to some other land, it is inevitable that to a greater or lesser degree they make the loyalty to another land overshadow their loyalty to this. There has come into my possession a copy of a letter written by Professor Paul Rohrbach, of Berlin, to a German, Professor Appel- man, of the University of Vermont. This letter was printed in the New York Times of April 5th. I have made careful inquiry and I find that the letter is unquestionably genuine. It was evidently written in answer to one from Dr. Rohrbach's correspondent in which the question was asked as to how German-Americans in the Righteous Peace and National Unity 49 United States should vote on the question of preparedness. The letter deals with the question whether it is or is not of advantage to Germany that the United States should be kept helpless. Pro- fessor Rohrbach is a university lecturer in Berlin ; he is the author of various works on economics and other subjects, and was for a number of years the German Imperial Commissioner in Southwest Africa. He has been one of the most widely quoted of the German professors who in the present war have set forth German claims; and, according to the "Vorwaerts," many of his utterances can be taken as at least semi-official. This semi-official representative of the German Government writes from Berlin under the date of Jan- uary 13, 1916, as follows, explaining why German-Americans should not favor preparedness (which he calls armament) : "It is perhaps open to question whether genuine German interests would derive benefit from American armaments. In order to form an opinion, one would have to be able to foresee * * * what lines German policy will follow after the con- clusion of peace, and particularly how our relations with Japan will shape themselves. It seems to me quite conceivable that in an American-Japanese war, we should adopt an attitude of very benevolent neutrality toward Japan and thereby make it easier for her to beat America. In that case, why should we help on the American armament policy? * * * i cannot see, there- fore, that German political aims would be forwarded ipso facto by German-Americans lending themselves to the schemes for American armament." Professor Rohrbach also speculates as to who may be "the next President after Wilson," saying: "If Roosevelt actually should be- come President again, which, after all, is not impossible, the Ger- man-Americans would then be found to have simply played his game for him." As regards this statement of Professor Rohrbach I very freely admit that no man ought to back me or support the policies for which I stand unless with the clear understanding that these are straight-out American policies, not policies in the interest of some other nation against my own, and that our citizens do "play my game" precisely to the extent that they support such straight- out American policies. A Traitorous Movement. This letter from Dr. Rohrbach unquestionably expresses the attitude of militaristic Germany in endeavoring to use, against the honor and interest of the United States, that portion of the pro- 50 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July fessional "German-American" element of this country which is disloyal to this country, and it shows why this disloyal element among the professional "German-Americans" has joined with the professional pacifists in the movement to leave the United States helpless against possible aggressors — a movement which is traitor- ous to this republic. It is a deliberate suggestion and invitation to German-Americans, not merely to vote in the interests of Germany, but to vote so that another foreign power, Japan, may be enabled to beat the United States in, as the letter states it, the "quite conceiv- able event" that Germany's interest is to see a war between Japan and the United States in which Japan shall be victorious. I am certain that the German-Americans who can consciously be reached by any such suggestion form an utterly insignificant pro- portion of the Americans of German descent. But some of their genuinely patriotic fellows may be influenced unconsciously by such arguments. Therefore, I ask my fellow citizens who are in whole or in part of German blood, to consider very carefully the above let- ter and to ponder what is meant for their children and grandchildren by the attitude thus set forth. These descendants of theirs are to live here in this land, just as my children and children's children will live. Their interests and the interests of my children's children will be identical In the end, as the generations go by, they will all intermarry and become not merely in interest, but by blood, identical. The men of German blood have always played a high and honorable part in this country. In the great crisis of the Civil War they stood with loyal devotion by the Union and against slavery; and it is probably true of them that at that time more generally than those of any other blood they upheld the cause personified by Abraham Lincoln. I believe that the great mass of them are at the present day undivided in their loyal devotion to this country. I know that our entire national government, from President down, could be manned with men of German birth or descent who would be Americans and nothing else, who would stand for the United States first and for no other nation second. A large proportion of my closest friends, of the men in whom I most believe, are Americans of German origin, but they are Americans first and last, and only Americans. Must AH Act as Americans. I very earnestly wish that some way could be found for repudiat- ing the men whose actions have made it possible for foreigners Righteovx Peace and National Unity 51 like Professor Rohrbach to write with the insolent belief that they can use our fellow-citizens of German birth and descent so that their political influence may be exerted in such fashion as to make this country helpless to defend itself against foreign aggression, whether from Japan, from Germany, or from any other power. I should just as strongly denounce any men of English birth or descent or of any other birth or descent who, in the interest of their fatherland or of the country from which their ancestors sprung, advocated such action against the interest of America by Americans as is advocated in Professor Rohrbach's letter. We must all act as Americans; and we cannot aiford to accept as our leaders either Germans or Englishmen, or men of any other foreign nationality. I ask my fellow-citizens of German birth to remember that whatever calamity befalls this country will make its effects felt on their children no less than on mine. If Professor Rohrbach's dis- ciples here succeed in shaping our action so that Japan, in the interest of Germany, beats the United States, the shame and the disgrace and the loss will be felt by your children, my fellow-citizens of German origin, no less than by mine. The conquerors who over- come us in such a war would not go out of their way to find out the different race strains of the people in the land. They would oppress all alike with grim impartiality. If New York were taken by Ger- many or by any other European power, or San Francisco taken by Japan, because we had failed to prepare to defend ourselves, the weight of the hand of the alien victor would be felt by all our citizens alike; and the story of our shame would be as evil for your children's children as for mine. When the British took Washington in 1814, the disgrace and the loss fell just as heavily on Americans of English origin as on Americans of any other origin. The extreme naval party in Germany has recently advocated war with the United States on the ground that in the end, as the result of such a war, we would "have to pay all the war expenditures of the Germanic powers and their allies." These enormous sums would be raised by taxation on all our citizens; those of German descent would pay as heavily as those of any other descent; and all would share equally the shame and dishonor. A foreign foe is the foe of all of us alike. If in this land the citizens of one national origin successfully set the fashion of influencing this nation to its ovm detriment in the interest of the country from which they originally came, sooner or later it is absolutely certain that the citizens of some other national origin will repeat the experiment; 52 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July and this country will be left degraded and helpless among the nations. If such an event befall us, the bitter bread of humiliation will be eaten by all those who dwell in this land, no matter what their creed, no matter what their national origin. It will be eaten by your children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren just as much as by mine. The Same Plea to All Americans. I make the same plea precisely to the Americans of German birth or descent that I always have made and always shall make to all Americans, no matter what their creed or their national origin. I am exactly as much opposed to English-Americans as to German- Americans. I oppose all kinds of hyphenated Americanism. I ask my fellow-Americans who are partly or wholly of German blood to show the foreign foes of America who, from abroad, instigate and guide our traitors at home — and above all I ask them to show these traitors at home — ^that the immense majority of Americans of German descent, whether naturalized or native born, are loyal Americans and nothing else and that they stand for the honor and the interest of the United States shoulder to shoulder with all other good Americans of no matter what creed or national origin. Ameri- canism is a matter of the spirit, not of birthplace or descent. Among the best Americans I have ever known, among the men closest to me in social and political life, are, and have been, men born in, or men whose fathers were born in, Germany, Ireland, the Scandinavian kingdoms, and other European countries. They stand on an exact level with the other Americans, whose ancestors were here in Colonial times. We are all part of the same people. We all stand together for our common flag and our common country. We must so prepare that this country will be a good place in which the children's children of all of us shall live; and to do this we must so prepare that we can repel all foreign foes and pre- serve the inestimable right of settling for ourselves the fate of this mighty democratic Republic. But the essence of this policy of full preparedness, which remember is not only military but at least as much industrial and social, is that it is purely defensive, and is the best possible assurance of peace. No nation will ever attack a unified and prepared America. NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS- MILITARY— INDUSTRIAL— SOCIAL Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at Kansas City, May 30, 1916 I COME to Kansas City, here in the Great West, to speak on Memorial Day to the farmers and merchants and wage workers and manufacturers who dwell west of the Mississippi. What I have to say to you is exactly what I should say to your fellows who dwell on the Atlantic Coast, or the Pacific Slope, or beside the Great Lakes, or on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico. My message is a message to all Americans. My appeal is to the spirit of thorough- going Americanism in all our people in whatever portion of the land they dwell. In thanking all the organizations — business, political and social — ^whose invitation I have accepted, including my comrades of the Spanish War, I know that none of you will object to my putting first the Grand Army of the Republic and the Confederate Veterans. I come here to speak on behalf of the spirit which, tn the early sixties, burned in the hearts of the men who wore the blue and of the men who wore the gray. In what I have to say I shall appeal with equal emphasis to the soul qualities of the men who followed Grant and of the men who followed Lee; of all who, in the great crisis, proved their truth by their endeavor and showed them- selves willing to sacrifice everything for the right, as God gave them to see the right. But I make no appeal to the spirit of the peace-at-any-price men of '61 to '65. I ask that we in this genera- tion prove ourselves the spiritual heirs both of the men who wore the blue and of the men who wore the gray. But I make no appeal to the memory of the copperhead pacifists who put peace above duty, who put love of ease and love of money-getting before devotion to country, and whose convictions were too weak to stir to action their tepid souls. This Is a Great Year of Decision. This is one of the great years of decision in our national history. The way in which we now decide will largely determine whether we are to go forward in righteousness and power or backward in 53 54 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July degradation and weakness. We are face to face with elemental facts of right and wrong, of force or feebleness. According to the spirit in which we face these facts and govern our actions, we shall determine whether in the future we shall enjoy a growing national life or suffer a lingering national decay. First and foremost, friends, I ask you to beware of the false prophets, both the prophets of sordid materialism, and the prophets of that silly sentimentalism which refuses to look truths in the face if the truths are unpleasant. We cannot meet the future either by mere gross materialism or by mere silly sentimentalism; above all we cannot meet it if we attempt to balance gross material- ism in action by silly sentimentalism in words. In actual practice the professional pacifists do not serve good. They serve evil. They do not serve high ideals. It is not righteous to fail to fight on behalf of assailed righteousness. Such a course probably means sheer cowardice, and certainly means moral surrender. The men who are the torch carriers of world civilization are those, and only those, who acknowledge the supreme duty of protecting sacred spiritual things when attacked. In actual practice the professional pacifist is merely the tool of the sensual materialist who has no ideals, whose shriveled soul is wholly absorbed in automobiles, and the movies, and money making, and in the policies of the cash regis- ter and the stock ticker, and the life of fatted ease. Two years ago any number of persons were assuring us that the day of great wars had passed ; that it was impossible that there ever should be great wars again ; that preparedness brought on war ; that we did not need to take any steps in our own defense ; that the capitalists of the world, because high finance had become interna- tionalized, would never permit a great war; that the opinion of the civilized world was enough to stop all international outrages. This was only two years ago. During these two years we have seen the most destructive war in all history waged on a wider scale than ever in history before. Never before has there been such slaughter as has been compressed into the last twenty-two months ; and, alas that it should be written, the brutality, the ruthlessness, the disregard for International Law, and the callous and calculated atrocities com- mitted on non-combatants, including women and children, have been such as the civilized world has not even approached during the past century. Two years ago the false prophets who said that there never would be another war were applauded by all our people who were National Prepa/redness — Military — Ivduatrial — Social 55 wholly absorbed in money-getting; by all who cared only for lives of soft ease and vapid pleasure; by all who liked to satisfy their emotions cheaply and safely by applauding high sounding phraSes; and by the great mass of well meaning men who had not thought out the matter with conscientious thoroughness. Let Us Not Be Misled. Let us not be misled again. Undoubtedly as soon as this war ends all the well-meaning, short-sighted persons, who two years ago said there never would be a war again, and who have been obliged to be silent on this particular point during the past two years, will once more begin their shrill pipings that the last war has occurred. Once more they will demand or announce the in- vention of some patent device by which strong and ruthless and cunning men will be held in place by timid men without any preparedness, without any display of courage or acceptance of en- durance, risk, labor and hardship. When this war is over it is possible that some one of the com- batants, being fully armed, will assail us because we offer our- selves as a rich and helpless prize. On the other hand it is also possible that there will be temporary exhaustion among the com- batants, and a willingness, even on the part of the most brutal and ruthless, to go through the form of saying that they are peaceful and harmless. In such event there will be real danger lest our people be influenced by the foolish apostles of unpre- paredness to accept this condition as permanent, and once more to shirk our duty of getting ready. I wish to say, with all the emphasis in my power, that if peace in Europe should come to-morrow, it ought not, in the smallest degree, to affect our policy of preparedness. As a matter of fact, we probably cannot now prepare in any way that will have a material effect upon the present war. Our folly has been such that it is now too late for us to do this. All we can now do is to prepare so that the war shall leave no aftermath of horror and disaster for our nation. If we fail so to prepare then assuredly some day we or our children will have bitter cause to rue our folly, and to remember too late the words of old Sir Thomas Browne: "For since we cannot be wise by teachings * * * there is an unhappy necessity that we must smart in our own skins." 56 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July The Results of Unpreparedness. I wish especially to call the attention of all people who may be momentarily misled by the statements of the peace-at-any-price men, the professional pacifists of to-day, to the actual results of our policy of unpreparedness. Twenty-two months have gone by since this war began. Nearly five years have gone by since the revolution in Mexico loosed on Americans in Mexico, and on Amer- icans on our own side of the border, the forces of murder and misrule. Yet, during these five years we have taken no efficient steps to control the situation in Mexico, and during these twenty-two months, since the world has been in such a cataclysm of fear and blood as never before in its history, we of this Republic, with liter- ally astounding folly, with a folly criminal from the national stand- point, have refused in any way to prepare. The professional pacifists said, and even now say, that such preparedness would have invited trouble with Mexico and trouble with Germany and perhaps with other old world powers. Look at the facts ! We kept ourselves help- less to do justice to or for Mexico ; we refused to make ready in any way to protect our citizens in Mexico, or even on our own side of the Mexican border. We submitted tamely to the murder of our men and the rape of our women. We bore with spiritless sub- mission outrages upon outrages, until the number of our citi- zens killed mounted into the hundreds. Yet, so far from securing the good-will of the Mexicans, this policy of unpreparedness and of tame submission to insult and injury, merely aroused both their anger and contempt to such a degree that we are now en- gaged in a harrassing little war along the border. We have not the forces to make that war effective. We have actually drained the Coast Artillery from the seaboard defense, to serve as infantry down on the Mexican border. This nation of one hiindred million people with a territory as large as all Europe and more wealth than any other nation in the world possesses, has to strip its seacoast forts of their defenders and put these defenders at work which they are not trained to do. Even thus we are wholly unable to make good our complete lack of prepared- ness. The Price of Irresolution. If at the outset, if three years ago, we had resolutely and with foresight prepared to act, and then, if necessary, acted, in Mexico, that country would to-day be as peaceful and prosperous as Cuba National Preparedness — Military — Industrial — Social 57 — where we actually did take the very action I advocate for Mexico. If, the instant that the great war broke out in July, 1914, our fleet had been mobilized, a competent man put at the head of the Navy Department, our army put into proper trim, and steps taken by our representatives at Washington, both Executive and Legislative, to show that we were making ready to meet any exigiency that arose, there would have been no trouble of any kind with any belligerent. Of course, when we submitted to wrongdoing from one side, we invited a repetition of that wrongdoing by that side, and the infliction of similar wrongs by the other side. The thousands of non-combatants, men, women and children, including many hundreds of American men, women and children, who have been killed on the high seas, owe the loss of their lives primarily to the supine inaction of this nation; to our failure to prepare, and our failure in instant insistence on our own rights and on those rights of others which we had guar- anteed to protect. The professional pacifists insisted that such lack of prepared- ness on our part, and the observance by us of that kind of neu- trality which consists in tame acceptance of injury from all sides, would make us popular with all the combatants and insure our well being. On the contrary, the only effect has been to earn for us the contemptuous dislike of all the warring nations and to bring us to the verge of trouble with them. If we had prepared we would have saved thousands of lives and we would have guar- anteed our own peace. The failure to prepare, the failure to stand up for the rights of ourselves and of others, the yielding to wrongdoing, resulted both in deferring the day when it was pos- sible for this nation to act as peacemaker, and in bringing us measurably nearer to the danger of ourselves being involved in the conflict. Weakness invites contempt. Weakness combined with bluster invites both contempt and aggression. Self-respect- ing strength that respects the rights of others is the only quality that secures respect from others. If, in our foreign policy, we are weak, if we use lofty words at the same time that we commit mean or unworthy actions, and above all, if we fail to protect our own rights, we shall not secure the good-will of any one, and we shall incur the contempt of other nations; and contempt of that kind is easily turned into active international violence. If we cannot protect ourselves we may be sure that no one else will protect us. If we are not prepared in advance, we cannot be true 58 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July to ourselves ; and if we are not true to ourselves we shall certainly be false to every one else. International Duty. I believe in International Duty. I hold that we cannot assert that we are entirely guiltless of responsibility for the outrages committed on well-behaved nations, particularly on Belgium, and on non-combatants, particularly on women and children, in the present war. Prior to the war we had become parties to the va- rious conventions and treaties designed to mitigate the horrors of war, and to limit the offenses that can, with impunity, be commit- ted by belligerents either on neutrals or non-combatants. When we declined to take any action under these conventions and treaties we ourselves treated them as "scraps