Yale University Library 39002002948025 ^g;>5%i;jr>/-v-:: r!?iS'V^-iP%*l lU^^^^ MwBw^^^ fe^^ ^^^^p Ssl^wtBCT^mtr i^aps*-*-'- '-" g^^^^^ §>'- ,;- ^a^^^^^^«^ "V** ^ -* ^P.^^"-::'* ^^^• "" pf'"^'--"'-" £k^N ^* "" '"^ sk?-;'" ' . ;J.i-^" ^ YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY IMPERIAL WASHINGTON By R. F. PETTIGREW Formerly United States Senator from South Dakota The Story of American PubKc Life from 1870 to 1920 CHICAGO CHARLES H. KERR fiC COMPANY CO-OPERATIVE Copyright 1922 by K. F. Pettigrew. AU rights, including the right of translation into foreign languages, reserved. Published October 1, 1922. Ci,3,G\a FEINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMEEICA. d80 PUBLISHERS' NOTE The substance of the present volume was privately printed in New York in January, 1922, under an other title. Commenting on this book Mr. Charles Edward Russell, justly prominent among present-day writers and judges of good writing, said : This is an extraordinary book by an extraordi nary man. No one that reads it impartially will be satisfied with any verdict less emphatic. Probably no other public man still among us has had an equal chance to see without illusions the inside of our political machinery. Certainly no other public man would have the courage to write with equal candor of what he saw, or thought he saw. Even men that have believed themselves soijhisticated about our public affairs will receive many a shock as they read here. To the rest the book is like a continuous electric battery, only stronger. . . . With scornful eye and a marvelously retentive memory, Senator Pettigrew for twelve years sur veyed from his seat the workings of the Senate and the real characters and performances of his fellow members. The results he has set down in vitriol. Scarcely a conspicuous man of his times escapes his burning. The huge control that the moneyed inter ests exercise upon government, the rapacity and cruelty of the profit-mongers,, the difference between the politician's unctuous play-acting and his slimy deed, the spread between reputation and fact con cerning many of these men — all the sordid stupidity and murderous greed of our social system one may find set forth here in most novel and stimulating fashion. Mr. Pettigrew is not a trained writer. All the bet ter for his purpose. He goes at the thing hammer and tongs, calls people names, bursts out into vehe ment tirades, flips from his pen "scoundrel", "rascal" and "scamp", pushes over the popular idols, tells us we^ are fools to think well of this man or that, runs both horns along the shelves of the national china- 4 PUBLISHERS' NOTE shop, and prances on the fragments, is bitter, extrav agant, unphilosophical, wrong-headed, violent, per fectly natural and extremely entertaining and profit able. Everybody should read this book. It is not neces sary (and- probably to those that retain some sense of proportion and fact it is impossble) to go along with the vehement author, but everybody should read it to get a notion of the flubdub, hypocrisy and fake that belong in public life. It will not be an accurate notion, but the trouble is that elsewhere you can get none at all. Therefore, read this. We do not have to believe, because Senator Petti grew believes it, that Samuel Gompers is the king of organized labor and can order it about likie a foreman of coolies. We do not have to believe that the evils in our social and political state are due to the machinations of a small group of very bad men with whom may the devil fly away. We do not have to accept the sheep-and-goats theory of human life be cause it seems to have made a greiat impression on him. Those that are familiar with the psychology of the American wage-worker will be astonished at his faith in an easily accomplished proletarian revolution here. But all these defects that might ruin another book only make this tjie more attractive. Because, however far this man's excursions may wander from cool reason and things as they are, he is so mani festly sincere that you cannot help liking him even when most you disagree with his text. I particularly recommend the book to those that are weary of the pedantic twaddle and verbal genuflec tions of the schoolmen. Here is something real ; here is a man on the level. O rare and joyous dis covery! Let him batter the social structure with mattocks and shiver its windows with bricks if he will — at least he feels something and means some thing, and a country half choked with rhetoric ought to hail him with grateful relief. TABLE OF CONTENTS. 1. INTRODUCTION. American Public Life 7 2. THE ECONOMIC POWER AT HOME. I. Land Grabbing i 13 II. Land for the People 26 III. Banks and Bankers 32 IV. Money 39 V. The Tariff 58 VI. The Trusts 71 VII. The Railroads 79 VIIL Labor 101 IX. Plutocracy 118 3. THE MACHINERY OF GOVERNMENT. X. Who Made the Constitution? 132 XI. Lawyers 141 XIL Politics 150 XIII. The United States. Supreme Court 163 XIV. Senates and Senators 196 XV. Ten Presidents 215 XVL Political Parties 248 XVII. Chauncey M. Depew 259 XVIII. -Bryanism : 269 XIX. Cannonism 277 XX. Business and Politics 283 XXL A Lost Election 291 4. IMPERIALISM. XXII. Hawaii— A Revolution to Order 307 XXIII. Anti-Imperialism 320 XXIV. Criminal Aggression 326 XXV. Imperialism at Work 334 XXVI. Benevolent Assimilation 344 XXVII. The U. S. and the Course of Empire 359 5. THE WORLD WAR. XXVIII. The Profiteers 369 XXIX. The Russian Revolution 384 XXX. The League to Perpetuate War 389 XXXI. The 1920 Election 396 6. OUR CIVILIZATION. XXXII. Capitalism 403 XXXIII. The Triumph of Christian Civilization 409 XXXIV. Looking Ahead 41& FOREWORD American Public Life The American people should know the truth about American public life. They have been lied to so much and hoodwinked so often that it would seem only fair for them to have at least one straight-from-the- shoulder statement concerning this government "of the people, by the people and for the people," about whose inner workings the people know almost nothing. The common people of the United States, like the same class of people in every other country, mean well, but they are ill-informed. Floundering about in their ignorance, they are tricked and robbed by those who have the inside information and who therefore know how to take advantage of every turn in the wheel of fortune. The people voted for Roosevelt be cause he talked of "trust-busting" at the same time that he was sanctioning the purchase of the Tennessee Coal and Iron Company by the Steel Trust. They supported Wilson "because he kept us out of war" at the same time that Wilson was making preparations to enter- the war. The rulers can negotiate "secret treaties" at home and abroad. The people, knowing nothing of either the theory or the practice of secret diplomacy, commit all sorts of follies for which they themselves must later foot the bill. At the present moment the American people are being taught "Americanism" — ^taught by the same gentry who are making away with billions of dollars, sometimes "legally" and sometimes without any sanc tion in the law. The most prominent among the leaders of the Americanization campaign were the most prominent among the war profiteers. They are the owners of 8 FOREWORD resources and industries — the owners of America. It is from them that the preparedness agitation came in 1915 and 1916, and it is from them that the new preparedness agitation is coming now. There is a newspaper story in the New York Herald (November 7, 1920) which illustrates the point. The story, evidently 'inspired by the War Department, is devoted to a description of certain big guns and_ cer tain new forms of tanks that the government is at the present time busy manufacturing. The country was caught napping once, says the writer, but the War Department is going to be sure that the same thing does not happen again. Therefore, it is build ing up its machinery now, while the country is still at peace. In this work the War Department is as sisted "by some of the leading industrial spirits of the country, who are keeping up the same enthusiastic devotion to the service of their country they displayed in the war. A little army of doUar-a-year men, headed by Benedict Crowell, former Assistant Secretary of War, has mobilized itself under the name of Army Ordnance Association and is giving its valuable time to the country without costing the govemment a single cent." Who are the members of this "little army" of pa triots ? The Herald gives the answer in full. Besides Mr. Crowell, there are, in the Army Ordnance Asso ciation, William Wheeler Coleman, president of the Bucyrus Company of Milwaukee, Wis.; Charles Eliot Warren, past president of the American Bankers' As sociation ; Ralph Crews, of the law firm of Sherman & Sterling, New York City; Guy Eastman Tripp, chair man of the board of directors of the Westinghouse Company; Samuel McRoberts, of the National City Bank of New York; Waldo Calvin Bryant, president of the Bryant Electric Company; Frank Augustus Scott, former chairman of the War Industries Board; Robert P. Lamont, president of the American Steel Foundries of .Chicago, and C. L. Harrison, of the First National Bank of Cincinnati. AMERICAN PUBLIC LIFE 9 What do these patriotic business men hope to gain by their devotion to the preparedness program of the War~ Department? The answer appears later in the same articles: "It is this desire to keep abreast of the world's performances in ordnance that has prompted the War Department to ask for an in creased appropriation next year. The department's appropriation last year was $377,246,944. The esti mates for this year call for an appropriation of approximately $814,000,000." The difference, or $435,000,000, represents the value of contracts that will go to the business interests of the United States. Again, bankers, lawyers, manufacturers and busi ness men are going to save the country — not by keep ing us out of war, but by getting ready for the next war. It is these men who dominate the life and thought as well as the industries of these United States, and it is just such men that have been in control of the United States ever since I entered the Senate thirty years ago. It is fifty years since I began to t^ke an interest in public affairs. During those years I have been par ticipating, more or less actively, in public life — afirst as a govemment surveyor, then as a member