of paper." Such being the case, while our guilt is not as great as that of the strong and ruthless nations who committed the misdeeds, we nevertheless occupy, in some respects, an even meaner position. For we pos- sess strength, and yet we refuse to make ready this strength and we refuse to use it for righteousness. We possess strength, and yet we decline to put it behind our plighted word when the inter- ests and honor of others are involved. Performance of international duty to others means that in international affairs, in the commonwealth of nations, we shall not only refrain from wronging the weak, but shall, according to our capacity, and as opportunity offers, stand up for the weak when the weak are wronged by the strong. Most emphatically it does not mean that we shall submit to wrong-doing by other na- tions. To do so is a proof not of virtue, but of weakness, and of a mean and abject national spirit. To submit to wrongdoing is to en- courage wrongdoing; and it is, therefore, itself, a form of in- iquity — and a peculiarly objectionable form of iniquity, for ft is based on cowardice. The first step in securing international jus- tice is that every peaceful, well-behaved nation shall develop its own strength and its intelligent will power, so as to prevent ill- behaved nations from wrong-doing. The second step is that the strong among these well-behaved nations shall, in some way or shape extend aid and comfort to their weak well-behaved brothers, when the latter are wronged. The duty of a nation like ours cannot be considered as if we stood alone in the world. We are one of a community of nations and the effective condemnation of wrong- National Prepa/redneas — Military — Industrial — Social 59 doing by that community is the great force of civilization. If we shirk our part of that duty to condemn, and if necessary more than condemn, the wrong, we are aiding to break down the force of the public opinion of mankind in the support of justice and righteousness, and with that we are helping to destroy the forces of peace and justice which serve to prevent others from doing wrong towards us and thus serve to preserve our peace and safety. It is, however, worse than idle, it is mischievous, to indulge in visionary plans about world-action in the future, until, in the present, we act as we should in two vital matters ; in the first place by abandoning the pernicious habit of making reckless promises which cannot, or ought not, or will not be kept, and in the second place, and most important of all, by preparing our own strength so that we can protect our own rights. Preparedness Secures Justice. Preparedness, instead of being provocative of war and injus- tice, tells in favor of peace and justice. Only through prepared- ness can we do justice to others. Only through preparedness can we secure justice for ourselves. Well-meaning persons who have not thought seriously or deeply on the subject sometimes assert that we are too far away from the old world ever to fear assault or invasion. The answer is two-fold. In the first place we have under our flag the Canal Zone and Alaska, and various islands. These it is absolutely impossible to protect from any formidable foe except by a first class navy and army. In the next place, the events of the present war show that the ocean is now a highway for any power whose ships control it. We have just witnessed the transfer by sea of a Russian army from Eastern Siberia to France — a sea voyage three times as long as that across the At- lantic. We have seen a huge army gathered at the Dardanelles from England, France and Australia ; and the distance from Aus- tralia to the Dardanelles is far greater than the distance from Asia to our shores. There gathered for the attack on Constanti- nople a host of fighting men drawn from the great island-conti- nent of the South Pacific, and they were joined by the fighting men of the British Isles, who dwelt on the opposite side of the world. From the northern and the southern hemispheres, the transport steamers have carried with speed and safety, over the two greatest oceans, masses of troops ten times as numerous as our whole mobile army. If any army half the size of that whicl; 60 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July attacked the Dardanelles was landed near New York or San Fran- cisco in a time no longer than that occupied by the British and Australians in reaching the Dardanelles, we should in the pres- ent condition of our forces be utterly at its mercy. The imme- diate loss would fall on the Atlantic or Pacific coast; but we are all Americans, and the disgrace would be shared by all of us wherever we live, and the blow to our self-respect and our mate- rial well-being would shake our whole country to its foundations. Those who confidently assert that there is no danger of our ever being attacked are either ignorant or forgetful of the multi- tude of examples which show how international conflicts arise. The pressure of population and a desire for wealth and power now as in former ages are urging nations in the old world to get possession of all the unoccupied or weakly held parts of the earth from which profit can be derived. This is what has often brought rival European nations face to face and to the verge of war in Asia and Africa. It has played a great part in bringing on the present war. It is possible that some nation will attack us out of hand, making of some action on the part of our people a plausible cause of quarrel. It is much more likely that if we are not strong enough to maintain our rights, including the assertion of the Mon- roe Doctrine, we shall be subjected to a series of aggressions upon our rights growing more and more grievous until we reach a point where we ourselves shall be obliged to resent the aggression or else to abandon policies essential to our national greatness and well-being. The Prime Needs in Preparedness. The prime needs in preparedness, the needs which can be im- mediately met, are to give us, first, the navy we require, and sec- ond the regular army we require. I have elsewhere given the reasons why we require the second navy in the world and a small, highly efficient regular army of 250,000 men, with a proper reserve. Here let it suffice to say that such a navy and such an army would be our best insurance against war and for peace. But the navy and the regular army are not enough. Exactly as back of the navy should stand the regular army, so back of the regular army should stand the nation. I speak to, and on behalf of, a nation of freemen. Freemen fit to be freemen do not have to hire other men to do their fighting. I speak here on the invi- tation of the men who wore the blue and the men who wore the National Preparedness — Milita/ry — Industrial — Social 61 gray of fifty years ago; of the men who fought in the two great citizen armies when, North and South, the bravest and best in the land went forth to battle for their deep convictions. I ask that we of this generation be loyal to the memories of our fathers, and be ready at need to pay with our own bodies for our own prin- ciples. When I ask you to prepare by seeing that your repre- sentatives provide a first-class navy and a first-class regular army, I am merely asking you to prepare to have the other fellow do your fighting for you. This does not satisfy me. It ought not to satisfy you. You and I, friends, cannot be loyal to the mem- ory of Washington, and of Grant, and of Lee, unless we are fit and ready to do our own fighting in time of need. I do not wish us, the people, to sink into a condition where we are so soft, so ease loving, so fond of pleasures, or so wrapped up in money get- ting that we cannot do the hard work that brave men must do when the need calls. I speak for universal service based on uni- versal training. Universal Training and Universal Service. Universal training and universal service represent the only service and training a democracy should accept. It is the plain people, it is the farmers, the working men, the small business men, the professional men, who above all others should back up this plan. I have just received a letter from a friend, a farmer in North Carolina, who is arranging to have six farmers' boys from his neighborhood sent to one of the training camps for boys this summer. He writes that he has been besieged by farmers and their wives to send their sons to that camp. They wish them to get the training, to have the value of the trip, and of the associa- tion with boys from other parts of the country. They realize how much good it would do them in every way. They realize that the kind of training for preparedness that their boys would receive would help them industrially in time of peace just as much as in war. These farmers and their wives do not wish war. They do not wish their sons to go to war if the war can legitimately be avoided. But they feel that if the nation does get into a fight they wish their sons to take part in that fight, and in such event they wish them to be able to take care of themselves and not merely be helpless victims of fever or of bullets. The farmers and wage workers, the business men and profes- sional men who are not men of large means, and whose wives have 62 The Progressive Party — Its Record from Janimry to Jtdy to exercise proper economy in order to keep their homes happy and comfortable — these are the people who, beyond all others, should realize that such training should not be reserved for the boys whose fathers or friends are rich enough to pay for it, but should be given to all American boys at the expense of the nation. It is the present lack of system, the present method of allowing only those boys to train whose fathers have money, which is un- fair and undemocratic. It breeds class distinction, among other unhealthy things. I do not believe as a permanent thing in a system that merely puts the Harvard boy alongside the Yale boy or the Princeton boy, the big merchant's son or railroad presi- dent's son beside the big lawyer's son or, perhaps, beside the em- ployee of the rich man who is patriotic enough to pay his ex- penses. All this is the best that we can get at present; and until the people as a whole wake up. But it is not enough. I believe in the system that will put all the boys I have mentioned along- side the boy whose father is a brakeman here in Missouri, or a hardworking farmer in Kansas, or a factory operative in Massa- chusetts or New Jersey, or a bookkeeper or stenographer in New York or Chicago ; that will put all of them beside the boy from the mountains of North Carolina who has never seen a railway train and has always gone barefoot. Let all these boys be given the same kind of training, and let the best boy out of the bunch be- come an oiBcer. Let no one be allowed to shirk the duty of pre- paring himself, for if he does, he is putting on the shoulders of a better man the burden which he himself should carry. The Volunteer Training Camps. We have heard a good deal of talk about the officer class, that we are getting from the volunteer training camps of the present day. As long as we do not have universal military service these camps offer the only chance for young men to prepare so as to serve the country. The man who goes to them renders a high and patriotic service and incidentally profits immensely by the training and experience. My sons have gone and are going to these camps. I believe in these camps with all my heart and soul. They are supplying by private initiative what our governmental representatives have not the foresight to provide for everybody. As long as our citizens do not insist upon everybody being trained, upon everyone going to such camps, why the boys that do go to them will inevitably get the commissions if war comes. National Preparedness — Military — Industrial — Social 63 In other words, as long as our people do not make the training universal, and do not make it paid for by the commonwealth, only the men of means will be trained as officers at these camps. At present this is the only way to provide that, in the event of war, we shall have officers worth having. But such a system is funda- mentally undemocratic. It is our own fault, the fault of our peo- ple, that we do not establish the really democratic system, for the only way to establish the democratic system is through universal service. Napoleon drew his marshals from the humblest ranks, simply because they were the best men for the job ; and in a demo- cratic army promotion should go by merit. Here, at present, the son of the farmer and the son of the wage worker know that they have little chance to become officers in the event of war because they cannot afford the time and the money to get themselves trained in advance. I ask the plain people of the United States, I ask the farmers, the wage workers, the ordinary men, to give their sons the same chance that the sons of wealthier men have. Make the opportunity open to all ; to your sons, to my sons ; to all on an even basis. A system of universal training for universal service would be one of the biggest things ever done in this coun- try to preserve our democratic institutions in spirit and in fact. The Spirit the Country Needs. The other day when I spoke on universal service in Detroit a woman in the gallery called out : "I have two sons and they shall both go if the country needs them." I answered her, "Madam, I take off my hat to you. That is the spirit this country needs, and if all the mothers of the country will do as you do and raise their boys so that they shall be able and ready at need to fight for the country, there will never be any need for any of them to fight for the country. No nation will ever attack a unified and prepared America." And to you men of the Grand Army, and you. Confederate Vet- erans, I need not say that this was in effect what was done in our Civil War. Of course, the men who had been trained at West Point had an initial advantage ; but every one went into the ranks on even terms and men from the ranks rose to the highest posi- tions on their merits. Let me illustrate this by an incident out of my own experience. I was colonel of a volunteer regiment at Santiago in the Spanish War. I served under the then Brigadier- General Sam Young, and I served beside the then Brigadier- 64 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July General Adna Chaffee. Later, as President, it was my good for- tune to give, first to Sam Young, and afterwards to Adna Chaffee, the appointment of Lieutenant-General of the United States, the highest office in the United States Army. On the day that Sam Young retired, and that Adna Chaffee was to take his place and be presented as Lieutenant-General at the White House, it hap- pened that Chaffee's epaulettes had not come and Sam Young sent him around his own epaulettes with a little note reading, "These are presented by Private Young, '61, to Private Chaffee, '61." The two fine old boys had entered the army in the same year at the beginning of the Civil War as privates in the ranks, and they had worked their way up by sheer force of courage and character, and perseverance and ability, until they stood in succession in the highest position at the head of the army in which they had once served as enlisted men. That symbolized what the American army should be, and what we could make the American army under a system of universal service based on universal training. It is a system which will give every man an equal chance, which will make it the duty of each man to learn how to serve his country, and which will secure to each man the right to serve that country in the capacity to which his ability entitles him. Such an army would be a people's army; and it would never be used except in a people's war. Eemember always that what I ask is asked in the name of peace and in the name of democracy, no less than in the name of national honor and interest. It is the men who do not believe in peace at any price who are most apt to secure the peace which self-respecting men and women can accept. I ask that this na- tion prepare, in the first place, because if war should be thrust upon us, we must be able to emerge victorious from the trial, and we cannot do so unless we are prepared; and in the second place I ask that we prepare because it is the surest way to secure peace, the surest way to keep war from our borders. Little Svdtzerland is at peace at this moment because she prepared and only because she prepared. In the Napoleonic wars Switzerland was overrun by French, German and Russian armies ; great battles were fought within her limits and she became an appanage of the French Em- pire — and all this purely and solely because at that time she had not prepared, she was not able to hold her own against invaders. A century later a war even greater bursts over Europe. Switzer- land's natural boundaries and defenses are precisely what they National Preparedness — Military — Industrial — Social 65 were ; the temptation to use her territory is precisely as great for the belligerents, but Switzerland had prepared, and therefore Switzerland to-day is at peace. AU-Round Preparedness the Need. Military preparedness is only one side of all around prepared- ness. It would be worthless unless based on industrial prepared- ness, and both would be worthless unless based on preparedness of the soul and the spirit. You men who wore the Blue and the Gray, when once the war was over, turned to the farm and the shop and the counting house, and again took up your life work of earning your living and supporting your families, and making provision for the generation that was to come after you. You did this work thoroughly, as you had thoroughly done the work of war. Our people of to-day must apply your spirit to the changed cir- cumstances of to-day. It is never possible to treat the past as giving the exact precedent for given action in the present. But the spirit shown by the men who in the great crises in the past rose level to those crises, must be shown by the men of the pres- ent in the crisis of the present. In this country we have the double duty of training ourselves so as to be willing to die for the country and of developing our internal policy so as to make the country worth living in. In the long run the country must be worth living in if it is worth dying for. In order to make this country worth living in we must de- velop a real national purpose controlled not only by moral motives but by cool intelligence. If our people put a premium upon the demagogue by supporting the man who makes impossible prom- ises, and who either does not attempt to reduce these promises to action, or else fails in attempting to do so, then we shall go down. The people must choose as their executive and legislative leaders at Washington men absolutely national in spirit; men whose theory of government is as far as the poles from the pork- barrel theory — and this, whether the pork-barrel be considered from a personal, political or sectional standpoint — men who look forward and not back; men who face the facts as they actually are. After this war we shall see a new Europe; a Europe ener- getically developing new social and economic means of meeting new problems. If, under these circumstances, we take refuge in formulae dug out as fossils from the workings of principles 66 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July in the past, instead of developing these principles so as to meet the future, we shall be as foolish as if we were to arm our soldiers with flintlocks and send them against an army possessing machine guns, high power rifles, and modern artillery. The time for flint- lock theories of statesmanship in this country is past. This applies as much to industry as to national defense. To let the interstate transportation systems of the country, for ex- ample, be regulated by forty-eight small conflicting sovereignties, is just as foolish as to trust to forty-eight conflicting sovereign- ties in military matters. The nation must regulate the arteries of traflic for the whole country in the interests of the whole coun- try. It must control the armed forces of the whole country in the interests of the whole country. In such matters there cannot be divided sovereignty without national weakness. Moreover, what applies to railways directly or indirectly concerned in interstate business, also applies to all great corporations engaged in interstate or international business. Two Dominating Truths. I stand with all my heart for military preparedness ; but no one knows better than I that military preparedness alone can neither make nor maintain a great nation. It is merely the essential safe- guard for a nation industrially efficient and prosperous, and with a prosperity justly distributed ; a safeguard for a national life organ- ized in all points for national ends and national ideals. This na- tional life must be dominated by the two great truths ; first, that in a successful democracy, every man must, in reasonable measure, be his "brother's keeper," and second, that every citizen in such a democracy must accept with his whole heart the principle that his first duty in war or in peace is to serve the nation. Occasionally it is said by some one blind to industrial tendencies that the nation has no right to regulate the activities of the great successful business men. Occasionally it is said by some unworthy would-be labor leader that the workingman owes nothing to the country, because there is not enough of such regulation in his in- terest. Each statement must be emphatically repudiated by every patriot. If any man, whether workingman or capitalist, believes that he owes nothing to this country, then the sooner he gets out of the country the better, for he is unfit to do good to himself or to anyone else. Such a man is not entitled to claim companionship with you veterans of the Civil War who are here to-day. He is unfit to National Preparedness — Military — Indiistriai — Social 67 live in the land which is proud of the memory of your deeds. On the other hand the great business men must recognize more and more, that there must be full and frank co-operation between them and the government to secure the public welfare. On the part of the government this co-operation must be given with the sincere desire to increase the efficiency of our industrial organization, not to hamper it, and with full recognition of the fact that much of modem industry must be carried on by great industrial units. The aim of government should be not to destroy these units but, while encouraging them, to regulate them in the interests of the people as a whole. At the same time the big business man must with equal frankness recognize the fact that his business activities, while beneficial to himself and his associates, must also justify themselves by being beneficial to the men who work for him, and to the public which he serves. Other National Needs. A nation to survive must stand for the principles of social and industrial justice. If any class is here oppressed, or so neglected that the neglect becomes in effect oppression, the ideals of patriotism in that class will assuredly be dwarfed and stunted. We must not let any man think that he can shirk his own duties, or blame his own failure and shortcomings on others; and yet we must shape our collective action, so that as far as possible each man shall have a fair chance to show the stuff that is in him, unhelped and unhampered by special privilege. Legislation to help the business man is eminently proper, but only on condition that we show equal zeal for the working and living rights, the social and economic rights, of farmer and wage earner; in short, the rights of all productive citizens must be safe- guarded with equal care. A protective tariff with the duties ad- justed outside of factional politics is essential in the industrial world of to-day. But the protective tariff by itself means nothing but the rudimentary beginning of the needed policy, or rather policies, for the broadest national development of our economic life, along lines designed to secure real, substantial justice. Our national resources must be conserved, but the conservation must be in the public interest, and on this as on all other points the prosperity and growth of industry must, so far as possible, be made to go hand in hand with a reasonably equitable distribution of its returns. ■ In addition to treating our brother man and sister woman as we 68 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July would wish them to treat us, we must also endeavor, so far as we are able, to secure them just treatment by others. This is why we must try to abolish child labor. This is why we must see that women in industry are protected from inhuman treatment of any kind. This is why we must try to secure, not merely for women and children, but for men also, conditions of life and labor, such that the head of the family will not be ground under foot by excessive toil, nor kept to a wage that will not permit him to bring up his family in the way it should be brought up, that will not permit him to save his wife from prostrating drudgery. It does not mean that we shall try to give to the shiftless the same reward as to the energetic and hard working. It does not mean that we shall permit the vicious to commit wrong with impunity. It does not mean that we shall excuse any wage worker, or any other man for failure to honor the United States flag and whole-heartedly to serve the nation — for the privileges of citizenship should be conditioned on the possession and exercise of patriotism. But it does mean that for the sake of our children and children's children who are to come after us, we shall strive to bring about conditions in this country such as to free every hard working and right thinking man from the sense of injustice and oppression, from the feeling that the laws do not secure him justice, but do give an advantage over against him to unscrupulous cunning and unscrupulous force. In the long run our children's children will find that this is not a good country for any one to live in unless we and they make it a reasona- bly good country for every one to live in. Performance Not Promise Needed. What I thus say does not represent anjrthing new in principle. On the contrary, the principles thus set forth have received the lip loyalty of many men before election, who, after election, forgot their pre-election promises. What we need in our public men is performance, not promise; to treat a platform merely as a means of getting office, not as a covenant to be kept in oflSce, is demoral- izing both to the public and to the servants of the public. Now, friends, the men here to-day whom I have particularly addressed, the men who wore the Blue, and the men who wore the Gray in the Civil War, proved that they had convictions worth dying for. They thereby made this a land worth living in. They showed that they were willing to sacrifice everything, including life itself, for certain great ideals. They thereby ranged themselves National Preparedness — Military — Industrial — Social 69 among the great peoples of mankind. No nation is really great, no race is entitled to a permanent position of leadership or of equality on this earth, unless its sons are willing to die at need for great ideals. But it is equally important that they shall show a like power of fealty to ideals in the way they live their ordinary lives. If after the close of the Civil War the soldiers who fought in it on both sides had shovm themselves so demoralized by the four years of fighting that they could not settle down to civil life, but insisted on continuing in arms and plunging the country into anarchy, the net result of their former heroism would have been destruction for this nation. Such a result would have proved that, although we could pro- duce soldiers, we could not produce citizens — and the soldier who is a bad citizen, and the citizen who cannot, at need, serve as a soldier are equally unfit to live in a free, self-governing common- wealth. The Lesson of Heroism. This is Memorial Day. You have to-day decorated the graves of gallant men who paid by their death for the lack of wisdom and foresight shown by their forefathers. This is a day of homage to heroism. But it is also a day of mourning. For forty years prior to the Civil War our people refused to face facts and soberly bend their energies to make war impossible. Heroes shed their blood, and women walked all their lives in the shadow, because there had been such lack of foresight, such slothful, lazy optimism. Let the lesson thus taught sink into the minds of us of this generation. Let us not from laziness and lack of foresight create a situation where brave men shall die to make good our shortsightedness. I ask that we prepare, not because I wish war, but because with all my heart I desire to keep war afar from us; and only by fore- thought and by preparation of soul and body can we thus keep it afar off. The end we have in view is a high and fine national life based on an industrial efficiency which shall be accompanied by social and economic justice. Military preparedness against war is merely a means to this end. But it is an indispensable means. We are not fit to be free men unless we show the forethought and will power necessary to insure that we ourselves shall have the right to decide our own destinies, and not be forced helplessly to submit to have them decided by alien conquerors. 70 The Progressive Party — Its Record from Jantiary to July If we are true to the men of the mighty past we shall guide ourselves by what Lowell wrote to the pacifists of his time, wh<) — to use his own words — ^wished to "knuckle down" to their foes. He said: "Peace won't keep house with Fear! If you want peace the thing you've got to do Is just to show you're up to fighting too; Better that all our ships with all their crews Should sink to rot in ocean's dreamless ooze. Each torn flag waving challenge as it went And each dumb gun a brave man's monument. Than seek such peace as only cowards crave; Give me the peace of dead men or of brave." « * * "Come Peace! Not like a mourner bowed For honor lost and dear ones wasted. But proud to meet a people proud. With eyes that tell of triumph tasted! "Come, while our country feels the lift Of a great instinct shouting 'Forwards !' And knows that freedom's not a gift That tarries long in hands of cowards!" THE WEASEL WORDS OF MR. WILSON Morning Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at St. Louis, May 31, 1916 I AM hereto speak for preparedness, and I wish at the outset to meet not an argument but a misstatement made by those who know it to be such — the statement that this preparedness move- ment is organized by the munition manufacturers. That statement is a falsehood, and I challenge any human being to produce evidence other than will show that ninety-nine out of every hundred men prominent in the preparedness cause have nothing whatsover to do with any munition manufacturer. In what I am about to say I shall speak with all courtesy and respect on the very vital points wherein I completely differ from the position taken by the President in his Memorial Day address. I speak of him because I can make my point clear only by taking up the position of the most prominent of the champions of the other side. I don't have to deal with Mr. Bryan and Mr. Ford. I regard them both as nice, amiable men, and I like them in private life. But I decline to take part in any such wild mental joy ride as would be necessary if I had to discuss seriously their attitude on public questions. The President said that he was for "universal voluntary train- ing," but that America did not wish anything but "the compulsion of the spirit of Americanism." Now, "universal voluntary training," as an expression, is precisely similar to any other contradiction in terms. It is like saying, in speaking of a truant law for the schools, that you believe in "universal obligatory attendance at the public schools for every child that does not wish to stay away." Weasel Words. In connection with the words "universal training" the word "voluntary" has exactly the same effect that an acid has on an alkali — a neutralizing effect. One of our defects as a nation is a tendency to use what have been called "weasel words." When a weasel sucks an egg the meat is sucked out of the egg; and if you 71 72 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July use a "weasel word" after another there is nothing left of the other. It is possible to have universal training. It is possible to have voluntary training. But when President Wilson uses the word "voluntary" to qualify the word "universal" he is using a "weasel word," which has sucked all the meaning out of "universal." The two words ilatly contradict one another. Again, the President said that "the acid test" was "about to be applied to business men to see whether they would allow their employees to volunteer." Now, I take flat issue with that con- ception of patriotism which makes the man of means heroically prepare to defend himself by having his employee trained to fight for him. I stand for the system under which the business man and the employee, or if they are too old, then the son of the business man and the son of the employee, will both have the same training, will sleep in the same dog tent, will eat the same rations, and go on the same hike, and if war comes will fight shoulder to shoulder. I don't believe in that species of patriotism by which one man declares for it and the other puts the declaration into practice. I don't believe in cultivating that fine fervor which will enable the business man to let the other fellow do his preparing and fighting. I do not believe in taxing the patriotic business man by asking him to let his employees volunteer and thereby put himself at a disadvantage compared to his unpatriotic business rival who follows the opposite course. Still less do I believe in letting the rich man stay at home while his hired man trains for war and goes to war. It Applies to Us All. What I say I mean to make applicable to all of us here; to all Americans eversrwhere. I am not asking you to let the other fellow prepare so that he may do your fighting for you. I am asking you to prepare, you yourselves; all of us here; all Americans every- where. Consider what this "acid test" of which the President speaks amounts to in practice. It means that the employer who is patriotic is to put himself at a disadvantage, as compared with his rival, by letting his business be hurt by having his men spend their time in being trained while his rival is not compelled to follow the same course. Apparently the President doesn't here consider the pos- sibility of the employer being patriotic enough to wish to face the same risk that his employee would have to face. In his highest flight of imagination about love of country, the President can only The Weasel Words of Mr, Wilson 73 conceive of that kind of "acid test" which will enable the stay-at- home man heroically to permit some other man to learn how to fight so as to defend both! This is what the "compulsion of the American spirit" of which the President speaks means in actual practice. Such "compulsion of the American spirit" will drive into service the patriotic and dis- interested man who yields to the feeling of love of country, but will leave out of service the cold and selfish man who is not stirred by patriotism. The President advocates the kind of "compulsion" which drives the honorable man to the sacrifice of material well- being and even of life, while it leaves the selfish man and the coward to make money at home, to profit basely at the expense of this gallant brother. Such a system is as wicked as it is foolish and ignoble. A Premium on Cowardice. The other day a young friend of mine, a kinsman by marriage, recited to me a shocking incident. He was listening to the talk in a smoking car on one of our big railway lines. A big, prosperous man, evidently one who had made a great deal of money and who was boasting about it, was jeering at preparedness. He said that his father was one of five brothers who had come from Vermont and gone West. At the time of the Civil War four of them went into the army. Two of them were killed and two were broken down in health. The fifth brother was this man's father. This man said: "My father was too wise to go to war ; he stayed out, and he made a fortune, while the other four fought; and I have all that fortune now. If there is a war now, I'll stay home and make money, and let other men fight!" The "compulsion of the American spirit" of which Mr. Wilson speaks drove the four high-minded brothers, at the risk of loss of life or health, into four years' service under the flag. But the "com- pulsion of the American spirit" wasn't felt by the cold and selfish fifth man. He saved his own carcass, and bequeathed to his chil- dren the property which he was enabled to accumulate because better men than he fought for the Union. And this is the system, the system of putting a premium on cowardice and mere money- getting, which the President champions as representing the "com- pulsion of the American spirit" ! Such words are worse than weasel words, because they really stand for the "weasel deeds" which suck the meaning from, which give the lie to, the high-sounding phrases 74 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July which astute and selfish politicians use when they desire to fool the people for their own personal and selfish profit. I stand for the man who wore the blue and for the man who wore the gray, but I don't stand for the copperhead pacifist who during the Civil War stayed at home and made money because braver men than he died for the sake of duty. I ask you to apply the "acid test" to this sentence of the President, that "America does not wish anything but the compulsion of the spirit of Ameri- canism." That spirit fiamed high from '61 to '65. But even in those days it couldn't drive the copperhead or the pacifist into the ranks. It left those men at home to make fortunes and to pursue ease and comfort, while better and braver men went to the war. I am for the volunteer who volunteers to fight; I am not for the volunteer who volunteers to stay in safety at home. Cloaking Ignoble Action. I will take another part of the President's speech which strik- ingly illustrates our common and popular sin of using lofty words to cloak ignoble action or mean inaction. The President says that one of "the principles which America holds dear is that small and weak states have as much right to their sovereignty and independ- ence as large and strong nations." I entirely agree with this fine sentiment, but only provided it is put into action in the concrete case. I don't believe in any fine sentiments that are not translated into deeds. Still less do I believe in fine sentiments that are used to cloak base and timid actions. There are two defensible positions that can be taken by this nation in international affairs. One is that she owes nothing to any other nation, that she is not concerned with the rights of small and weak nations at all. This is a defensible position. I don't regard it as a very exalted position. But it is defensible to say that America must only consider herself and her own interests. The other position is that, in addition to what America owes to herself, she also owes a real duty to humanity at large, to the other nations of mankind. This means that, especially where she has by treaty committed herself, she must endeavor in some way to protest against any wrong done to the liberty or life of a small, well- behaved, weak nation by a powerful and unscrupulous nation. You can take either of those positions. I take the last. I think it is a loftier position than the first. But either position can be The Weasel Words of Mr. Wilson 75 taken. It is not possible, however, with self respect or regard for truth to talk in accordance with one position and act in accordance with the other. It is not possible truthfully or with self respect to say that we "hold dear the principle that small and weak states have as much right to their sovereignty and independence as large and strong nations," and then, when the concrete case arises, announce that it is our duty "to be neutral in word and thought" between the small, weak state and the large, strong nation which is robbing it of its sovereignty and independence. Yet this is precisely what President Wilson has done. The fine phrase is that which the President used in his address yesterday. The ignoble act was that which he performed in the concrete case of Belgium. After this war began for the first sixty days I loyally supported the President in his attitude, assuming that he was right when he stated that we had no responsibility as regards Belgium. Then I became uneasy as to whether he was right. I made up my mind that I would look up the Hague Con- ventions for myself, and would study the matter independently. I did so, and I became convinced that the President was leading the people wrong, and that we as a people had a duty to perform; and from that day to this I have preached this duty. Can't Walk Two Ways at Once. We can't with safety walk two diverging ways at once. We can't with self-respect, we can't if we wish to escape the reproach of hypocrisy, occupy both the position that it was our duty "to be neutral in thought and deed" between Belgium and Germany, and also the position that we must "hold dear as one of our principles the right of small and weak states to sovereignty and independence." Follow one road or follow the other ; don't try to follow both, under penalty of being convicted of moral dishonesty. Let us as a nation either refrain from uttering or sanctioning such a sentiment as that about "holding dear the rights of small and weak states," or, when the concrete case arises, reduce the abstract principle to prac- tice in that concrete case. The case of Belgium exactly meets the President's fine phrase about "the principle of the right of small and weak states to sovereignty and independence." But the President's phrase was only a phrase. He feared to make it a fact. His words have been bold and vigorous. His deeds have been timid and feeble. And we the people are ultimately to blame; for in the long run our rulers behave precisely as we let them behave. 76 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July Remember that in the case of Belgium, while we were bound in honor to act under the Hague Convention, we were also required to act under the general principles of international law, as often loudly proclaimed by us, and as specifically set forth by the govern- ment of the King of Prussia, the after-time Emperor of Germany, in his action against the United States and on behalf of England at the time of the Trent affair during the Civil War. At that time Prussia protested, the protest being made by command of the King through his Foreign Minister, Herr Bernstorff, the father, as I am informed, of Ambassador Bernstorff. The protest, written in Decem- ber, 1861, included advocacy of "the cause of peace with President Lincoln" — a peace which would have left secession triumphant and slavery definitely established. The protest was on behalf of England, setting forth that "although it is England only which is immediately concerned," yet that if the American Government ordered or sanc- tioned the conduct complained of, the Prussian Government, to its "great regret," would be "constrained" to see in the action of the United States "a public menace offered to the existing rights of all neutrals." Prussia, speaking through the aftertime German Em- peror, thus championed "the neutral rights" of powerful England, against the weakened and seemingly beaten United States. It would have been well indeed for our honor if with this precedent in view. President Wilson had championed "the neutral rights" of weak, innocent, gallant Belgium against the triumphant wrong-doing of powerful and seemingly victorious Prussianized Germany. AMERICA FOR AMERICANS Afternoon Speech of Theodore Roosevelt at St. Louis, May 31, 1916 HERE in St. Louis I wish to speak briefly on the subject of Americanism. I stand for straight Americanism uncon- ditioned and unqualified, and I stand against every form of hyphenated Americanism. I do not speak of the hyphen when it is employed as a mere matter of convenience, although personally I like to avoid its use even in such manner. I speak of and condemn its use whenever it represents an effort to form political parties along racial lines or to bring pressure to bear on parties and poli- ticians, not for American purposes, but in the interest of some group of voters of a certain national origin, or of the country from which they or their fathers came. Americanism is not a matter of creed, birthplace or national descent, but of the soul and of the spirit. If the American has the right stuff in him, I care not a snap of my fingers whether he is Jew or Gentile, Catholic or Protestant. I care not a snap of my fingers whether his ancestors came over in the Mayflower, or whether he was born, or his parents were born, in Germany, Ireland, France, England, Scandinavia, Russia or Italy or any other country. All I ask of the immigrant is that he shall be physically and intellectually fit, of sound character, and eager in good faith to become an Ameri- can citizen. If the immigrant is of the right kind I am for him, and if the native American is of the wrong kind I am against him. But unless the immigrant becomes in good faith an American and nothing else, then he is out of place in this country, and the sooner he leaves it the better. Let Us Be Americans, Nothing Else. We in this country form a new nation, akin to, but different from, each of the nations of Europe. As Alexander Hamilton put it, "Let us be neither Greeks nor Trojans, but Americans." We are false to this country if we rank ourselves as "German-Americans" or "English-Americans," "Irish-Americans" or "French-Americans." 