of the Legislature of Dakota; as a member of the House of Representatives and, finally, as a member of the United States Senate. Since 1880 I have known the important men in both the Republican and Democratic parties; I have known the members of the diplomatic corps ; I have known personally the last ten presidents of the United States, and I have known personally the leading business men who backed the political parties and who made and unmade the presidents. For half a century I have known public men and have been on the inside of business and politics. Through all of that time I have lived and worked with the rulers of America. When I entered the arena of public affairs in 1870, the United States, with a population of thirty-eight millions, was just recovering from the effects of the 10 FOREWORD Civil War. The economic life of the old slave-holding South lay in ruins. Even in the North, the Panic of 1873 swept over the business world, taking its toll in commercial failures and unemployment and an in crease in the number of tenant farmers. The policy of sending carpet-bagging rascals into the embittered South hindered reconciliation, and sectional differences prevented any effective co-operation between the two portions of the country. The result was a heavy loss in productive power and in political position. Through this period, the United States was an incon sequential factor in international affairs. The transformation from that day to this is com plete. With three times the population ; with section alism practically eliminated ; with the South recovered economically and the economic power of the North vastly increased; with more wealth than any other five nations of the world combined ; with the credit of the world in her hands; with large undeveloped, or only slightly developed resources; with a unified population and a new idea of world importance, the United States stands as probably the richest and most influential among the great nations. I witnessed the momentoi^s changes and participated in them. While they w6re occurring I saw something else that filled me with dread. I saw the govemment of the United States enter into a struggle with the trusts, the railroads and the banks, and I watched while the business forces won the contest. I saw the forms of republican govemment decay through disuse, and I saw them betrayed by the very men who were sworn to preserve and uphold them. I saw the empire of business, with its innumerable ramifications, grow up around and above the structure of government. I watched the power over public affairs shift from the weakened structure of republican political machinery to the vigorous new business empire. Strong men who saw what was occurring no longer went into politics. Instead, they entered the field of industry, and with them the seat of the government of the United States AMERICAN PUBLIC LIFE 11 was shifted from Washington to Wall Street. With this shift, there disappeared from active public life those principles of republican government that I had learned to believe were the means of safeguarding liberty. After the authority over public affairs had been transferred to the men of business, I saw the machinery of business pass from the hands of indi viduals into the hands of corporations — artificial per sons — created in the imagination of lawyers, and given efficacy by the sanction of the courts and of the law. When I turned to the reading of American his tory, I discovered that these things had been going on from the beginnings of our government, that they had grown up with it, and were an essential part of its structure. From surprise and disgust I turned to analysis and reason and, for the past twenty years, I have been watching the public life of the United States with an understanding mind. For a long time I have known what was going on in the United States. Today I think that I know why it is going on. When I look back over the half century that has passed since I first entered public life, I can hardly realize that the America, which I knew and believed in as a young man in the twenties, could have changed so completely in so short a time. Even when I know the reason for the change, it is hard to accept it as a reality. Many of the public men who have lived and worked in the United States during the past century have written their impressions of public affairs. Benton, Blaine, Grant and Sherman discussed the public life of the middle of the last century. Since then, there have been many autobiographies and memoirs. I have read these books carefully, and it seems to me that not one of the writers is at the same time a student and a realist. First of all, they have written about politics, with very little or no attention to the economic forces that were shaping politics. In the second place, too many pf them have written the agreeable things and left 12 FOREWORD the disagreeable ones unsaid. In the third place, they have written what they believed should have happenea rather than what actually did happen. Fourth, and by far the most important, each of these men has written as a member of a ruling class, pleased witn himself, and satisfied that rule by his class was the best thing for the community. The pictures that these men give are like the decisions of our courts — ^built of precedents rather than of realities. It is my ambition to tell my fellow-countrymen what has happened during the half century that I have known public life. I know what went on, because I saw it. I want others to have the same knowledge. During my public career I have received very definite impressions, and I am anxious to pass those im pressions on to others. I want to do this because I believe that my country is in danger; I believe that the liberties of the American people are already well- nigh destroyed ; I believe that >ve are moving forward to a crisis of immense significance to the future of the American people, and the ideas and ideals for which the United States has stood before the world. We are far along on the road to empire, and we are traveling faster towards that goal than any nation in history ever traveled. It is with that purpose and in that spirit that I have written this book, and it is in that spirit that I ask them to consider and ponder what I have said there. IMPERIAL WASHINGTON I. LAND GRABBING My first struggle with the business interests, after I entered the Senate in 1889, came over the question of land-grabbing. At that time the Federal Govemment still owned millions of acres of valuable timber, mineral and agricultural land that might easily have been utilized for public advantage instead of for private gain. The attorneys and other representatives that the vested interests maintained in Washington were busy grabbing this land. I set myself to save it for the people. I was thoroughly familiar with the public Land Laws of the United States as I had been a practicing lawyer before the Land Department, a surveyor on the public domain, and beside that I had planted a timber claim with white ash trees which stand today. I, therefore, sought appointment upon the Senate Committee on Public Lands, of which Preston B. Plumb, of Kansas, was Chairman. In that position I had an excellent opportunity to see land grabbing from the inside. The House passed a bill to repeal the timber cul ture law "and for other purposes" in February, 1890. When the bill reached the Senate it was referred to the Committee on Public Lands, and Chairman Plumb appointed Senator Walthall of Mississippi and me as a sub-committee to consider the bill. I gave the mat ter very careful attention and, after some weeks of study and work, I reported the' bill to the Senate in. such a form that it involved a complete revision of the Federal land laws. The bill, containing nineteen 14 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON sections, finally . passed .the Senate on the 16th of September, 1890. Immediately, upon its passage, a conference was re- quested and Senators Plumb, Walthall and Pettigrew were appointed as Conference Committee on the part of the Senate. In the House the bill was refe^ed to the Committee on Public Lands, which reported it back, early in the next session of Congress, agreeing to the Conference asked for by the Senate and ap pointing three conferees, Payson of Illinois, Holman of Indiana and Pickler of South Dakota. Plumb did not act with the Conference Committee. Walthall of Mississippi and myself took full charge of the work and, after many conferences, we finally agreed upon and did report to each house a bill just as the Senate had passed it, with five additional sections, mating twenty-four in all. The 24th section was as follows: "SEC. 24, p. 1103, 51st CONGRESS, MARCH 3, 1891. "That the President of the United States may from time to time set apart and reserve, in any State or Territory having public land bearing forests in any part of the public lands wholly or in part covered with timber or undergrrowth, whether of commercial value or not as public reservations and the President shall by public proclamation declare the establishment of such reservations and the limits thereof." I gave this section in full, first, because it resulted in departure in public policy that was highly advan tageous to the people of the United States, and second, because it l6d to one of the most bitter fought parliamentary struggles in which I have ever par ticipated. Section 24 was placed in the bill at my suggestion to take the place of the timber culture law, which never had produced any timber. I had offered this section in the Senate Committee on Public Lands but the Western Senators were opposed to "locking' up" the country in forest reservations. In conference LAND GRABBING 15 while I had some difficulty, I secured an agreement which included this section in the bill. Nothing was done under Section 24 until after Cleveland commenced his second term and then he, as President, appointed a commission of eastern peo ple to go out into the Western country — Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado: — and establish the forest reserva tions. These men rode about the country in a Pull man car, and prescribed the boundaries of forest res ervations without any discriminating judgment. For example, they established the reservation of Black Hills in South Dakota, and embraced within its boundaries the city of