77 78 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July Our duty is to the United States. This duty should constrain us in the first place to treat the other nations primarily according to the way such treatment serves American interests; and in the second place so far as possible to treat other nations in such manner as serves the interests of mankind at large. Every nation acts some- times well and sometimes ill. Therefore we should stand for or against any nation accordingly as its behavior tells for good or for evil in the particular crisis with which we have actually to deal. We should be friendly to all nations, and in any crisis we should judge each nation by its conduct in that crisis. We should condemn the misconduct of any nation, we should oppose its encroachments upon our rights with equal vigor, whether it be Germany, England, France, Russia or any other power, according to what it actually does on the given occasion with which we have to deal. So much for our treatment of other nations. Now for our own citizens. We represent many different race strains. Our ancestors came from many different Old World nationalities. It will spell ruin to this nation if these nationalities remain separated from one another instead of being assimilated to the new and larger Ameri- can life. The children and children's children of all of us have to live here in this land together. Our children's children will intermarry, one with another, your children's children, friends, and mine. They will be the citizens of one country. Even if they wished, they could not remain citizens of foreign countries. The attempt to keep them with a half citizenship, with a divided loyalty, split between devo- tion to the land in which they were bom and in which their children are to dwell, and the land from which their fathers came, will merely mean that they fail to remain citizens of the old-world land and yet do not get the benefit of being citizens of the new-world land. The effort to keep our citizenship divided against itself by the use of the hyphen and along the lines of national origin is certain to breed a spirit of bitterness and prejudice and dislike between great bodies of our citizens. If some citizens band together as German-Ameri- cans or Irish-Americans, then after a while others are certain to band together as English-Americans or Scandinavian-Americans and every such banding together, every attempt to make for politi- cal purposes a German-American alliance or an Irish-American alli- ance or an English-American alliance or a Scandinavian-American alliance, means down at bottom an effort against the interest of straight-out American citizenship, an effort to bring into our nation America for Americans 79 the bitter old-world rivalries and jealousies and hatreds. What I have been striving for a year and three-quarters to do is to protest against the up-growth of this utterly un-American spirit, to pro- test against the upgrowth of a spirit which means, if successful, division and impotence in our national life, the breaking up of our unity as a nation, the severance of our citizenship along the bitter lines of old-world antipathy. We cannot afford to have our chil- dren and our children's children grow up excepting as Americans pure and simple, Americans and nothing else. The Result of Divided Allegiance. If any of our people born here go back to the land from which their fathers came, they find themselves inevitably looked upon as foreigners. The American of English descent who goes to England finds himself looked upon and treated, as he ought to be, as an out- sider, a Yankee. His ways of thought are different from the ways of thought of the people of the land. The American of German descent who goes to Germany is not looked upon as a German. He is looked upon and treated as a foreigner, as an American; and his ways of thought are different from the ways of thought of the people of the land. He has gone to a land where no divided allegi- ance would for one moment be permitted, where, very properly, whoever dwells in the land is held to a sole and undivided allegiance to the German flag ; and the American of German descent who goes there either remains absolutely an outsider and an alien, an Ameri- can, or else he has to become absolutely German. If either the American of English descent or the American of German descent or the American of any other descent tries to remain with a dual alle- giance, with a divided citizenship, he merely ceases to become an American without thereby becoming a German or an Englishman or anything else. He becomes a man without a country who has forfeited the right to be stirred by the feeling of patriotic devotion to any land, or to have a special and peculiar kinship with any people. The American birthright is the birthright of all of us ; and it is a shame and a disgrace for any man to barter it for so poor a mess of pottage as is implied in that kind of hyphenated citizenship which means that the individual tries to be a half-way citizen of two lands and forfeits the right to be a whole citizen of any land. When our nation was formed in the 'stress of the Revolution, it was under the lead of men of many different race strains; English, Dutch, German, Irish, French. But they were all Americans and 80 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July nothing else. Their loyalty to this country was whole-hearted and undivided, and they sought to serve only the United States and not any of the countries from which their ancestors had come. All Nothing But Americans. The same rule applies to-day. Throughout my life my closest personal and political friends have included men who were them- selves born in, or whose ancestors were born in, Germany, Ireland or Scandinavia, just as they included men who were of old Colonial American stock. The man who, for the ten years when I was Governor, Vice-President and President, was closest to me, was a man whose father and mother were born in Germany — and his father served in the Civil War, by the way. He and I looked at all problems, national and international, from the standpoint, and only from the standpoint, of our common Americanism. The man who, when I was Police Commissioner in New York, was closest to me was born in Denmark. He is dead now. His name was Jacob Kiis. He was one of the best Americans I have ever knovwi. Again and again I have held up his career as a model for our American boys to follow. One of the best Americans I know, a man who has done better work for the navy than any one else during the last two years, is by birth a Swede. During my scien- tific work in Africa and South America, at the head of American scientific expeditions, the American members of my party included the man with whom I have been most closely associated in zoological work, and who was joint author with me of the zoological book of which I am most proud. His parents were born in Germany; his kinfolk fought in the Union Army. Another of my American com- panions, an Iowa man, was born of an Irish father who fought in the Civil War. Another's father was born in Bohemia, being a Czech, and also fought in the Civil War. Yet another, an Indiana boy, had a German father and a French mother. But we were all of us Americans, and nothing but Americans. In my cabinet a descendant of one of Blucher's colonels sat side by side with a descendant of one of Napoleon's brothers. An- other member of the cabinet had been born in Germany, and yet another member in Scotland. The parents of another member were born in Ireland. They were all of them Americans, and nothing else. If they had severally designated themselves, and had acted as, one a "German-American," another a "French-American," another an "Irish-American," another a "British-American," each condition- America for Americana 81 ing his loyalty to the United States by a hyphen, not one of them would have remained an hour in my cabinet. The greatest work done by any American in recent years was the work done by General Goethals in the Panama Canal Zone. His parents were born in Holland. But he is no more a "Dutch-American" than I am. He is an American. Among the other Army men who have been closely associated with me, Major General Barry is of Irish parentage, whereas Major General Leonard Wood's forbears came over in the Mayflower three centuries ago. But General Barry is not an "Irish- American." Nor is General Wood an "English-American." They are Americans. When the battle fleet went around the world, two of the best men aboard it were Admirals Wainwright and Schroeder. Wainwright was of old Colonial English descent, and Schroeder's parents were born in Germany. But the one was not an "English- American" or the other a "German-American." They were Ameri- cans — and incidentally, both of them were as gallant and accom- plished officers and as thorough seamen as ever commanded a squad- ron of warships under the American flag. Must Not Divide Allegiance. As another example I take an enlisted man. Throughout my term as President the doorkeeper in the Executive office, the man to whom the safety of the President and the intimate workings of the government were in a peculiar sense entrusted, was an ex-soldier of the regular army. He was by birth a German. At the outbreak of the Civil War his regiment was stationed in Texas. Some of the officers joined the Confederacy. Others were imprisoned. The enlisted men were left alone. A body of them, including my friend, marched north through the Indian country, without any officers, reached the Union lines, rejoined the army, and fought through the war. How would it be possible to find better Americans? My old friend's children and grandchildren live in this country beside my children and grandchildren. It is their country; and they all have an equal claim on it, and owe to it an equal duty. He and I fought for and under the same flag. That flag floats over our children's children. It is their flag and their only flag. It would be a wicked and a cruel thing to try to sunder them from one another and to make any of them divide their allegiance by a half-loyalty to any other flag. It would be possible to man our entire administration from 82 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July President down with men of German blood, and of such uncompro- mising Americanism that every good American could follow them with whole-hearted loyalty. I would vote to seat in the President's chair any American of German, Irish, Scandinavian or other parent- age, of whatever creed, as against any man whose ancestors came over in the Mayflower or settled on the banks of the James three centuries ago, if I thought the first man was better fitted for the position than the second man. I hold it an outrage and a viola- tion of every principle of true Americanism to discriminate against such a man because of the land from which he or his parents came, or because of his creed. But I hold it no less an outrage for him to act in our domestic politics not as an American, but as an American with a qualification; as an American who has some un-American interest to serve, some foreign country to serve, because of his an- cestry. The man who thus acts is the hyphenated American. Not An Abstract Question. This is not a mere abstract question which I am discussing. At this very moment it is blazoned forth in the public press that branches of the "German-American Alliance," so-called, in diiferent parts of the country, are attempting to coerce timid and unscrupu- lous politicians by threatening to vote against them, or by actually voting against them, when the German-American Alliance regards their action as unsatisfactory from the standpoint, not of the United States, but of Germany. These branches of the Alliance openly take the ground that they intend to shape American politics in the interests, not of the United States, but of Germany. The German- American Alliance of Pennsylvania, for instance, as reported in the public press, states that it intends to show "the leaders of the national conventions that they have to deal with a United German- American vote." Such a statement represents moral treason to the Republic. Branches of the German-American Alliance in other parts of the country have used practically the same language. The Alliance has put forth no program affecting America. The program on which it wishes American citizens to vote is one affecting Ger- many, and only Germany. I do not in the least object to it because it denounces me. It has denounced Mr. Wilson almost as often and almost as severely. One of its favorite forms of denunciation in- cludes Mr. Wilson, Mr. Root and myself, as equally to be opposed in the interest of Germany. America for Americans 83 Moral Treason. It is moral treason to the United States for any of its citizens to act and to seek to make their governmental representatives act, not with reference to the interests of the United States, but of some foreign power. The German-American Alliance is, in practice, an anti-American alliance. Any such political organization, whether German-American, Irish-American or English-American, is not a healthy element of the body politic. Any body of our citizens have a perfect right to oppose any man because of a difference of judg- ment concerning American problems provided the judgment is based purely on American needs and ideals; but it has no right to deal with American public servants, or American public men on the basis of the interests of some foreign power. The men who so act are dis- loyal- to the United States, and I would say this just as quickly of men trying to serve England or France as I say it of men trying to serve Germany. I would condemn the American citizen who acted as "English-American" just as strongly as I condemn the American citizen who acts as a "German-American." If France had subju- gated Belgium I would condemn her just as strongly as I have con- demned Germany. If British warcraft had sunk German passenger vessels and taken the lives of hundreds of American men, women and children, as German submarines did in the case of the Lusitania, the Arabic and other vessels, I would have condemned any "English- American" who excused the act as unhesitatingly as I have con- demned and now condemn the "German-Americans" who now defend or apologize for the actions of the German submarines. I would condemn as strongly the actions of any of our people who sought to make this country subservient to England as I now condemn those who seek to make it subservient to Germany. Such men are not merely un-American; they are anti-American to the core, and unfit to be citizens of this Republic. I believe that the men thus acting not only do not represent, but scandalously misrepresent the great majority of real Americans of German origin. I believe that the great mass of Americans of German origin are now, as they have always been, among the most patriotic and loyal citizens in this country. A Record of Honor and Glory. Here in this city I could repeat name after name of men of German birth who as American citizens have had distinguished 84 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July records of intense loyalty to the Union, and of eminent national service as soldiers and statesmen and above all as patriots. In the Civil War a much larger proportion of the citizens of imme- diate German origin, than of the citizens of old Colonial native stock, were loyal to the Union. This State of Missouri, like Mary- land and Kentucky, owes the fact that it stayed in the Union pri- marily to the Germant element in its citizenship; and across the river in Illinois, the debt owed by lovers of the Union to the Ger- man element was almost as great. These men knew no divided, no half-hearted loyalty. Carl Schurz was a Major General in the Army, a United States Senator, and a member of the President's cabinet. He was no more fervently devoted to the cause of the Union and freedom in the Civil War, than to the fight against po- litical corruption and against the spoils system in our political life when peace succeeded war. By a statue at Forest Park you of this city have commemorated the services of Major General Franz Sigel, who here entered the United States service. So did the after time Major General Osterhaus, whose son served under me as Admiral while I was President, and whose grandson, as gallant and efficient a young naval officer as there was in the service, served at one time as my aide. From St. Louis there marched into the Union Army no less than nine regiments, all of which had colonels born in Germany. This is a great record, and it is typical of the record made throughout the Union by the men of German birth or parentage. But it is not a matter of pride merely to Americans of German descent. Every American worth calling such thrills at the thought of it. It is a record of honor and glory for my children's children just as much as for yours. It is part of the common heritage of pride bequeathed to all who dwell in this great land of ours, to all whose single-hearted loy- alty is given to its flag that floats over all of us. In my own regiment in Cuba, among the many gallant men who served under me, were men of German birth or parentage. They served side by side with men of Irish birth or parentage, and with men of old native American stock; and they all served with equal gallantry and with equal devotion to the flag. Two of my captains were killed at the very outset. One was of old Amer- ican stock, a man whose forbears from father to son had served in the United States Army for five generations. The other was the son of an Irish immigrant who had himself fought in Mea- gher's Brigade in the Civil War. Another of my captains was America for Americans 85 bom in Germany. Yet another, who fought under me against Spain, was of almost pure Spanish descent. My orderly was the grandson of a German "forty-eighter." One of my best sergeants was born in Norway. Another was born in Italy ; and yet another was of Polish parentage. But each of these men was an American and nothing else. They all acted together as Americans. I would have driven from my regiment any man who tried to discriminate among them because of a difference in creed, or because of the different lands in which they or their forefathers were born. Their honor was my honor. We had one country. We bore proud allegiance to one flag. America For Americans. The other day in Detroit, when I spoke for universal service based on universal training, a woman in the gallery called out to me, while she waved an American flag: "I have two sons. I offer them if the need comes." I answered her: "If every mother in our country would make the same offer, there would be no need for any mother to send her sons to war." Now, from the press of the following day I saw that her name was Mrs. Anna Neuer, wife of Mr. D. M. Neuer. Her husband, judging from the name, must of course be of German ancestry. Her father fought on the Union side in the Civil War. Her two sons are not German-Americans any more than they are English-Americans or any other type of hyphenated Americans. They are Americans. That is an Amer- ican family. Mrs. Neuer represents the type of woman that we like to think of as typically American. All I am asking of our people is that they shall be Americans exactly in the sense that the Neuer family is American. The salvation of our people lies in having a nationalized and unified America, ready for the tremendous tasks of both war and peace. I appeal to all our citizens no matter from what land their forefathers came to keep this ever in mind, and to shun with scorn and contempt the sinister intriguers and mischief makers who would seek to divide them along lines of creed, of birthplace, or of national origin. I ask them to remember that there is but one safe motto for all Americans, no matter whether they were born here or abroad, no matter from what land their ancestors came; and that is the simple and loyal motto, AMERICA FOR AMER- ICANS. LETTER FROM THEODORE ROOSEVELT TO CHARLES J. BONAPARTE May 29th, 1916. My Dear Bonaparte : I thank you for your letter of May 24th. You say that there are many men not only in the Progressive Party, but in other parties, who "are seriously perplexed and concerned by reports which they now hear from different quarters that (I) have an- nounced that (I) will not be their candidate unless (I) also re- ceive the Republican nomination." As I wish to avoid anjrthing that can possibly be construed into the nature of a threat uttered by me with the design to influence the Republican National Con- vention, I shall ask you not to make this letter of mine public ; but you are entirely at liberty to show it confidentially to any of the persons of whom you speak. I have, of course, made no such announcement as that alluded to in the quotation from your letter given above. I have scrupu- lously refrained from saying whether I would or would not run if nominated only by the Progressives. The determination of that point must await the action of the Conventions in Chicago. I very earnestly hope that the Republicans will so act as to make it possible for the Progressives to join them. We might as well face the fact, however, in view of the attitude of some of the Republican leaders, that it is at least conceivable that we shall be put in a position where our highest duty, our fealty to the country, our sense of what patriotism demands in a great crisis will make it imperative upon us to run a separate ticket. Whether in such event I will head that ticket cannot be determined in advance. It, of course, might be necessary for me to do so, or on talking it over with you and my other friends who will constitute the Pro- gressive Convention, it might seem to me and to all of us inad- visable for me to do so. The decision of this point, like the whole matter of running a separate ticket, must be left for all of us to d,ecide after full consultation, in the event of things at Chicago not taking the course we earnestly hope they will take, that is, in the event of its proving impossible to persuade the Republicans to act so that the Progressives will be able to act with them. 86 Letter from Theodore Roosevelt to Charles J. Bonaparte 87 I must ask that this letter be accepted at its exact face value, and that my friends in the Progressive Convention no more pro- ceed upon the assumption that I will run, than my friends in the Republican Convention proceed upon the assumption that I will not run. My course must be determined by my belief as to what the interests of the country demand in view of the action finally taken by the Conventions at Chicago. Very truly yours, (Signed) THEODORE ROOSEVELT. CHARLES J. BONAPARTE, ESQ., 216 St. Paul Street, Baltimore, Maryland. TELEGRAM FROM THEODORE ROOSEVELT TO EX-SENATOR W. P. JACKSON ON JUNE 8, 1916 Hon. W. P. Jackson, Republican Headquarters, Chicago, 111. In answer to your telegram, I shall only say that the matter lies with the Republican Convention and if it desires me to ad- dress it I shall be glad to do so. I very earnestly hope that the Republicans and Progressives assembled at Chicago will keep steadily in mind the gravity of this crisis not only for America but for the world and the need that their action, dignity, foresight and patriotism shall rise level to the crisis. I hope that their aim will be not merely to nomi- nate a man who can be elected next November, but a man of such power, character, steadfast conviction and proved ability that, if elected, he will again place this nation where it belongs by mak- ing it true to itself and, therefore, true to all mankind. President Wilson, however amiable his intentions, has rendered to this peo- ple the most evil service that can be rendered to a great democ- racy by its chosen leader. He has dulled the national conscience and relaxed the spring of lofty, national motives by teaching our people to accept high sounding words as the offset and atonement for shabby deeds and to use words which mean nothing in order to draw all meaning from those which have a meaning. It will be no easy task to arouse the austere self-respect which has been lulled to slumber by those means. To this task we should bend our united energy, in the spirit of Washington and Lincoln, the spirit of genuine democratic leadership, the spirit which sets the standard to which the nation ought to rise and then with confident hope appeal to the soul of the people so that they may in fact sup- port the standard thus raised. The differences that have divided, not merely Republicans and Progressives, but good Americans of all shades of political belief, from one another in the past, sink into nothing when compared with the issues now demanding decision — for these issues are 88 Telegram from Theodore Roosevelt to Ex-Senator Jackson 89 vital to the national life. They are the issues of a unified Amer- icanism and of national preparedness. If we are not all of us Americans and nothing else, scorning to divide along the lines of section, of creed or of national origin, then the nation itself will crumble into dust. If we are not thoroughly prepared, if we have not developed a strength which respects the rights of others, but which is also ready to enforce from others respect for its own rights, then sooner or later we shall have to submit to the will of an alien conqueror. These questions are not in the realm of abstract thought. They must be taken out of the world of cloudy promise and vague phrasing into the world of performance and of fact. They are to-day in concrete form before you and your fellows for de- cision. For two years, in the face of the awful world cataclysm, this Nation has stood supine and helpless and has not in the smallest degree prepared itself to ward off the danger. No prom- ise, no excuse now made by those responsible for this inaction, is entitled to consideration. It is for you and your associates to show the people that they have a worthy alternative to which to turn. The professional German-Americans, acting through various agencies, including so-called German-American alliances, are at this moment serving notice on the members of your Convention that your action must be taken with a view to the interest, not of the United States, but of Germany and of that section of the Ger- man-American vote which is anti-American to the core. I believe with all my heart that the action of these sinister, professional German-Americans will be repudiated with angry contempt by the great mass of our fellow citizens who are in whole or in part of German blood — and who are, as I well know, unsurpassed in rugged and whole-souled Americanism by any other citizens of our land. But the professional German-Americans are seeking to terrorize your convention ; for they wish to elect next November a man who shall not be in good faith an American President, but the viceroy of a foreign government. It is for your convention in emphatic fashion to repudiate them. This can be done in effect- ive manner only if such action is taken as to enable the Repub- licans, the Progressives, and the Democrats who are true to the principles of Andrew Jackson and independent — in short, all loyal Americans — ^to join in the effort to reach the goal we all have in view. 90 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July Can we not, forgetting past differences, now join for the safety and honor of our country to enforce the policies of genuine Amer- icanism and genuine preparedness? Surely we can afford to act in accordance with the words of Abraham Lincoln when he said, "May not all, having a common interest, reunite in a common effort to save our common country? May we ask those who have not differed with us to join in the same spirit toward those who have?" As far as my own soul is known to me, it is in this same spirit that at this time I make my appeal to the Republicans and Pro- gressives assembled at Chicago. THEODOEE ROOSEVELT. PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL PLATFORM— 1916 This is the year of decision for the nation's future. As we now decide, so we shall go forward in righteousness and power or backward in degradation and weakness. Of necessity, we deal with the foundations of our national life. We are facing elemental facts of force, of right and wrong, of extreme national peril. Our present choice of path will be irre- vocable. The tradition of isolation has been ended. The United States is now part of a world's system of civilization. We stand or fall as we prepare now to take our part in peace or war and hold our own therein. As members of an international community, we are subject to certain basic duties: To secure the rights and equal treatment of our citizens, native or naturalized, on land and sea, without regard to race, creed or nativity. To guard the honor and uphold the just influence of our nation. To maintain the integrity of international law. These are the corner-stones of civilization. We must be strong to defend them. The present war shows that it is the supreme duty of civili- zation to create conditions which will make for permanent peace. We earnestly desire to keep the peace, but there are higher things which we must keep if we would keep the faith as Washington and Lincoln kept it. Peace at the price of submission and cowardice is not desirable, nor is it the peace of justice which alone would make it permanent. Supine submission to the invasion of our rights or indifference to the wrongs of weaker nations will not long maintain peace, nor will mere threat of action enforce our rights under international law. There must be an unfaltering determination and a prepared ability to defend our rights and to fulfill our international obligations. In such a readiness lies the surest safeguard of both national honor and continued peace. Failure to deal firmly and promptly with the menace of Mexican disorders and threatened violations of the rights of our citizens on the high seas have resulted in the wanton murder of our citi- zens and in the tragic weakening of our national self-respect. 91 92 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July Whatever our country can legitimately do to attain peace for war-stricken Europe, and to aid in the procurement of equal rights without discrimination because of race or creed to all men in all lands, should be done. We should not conclude a treaty with any country that will not expressly secure to American citizens such absolute rights. Adequate provision for the common defense has become the task of foremost national concern. We must be ready, in spirit, arms and industry. Beneath the structure of military and economic strength there must be a unified spirit of this cosmopolitan people, a deep loyalty and undivided allegiance to America, the land which has wel- comed us and our immigrant forefathers. Back of any adequate national preparedness in arms or industry, must remain the demo- cratic soul of an undivided people, determined to keep America's great heritage and traditions unfalteringly in first place. Amer- ican problems must be faced and solved solely in the light oi American ideals. American political action must be taken in the service of American ends. Unwavering patriotism and unfalter- ing fidelity to America is the only spirit which should animate our citizens. If in this melting-pot of a hundred nations, the children of any fail to find our common destiny worthy of common devotion and defense, we shall suffer irreparably in the loss of national character. In this spirit of Americanism, action must be taken for the common defense. Preparation in arms requires: A navy restored to at least second rank in battle efficiency. A regular army of 250,000 men, fully armed and trained, as a first line of land defense. A system of military training adequate to organize with promptness, behind that first line of the army and navy, a citizen soldiery, supplied, armed and controlled by the National Govern- ment. In our democracy, every citizen is charged with the duty of defending our country. This duty is not new. It has existed from the foundation of the government. Under modern condi- tions it cannot be performed without military training; service without training means slaughter and disaster. As the nation has always recognized and exercised the right to enforce compul- sory military service in time of war, so should there be universal military training for that service during times of peace. Progressive National Platform — 1916 93 We believe in preparedness for defense, but never for aggres- sion. We must not sacrifice the lives of men for the glory or gain of military conquest. And we believe that the women of the coun- try, who share with men the burdens of government in time of peace and make equal sacrifice in time of war, should be given full political right of suffrage, both by Federal and State action. Arms alone cannot maintain a nation. Of far greater perma- nent importance must stand a national industry efficient for the general welfare, a prosperity justly distributed, a national life organized in all points for national ends. Four years ago this party was born of a nation's awakened sense of these fundamental truths. In the platform then adopted we set forth our position on public questions. We here reaffirm the declarations there made on national issues. A nation to survive must stand for the principles of social and industrial justice. We have no right to expect continued loyalty from an oppressed class. We must remove the artificial causes of the high cost of living, prevent the exploitation of men, women and children in industry, by the extension of the Workmen's Com- pensation Law to the full limit permitted under the Constitution, and by a thorough-going child-labor law; protect the wage earner; and by a properly regulated system of rural credits encourage the farmer and give to the landless man opportunity to acquire land. A country must be worth living in to be worth fighting for. To make possible social justice, to maintain our position in peace and war, we must insure business and industrial prosperity. This can be done: By a regulation of industry aimed at promoting its growth and prosperity, a just distribution of its returns; and a healthy expansion of foreign trade. By a conservation and development of our national re- sources for the good of all. By the re-establishment of our merchant marine. By the development of a system of interstate national high- ways. By making a new standard of governmental efficiency through a complete civil service system, a national budget, and the destruction of "pork barrel" legislation. By the creation of a permanent, expert tariff commission with a view to intelligently and scientifically adjusting the tariff so as to build up rather than destroy American industry 94 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July The protective system is essential to our national prosperity. Tremendous new pressures will be thrown upon our industries after the war by the highly mobilized production of Europe. At all times conditions of competition must be equalized between our own and foreign countries. We can only get the protection we need through the Use of exact and complete knowledge, unaflPected by prejudice or politics. We can secure that knowledge, at all times and when needed, only through such a commission. The industrial issues are chiefly national. The present and certain future make it imperative that the regulation and promo- tion of industry, and especially of transportation and foreign trade, be national, not local. Only Federal power can work jus- tice to capital and labor throughout the nation. Only national authority can mobilize industry for defense as the nation's need demands it. We have set forth in this platform plain essentials of national existence. They are not new in principle. Most men agree with them. Any man may propose them. The urgent and immediate need is for their performance. We have had ample experience with the promiser; with words and the bitter taste of words re- tracted. We must choose a man, who, not alone by words but by past deeds, gives guarantee that he can and will make these things good. The issue is one of men. In the midst of world changes unparalleled in history, we cannot forecast the problems which will confront our government during the war and at its end. We therefore need as President a leader who knows the nations — a man who acts. If we continue longer to stand for words as above deeds, for fancies as above facts, we shall receive and merit the fate that surely awaits the man or people who do not face the truth. We will meet and work with any man or party who sees the nation's need, and puts forward a leader fit to meet it. We will accept no less, in plan or in the man, and we solemnly charge upon any who place partisan politics above country the responsibility for a nation's future, sacrificed to self-interest and spoils. RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE PROGRES- SIVE NATIONAL CONVENTION, JUNE 10, 1916 Resolved, That the National Committee is empowered to fill any vacancies that may occur on the ticket. LETTER FROM THEODORE ROOSEVELT TO THE PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL COMMITTEE To the Progressive National Committee: Gentlemen — In accordance with the message I sent to the Pro- gressive National Convention as soon as 1 had received the notifi- cation that it had nominated me for President, I now communi- cate to you my reasons for declining the honor which I so deeply appreciate. Since the adjournment of the Convention, I have re- ceived between two and three thousand letters and telegrams from men who had supported me for the nomination, the majority ex- pressing the desire that I would refuse to run, while a minority urged that I should accept the nomination. As it is a physical impossibility to answer these letters and telegrams individually, I beg of the courtesy of the senders that they will accept this pub- lic statement in lieu of such answers. Before speaking of anything else, I wish to express my heartiest and most unstinted admiration for the character and services of the men and women who made up the Progressive National Con- vention in 1916. I can give them no higher praise than to say that in all respects they stood level with the men and women who in 1912 joined at Chicago to found the Progressive Party. These two conventions, in character, in disinterestedness, in vision, in insight, in high purpose, and in desire to render practical service to the people, typified exactly what such bodies ought to be in a great self-governing democracy. They represented the spirit which moved Abraham Lincoln and his political associates during the decade preceding the close of the Civil War. The platform put forth in 1912 was much the most important public document promulgated in this country since the death of Abraham Lincoln. It represented the first effort on a large scale to translate abstract formulas of economic and social justice into concrete American Nationalism; the effort to apply the principles of Washington and Lincoln to the need of the United States in the twentieth century. No finer effort was ever made to serve the American people, in a spirit of high loyalty to all that is loftiest in the American tra- dition. 96 Letter from Theodore Roosevelt to Prog. Nat. Committee 97 Events have shown that the Progressive Party in 1912 offered the only alternative to the triumph of the Democratic Party. Moreover, these events have shown that the application of the principles which we then advocated is even more necessary to this nation than we at the time supposed. The results of the terrible world war of the past two years have now made it evident to all who are willing to see, that in this country there must be spiritual and industrial preparedness, along the lines of efficiency, of loyal service to the Nation, and of prac- tical application of the precept that each man must be his brother's keeper. Furthermore, it is no less evident that this preparedness for the tasks of peace forms the only sound basis for that indis- pensable military preparedness which rests on universal military training, and which finds expression in universal obligatory serv- ice in time of war. Such universal obligatory training and service are the necessary complement of universal suffrage, and represent the realization of the true American, the democratic, ideal in both peace and war. Sooner or later the national principles championed by the Progressives of 1912 must in their general effect be embodied in the structure of our national existence. With all my heart I shall continue to work for these great ideals, shoulder to shoulder with the men and women who in 1912 championed them; and I am sure that these men and women will show a like loyalty to the other, the fundamental, ideals which the events of the past two years have proven to be vital to the permanency of our national exist- ence. The method by which we are to show our loyalty to these ideals must be determined in each case by the actual event. Our loyalty is to the fact, to the principle, to the ideal, and not merely to the name, and least of all to the party name. The Progressive movement has been given an incalculable impetus by what the Progressive Party has done. Our strongest party antagonists have accepted and enacted into law, or embod- ied in their party platforms, very many of our most important principles. Much has been accomplished in awakening the public to a better understanding of the problems of social and industrial welfare. Yet it has become entirely evident that the people under ex- isting conditions are not prepared to accept a new party. It is impossible for us Progressives to abandon our convic- tions. But we are faced with the fact that as things actually are 98 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July the Pro^essive national organization no longer offers the means whereby we can make these convictions effective in our national life. Under such circumstances, our duty is to do the best we can, and not to sulk because our leadership is rejected. That we ourselves continue to believe that the course we advocated was in the highest interest of the American people is aside from the question. It is unpatriotic to refuse to do the best possible merely because the people have not put us in position to do what we re- gard as the very best. It remains for us, good humoredly and with common sense, to face the situation and endeavor to get out of it the best that it can be made to yield from the standpoint of the interests of the nation as a whole. That was the situation at the opening of the present year. It was clearly evident that unless a cataclysm occurred the presi- dential election would result in the choice of either the Republican or the Democratic nominee. The present administration, during its three years of life, had been guilty of shortcomings more sig- nal than those of any administration since the days of Buchanan. From the standpoint of national honor and interest, it stood on an even lower level than the administration of Buchanan. No administration in our history had done more to relax the spring of the national will and to deaden the national conscience. Within the Republican Party conflicting forces were at work. There were men among the organization leaders who advocated a course of action such as offered no improvement upon the Democratic po- sition, and advocated the nomination of candidates whose election would have represented no improvement upon the continuance in office of Mr. Wilson. If such a course were followed, it would obviously become our duty to run a third ticket. But it was plainly our duty to do everything honorable in order to prevent such a necessity; to do everything short of sacrificing our most sacred convictions in order to secure the alignment under one leadership of the forces opposed to the continuance in power of Mr. Wilson and the Democratic Party. Under these circumstances the Progressive National Commit- tee, at Chicago, in January, outlined our duty to seek common action with the Republican Party, using the following words: "Our people are seeking leadership — leadership of the highest order and most courageous character; leadership that will draft to itself for the country's benefit the unselfish and patriotic serv- ices of its ablest citizens. The surest way to secure for our Letter from Theodore Roosevelt to Prog. Nat. Committee 99 country the required leadership will be by having, if possible, both the Progressive and Eepublican Parties choose the same standard bearer and the same principles." Six weeks later, on March 9th, in my Trinidad statement, I asked for a similar combination against the Democratic Party, on a platform of "clean-cut, straightout National Americanism," and for a candidate "who will not merely stand for such a programme before election, but will resolutely and in good faith put it through if elected." This was, in effect, the same statement that I made in my tel- egram to ex-Senator Jackson, pending the Convention, which ran in part as follows : "Can we not, forgetting past differences, now join, for the safety and honor of our country, to enforce the poli- cies of genuine Americanism and genuine Preparedness? Surely we can afford to act in accordance with the words of Abraham Lincoln when he said, 'May not all having a common interest re- unite in a common effort to save our common country? May we ask those who have not differed with us to join in this same spirit toward those who have?' As far as my own soul is known to me it is in this same spirit that at this time I make my appeal to the Republicans and Progressives assembled at Chicago." In addition to these public statements I had also stated my own attitude verbally, and in letters, during the weeks immedi- ately preceding the convention, to scores of leading Progressives from all parts of the country, including many of the leaders at the convention. To these men I expressed my earnest hope that the Republicans would so act as to make it possible for the Pro- gressives to join with them. I stated to them, however, that in view of the attitude of some of the Republican leaders it was at least conceivable that we should be put in a position where our highest duty, our fealty to the country, our sense of what patriot- ism demanded in a great crisis would make it imperative upon us to run a separate ticket ; and that whether in such event it would be necessary for me to head that ticket could not be determined in advance. I stated in these interviews and in these letters, with the utmost emphasis, that the decision of this point, like the whole matter of running a separate ticket, would have to be determined by what the interests of the country demanded in view of the ac- tion finally taken by the Conventions at Chicago. At the time many of the Republican leaders asserted that my statements were not made in good faith; that I really intended 100 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July to insist upon my own nomination by the Kepublican Convention ; and that if I was not so nominated, I intended to accept the Pro- gressive nomination and run on a third ticket. Of course my fellow Progressives were under no such error. They knew that I spoke in good faith and meant exactly what I said. They knew that my utterances were to be accepted at their exact face value as meaning that if the Eepublicans nominated a man whom we could conscientiously support we would support him. The Pro- gressive Convention came together knowing my public statements and therefore knowing exactly what my attitude was. In my judgment, the nomination of Mr. Hughes meets the con- ditions set forth in the statement of the Progressive National Committee, issued last January, and in my own statements. Under existing conditions, the nomination of a third ticket would, in my judgment, be merely a move in the interest of the election of Mr. Wilson. I regard Mr. Hughes as a man whose public record is a guarantee that "he will not merely stand for a programme of clean-cut straightout Americanism before election, but will reso- lutely and in good faith put it through if elected." He is beyond all comparison better fitted to be President than Mr. Wilson. It would be a grave detriment to the country to re-elect Mr. Wilson. I shall, therefore, strongly support Mr. Hughes. Such being the case, it is unnecessary to say that I cannot accept the nomination on a third ticket. I do not believe that there should be a third ticket. I believe that when my fellow Progressives coolly con- sider the question they