Deadwood, and the towns of Leed, Custer and Hill City, which contained thou sands of people who were mining, home-building and getting the timber necessary for these activities' from the surrounding forests. Once these reservations were established it became impossible to cut any timber upon them; consequently the people who had made their homes in the reserved area were practi cally compelled to move. Since no law had been passed for the administra tion of these newly created .reserves, the country was completely locked up. No new people could go in and settle, and those already there found themselves re stricted on every hand. The result was a general dissatisfaction with the whole policy of forest reser vations. I realized that, unless some change was made, the -whole policy would be discredited, and therefore I secured legislation suspending reservations already located until proper legislation could be secured for their administration. Finally, at my request, Wolcott, who was then at the head of the Geological Survey, prepared an amendment to the Sundry Civil Appropriation Bill, which I offered in the Senate, providing for the ad ministration of these forests. After this law for administration was enacted, the Secretary of the In^ terior informed me that he would make the boun- 16 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON daries of the Black Hills Forest Reservation what ever I might recommend. I went out to the macK Hills, held meetings of the people, and explained to them the purpose of the Forest Reservation, in every instance they passed resolutions in favor ot be ing embraced with the Forest Reservation as ad ministered under the new laws. By this direct ap peal to the people most intimately concerned I was able to enlarge the reservation by over 200,000 acres. When I returned to Washington, the Secretary of the Interior asked me to suggest such rules and reg ulations as would best enable his Department to ad minister the forest reservations laws. In accordance with this request I wrote out the rules and regula tions which were afterwards adopted by him. I remember in one of the regulations that I pro vided for sowing the Black Hills spruce seed upon the snow in all the open parks and denuded -places, so that when the snow melted, these seeds would, sink down into the moist ground and immediately sprout and grow; and, today, there are many thousands more acres of forest in the Black Hills reservations than there were when the law was enacted. Thus far matters had gone very nicely. I had had a hard' fight to get the policy of forest reservation adopted and the reservations themselves established. Now came the real fight— to hold them for the people. In the amendment which was added to the Sundry Civil Appropriation Bill I inserted a provision that permitted any settler, who was embraced within a Forest Reservation, to exchange his land, acre by acre, for other govemment land, outside of the reser vation. Such a provision enabled settlers who had taken land before the establishment of reservations to take up a new quarter section in case they did not care to live under the reservation regulations. The Conference Committee of the two houses that considered the Sundry Civil Bill changed /the word ing of this section in such a way that the land grant railroads, which had received in all nearly two hun- LAND GRABBING 17 dred million acres of land, could exchange their land, if embraced within a forest reservation, for the very best land the Government had remaining on the pub lic domain outside of the reservation. Allison of Iowa was Chairman on the part of the Senate and Joe Cannon of Illinois, Chairman on the part of the House. The Conference report came to the Senate the day before the end of the session. Therefore it was not printed, but was rushed through after having been read hurriedly by the clerk. I listened to the reading, but I did not notice this change of wording in my amendment, and so this monstrous proposition became a law. - Of course, the conferees knew what they were do ing when they slipped through this provision. Under it, the Interior Department ruled that the land grant railroads could exchange their odd sections, embraced within a forest reservation, for the best remaining acres of the public domain. The right to make this exchange was worth at least fifty millions of dollars to the land grant railroads. I did not discover this change, made by the Con ference Committee, until I learned tliat the Depart ment of the Interior was permitting the railroads to make these exchanges. As soon as I discovered this, I looked up the law and found what an enormous fraud had been practiced through the cunning of Senator Allison of Iowa, Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, and Joe Cannon, Representative from Illinois, a banker and lawyer, and Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations in the House. Nearly ten years had dragged along, from the time I began to fight in favor of forest reservations, until this fraud was perpetuated on the American people by these two representatives of business. In order to meet the situation I presented an amendment to the Sundry Civil Bill on May 31, 1900 (56th Congress, 1st Session, pages 6289 to 6298 of the (Congressional Record), which reads as follows: 18 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON "And said superintendents, assistant inspectors, super visors and rangers shall, under the direction of tne Secretary of the Interior, examine all lands within tne boundaries of any forest reservation that belong to any land-grant railroad company, and have not here- ' tofore been sold in good faith for a valuable consider ation, and report to the Secretary the character and value of said land, and pending such examination and report none of said lands shall be exchanged for other ^ lands outside of said reservation." It may be well to state at this point that the Cen tral and Union Pacific Railroad had received grants by an Act of Congress, 20 miles wide, from the Missouri River on the west' boundary of the State of Iowa, straight across the continent to the Pacific Ocean, througli the length of the States of Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and Califomia. The road has the odd sections on a strip 10 miles wide on each side of the tracks. The Northern Pacific Road re ceived a grant of land 40 miles in width from some point in the State of Minnesota, clear through to the Pacific Ocean. This grant extended through the States of Minnesota, North Dakota, Montana, Idaho and Washington, and the area granted included the odd sections throughout this entire region. These grants embraced the good and the bad land alike. Of necessity they included large areas on the tops of the Rocky Mountains and the Cascade Range and a great deal of desert land. Whether by design or not, when the forest reservations were created, they em braced, indiscriminately, forested and non-forested districts. By some chance they also embraced large areas of desert land. These deserts were probably embraced intentionally so that the railroads could exchange their odd sections of worthless desert land for lands of great value outside the reservation. After I had presented the amendment just referred to, I made a statement of these facts, after which the following significant debate took place. I quote it in order to show where certain Senators lined up when it came to an issue betv/een private interest LAND GRABBING 19 and the public welfare. (Con. Record, May SI, 1900, 1st session, 56th Congress, p. 6288.) Mr. PETTIGREW: "Mr. President, the amend ment I propose is a provision for the protection and administration of forest reservation. Three years ago in an appropriation bill we provided for the pro tection and administration of these reservations, and provided that any actual and bona-fide settler who had taken a claim within a forest reservation after wards created could exchange his land if he desired to do so, for a like area of the public domain. It was the intention of the law to allow a settler whose Yknd was embraced in any forest reservation to ex change his land, if he desired to do so, for lands out side of the reservations, acre for acre. "But certain words were inserted under which the Department has decided that a land-grant railroad can exchange the worthless lands — Elands from which the timber has all been cut, tops of mountains, the inaccessible and snow-capped peaks of the Rockies and Sierra Nevadas — ^for the best land the Govem ment has, acre for acre. So they have swapped lands on the Cascade Range, which are covered forever with ice and snow, not worth a tenth of a cent an acre, for lands worth from six to ten dollars in the valleys of Washington and Oregon and Idaho and Montana, thus depriving the settlers of a chance to secure these lands, besides enlarging the grants of the railroads to that extent. "Now, my amendment simply provides that these lands shall be inspected and examined by the officers who have charge of the reservations, and they shall report to the Secretary the character of the lands that belong to these companies, so that in the future we can make a proper adjustment — ^not an adjust ment by which they shall receive a thousand times more than which they surrender — and that while the appraisement is going on no more exchanges shall be made. That is all that the amendment aims to ac- 20 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON complish, and it is one in the interest of the public beyond all questions, suspending the operation ot a law which Congress would never have passed if it had been discussed." Mr. ALLISON: "I wish to say that thi3_ amend ment, as it appears to me, is general legislation. Cer tainly on the statement made by the Senator from South Dakota, it changes the existing law. I hope he will not press it on this bill, because if he does we shall be obliged to make the point of order that it is proposed general legislation." Mr. PETTIGREW: "I wish to say that I do not believe it is subject to the point of order, because it prescribes the duties of these officers who are pro vided for and the method of the expenditure of the appropriation now in the bill. Therefore, I do not believe it is subject to the point of order. It seems to me if it is possible to insert the amendment we ought to do it and protect the