will for the most part take this position. They and I have but one purpose — the purpose to serve our com- mon country. It is my deep conviction that at this moment we can serve it only by supporting Mr. Hughes. It is urged against Mr. Hughes that he was supported by the various so-called German-American Alliances. I believe that the attitude of these professional German-Americans was due, not in the least to any liking for Mr. Hughes, but solely to their antago- nism to me. They were bound to defeat me for the nomination. The only way by which they could achieve this object was by sup- porting Mr. Hughes and they supported him accordingly, without any regard to other considerations. I need hardly repeat what I have already said in stern reprobation of this professional Ger- man-American element — the element typified by the German- American Alliances and the similar bodies, which have, in the pre-nomination campaign, played not merely an un-American but Letter from Theodore Roosevelt to Prog. Nat. Committee 101 a thoroughly anti-American part. These men have nothing in common with the great body of Americans who are in whole or in part of German blood; and who are precisely as good Americans as those of any other ancestry. There are not, and never have been, in all our land, better citizens than the great mass of the men and women of German birth or descent who have been or are being completely merged in our common American nationality; a nationality distinct from any in Europe, for Americans who are good Americans are no more German-Americans than they are English-Americans, or Irish-Americans, or Scandinavian-Ameri- cans. They are Americans and nothing else. No good Ameri- can, whatever his ancestry or creed, can have any feeling except scorn and detestation for those professional German-Americans who seek to make the American President in effect a viceroy of the German Emperor. The professional German-Americans of this type are acting purely in the sinister interest of Germany. They have shown their eager readiness to sacrifice the interest of the United States whenever its interest conflicted with that of Germany. They represent that adherence to the politico-racial hyphen which is the badge and sign of moral treason to the Ke- public. I have singled these men out for specific denunciation, and assuredly if I support a candidate it may be accepted as proof that I am certain that the candidate is incapable of being in- fluenced by the evil intrigues of these hyphenated Americans. Mr. Hughes' character and his whole course of conduct in public affairs justify us in the assured conviction that the fact that these men have for their own purposes supported him will, in no shape or way, affect his public actions before or after elec- tion. His entire public life is a guarantee of this. The events of the last three and a half years have shown that as much cannot be said for Mr. Wilson. In Mr. Wilson's case we do not have to consider his words, but his deeds. His deeds absolutely contradict his words; and for the matter of that his words absolutely contradict one another. It is folly to pay heed to any of the promises in the platform on which he now stands in view of the fact that almost every important promise contained in the platform on which he stood four years ago has since been broken. We owe all of our present trouble with the professional German-American element in the United States to Mr. Wilson's timid and vacillating course during the last two years. The de- fenders of Mr. Wilson have alleged in excuse for him that he con- 102 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July fronted a difficult situation. As regards Mexico, the situation which Mr. Wilson confronted was nothing like as difficult as that which President McKinley confronted in connection with Cuba and the Philippines at the time of the Spanish War. Under the actual circumstances we could with only a minimum of risk have protested on behalf of Belgium, a small, well-behaved nation, when she was exposed to the last extremity of outrage by the brutal violation of her neutral rights ; this violation being itself a violation of the Hague Conventions to which we were a signatory power. As regards the foreign situation generally during the great war, the fact of the existence of the war made it far easier and safer for Mr. Wilson to assert our rights than if he had had to deal with some single strong power which was at the time un- hampered by war. During the past twenty years questions have arisen with Powers of the first rank, such as England, Japan and Germany, each of which has necessitated far greater courage, res- olution and judgment on the part of the President dealing with it than President Wilson need have shown in order to put a com- plete stop to the continually repeated murder of American men, women and children on the high seas by German submarines — ^the Lusltania being merely the worst of many such cases. The same feebleness that was shown by President Wilson in dealing with Germany abroad was also shown by him in dealing with the or- ganized German outrages within our own land, and, finally, in dealing with the organized German-American vote. The continued existence of the German-American menace at home is directly due to Mr. Wilson's course of action during the past two years. Certain of my friends who feel that the Progressives should run a third ticket base their feeling on objection to the character or actions of the Republican National Convention. As regards this point, it is sufficient to say that the members of the Repub- lican National Convention were unquestionably induced to nomi- nate Mr. Hughes primarily because of the belief that his integrity and force of character, and his long record of admirable public service, would make him peculiarly acceptable, not only to the rank and file of the Republican Party, but to the people generally. I do not believe that Mr. Hughes would have been nominated if it had not been for the fight on behalf of public decency and effi- ciency which the Progressive Party has waged during the past four years. In any event, and without any regard to what the personal Letter from Theodore Roosevelt to Prog. Nat. Committee 103 feelings of any of us may be as regards the action of the Repub- lican Convention, I wish very solemnly to ask the representatives of the Progressive Party to consider at this time only the welfare of the people of the United States. We shall prove false to our ideals and our professions if, in this grave crisis of the Nation's life, we permit ourselves to be swerved from the one prime duty of serving with cool judgment and single-minded devotion the Nation's needs. Our own political fortunes, individually and col- lectively, are of no consequence whatever, when compared with the honor and welfare of the people of the United States. Such things do not count when weighed in the balance against our duty to serve well the country in which, after we are dead, our children and our children's children are to live. The world is passing through a great crisis and no man can tell what trial and jeopardy will have to be faced by this nation during the years immediately ahead. There is now no longer be- fore us for decision the question as to what particular man we may severally most desire to see at the head of the government. We can decide only whether during these possibly vital years this country shall be entrusted to the leadership of Mr. Hughes or Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson has been tried and found wanting. His party, be- cause of its devotion to the outworn theory of state rights, and because of its reliance upon purely sectional support, stands against that spirit of far-sighted nationalism which is essential if we are to deal adequately with our gravest social and industrial problems. Mr. Wilson and his party have in actual practice la- mentably failed to safeguard the interest and honor of the United States. They have brought us to impotence abroad and to divi- sion and weakness at home. They have accustomed us to see the highest and most responsible offices of government filled by incom- petent men appointed only for reasons of partisan politics. They have dulled the moral sense of the people. They have taught us that peace, the peace of cowardice and dishonor and indifference to the welfare of others, is to be put above righteousness, above the stern and unflinching performance of duty whether the duty is pleasant or unpleasant. Yet in Mexico they have failed even to secure the peace which they thus sought; and they have failed in spite of the most ample opportunity and most ample warning, to prepare in any real fashion to meet the crisis which their own policy invited. They have taught us to put "safety first," safety 104 The Progressive Party — Its Record from Jamuiry to July before duty and honor; to put that materialism which expresses itself in mere money making, and in the fatted ease of life, above all spiritual things, above all the high and iine instincts of the soul. They have taught us to accept adroit elocution as a sub- stitute for straightforward and efficient action. They have raised indecision, hesitancy and vacillation into a settled governmental policy. Mr. Hughes has shown in his career the instinct of efficiency which will guarantee that, under him, the government will once more work with vigor and force. He possesses that habit of straightforward thinking which means that his words will be cor- related with his deeds and translated into facts. His past career is the warrant for our belief that he will be the unfaltering oppo- nent of that system of invisible government which finds expres- sion in the domination of the party boss and the party machine. His past career is a guarantee that whatever he says before elec- tion will be made good by his acts after election. Morally, his public record shows him to be a man of unbending integrity; in- tellectually, it shows him to be a man of original and trained ability. We have the alternative of continuing in office an admin- istration which has proved a lamentable failure, or of putting into office an administration which we have every reason to believe will function with efficiency for the interest and honor of all our people. I earnestly bespeak from my fellow Progressives their ungrudging support of Mr. Hughes. Yours truly, THEODORE ROOSEVELT. Sagamore Hill, June 22, 1916. SPEECH OF RAYMOND ROBINS AT THE MEET- ING OF THE PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL COMMITTEE, JUNE 26, 1916 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee: I do not know what claim I may have as a Progressive. I am at the present time a Progressive. I believe I have been such for four years. I believe I am one of the persons who have steadily contrib- uted money to keep the enterprise going, who have spoken in States where there was difficulty in getting an audience for the cause, and so went steadily on up to the last Convention. I think that any suggestion that the last Convention was not handled fairly is false. I think that any statement that there was not a motion made for its adjournment or that it was not fairly put is false. The record will declare. When the announcement came to me that Colonel Koosevelt had given a practical declination, but not an absolute declination, my first thought was that inasmuch as Justice Hughes' statement had not satisfied me, and it might not satisfy a great many Progressives, that a later hearing might settle the matter, and that Colonel Roose- velt might be persuaded to run. I did not know but that some Progressive who was on the ground and who was ready to make the fight, and had the right to make it, because of his national position, such as Mr. Murdock, or Gifford Pinchot, might be nominated, and it might be well to make the race. I felt that we should complete our ticket. I felt that we should give an earnest to those men and women of that Convention that there were men and women ready to fight, that that earnest would be a good thing, as far as the Colonel was concerned, and that it would be a better thing in so far as any other candidate might be concerned. I am responsible, and solely responsible, for the raising of the money in that Convention. I did it honestly, believing it was the fairest thing for the Progressives of this country. I have no apol- ogy to make for it. Any one who wishes to discuss it or question it is free to do so. When the Convention had finished its work, my first duty was to 105 106 The Progressive Party — Its Record from Jamiary to July go to see the Colonel, as I thought, and find out what his final judg- ment was. I went and saw him. In company with the National Committeeman from this State, an ex-Republican, a man who has been sincere and faithful, and has carried the load in Illinois, a man who made this county by efficient organization — ^the greatest in- dustrial community in this nation — Progressive in 1912 by 36,000 majority over both Taft and Wilson, I went with him and we saw Colonel Eoosevelt. It was perfectly clear that his mind was made up, that he believed that the national crisis was such that Mr. Hughes ought to be elected, and that Mr. Hughes would answef the preparedness, Americanism and progressive demands of our party. In that judgment I did not agree. I then dissented, and I now dissent. At this hour, if I had to vote or declare my sentiments, I should declare for Woodrow Wilson and vote for him. I say that because I have not determined where I shall stand. I shall wait until the evidence is all in. My first declaration to myself when that convention had the message of Theodore Roosevelt before it was this: "Go slow, old boy. You are up against a real situation. Don't make a statement until three things have happened: First, until Mr. Roosevelt has made another statement; second, until the Democratic Convention has made up its platform and nominated its candidate; and, third, until Mr. Hughes has given a statement of his principles and his policy to the American people, which I do not consider has come to the American people in his statement, after his nomination." After talking with Colonel Roosevelt, I then wanted to see what there might be of leadership and resources for a continuous progres- sive movement that would be vital, honest, sincere and not con- temptible, not a mere faction futilely making a noise in spots. I went to the next recognized leader of this party so far as I am con- cerned, Hiram Johnson, of California, a man who has made a greater sacrifice in political power than any other man, a greater political sacrifice than any other man, except John M. Parker, of Louisiana. He had won in a day when all of us went down into defeat. I was a "last ditcher" in 1914. I took what was coming. I did not complain. We had nothing to complain of in our record, so far, in Illinois. I went to Hiram Johnson, and said: "What is the situation?" And he said, "It is not quite clear," but, he said, "Robins, under all the circumstances, it seems that we have to go back into the Republican Party in California, and that will be my action, I think." Speech of Raymond Robins 107 We talked it over. I said, "What about a third party in this situa- tion? Can we get enough votes? Can you get enough votes in California to keep this thing alive, so that it is a real, vital force, that -wni advance our principles instead of making them phrases?" And he said, he feared not. I then went to Gifford Pinchot. Gifford Pinchot, to my mind, is as free and as forthright in this situation as any man in the party. I said to him, "What about Pennsylvania?" He said, "Robins, under the circumstances, in this national crisis, I am con- vinced that our duty is to, and that we shall, go back into the Repub- lican Party, in Pennsylvania, and that will be the answer of nearly all of our group." I then went to Mr. Garfield and talked with him. He said that in his judgment that was the inevitable situation. I then talked with Mr. Ickes. A convention or conference was called here of some 300 Progressives in the State of Illinois, and their sentiment was about 70 to 30 that they would go back into the Republican Party. I stated in each one of these conferences that probably I should support Mr. Wilson. It became, to my mind, a clear conviction that the carrying forward of the Pro- gressive Party as a third party, and on a third ticket, would sim- ply be the continuation of a faction; that it would be swept away, so far as any real service to the country, or any real power, was concerned. But, I thought the Progressive Party might do another thing. That it might keep the splendidly efficient and earnest group of men in this country from their proper places of service in the vital chan- nels of American public life, and I thought that that would be a misfortune. For myself, I saw before me a separation from my friends of four years. I came from the Democratic Party. I was a Progres- sive Democrat. I fought fourteen years in that party for Pro- gressive principles, and with small returns, and yet I felt that on the whole, based on Wilson's administration, that I would support him in the final issue. I said this to myself: "Beware, Robins, of taking some adventitious advantage out of your association with these men who are normally Republicans and can probably only function in the Republican Party, and if you and Colonel Parker and the other men go to the Democratic Party, then go with clean hands, go after you have done the best you can to put back into the perma- nent current of American public life the men who have trusted 108 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July you, the men who have worked with you, placing them back where they can work most effectually for the future welfare of the American people." Mr. Chairman, I feel that if I were designing to perpetuate a paper organization of the Progressive Party, if I were designing to create faction, and publicity, that might aid adventitiously some candidacy outside of this room, I should take the occasion of nom- inating as a candidate of the Progressive Party a man who is on the high seas between here and China whose refusal cannot come back for quite a period of time. Mr. Chairman, if I wanted to prevent the better public spirit of free men who have trusted me, and with whom I have worked, as- serting itself, I would then seek to ally myself with the Democratic Party surreptitiously, and then I would seek to force a third nom- ination, that I myself later on would not support, and I would leave the party hamstrung with public men of possible service outside the current of public work, in a great hour of national and international crisis. I conceive my duty to be otherwise. I conceive that when the time comes to endorse Mr. Hughes in this Committee, I shall probably vote no. I conceive though that at this time, and until this formal action has been taken, I must, in good faith, absolutely remain free to do the thing that needs to be done, and as at every turn in life, try to be honest and sincere, not for my personal polit- ical advantage, not for the purpose of claiming that I was able to do so and so in the Progressive National Committee at Chicago, but, rather, that I lost whatever advantage I might gain — I lost the friendship of sincere friends, and so acted that I could face myself ten years hence, and say : "Robins, you did your duty." There are questions of good faith and sincerity among men that outweigh all advantages of the hour. I am not seeking personal advantages in this struggle. I am accustomed to strenuous fight- ing. I am accustomed to friction; but I am not accustomed to being called a liar by a gentleman whom I have respected in the past. There is now in this room and this hour a time of judgment that some of us will look back upon in the years to come. If I go to Woodrow Wilson, as I believe I shall, I want to do the utmost I can for his success, and I shall do it, parting frankly with my friends of the past four years in the main. But, let us not do here some- Speech of Raymond Robins 109 thing that leaves us baffled and helpless, something that presumes a thing that does not exist. When men ask us are our principles less true than they were in 1912, we answer no. But the instru- mentality to force forward those principles has fundamentally changed. In 1912 we were burdened by the quality of the Demo- cratic nomination. In 1916 we are burdened by the personal char- acter and quality of the Republican candidate, and in this crisis that is now confronting the nation, a third ticket under these conditions seems to me to mean that the third ticket would be simply a center of contention, simply a waste of political force, and leadership, and power, in an hour of action needing every citizen and calling for all the force and brains and leadership that we have. But, if the Pro- gressives in this responsible group, I mean if the majority of the group in this room, with Hiram Johnson represented by Chester Rowell, and Gifford Pinchot represented by William Flinn, or, if he is not represented by William Flinn, by William Draper Lewis, if they say on the whole they want a third ticket and will fight for it, I will pledge myself for six months, to speak every day, where it will be thought that I shall be most helpful, and I will now con- tribute $5,000 to support the nominee of this body, if that is deemed a wise thing to do. But I don't believe it is. Why do I not believe it? When men say that Theodore Roosevelt has abandoned the people of the country or has thrown aside Progressive principles, I think it is untrue. The Progressive voters of 1912 abandoned Theo- dore Roosevelt and the Progressive Party. The people of the United States, in 1914, decided that in time of industrial depression they would fall back into the old order, believing that the two-party system of the nation was the only way to get results, by throwing the Democrats out. They said, "We Progressives have got to vote the Republican ticket," and that took place all over the country. One might say that in the State of Illinois my candidacy was adven- titious. It may be, but 203,000 men went into the ditch with me, notwithstanding that. But this could not be said of Murdock in Kansas. Murdock was the superman of Kansas, Murdock was the idol of his people; Murdock has all the qualifications of the success- ful, practical politician of the front ranks with genius and sincerity added. Victor Murdock had just the nomination that he wanted. He called me into the State of Kansas. They forced Henry J. Allen to accept the candidacy for Governor, assuring him that he would win. Mr. Allen hesitated. We stumped the State. We broughl into the Topeka Convention the strength that nominated Henry J. 110 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July Allen. He said, "Now, if Curtis can be nominated, I am certain to win." Victor Murdock had everything that he desired. What hap- pened? Victor Murdock was overwhelmingly beaten, and the reac- tionary Curtis was in the saddle. That was Kansas, the prairie State; Kansas, the historic free State; Kansas, the revolutionary State. Down in Indiana, ran Albert J. Beveridge. If you don't like the fiery Progressive Murdock, the man who has always been kicking, then take a man who has been most of the time regular, take a man of great skill and power, of great ability, a man who had been some- body under the old regime, and run him in the State of Indiana. They did run Beveridge, and he was overwhelmingly beaten. Take the case in Pennsylvania, with its magnificent organization well financed, with a splendid paper back of it, like the Philadelphia North American, with Van Valkenburgh, and there the nominee is overwhelmingly defeated by Penrose. Gentlemen of this Committee, the people of the United States have decided, whether for good or ill, that they are going to work out the future destiny of the American Nation within the lines of the two old parties, the Democratic or the Republican, for our time at least. Now, then, we are in a time of crisis. No man in this room who has had a place in American politics in the last years but knows that this is a tinie of crisis. The idea that there is a great differ- ence between Mr. Hughes and Mr. Wilson is not the important point. What I do want is this, that the men who in the nature of things ought to be in the Republican Party, and who have to work, if they work at all, through that party, I want them to work there, in this hour of crisis. And the men who in the nature of things should be in the Democratic Party, who are going to line up there for the struggle, I want them to line up there like men, and fight this battle to a conclusion, without fraud or sham or baffling issues, or candidacies that prevent the real expression of the purpose of the American people, in one of its supreme hours. Gentlemen of this Committee, we will vote down the nomination of Victor Murdock, and then, if there is in this room a Progressive, sincere and true, of real national proportion, who is ready to lead these people, then let him be nominated. But if not, do not let us be hung up for a long period of time. Let us take the action that is best for the country. I don't know what it is. I don't know whether there is any man in this room who knows what it is. But Speech of Raymond Robins 111 in fair discussion, honest, frank and manly, we can, in this hour, prevent foolish, wasteful, side and cross eddies and currents in American public life, we can honestly take sides and fight the issue, believing that in thus meeting the growing need of our America, we shall not wholly fail." SPEECH OF JAMES R. GARFIELD AT THE MEET- ING OF THE PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL COMMITTEE, JUNE 26th, 1916 Mr. Chairman, whatever may have been the purpose in the pres- entation of the name of Victor Murdock, we need not consider it. It brings us face to face with the proposition that must be answered by this Committee. It is my personal belief that Mr. Murdock will not, or would not, if he were here, permit his name to be presented for consideration. But that does not avoid the necessity of answer- ing the question that has been presented by this method of pro- cedure. I yield to no one in my appreciation of all that Victor Murdock has done for the Progressive cause. And because of my high appre- ciation of that work, I should vote against placing Victor Murdock's name on the Progressive ticket, as our candidate for President, as I should vote against placing the name of any Progressive upon the Progressive ticket for that office. And why? I want you gentlemen here to realize the circum- stances that have brought about the condition that we are facing to-day. In January of this year our Committee met in Chicago and gave to the public the January statement with which you are all familiar. It is well, now, in the heat of discussion to-day, to remember what the Progressives accepted as their line of conduct in January, 1916. The language was this: "We call the National Convention of the Progressive Party to assemble at Chicago at the same time the National Conven- tion of the Republican Party is to assemble there. We take this action, believing that the surest way to secure for our country the required leadership will be by having, if possible, both Republican and Progressive parties choose the same standard-bearer and adopt the same principles. We are confi- dent that the rank and file of the Republican Party and the very large independent vote of this country will support such an effort." Now, upon that statement, and that statement alone, the Pro- 112 Speech of James R. Garfield 113 gressives in this country went forward in their campaign, prior to the Convention. During the six months, what developed? Mr. Roosevelt was our avowed candidate, believing as we all believed that no man in this country so represents what the people of this country are aspiring toward in this great crisis. We tried to live up to and we did live up to the January state- ment. Mr. Roosevelt said that it was with no personal ambition on his part that he went forward in this campaign, but that if the Republican Party should nominate a man who measured up to the standard which we Progressives had set, and we could unite upon that man, it would be the duty of all good citizens and all Pro- gressives to follow in good faith the statement that was made in good faith in January of this year. When we came to our Convention we came with the hope that we could induce the Republican Party to accept Mr. Roosevelt. We came here with the firm belief that pursuing the line of conduct that we did pursue, we would give the Republican Party the oppor- tunity for conference upon the question of the candidate and upon the question of principles, and when Mr. Colby or any other man says that Theodore Roosevelt knew that he would not accept this nomination when it was offered to him, Mr. Colby is not stating the facts. It may be his opinion, but it is not the fact. Theodore Roosevelt, in his long life of public service, in his dealings with men as he has dealt with men and women of this party, has never been guilty of such conduct as that. Now, let us see what our Convention says. The platform of the Progressive Convention which was adopted, not in haste, but as the result of the most thorough, painstaking study, first by the Committee, and then by reading it to the Con- vention and then having it held by the Convention until the last day of the Convention, contained this significant clause: "We will meet and work with any man or party who sees the nation's need and puts forth a leader fit to lead it; but we will accept no less in plan or in man, and we solemnly charge upon any who place partisan politics above the country, the re- sponsibility for a nation's future sacrificed to self-interest and spoils." In this our Convention followed out both the spirit and the letter of the January agreement, and the men in that Convention who were striving their utmost for the successful attainment of their I 114 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July dearest wish, namely, the nomination of Theodore Roosevelt, failed in obtaining from the Republican Convention the nomination of Theodore Roosevelt. We failed in uniting with the Republican Party upon a candidate. They chose their candidate. We chose our candidate. Then their candidate made the statement with which you are all familiar. Then our Convention adjourned, after com- pleting its business, and at that time, what did they do? They adopted a resolution, which reads as follows (I made the motion) : "That the letter of Theodore Roosevelt be accepted by this Convention in the spirit in which he gives it, and that it be referred to our National Committee, with power to act thereon." Now, therefore, what is the situation that we are in to-day? Theodore Roosevelt has presented his letter and has declined the nomination. It is now for this Committee to determine what action it shall take in the premises. One line of action has been suggested by the mover of the nomination of Victor Murdock, an entirely proper method of acting in accordance with that resolution, should this Committee determine that that was the wise course to pursue, leaving entirely aside the question of Mr. Murdock's present views. Let us consider the problem of whether it is wise for the Pro- gressive Party to fill the vacancy caused by the declination of Theodore Roosevelt. What does it lead to? What is to be gained? How are we to further the great principles for which we Pro- gressives have for these four years been striving together? We are, therefore, to determine the question whether there should be a nomination to fill this vacancy. We must view this in the light of the January statement, and in the light of the Convention's action, and then determine whether or not the Republican Party, by the nomination of Mr. Hughes, has placed in nomination a man who measures up to the standard that we Progressives have set as a standard for the Republican nominee upon whom we could unite if we failed to nominate our candidate. Therefore, it is most pertinent to discuss at this time the ques- tion whether we will in good faith carry out what was made in good faith or whether we will for some other reason throw aside the January statement, throw aside the resolutions of the Conven- tion, and proceed with a third ticket without even considering the personality of the man who has been nominated by the Republican Party. I take it that this is the only method by which we can wisely de- termine our course of action. Now, let us see what the situation is. We have all heard what Mr. Roosevelt says about Charles Evans Speech of James R. Garfield 115 Hughes. You may believe it or not. That is for each one to deter- mine. But we, sitting here as the representatives of the Progressive Party of the United States, must go beyond our personal inclina- tions. We must find out what our duty is towards the Progressives in our various States, and whether we can best accomplish what this party has stood for and pledged itself to do by the acceptance and approval of Mr. Hughes, the Republican nominee. What has occurred since the meeting of our National Conven- tion? We men from all over this country have gone to New York. We have gone back to our homes. We have conferred with the various men all over the country regarding this proposition. Many of us have conferred with Mr. Hughes, and many more have con- ferred with Mr. Roosevelt. We have conferred with the Republican leaders, we have conferred with Progressive leaders and with Demo- cratic leaders. We have been striving to bring back to this Com- mittee the best judgment that any thoughtful men can give to a problem of this tremendous importance. Now I, for one, have unqualifiedly reached the conclusion that to attempt the running of a third ticket by placing in nomination a Progressive would mean the utter destruction of all that we have been striving for. We must frankly face the situation that the third party move- ment in this country has not been a success, as a party. As a group of men and women working for the principles that we set forth four years ago, it has been a tremendous force for good throughout this land. It has compelled both the old parties in State and Nation to place on the statute books many of the things that we call for in that great platform of 1912. As a group of men and women earn- estly striving for betterment of conditions in this country, it has made progress unheard of in former years, in social and industrial developments. But, measured by the standard of political parties, we have not been able to do that which we hoped we could do. Now, therefore, are we to continue as a mere party to protest by the nomination of candidates who have no possible show of get- ting an electoral vote, who have no possible way of carrying into effect the principles for which we are fighting and whose candidacy will merely give the opportunity for men to waste their votes, rather than, man-fashion, determining whether they will vote for Wilson or vote for Hughes. Now, let us analyze it a little farther. I am not one of those who believe that the Progressive movement is dead. When I say what I have said to you about the Progressive Party, it does not 116 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July apply to the Progressive movement, nor does it imply the prop- osition that we here as representatives of that great Convention of the Party should seek to put it out of existence by any act of ours. We should go forward with our organization; we should strive by keeping our groups of men and women in the various States together, and in touch with one another, whether they be in the Democratic ranks or the Eepublican ranks, we should strive to keep them in touch with one another so that year by year we shall be able to carry on in our own States the great work that has hitherto been done. But, we cannot do it by the nomination of a third ticket. We can do it by following out what we have said we would do in January, and what we have said in our Con- vention. I do not expect that whatever action we take here can by any possibility be unanimous. It cannot be unanimous because we Progressives are men of many minds and earnest minds. We think deeply and feel strongly. We realize that each one of us must in the end work out his own salvation in his own way, and if perchance any one of the men with whom I have been striving for these four years differs with me and goes to the Democratic Party rather support Mr. Hughes, I shall not bear any bitterness toward that man. I shall work with him, regardless of party lines, for all these things that we have been striving for here to- gether as Progressives. But I want to leave for that man and for myself some method by which we can keep in touch with one another when partisanship is not the rule of our conduct. Now, let us see what can be done. If this motion for the nomination of Victor Murdock fails, I purpose to present to this Committee a motion for the approval of Mr. Hughes, in accord- ance with the suggestion by Theodore Eoosevelt. At that time, if this motion fails, to adopt a third ticket, then we will be up to the question of carrying through the promise that we have made to the people of this country, that in good faith we will endeavor to do what is for the best interests of our country at large. And we can do it in a dignified, fair and square manner. We can do it as American citizens striving to do that which is best and wisest for our country. And we can do it without in one single particular leaving or proving false to the principles which we have been striving for as Progressives. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee, it is my hope that we will vote down the proposition to nominate Victor Murdock or any other man on our ticket to fill this vacancy. RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE PROGRESS- IVE NATIONAL COMMITTEE JUNE 26, 1916 First Resolution Whereas, 'the statement issued by this committee in January and the platform adopted by the Progressive National Convention set forth that putting aside all partisan considerations, in view of existing world and national conditions, we would work with any man or party who saw the nation's need and put forth a leader fit to meet it; and Whereas, we believe with Colonel Roosevelt that in nominat- ing Charles E. Hughes of New York the Republican Party has put forth such a leader; We endorse and concur in the recommendation of Colonel Roosevelt that we support Mr. Hughes. Second Resolution. Resolved, first, we hereby direct the National Executive Com- mittee to co-operate with Mr. Hughes and take any steps which they deem proper effectively to prosecute the campaign. Second, we leave to the State committees the determination of action in their respective States and recommend that whatever action they take be taken after consultation with the National Executive Committee. Third Resolution. 1. The Progressive Party was created by the coming together of men who saw that if our nation was to maintain its place in civilization certain great advances must be made in economic con- ditions, in governmental efiiciency and in political machinery. These men set forth in the Progressive platform of 1912 a great and definite programme of action, then far in advance of any pro- posals made to the American people, but now, by the work of these men, accepted in substance by the whole country as the plain path of duty. 2. Moved by this purpose, at the sacrifice of old associations and material considerations, under the leadership of Theodore 117 118 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July Roosevelt, these men and women for four years, without hope of personal gain or advantage, have earnestly labored to serve their country in its need. J_As a political party they met almost uniform defeat at the elections. But out of office, opposed by some of the most powerful and subtle forces of modern life, they succeeded in the substance of their aim and in making their purpose the pur- pose of the nation. Thus much of the Progressive programme has already become law. Again, the 1916 platform of the Republican Party has been made substantially progressive, pledging that party to a Federal Child Labor Law, a Federal Workmen's Com- pensation Act and Federal investigation of the conditions of work- men in industries. War Brings New Issue. 3. Had world conditions remained normal it is fairly certain that the Progressive Party would ultimately have secured in leg- islation, in government action, in non-sectional politics, the en- forcement of their great plan of advance. Across the normal paths of peace, however, came the great European War and with it an issue deeper than that of national advance, the issue of national unity and the nation's existence, of Americanism and of Preparedness. The Progressive platform of 1916, therefore, placed foremost as our immediate need prepar- edness in arms, industry and spirit; in arms, the democratic prin- ciple of universal military training; in industry, the co-operation, through government, of the whole people to promote individual welfare and business prosperity; in spirit an Americanism that knows no hyphenated patriotism. The Progressive National Com- mittee recognizes that such are now the issues that immediately confront the country, and looks only to the duty that arises there- from. 4. As a plain political fact, the next Administration of the United States will be either Republican or Democratic. The Pro- gressive Party holds the deciding vote in this issue. If that party throws its weight to Mr. Hughes his election will probably be insured. If that party runs a third ticket of its own, it is equally probable that it will insure the re-election of Mr. Wilson. The party is in accord with the views of Colonel Roosevelt set forth in his letter as to the disastrous effects which the Democratic Administration has had on the interests and honor of our country. The national committee concurs in his view of a continuance of Resolutions of Progressive National Committee 119 that Administration and as to the importance and desirability of placing Mr. Hughes in the control of the Administration. Work of the Party. 5. The Progressive Party has brought together much of the best intellect, moral courage and qualities of leadership that the country has. In the work that must be done for the country in the next few years it is essential that these qualities, the most important national resources, be available, either individually, or, if need be, in organized form. The men and women who formed the Progressive Party have, in the past four years, come to know each other; have been bound by the common ties, a great and unselfish purpose, of personal sacrifice and united action. As in- dividuals their influence had before that time been small. As such a group they worked an enormous change in American con- ditions. 6. Facing these essential facts, which transcend partisan or personal considerations, the National Committee sets forth the following as its earnest and solemn conviction: "It accepts the resignation of Colonel Roosevelt as the candi- date of the party for President of the United States, and concurs in the reasons for his action given in his letter of resignation. It recognizes his past service to the country as leader of this party, a service that cannot adequately be expressed in words, and it recognizes also the sacrifice which the present crisis has demanded of him, and which he has met in listening rather to the urgent need of the nation than to partisan or personal ambition. Declares for Hughes. "The National Committee supports Charles Evans Hughes, of New York, for President. "The committee desires to make it entirely clear that in its action herein it asks nothing for the Progressive Party as a party or for the members thereof. It imposes no condition or consid- eration for the support of the party save on the condition that Mr. Hughes shall earnestly work toward the accomplishment of the great purposes of national security and national honor and justice which are set forth by Colonel Roosevelt in his letter as the motive for his action. "The committee earnestly desires that the power of the Pro- gressive movement, which has, largely without political victory, accomplished so great a change in the aspect of American affairs, 120 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July be continued and preserved intact for further service. To this end the committee, therefore, recommends that the organization of the Progressive Party be preserved so far as possible, and so far as is best consistent with that purpose of national service; that the state committees continue in operation and take such action as is best fitted to give unity and expression to the Pro- gressive movement in their respective localities. The national committee will maintain its organization for the same purpose throughout the country, to the end that we may preserve the unified working power of that great body of men and women of high national purpose, whose intellects and ideals were never more needed by the country, and whose power to make good these ideals will be greatly increased by maintaining their common action, both for the present and for the future." TELEGRAM FROM CHARLES EVANS HUGHES TO THE PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL COMMITTEE New York City, June 26, 1916. 