Government and the people of this country against the execution of a law which we never would have passed if we had known what it contained." Mr. PETTIGREW: "I should like to ask the Chair man of the Committee on Appropriations if the Sec retary of the Interior did not think the law should be entirely repealed?" Mr. ALLISON: "The Secretary did." Mr. PETTIGREW: "Did he not think there were great frauds being practiced under it?" Mr. ALLISON: "I have no doubt that is all true, but that is a subject we cannot deal with now." (The amendment is read again.) Mr. PENROSE: "I make the point of order that this is general legislation and contrary to the rule." THE PRESIDENT (protempore) : "The Chair has overruled that point of order. It has already been made. The question is on agreeing to the amend ment." LAND GRABBING 21 "The amendment was agreed to." Allison of Iowa, Tom Carter of Montana, Chandler of New Hampshire, Piatt of Connecticut, Aldrich of Rhode Island, Penrose of Pennsylvania, Walcott of Colorado, Hawley of Connecticut, all joined in the fight against me to see that the land-grant railroads were given this vast graft at the expense of the people of the United States and against the public welfare. This is but a typical case. The lawyers in the Senate always lined up against the people of the United States and in favor of the railroads and the other predatory interests who are the real govern ment of the United States. This Senate debate is significant because it shows that rascality, graft, and public plunder are not political questions, especially in so far as the Senate of the United States is con cerned. Observe that Allison of Iowa, who had inserted the amendment making possible the exchange of these railroad lands, was among the first to attack my amendment and to insist that it should not go into the bill. Observe further that Tom Carter, Chair man of the Republican National Committee, took the same side. It was he who figured in the scandalous affair during Harrison's second campaign for elec tion, at which time he collected from Cramp, the shipbuilder, $400,000 and told Cramp where the money was to be expended. When Tom Carter died he left a large fortune. This same debate was par ticipated in by Bill Chandler of New Hampshire, Stewart of Nevada and finally Penrose of Pennsyl vania, who arose and for the second time raised the point of order against my amendment. Penrose con tinued in public lif6 for many years as a faithful servant and representative of the great predatory in terests. He has never been a representative of the people of Pennsylvania or of the United States. Despite all of this opposition my amendment was adopted without a roll-call. The reason is plain. Neither these men nor their backers desired to have 22 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the amendment become a law, but the scandal con nected with the exchange of the railroad lands naa gained such publicity, and the amendnient was so cleariy in the public interest that they did not dare to kill it openly. Besides, this was an amendment to the Sundry Civil Bill and could be changed m con- ference, and the conference report forced through the Senate on the last day of the session. Allison of Iowa was called "Pussyfoot Allison" by his fellow Senators because of his cunning, his unscrupulous rascality, and his suavity, and he could be relied upon to throw out the bill as reported from the confer ence committee anything that threatened property interests. So the bill passed the Senate and went to con ference. Allison was chairman of the conference on the part of the Senate and Joe Cannon on the part of the House. The conference struck out my amendment, adopted by the Senate, and inserted in its place the following: "That all selections of Land made in lieu of a tract covered by an unperfected bona-fide claim or by a patent included within a public forest reservation ad provided in the Act of June 4, 1S07, shall be confined to vacant surveyed non-mineral public lands which are 8ubje(^ to Homestead entry not exceeding in area the tract covered by such claim or patent." The conference simply struck out the Senate amendment and inserted the original clause that they had placed in the Sundry Civil Bill of 1897 and under which the fraudulent exchange had taken place. The change would have permitted the railroads to con tinue the exchange of their worthless lands for the best of the govemment land and thus to plunder the public domain. The Conference report came up in the Senate on the day before adjournment. I was watching to see what had been done with my amendment, for I kjiew LAND GRABBING 2d Allison and Cannon were but paid attorneys of the railroads. WTien the amendment was read (56th Congress, 1st Session, Congressional Rec., p. 6690) : Mr. PETTIGREW: "I should like to understand the paragraph in relation to non-mineral lands. As I understand it, as read from the Secretary's de?k, it permits a continued exchange by the land-grant railroad companies of the worthless lands in the for est reservations for the best land the Government has. Is that correct?" Mr. ALLISON: "I do not so understand it. The amendment provides for the exchange of surveyed lands only, and not of unsurveyed lands." Mr. PETTIGREW: "But it allows the exchange?" Mr. ALLISON: "It allows the exchange of sur veyed lands." Mr. PETTIGREW: "Mr. President, this confer ence report provides that lands where a railroad company has cut off all the timber or the land on the snow-capped peaks of the mountains, if they are within a forest reservation, can be exchanged for the best lands the Government owns, acre for acre, for timber lands. Hundreds of thousands of acres have already been exchanged, and yet, although the Senate placed upon this bill an amendment which would stop that practice, the conference committee brings in a report to continue it." I wish to call particular attention to the statements made by Allison and Wolcott, that only surveyed land could be exchanged. This statement is specifi cally contradicted by the wording of their own amendment. The falsity of the statement was well known to them, yet they made it for the purpose of deceiving the Senate. A number of the faithful friends of the plutocrats distinguished themselves signally in this debate. Among them were Senators Wolcott of Colorado and Hawley of Connecticut. 24 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Senator Wolcojt, who came into the Senate with out a dollar, retired from that body with a large lor- tune. He was always eager to get into the Kecora as having produced laughter on the part pf the benato^. He considered his effort in the interest ot the rob bery of the public domain particularly worthy of Old Hawley of Connecticut was always a champion of the interests. As long as I knew him he was mentally incapacitated from comprehending anything except the interests of the big business groups with which he always acted. He had an intellect like the soil of Connecticut, so poor by nature that it could; not be exhausted by cultivation. The amendment, as modified by the Committee on Conference was finally agreed to, because if we did not agree to the Senate Civil Sundry Bill with this amendment in it, an extra session would have befen necessary. Thus the fraud was perpetuated, and the continued grabbing of public lands made possible. The frauds thus deliberately ratified by Congress after all the facts were known caused me to wonder what forces were in control of the Government, and convinced me that the lawyers who composed^ two- thirds of both Houses of Congress were but the paid attorneys of the exploiters of the American people, and that both political parties were but the tools in the hands of big business that were used to plunder the American people. The frauds begun under Cleve land, a Democratic President, were enlarged and completed under McKinley, a Republican President. Millions of acres of forest reservation were estab lished in Montana, all within the grant of the North ern Pacific Railroad, where there was no timber or forests, only a little scrub pine that never was and never will be of any value for lumber or any kind of forest products, and that was done so that the North- em Pacific Railroad could exchange its odd sections of worthless desert for scrip, acre for acre, and this scrip sells for from $8 to $10 per acre, and can be LAND GRABBING 25 located on any land the Government owns anywhere within our broad domain, and the desert for which this scrip was exchanged was not and is not worth ten cents per acre. This is the story of one small event in the great drama of American public life that had been unfold ing all around me. I have told it in detail because it shows, as well as anything that I ever learned, the fate that lay in wait for any measure aimed to pro mote the public welfare. When I began this fight for the enactment of forest legislation, I believed that we were enjoying a system of popular govemment in the United States. By the time the .fight was ended, I understood that the country was being run by plunderers in the interest of capital. IL THE LAND FOR THE PEOPLE Powerful interests were out to plunder the public domain. I had felt their grip. They were shrewdly advised. I had faced their spokesman in the Senate and the House. They were sinister. Many a man, under my eyes, had tried to thwart them, and not one such had remained an enemy of the vested interests and at the same time continued in public life. Never theless, I went straight ahead, trying to. save the land for the people. I knew how enormously rich was the public domain; I had an idea of its possibili ties. I wanted to have it used in the future, not for the enrichment of the few, but for the well being of the many. In order to protect the public in their sovereign rights over the remainder of the public domain, I worked out what I believed was a feasible plan for* keeping the public domain in the hands of the public. After I had secured the forest legislation and the passage of the law administering forests, I introduced the following bill in the Senate on March 22, 1898 (55th Congress, 2nd Session) : A BILL To preserve the public lands for the people. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre sentatives of the United States of America, in Con gress assembled. That the public lands of the United States, except reservations, be and they are hereby donated to the States and Territories in which they may be located on the sole condition that all such public lands shall be held in perpetual ownership by such States and Territories to be used by the people residing therein free of rent under such regulations as may be pre scribed by the legislatures of such States and Terri- tories each for itself. THE LAND FOR THE PEOPLE 27 This bill had three purposes: 1. To make use and not ownership the criterion in the distribution of nature's gifts to individual citi zens. 2. To keep the title to the public domain, including agricultural land, mineral land, timber land, water- power, and all other natural gifts, perpetually in the whole people, and thus to prevent any greater quan tities from getting into the grip of the few. 3. To localize control over the administration of the lands, so as to bring the problem closer to the people. Could this first step be taken, I believed that we should be in a position to go forward with a general program for the conservation of all resources. The bill was referred to the Committee on Public Lands, of which I was a member, and to the members of that committee, individually and collectively, and on the floor of the Senate, I presented my arguments. In support of my proposition that the public domain should be leased but never sold, I stated that the public domain in my own state amounted to 20,000,- 000 acres of grazing land. Then I showed that if these lands were conveyed to the State of South Dakota, with the privilege of leasing, they could be leased to cattlemen for ten cents an acre, which would produce a revenue of $2,000,000 a year. Then I showed that this money derived from farm leases could be used to build great reservoirs on the heads of all streams and store the flood- water, and thus irrigate and make productive large areas of this semi-arid land. I called the attention of the Senate to the fact that Dakota land was only one part of the public domain, and that the Dakota problem was only one aspect of the whole problem of conservation. I showed them that the United States had 500,000,000 acres of arid and semi-arid land, large areas of which could be irri gated to advantage, either through stream conserva tion or through the sinking of artesian wells. 28 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Furthermore, I showed that the (Jovemment, through its control of the lakes and streams ot the country, had an opportunity to adopt constructive re lief measures designed to meet the recurring floods and droughts in the lower reaches of the rivers. Many of the streams are navigable. Successful navigation depends on the maintenance of a steady flow of water. Many were used for the generation of power. Again, there is a need to conserve the spring surplus to cover the needs of the late summer. Each spring this water, so sorely needed later, is allowed to run off from the land, not only wasting the supply but, through floods, overflowing the banks and destroying temporarily or permanently large areas of fertile and cultivated land. For the purpose of preventing this destruction, particularly along the Mississippi, Congress had for many years appropriated money for the construction of dykes and levees, under the theory that such work was for the benefit of commerce. Here was a two fold problem: Millions of acres of arid land, on the one hand, required only water to make them prodi^ce splendid crops. On the other hand, the interests of commerce, of power development and of the dwellers along some of the larger rivers, demanded an in telligent regulation of stream flow. It was estimated at that time by the Government authorities that 72,000,000 acres of land could be thus reclaimed and made to produce crops suflScient to support 15,000,000 people. The benefit that com merce, industry and agriculture would derive from such a plan would be incalculable. Therefore, I mov ed an appropriation of from one to two hundred million dollars to begin the building of such reser voirs as were most urgently needed and the establish ment of irrigation projects in the districts that would - yield the most immediate results. I further showed that if the storm water was all stored in these reservoirs, it would reduce the floods on the great rivers — ^the Missouri and the Mississippi THE LAND FOR THE PEOPLE 29 — and obviate the necessity of building embankmeiTts to reclaim the lands heretofore flooded by these great rivers. Thus, the leasing of the land held the title for all the people, while it made the land available for such as were able to utilize it. For my part, I stated that I would prefer to have Congress turn over its arid and semi-arid land, lying within its boundaries, to the State of South Dakota, because I believed the problem would be practically and honestly worked out to the great advantage of the people of that state. The same thing I insisted was true of Idaho, of Montana, of Wyoming, of Colo rado, of Nevada, of Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Western Kansas, Western Nebraska and North Dakota. I insisted that the nation could not afford longer to neglect this great opportunity for material advancement, which I considered of fully as much importance, if not of more importance, to the future greatness and prosperity of this country than the clearing out of harbors along the small streams of the coast, or even the development of the great har bors themselves. The arguments fell on deaf ears. These questions arose during the days following the Spanish War and preceding the conquest of the Philippines. We had started upon a career of conquest rather than one of internal improvement. The Administration, backed by many of the people, believed that it was of great benefit to this country that we should annex 10,000,- 000 people in the Philippines. Instead of spending hundreds of millions in conquering the Philippines, it would have been far better economy and better business judgment to spend it in reclsliming the arid lands of the west. At the time that I presented these arguments to the Senate, I considered them weighty. I consider them weighty today. I believe that they represented the only statesmanlike approach to the problem of re source conservation and that they suggested a line of action that might have been followed to the advantage 30 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON of the people of the United States. Yet I was unable to persuade the committee to report the bill back to the Senate in any form. There was no question of choosing between two policies. The committee had no policy on this sub ject. On the subject of the public domain they had one conclusion— that the only way to get a state or territory prosperous was to get the title of the public domain out of the Government and into the hands of some private interest, by selling it, or giving it away, or doing anything to get rid of it. There was not a single member of the committee on public lands that was in favor of the sovereign ownership of the natural resources. They wanted to deed not only the land, but the minerals underneath the land, and also to convey the water power so that these utilities, of no value except that which the community gave them, could be used to enrich in dividuals and exploit the whole population. Every one was opposed to public utilities being used for any other purposes than that of enriching individuals, and corporations were being rapidly formed for the purpose of more thoroughly performing this work of exploitation. Two-thirds of both houses were lawyers, and they believed that the rights of property, no matter how acquired, were the only sacred thing In connection with humanity, and the only legitimate subjects for the consideration of a well-ordered legislative cham ber in an intelligently directed state. The same point of view has prevailed ever since, and therefore no policy of reclaiming and utilizing the public domain for the benefit of the people of the United States has ever been adopted. Instead, the 65th Congress, at its second session, passed the infamous Shield's Water Power Bill. The natural resources of the United States, a hun dred years ago, were the richest possessed by any modern nation. Like the air and the sunlight, they existed in almost limitless i^bundance. But the "land- THE LAND FOR THE PEOPLE 31 hog," in his multitude of corporate forms, came upon the scene and today the timber (except 170,000,000 of acres embraced within the forest reservations), coal, copper, iron and oil that once belonged to the American people are in the hands of a few very rich men who, with their agents and attorneys and hang ers-on, administer these free natural gifts for their own profit. At the present moment, the one great re source remaining in the hands of the whole people — the "white coal" of our streams and rivers — is being gobbled up by the public utility corporations, which plan to charge four prices for a commodity that should go to the people at the cost of production. I made my fight on the land because it was so basic and so important from the point of view of economic strategy; because it was so rich; because, by holding and using it for their common advantage, the Ameri can people might have remained free; because this same land, in the hands of a small and unscrupulous ruling caste, will not only enable the members of that caste to live parastically upon the labor of the re mainder of the community, but will give them the right to decide who among the citizens* of the United States shall be able to earn a living and who shall be condemned to slow starvation. I lost my fight on the land because every branch of the government machinery was manned by the agents and attorneys of the interests which were busy grab bing the public domain; because, through their con trol ofjhe press, they kept the public ignorant of the things that were really transpiring, and because the people, lulled by soft words such as "liberty" and "constitutional rights," were busily pursuing their daily occupations, secure in the belief that the Gov ernment would protect them. So I lost the fight be cause those who wanted the land were keen and powerful, though few in number; while the many, from whom the few stole it, were basking in the be lief that they were citizens of a "free country." III. BANKS AND BANKERS My life in the West taught me the power of the landgrabbers. My experience in the East gave me an insight into the power of the banker. The land- grabber cornered land. The banker comers money and credit. Both are able through their monopolies to plunder the producers of the product of their toil. We learned, through our experiences with the Eastern bankers, that the institution which can issue money and extend credit holds the key to the whole business world. The banks, under the present laws, can do both, and this fact makes them the dictators of business life. Perhaps a little story, "The Evolution of a Banker," will help to show what the banker does to his fel low-men. In 1868 placer gold was discovered high up on the sides of Mount Shasta, in Northern Califomia. The report of this discovery was quickly known in other placer mining camps farther south, and a great stampede occurred. Five or six hundred miners, at one time, went to Shasta, staked out their claims, and commenced mining. Of course there was every variety of the genus homo, from the saloon-keepers, gamblers and high waymen to miners, speculators and prospectors — a motley crowd. Among the others there was Robert Waite, an educated fellow — a sort of graduate — ^who could talk on every subject from the Bible to Hoyle. Then there was Silver Jack who, when he was not mining, was shooting up the mining camps or rob bing stage-coaches. When they arrived at Shasta, all of the members of the crowd, with one exception, staked out claims BANKS AND BANKERS 38 and went to work. The diggings were good. The re turns were high. In the camp lived the usual hangers-on, and among them there was one man who among all of his fellows had staked out no claim. Everybody else worked at something. He never worked. The others were equal g,nd democratic. He held himself aloof. He was better dressed than the others ; he was never about in the daytime, but in the early evening he might be seen loitering about the gambling houses. He neither swore nor drank; he talked but little, and he was known by everybody. As the weeks went by he opened a little office and began to lend money to miners who had a good claim and who were dissipating their earnings, at four per cent a month. Time passed, and he opened a bank. Because of his personal habits and rather agreeable appearance, the miners deposited their savings with him. He paid the depositors ten per cent a year, and loaned the money to other miners, who were willing to give their claims as security, for four per cent a month. Under these conditions the bank flourished and the banker made money. But one day he sold the bank and moved to San Francisco, and there opened a bank on a large scale, and became known as one of the great financiers of the Pacific Coast. A feW years afterward, when he had become famous, he removed to New York and entered the circle of the great financiers of the world, and became widely known as a manipulator of moneys and credits. At a banquet which he gave to celebrate the thir tieth year of his entry into the banking business, he grew enthused with wine, and in his speech gave a sketch of his life and told how he was the first bank er in Shasta in '68. Thereupon the miners- at Shasta — ^those of the oldtimers who still remained — ^held a meeting to discuss the question. And they said: "Why this man is not the man who started the first 34 IMPERLA.L WASHINGTON bank in Shasta; or, if he is, then his name was so- and-so, and we remember him well." And they thereupon appointed a committee of three to make an investigation and ascertain how the great banker got his start, and the committee reported that he had gone with the stampede to Shasta, had taken no claim and done no work whatever; but that he slept days and crawled around at night and stole from each of the miners so little of the day's pro duction that he did not miss it. The committee there fore resolved that he had changed his name but had not changed the methods of doing business which he •inaugurated at Shasta in the early days. He was still stealing so little from each of his fellow men that they did not miss it, and had thus accumulated an enormous fortune and become one of the greatest financiers of the world. The committee further concluded that no person or corporation should be permitted to do a banking busi ness under any circumstances ; that the medium of ex change was the life-blood of business and the most; important of all public utilities and that, therefore, it should be controlled by the government alone; that every post-office should be a savings bank, and that the govemment should establish commercial banks everywhere and loan money to the people at just what it cost to do the business above what was paid the de positors who placed their surplus in the Postal Sav ings Banks, so that if the Postal Banks paid three per cent to depositors, the Government commercial banks would loan this money to the people of the locality where it was deposited for not to exceed three and a half per cent. And thus this great engine of exploitation, now operated to plunder the producers of wealth in the United States, would be turned into a great public benefaction and compel the bankers —parasites on society— to join the ranks of the pro ducing classes. The banking business is a parasite business; the banker is a member^of a parasite class; yet so com- BANKS AND BANKERS 35 pletely does he dominate the present order of society that, instead of befng punished by society and com pelled to take a position and earn his living like the masses of the people, through the pursuit of some useful occupation, the banker is generously reward ed; laws are passed in his favor and he is encourag ed and assisted in his efforts to pluck his fellow men. For years, under our National Bank Act, the bank er could subscribe for Government bonds, deposit them in the Treasury, and have the Treasury issue to him the full face value of the bonds in currency. Thus he retained the bonds and at the same time was able to secure an equal amount of money which he could use for his private profit in the banking business. The issue of money was thus made a function of pri vate banking institutions. They could not only lend money; they could actually create it. During my visit to Japan, I received some interest ing sidelights on our banking business as the Japs saw it. - Before going to Japan I talked with the Japanese Minister in Washington, and secured from him all of the books published in English giving the history and the economic development of Japan. I also secured two large volumes on the Japanese banking system written by Soyeda, a Jap educated in England, who was then the Treasurer of Japan. When I arrived Soyeda met me; and he not only entertained me very graciously, but talked with me on many occasions. I had noticed in reading his book on Japanese banking that Japan had at first adopted the American National Banking system, but had abandoned it after four years of trial. I asked Soyeda why this was. He explained that four years had convinced them that the system was entirely unworkable because under it the bankers could cause an expansion of the currency whenever it was profitable for the bankers to expand, and a contraction of the currency when ever it was profitable for them to contract. The re- 36 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON suiting panics benefited the creditor class and ruined the producing class: that in fact our banking system worked in Japan just as it worked here — expanding the currency to gratify the greed of the bankers when expansion was to their profit, and contracting it in the interest of the bankers whenever it was to their advantage to contract the volume of money. Japan has concluded that all money should^ be is-^ sued by the Govemment and its volume regulated by index numbers so as to maintain a steady range of prices; that is, when the volume of money was un duly expanded, it would cause a rise in all prices and lead to the expansion of business and a new credit; that whenever the money was unduly contracted in volume, it would lead to a decline of all prices, cause panics, and allow the creditors to take possession of the property of the producers. And so the Japanese established a central bank and branches, and the nation issued its ovrn cur rency. In other words, the Japs discovered a great economic law, well known to some people of the United States, but the officials of Japan had the hon esty and Character to act upon this law instead of following our example of leaving the issue of money and the control of its volume in the hands of a few manipulators to be used as an engine for exploiting the producing population. This Japanese situation was interesting to me. I had left the Republican party in 1896 on this very issue. The Japs with their keen sense of values and their willingness to experiment learned in four years what the American people had not learned in foriy — ^that the banking power in private hands makes the bank ers the autocrats of the business world. This lesson came to me with double force. When I retumed to America I found Congress debating the extension of National Bank charters. Aldrich of course was for the extended charters. In the Senate BANKS AND BANKERS 87 (March 2, 1901), two days before my term as Sen ator expired, he said: "The present charters of the National Banks expire from time to time, commencing July 14, 1902. The law is that new plates shall be issued to all banks in extending their charters. The preparation of these plates will take nearly a year, and it is desirable that this bill should be passed at this session. There can be no objection to it. It is simply a matter of form, as certainly the time of the charters will be extended in the next Congress." Mr. PETTIGREW: "Mr. President, I do not believe that the charters ever ought to have been issued, and I am certainly opposed to their being renewed. I be- lieve the system is a pernicious one and has a ten dency to breed panics, to expand the currency when it ought to be contracted, and to contract it when it ought to be expanded. Japan adopted this system, and after thorough investigation repealed the law, and for this very reason. "Under this system, which is a branch of our finan cial system, the banks can produce a panic whenever they please, and wreck the property of this country or