0. K. Davis, Secretary Progressive National Committee, Black- stone Hotel, Chicago, 111.: I vyelcome the support of Progressives. We make common cause in the interest of national honor, of national security, of national eflSciency. We unite in the demand for an undivided and unwavering loyalty to our country, for a whole-hearted patriotic devotion overriding all racial differences. We want a revival of the American spirit — a nation restored. We insist upon prompt and adequate provision for the common defence, upon the stead- fast maintenance of all the rights of our citizens and upon the integrity of international law. The most serious difficulties the present Administration has encountered have been due to its own weakness and incertitude. I am profoundly convinced that by prompt and decisive action, which existing conditions manifestly called for, the Lusitania tragedy would have been prevented. We strongly denounce the use of our soil as a base of alien intrigues, for conspiracies and the fomenting of disorders in the interest of any foreign nation, but the responsibility lies at the door of the Administration. The moment notice is admitted, re- sponsibility is affixed. For that sort of thing could not continue if the Administration took proper measures to stop it. That re- sponsibility the Administration cannot evade by condemning others. It was officially stated by the Secretary of State in the Mexican note of June 20, 1916, that "for three years the Mexican Eepublic has been torn with civil strife; the lives of Americans and other aliens have been sacrificed; vast properties developed by Ameri- can capital and enterprise have been destroyed or rendered non- productive; bandits have been permitted to roam at will through territory contiguous to the United States and to seize, without punishment or without effective attempt at punishment, the prop- 121 122 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July erty of Americans, while the lives of citizens of the United States who ventured to remain in Mexican territory or to return there to protect their interests have been taken, in some cases bar- barously taken, and the murderers have neither been apprehended nor been brought to justice." What an indictment by the Administration of its Mexican pol- icy! And still we are unprepared. That unpreparedness in the midst of perils, and after the experience of three years, is a dem- onstration of an unpardonable neglect for which the Administra- tion is responsible. The Government now has and must have most emphatically the unstinted and patriotic support of every citizen in the exist- ing exigency. But unquestioning, loyal and patriotic support of the Government is one thing; approval of the fatuous course which the Administration has followed is quite another. I can- not in this message adequately review that course; that I shall do later. No intelligent man is deceived by the temporary prosperity due to abnormal conditions, and no one can fail to appreciate the gravity of the problems with which we shall be faced when the war ends. We are alive to the imperative necessity of assuring the bases of honest business. I am in deep sympathy with the effort to improve the conditions of labor; to prevent exploitation; to safeguard the future of the nation by protecting our women and children. I believe in workmen's compensation laws; in wise conservation of our national resources, so that they may be pro- tected, developed and used to the utmost public advantage. But underlying every endeavor to promote social justice is the indis- pensable condition that there shall be a stable foundation for hon- orable enterprise. American industry must have proper protection if labor is to be safeguarded. We must rescue our instrumentalities of inter- state and foreign commerce, our transportation facilities, from uncertainty and confusion. We must show that we know how to protect the public without destroying or crippling our productive energies. To what agency shall we look for the essential constructive programme on which our security and prosperity must depend? It is vain to expect it from the Democratic Party. That party has not the national outlook. Both its traditions and dominating in- fluences are fatal handicaps. I have no sectional word to utter. Hughes' Telegram to Progressive National Committee 123 We are to elect a President of the whole country, not of a part. The South, as well as the North, East and West, will be the gainers from our endeavors. But it is sober truth as I see it that as we go forward we must make the Republican Party the instrument of our advance. We want deeds, not words ; far-reaching national policies. The Progressives have insisted on responsible, not invisible government ; on eflScient administration. I yield to no one in that demand. I am eager to call the best ability of the country to our aid. For the conduct of the great departments the Executive is directly responsible, and there is no excuse whatever for the tol- eration of incompetence in order to satisfy partisan obligations. I am deeply appreciative of your indorsement. I find no dif- ference in platform or in aim which precludes the most hearty co- operation and the most complete unity. It is within the party that the liberalizing spirit you invoke can have the widest and most effective influence. I solicit your earnest effort for the com- mon cause. CHARLES E. HUGHES. LETTER FROM CHARLES EVANS HUGHES TO THEODORE ROOSEVELT Hotel Astor, New York City, June 26, 1916. My Dear Colonel Roosevelt : I warmly appreciate the cordial letter of indorsement which you have sent to the Progressive Committee. No one is more sen- sible than I of the lasting indebtedness of the nation to you for the quickening of the national spirit, for the demand for an out and out one hundred per cent. Americanism and for the insistence upon the immediate necessity of a thorough-going preparedness, spiritual, military and economic. I am in this campaign because of my conviction that we must not only frame but execute a broad, constructive programme, and that for this purpose we must have a united party — a party in- spired by its great conditions and reconsecrated to its loftiest ideals. I know that you have been guided in this emergency by the sole desire to be of the largest service to the United States. You have sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat. And I want you to feel that I wish to have all the aid that you are able and willing to give. I want the most effective co-opera- tion with all those who have been fighting by your side. Let us work together for our national security and for the peace of righteous- ness and justice. I enclose a copy of my telegram to the committee, in which I have set forth my attitude. I shall later undertake a full discus- sion of the issues of the campaign. Hoping that I may have the pleasure of seeing you at an early day, I am, my dear Colonel Roosevelt, with cordial regards, Faithfully yours, (Signed) CHARLES E. HUGHES. THEODORE ROOSEVELT, ESQ. Oyster Bay, New York. 124 STATEMENT OF RAYMOND ROBINS (CHAIR- MAN OF THE PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL CONVENTION) TO THE PROGRESSIVES OF THE COUNTRY To My Fellow Progressives: For some years prior to 1912, in common with other progressive citizens, I had hoped for a new cleavage in American political life — a cleavage that would bury the dead issues of 1860, wipe out sec- tional lines and prejudices — and comprehending the vital social and economic issues of the twentieth century, would divide American political parties along true lines of honest progressive and honest conservative sentiment. When Colonel Roosevelt voiced this need and desire and declared himself as willing to serve in realizing a genuine progressive and liberal party, I in common with over four million voters responded to his call. In our first campaign, while the actual vote was an extraordi- nary testimony to Colonel Roosevelt's personal popularity, we elected no single Progressive governor, nor legislature, nor sufficient mem- bers to be even a balance of power in Congress. This, however, was no discouragement to those Progressives who did not seek office and were ready to fight on through any number of defeats to gain a genuine victory. In 1914 we had a real test of the Progressive voters of 1912 and the willingness of the American people to use a new party in the practical solution of the problems of our political life. Generally throughout the nation the Progressive candidates — embracing its most gifted leaders and all generously supported by Colonel Roosevelt and as a rule fairly treated by the daily press — ran a bad third. Nearly three-fourths of the Progressive voters of 1912 refused to support the Progressive candidates in 1914. More- over, the acid test of the party loyalty of the voter is not found in his support of party candidates in a general election, but in his willingness to enroll or register in the primaries of his party. By this test throughout the union the Progressive voters of 1912 de- clared in overwhelming majority that they regarded the Progres- sive candidates as the representatives of a protest and not a party — of a mere revolt rather than a permanent political cleavage. 125 126 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July Under our system of government the voters are at last supreme. No gifts of leadership nor merit of program can finally drive the American people into a party against their will. In the 1914 and 1916 primaries the Progressive voters of 1912 deliberately and in overwhelming numbers abandoned the Progressive Party. The efforts of Colonel Roosevelt's friends to secure his nomina- tion by both the Republican and Progressive conventions was a mere recognition of this fact. Colonel Roosevelt's declination to run as the Progressive candidate only, simply declared his acceptance of the verdict of the voters as delivered by them in the primaries of 1914 and 1916. The refusal of the Progressive National Committee to favor a third ticket candidacy did no more than to make final the judgment entered by the Progressive voters themselves. While I had hoped against hope that the extraordinary events in this epochal hour might overrule the verdict of the voters, and under the leadership of Colonel Roosevelt the Progressive Party might yet dominate the situation, nevertheless, when the Progressive Conven- tion had adjourned, and the entire situation was considered — it was manifest that the end which the voters had decreed had come — ^that the Progressive Party was dead. The Progressive movement and revolt of 1912 having failed as a permanent political party, and the verdict of the voters having been rendered in favor of the Demo- cratic and Republican parties as the instruments of their organized political action; what is the present duty of the men and women who were loyal to the Progressive Party and who believe in Pro- gressive principles ? In which of these dominant parties in the long run will Progressive principles find most effective support, and where will the rank and file and leadership of the Progressive Party find largest co-operation in the service of our common country? While this question must at last be settled in the individual mind and heart, we are grateful for honest counsel one with another. For myself, I cannot determine this question by the merit of candidates and platforms alone. Platforms change with each cam- paign and leaders come and go. Should we not consider that drift of opinion — almost glacial in slowness and certainty — whereby the permanent voting mass in each party inevitably determines the topography of our political world? Is there not a main current underneath the changing surface eddies, a purpose and tendency of the rank and file voters in the one party as opposed to the other, that abides? If so, which party through such mass drift, such tendency of its permanent rank and file, holds the better hope for Raymond Robins' Statement to the Progressives 137 Progressive principles in the solution of our domestic problems and international policy? The answer to this question is two-fold, first the character and environment of the primary voter mass control, and second, the permanent achievements of its leadership. The primary voter mass control of the Democratic Party is in fifteen southern and southwestern states and in the industrial cities of the nation. The fixed southern control of the Democratic Party is individualistic in its thinking, sectional in its sjmipathies, and in- herits a tradition against common labor as servile. The social or- ganization is still semi-patriarchal in the rural communities and the southern environment presents the maximum of natural and cultural resistance to necessary social and industrial standardiza- tion. The Democratic primary voter mass control in the industrial cities is the most heterogeneous of our national groups and the excessive pressure of living and industrial conditions renders it the most fertile field for boss control in the service of selfish personal and corporate interests. The primary voter mass control of the Eepublican Party is in the rural communities of the central, western and New England states. This group represents the highest literacy in America, is freest from severe social and economic pressure, is in the zone of the greatest natural tendency to industrial standardization and equality of opportunity, and inherits the tradition of Lincoln and the men who saved the Union. The Republican Party — though often dominated by the masters of special privilege and made by them the instrument of vast ex- ploitation — has a rank and file of men and women who have proved their capacity to reject false or dishonest leadership. Conceived in moral revolt against human slavery, it was bom, baptized and nur- tured in the supreme national struggle to maintain the national heritage and fulfill the promise of equal opportunity to every citizen. Is not its rank and file best calculated to support a leadership that will create a national mind and conscience, and having preserved the integrity of the nation against the heresy of secession, will it not develop and maintain a progressive national program of social and economic organization? Let us now turn to the test of actual achievements in progressive legislation and administration. The freest and most progressive state in this Union is California. Eight years ago it was a rotten borough and had been under shameless and corrupt corporation and boss control for a generation. Twenty years ago able and honest 128 The Progressive Party — Its Record from Jammry to July progressive Democrats were fighting in that state for reform. They led in the education of the people, but the rank and file of the Democratic Party refused to follow their leadership. How was the actual deliverance of California achieved? By the rank and file of the Eepublican voters under the leadership of Hiram W. Johnson. The second freest state in this Union is Wisconsin. Twenty years ago the brewery ring of Milwaukee and the railroad ring of Madison controlled that state. Which party redeemed Wisconsin? The rank and file of the Republican Party under the leadership of Robert M. LaFoUette. After long years of shameless corruption and misgov- emment Pennsylvania has made a notable advance toward decent government and progressive policies in the last two years. Here again the rank and file of the Republican voters under the leadership of Governor Brumbaugh is breaking boss control of government in the Keystone state. When New Hampshire broke the bonds of her railroad ring, how was that victory won? Through Robert P. Bass and Winston Churchill supported by the rank and file of the Re- publican Party. My home State of Illinois is an illuminating example of the gen- eral experience. We have had able progressive Democratic leader- ship and within the past decade have won both the city and the state governments. Yet permanent gains for progressive principles have been practically nil. A fatal incapacity for efficient adminis- tration or fundamental progressive legislation seems to rest upon the Democratic Party in Illinois. After sixteen years, during twelve of which I served with the Progressive Democrats, the Democratic Party is more completely under the control of a corporation boss who represents the worst in our political system than at any other time in twenty years. The present administration at Washington has helped rather than hindered the growth of this boss control of the Democratic Party in Illinois. The progressive Democrats of Illinois are a heartsick minority. The progressive Republicans are a mili- tant — and properly organized — ^will be a triumphant majority. The final regeneration of the government of this State will have to be won by the leadership of progressives in the Repulolican Party sup- ported by its rank and file. When the hour came to break the control of the corrupt plu- tocracy and the bosses over the national government, again it was the rank and file of the Progressive Republican voters that sustained the leadership in the White House and Congress which laid the foundation of effective progressive opinion and finally culminated in Raymond Robins' Statement to the Progressives 129 the revolt of 1912. It was the fear of this progressive spirit that nominated Mr. Wilson over the choice of the Democratic rank and file in the Baltimore convention ; that maintained President Wilson's control over Congress; that dictated the progressive planks in the Democratic platform in St. Louis and nominated Mr. Hughes in the Republican Convention at Chicago. It was progressive Repub- licans that furnished 95 per cent, of the leadership and 80 per cent, of the voters for the Progressive candidates in 1912. The national conscience now aroused must be made effective. It must develop a national mind that will comprehend our social, industrial and military unpreparedness. It must appreciate the domestic injury and national danger that lies in our lack of a definite foreign policy. It must realize that we will be as unpre- pared for peace as we are unprepared for war. The supreme need in American political life is leadership supported by a voting rank and file that will organize and maintain an adequate, social, in- dustrial and military preparedness, together with a comprehen- sive foreign policy. The first step in social preparedness is woman suffrage to protect our children and homes from the incompetence, cor- ruption and vice of our municipal housekeeping. We need industrial preparedness with a program of stand- ardization in our economic life. For the workers, we need living wages, fair hours of labor, workshop sanitation and fire protection, with accident, sickness, old age and unemploy- ment insurance. Trade agreements and arbitration should take the place of individual exploitation and industrial civil war. For capital, we need the intelligent co-operation of government both at home and abroad. When this war is over we will face the most intense industrial competition that the world of commerce has ever known. A comprehensive pro- tection of the home market and support for American foreign trade is indispensable if we are to preserve industrial pros- perity. For both capital and labor, we should develop a pro- gressive policy in taxation that will lift the fiscal burdens of government from labor and enterprise and place them upon monopoly and privilege. Graduated progressive taxation upon incomes, inheritances and land values must be a part of any adequate preparedness program. We need universal service and military training of the youth of America. This will do more in one generation to 130 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July break down class and sectional prejudice, develop disciplined, vigorous and efficient citizenship, and to unify the diverse groups of our national life in a vital Americanism than all other forces combined. It will destroy militarism and the military caste, while providing that genuine preparedness for efficiency in time of peace and defense against aggression in time of war which is needed in every citizenship. This is the policy of the labor government of Australia and the demo- cratic people's government in Switzerland and is worthy of the vigorous support of every informed progressive in America. We need a comprehensive foreign policy that will accept the facts of the world situation and our obligations under the Monroe Doctrine; the open door in China; and the Exclusion Acts; and prepare adequately to maintain our right part in the world movement, advancing the democratic purpose and human interests in the international field as against the dom- ination of privilege, autocracy and militarism. Can these imperative national needs be worked out by a states rights Democratic Party that plans a state-dominated militia with its menace of shiftless incompetence, spoils politics and organ- ized snobbery as a national defense force, at a time of world peril? More and more it becomes plain that most of our pressing problems of large import are national in scope and will yield only to national action. Yet we find in the Democratic Party the mod- em, and let us hope the last, stronghold of the advocates of local sovereignty. This doctrine of individualism, sectionalism and dis- union menaced and almost prevented the freeing of the colonies from foreign domination. This doctrine well-nigh defeated the adoption of a unifying constitution wherein the American nation became a fact. This doctrine after sixty years almost overthrew the national structure in dissension over the issue of slavery. This doctrine since the Civil War has delayed national legislation so urgently needed to solve the problems of pure food, transpor- tation, child labor and conservation. Wherever the fight for more efficient and more humane government has been waged this bane- ful doctrine of States Eights has been invoked to rally and shelter the anti-social forces, to arouse sectional bias, local jealousy and all the mean, narrow passions that hold men's eyes upon the ground, when great human needs call upon them to look beyond Raymond Robins' Statement to the Progressives 131 the rough and dusty roads to the far country that is worth the toil and sacrifice of the long, hard journey. Comprehending our national necessities, how can a Progres- sive hesitate long to choose between the party of nationalism and the party of sectionalism? Should not wise and sincere Progres- sives go en masse into the Kepublican primaries, and fighting shoulder to shoulder with progressive Eepublicans, help and be helped in our common struggle for social and industrial justice in city, state and nation? If this is generally done the common bonds of our fellowship for the past four years will not be broken but rather augmented, and we can continue to work together and bring back a chastened Kepublican Party to its ancient faith in human rights and national integrity, which made its triumph under Lincoln's leadership the supreme achievement of the dem- ocratic spirit in the history of mankind. The present leader of the Republican Party won his reputation as the progressive Republican Governor of New York. He there proved himself completely independent of all boss control and demon- strated that he will take advice from many but dictation from none. His words have been made good by deeds. His leadership is the fruit of Progressive movement in American politics. His nomination was not two hours old when the most resourceful general of the "old guard" was dropped overboard into political oblivion. The forced retirement of William Barnes, Jr., was the "high sign" to all who wish to know and understand that/ the control of the Republican Party had passed forever from the "old guard" of 1912. Mr. Hughes' recognition of the Progressives in the appointment of his campaign committee is a guarantee of the good faith in which he appeals for Progressive support. This estimate of the progressive character of the Republican nominee does not rest upon the testimony alone of his record and his associates. From a statement over the signature of one of the ablest of the progressive leaders in this nation I quote as fol- lows: "The nomination of Mr. Justice Hughes will be acceptable to the great body of progressive Republicans in this country. * * * He was not the choice of the reactionary element which formed the platform and otherwise controlled the convention * * *. He is able, independent, fearless, and possessed of high public spirit. There is no question of his personal and political integrity, he 133 The Progressive Party — Its Record from January to July will go as far as his convictions carry him and no ulterior influ- ence can stop him." — Eobert M. La Follette. We Progressives stand at the cross-roads. American social, industrial and political life has broken down under the old indi- vidualistic control. A new national mind and conscience devel- oping social unity, industrial standardization, efficient political honesty; from a self-controlled democracy — this is the goal of our generation in American life. I believe in the character and courage of the nominee of the Eepublican Party. He is the most conspicuous example in our history of the possibilities that Amer- ican politics may hold for success in able and unselfish public service. For myself, I gladly enlist with the great majority of the Progressives of the nation under the leadership of CHARLES EVANS HUGHES. EAYMOND ROBINS.