any other country where the system exists. The subject ought to be studied and thoroughly investi gated. These charters never should be renewed, and a remedy should be offered by which we could have an elastic currency rather than one which produces too much when there is already too much and too little when there is already too little, and puts the control of the volume of the money of the country in the hands of a combination of national bankers. I therefore object to the bill." The bill therefore went over to the next session. Then, after my term of service in the Senate ex pired, the bill was passed. The experiences of the American Banking system during the great war confirmed my view in every particular. The Federal Reserve Act, passed in 1913, had made possible the centralization of banking pow- 38 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON er. The war did the work. As Roger Babson re cently stated the matter: ... "In 1914 w« had 30,000 banks, functioning m a great degree in independence of one another. Then came the Federal Reserve Act, and gave us the ma chinery for consolidation, and the emergency of five- years' war fumished the hammer-blows to weld the structure into one." IV. MONEY My experiences with the world of affairs have con vinced me that the power in our public life was ex ercised through the bankers. My study of banking showed me that the grip which the bankers were able to maintain on the economic system depended large ly upon their ability to control money. There were two ways in which they exercised this control. One was by determining who should issue money. The other was by specifying its character. The bankers of the United States have been in a position to de cide both of these questions in their own interest. The Constitution of the United States says that the Congress shall have power to coin money, to reg ulate the value thereof and of foreign coins, and to fix the standard of weight and measures. The Con stitution does not empower Congress to delegate the right to issue money to any person or combination of persons. Yet the Congress has always delegated the right to issue money to the banks. The power thus conferred by Congress upon the banks to issue money has been used by the bankers to exploit and plunder the people of the United States. While I was a member of the House of Represen tatives (1880) I had become acquainted with Peter Cooper ©f New York. The renewal of the National Bank charters was under discussion in the House at the time and of course the whole question of cur rency and of our economic system was covered in the debate. One day Peter Cooper of New York placed upon our desks a pamphlet dealing with the money question. I read this pamphlet with great in terest, because Peter Cooper was called a "green- backer" and was supposed to be in favor of what they called "fiat" money. Again any again throughout they 40 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON debate his name had been mentioned and he had been abused by the speakers. The foundation theory of Peter Cooper's pamphlet was that the law of supply and demand applied to money just as it applies to other commodities, so that an abundance of money would be registered in the rise in the price of all those things whose value is measured in terms of money. In other words, that the law of supply and demand (the theory that quan tity affects price) applies to money as well as to corn, oats, and potatoes. Therefore, the proof of a too great abundance of money lay in the universal rise of prices; and, conversely, the proof of money scarcity was the universal decline in prices. Follow ing this theory, it became evident that while the price of any one commodity would rise or fall, according to the variations in the supply of and demand for that commodity, a general rise or fall of all prices indicated that money was to abundant or too scarce. Peter Cociper held that money was redeemed when ever it was exchanged by the possessor for the things which he desired more than he desired the money, and that there should be no other form of redemp tion. In other words, money should be issued by the government and its volume so regulated as to main tain a steady range of prices. I was so interested in this pamphlet that I went to New York, made the personal acquaintance of Peter Cooper, and talked with him many times and quite fully upon social and economic questions. These talks, and the ideas which I had secured from my reading, convinced me that so long as the banks controlled the issue of money, they would be able to determine the economic life of the United States. Shortly after my entrance into the Senate, the whole question was dramatized in the struggle over the free coinage of silver. The big business interests had become convinced that if the United States was to take her position as one of the great exploiting nations of the world she MONEY 41 must follow the example of England — ^the world's premier empire — and establish a gold basis for the currency. It was in opposition to this policy of im perialism that we advocated the free and unlimited coinage of silver. - We were demanding that, in this respect, the United States should take a position worthy of her great traditions and refuse to strike hands with the international plunderers who were busy with their work of economic aggression in all parts of the world. Those of us, who were opposing British or any other brand of imperialism, were, with equal insistence, demanding that the United States adopt a money sys tem calculated to protect the borrower as against the lender, and so designed as to take out of the hands of private individuals the huge power that money- lending conferred. Many of the leaders of American public life were urging that the United States must wait for England to move, but the absurdity of such a proposition was apparent on its face. Indeed, her leading statesmen declared that fact in so many words. Thus Glad stone is credited with the following statement in a speech to the House of Commons. (London Times, March 1, 1893) : "I suppose there is not a year which passes over our heads which does not largely add to the mass of English investments abroad. I am almost afraid to estimate the total amount of property which the United Kingdom holds beyond the limits of the United Kingdom, but of this I am well convinced, that it is not to be counted by tens or hundreds of millions. One thousand millions ($5,000,000,000) probably would be en extremely low and inadequate estimate. Two thousand millions ($10,000,000,000) or fifteen hundred millions, is very likely to be nearer the mark. ('Hark! Hear!') I think under these circum stances it is rather a serious matter to ask this country to consider whether we are going to perform this supreme act of self-sacrifice. I have a profound 42 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON admiration of cosmopolitan principles. I can go a great length, in moderation (laughter), m recom mending their recognition and establishment, but it there are these two thousand millions ($10,000,000," 000) or fifteen hundred millions ($7,500,000,000) of money which we have got abroad, it is a very ser ious matter as between this country and other countries. "We have nothing to pay them ; we are not debtors at all; we should get no comfort, no consolation, out of the substitution of an inferior material, of a cheaper money, which we could obtain for less and part with for more. We should get no consolation, but the consolation throughout the world would be great. (Loud laughter.) This splendid spirit of philanthropy, which we cannot too highly praise — be cause I have no doubt all this is foreseen — would re sult in our making a present of fifty or a hundred millions ($500,000,000) to the world. It would be thankfully accepted, but I think the gratitude for your benevolence would be mixed with very grave misgiv ings as to your wisdom. I have shown why we should pause and consider for ourselves once, twice, and thrice before departing from the solid ground on which you have, within the last half century, erected a commercial fabric unknown in the whole history of the world — before . departing from the solid ground you should well consult and well consider and take no step except such as you can well justify to your own understanding, to your fellow countryman, and to those who come after us." (Cheers.) How could England be expected to abandon an eco nomic system that was yielding hundreds of millions in yearly profits to her bankers and investors? Again and again this issue has been raised at inter national conferences. The first conference was held in 1867 at the invita tion of France, and met at Paris on June 17, 1867. Eighteen of the principal European countries and, the United States participated. They voted unanimously MONEY 43 against the single silver standard, and every nation participating in that conference voted in favor of the single gold standard but the Netherlands, and they also voted to establish the 25-franc gold pices as an international coin. The next conference met, at the invitation of the United States, at Paris, August 16, 1878. Twenty coun tries were represented. Germany refused to send dele gates. It was proposed by the United States, first, that it is not to be desired that silver shall be ex cluded from the free coinage in Europe and the United States; second, that the use of both gold and silver as unlimited legal tender may be safely adopted ,by equalizing them at a ratio fixed by international agreement. Then the convention resolved — what? Simply this, and nothing more: That the difference of opinion that had appeared excluded the adoption of a common ratio between the two metals, and then adjourned. The next, or third, conference was called by France and the United States, and was hejd in 1881, nineteen countries being represented. The delegates from Swe den said that they had better reaflfirm the declaration of 1878, and the conference reaffirmed that declaration and adjourned never to meet again. The declaration of 1878 was that the differences of opinion which had appeared excluded the adoption of a common ratio be tween the two metals. The next conference was held at Brussels in 1892. At that conference the United States proposed, not the free and unlimited coinage of silver at any ratio, but simply this : The United States had at first sent an invitation to Great Britain, asking that government to join us in a convention to adopt both metals at a ratio to be agree upon. Great Britain refused to ac cept the invitation to the conference to discuss the question of agreeing upon a ratio for the coinage of the two metals, but, when we changed the invitation so as to provide for simply meeting and discussing the question of the enlarged use of silver. Great 44 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Britain joined in the conference, and this was the program of the United States in the conference of 1^92: That in the opinion of this conference it is desirable that some measure should be found for increasing the use of silver in the cur rency system of the nations. That was all. No greater or broader resolution would be accepted by Great Britain. Neither would she join us in a conference to discuss the question of the ratio. But what more? Mr. Wilson, a delegate from Great Britain, immediately said: "Her Majesty's Government did not find it possible to accept an invitation conveyed in terms which might give rise to a misunder standing by implying that the Government had some doubt as to the maintenance of the monetary system which had been in force in Great Britain since 1816." Speaking of Sir Charles Freemantle and himself, he said: "Our faith is that of the schoel of mono metallism pure and simple. We do not admit that any other than the simple gold standard would be applicable to our country." Early in the session the leading delegate from Ger many declared: "Germany, being satisfied with its mone tary system, has no intention of modifying its basis. ... In view of the satisfactory mone tary situation of the Empire, the Imperial Government has prescribed the most strict reserve for its delegates, who, in consequence, cannot take part either in the discussion or in the vote upon the resolution presented by the delegates of the United States," MONEY 45 Germany, in that conference, then refused to dis cuss or vote one way or another upon a proposition simply for the' enlarged use of silver. Austria-Hungary, although represented in the con ference, instructed their delegate to take no part in the conference, in its discussion or votes. The delegate from the Netherlands declared: "That Holland would not enter into a bi metallic union without the full and complete participation of England, is a part of the formal instructions fumished us by our gov ernment." France made the same declaration practically; in fact, absolutely the same declaration, that she would not participate in any agreement unless England joined. The convention adjourned to meet again at some future time, to be called again, some time within the then coming year, but it never reassembled. After wards, the Congress of the United States passed a bill providing for nine delegates to a monetary conference whenever we could find anybody who would confer with us; and we were unable to find anyone who would join in a conference and who would talk with us about this question, and the law lapsed by limita tion of time. The United States had become a capitalist nation — producing surplus wealth ; exporting it in the form of goods and investment funds, living on the interest that these investments produced, and thus saddling upon the backs of the undeveloped countries of the world the burden of taking care of those nations which were rich enough to bind the poorer peoples to them by the lending of money. The gold standard was a part of the harness that the eastern bankers had used to drive the western farmers. The ^Sght was lost by the free silverites. The gold standard won the day and with that victory went the triumph of protection, the establishment of a 46 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON trust-controlled govemment, the degradation of labor, and the assurance of plutocracy's power. The Government of the United States has allowed interested parties — creditors and bankers — ^to manip ulate its credit and volume of money in such a way a^ to produce panics and, by this means, to plunder those who toil. These panics have come at stated in- terals. M. Juglar (a French authority) has fully analyzed the three phases of American business life into prosperity, panic and liquidation, which three constitute themselves into a "business cycle" which ordinarily occupies about ten years. These ten years may be apportioned roughly as follows: Prosperity, five to seven years; panics, a few months to a few years; liquidation, three or four years. Here is a list, with dates, of all the panics in the United States during the last century, with the cor responding dates for France and England : France England United States 1804 1803 • * • • 1810 1810 .... 1813-14 1815 1814 1818 1818 1818 1825 1825 1826 1830 1830 1829-81 1837-39 1836-39 1837-89 1847 1847 1848 1857 1857 1857 1864 1864-66 1864 , , , . 1873 1873 1882 1882 1884 1889-90 1890-91 1890-91 1894 1894 1893-94 1897 1897 1897 1903 1903 1903 1907 1907 1907 1913 1913 1913 What evidence could be more conclusive of the ut ter failure of a system of economic life than these sue- MONEY 47 cessive breakdowns in the machinery of production and exchange? Yet here is the record upon which the present economic system must stand condemned in the eyes of every thinking human being — ^the record of disaster following disaster, with neither the in clination nor the ability, on the part of the masters of business life, to put a stop to these successive stop pages of economic activity. The figures just cited show that, during the past century, panics have occurred in England and France at the same time that they occurred in the United States. These three countries are linked together by the "gold standard," and their governments are capi talistic governments — administered by the banks and creditor classes for the benefit, not of the people, but for the benefit of the rich. Furthermore, all three countries have the same, or about the same, distribu tion of wealth. In each of these countries the workers are robbed of what they produce by the same process. The creditor classes, through their privileges, are able to manipulate the money and credit through panics, so as to produce, first, a rise in prices — ^by expansion of money and credit, then a withdrawal of both, followed by a sudden drop in prices, and then liquidation. Or, in other words a gathering in of all property produced by toil. With the liquidation, the cycle is completed and there follows a new cycle of ten years more, of prosperity, panic and liquidation. I have had an excellent opportunity to observe the effect of these successive economic disasters upon the producing class. I went to the Territory of Dakota in 1869 and located at Sioux Falls, near the northwest corner of the State of Iowa. At that time, all of the land in Dakota was owned by the Government and was subject to entry unrler the Homestead and Pre emption laws, and coulrl only be secured by actual settlers. The result of the nanic of 1873 cauFsed very many of these homesteader'' to commute their home steads, because the price of farm products had de clined below the cost of production. As a result, the / '48 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON movement for farm tenancy was begun. The United States publishes no figures on farm tenure previous to 1880, but by that year the percentage of tenant farmers in the rich Middle West was for Illinois, 23,7 per cent; Michigan, 31.4 cent; Iowa, 23.8 per cent; Missouri, 27.3 per cent; Nebraska, 18 per cent, and Kansas, 16.3 per cent. The next great disaster to the producing classes cul minated in the manufactured panic of 1893. Grover Cleveland had been elected President of the United States upon the tariff issue in 1892, and when he took office in 1893 he called a meeting of Cdngress for the purpose of repealing the purchasing clauses of the Sherman law of 1890, which provided that the Treas urer of the United States should purchase and coin not less than two million dollars' worth of silver and not more "than four and a half million dollars' worth during each month, thus adding to the volume of cir culating medium. The cutting-off of four and a half millions of silver by the repeal of the Serman law pur chasing clauses, with its consequent decline in the vol ume of money, proved disastrous. The prices of all farm products fell sharply, causing the ruin of the agricultural classes and a prolonged panic nearly as disastrous as that of 1873. The members of the House of Representatives, who believe in bimetallism, called a meeting a day or two before Congress was to assemble, and 201 members of the House declared that they were in favor of both gold and silver as money, because there was not gold enough in the world to furnish a circulating medium. Two weeks afterwards, when the vote was taken in the House of Representatives on the bill to completely, de mocratize silver by repealing the purchasing clause of the Sherman Act, one hundred of these members had been bought over, through patronage and money and party pressure, to the interests of the bankers, and thus the bill was passed. The panic of 1893, resulting from this act, which involved a contraction of the volume of money and a MONEY 49 reduction in prices, again drove large numbers of people from the land and reduced agricultural produc tion below a remunerative point. As a result of this panic and the panic of 1873, the lands in Dakota, which had all been owned by the cultivators, passed into the hands of the mortgage companies, the banks, the cred itors, so that in the county where I reside — Minnehaha County, South Dakota — 52 per cent of the farms now are cultivated by tenants. Within my memory, every acre of land in that county belonged to the Govern ment. Both in the panic of 1873 and in that of 1893 the results were the same. The owners and monopo lists of money used their monopoly power to squeeze the small producer and to enrich themselves. The panic of 1893 was followed by thev discovery in South Africa of the richest gold deposit in the world and within the next few years these mines produced vast sums of gold to be used as money, and caused a rise in the price of everjrthiiig that is the product of human toil. These were the two outstanding economic disasters that occurred during my connection with public affairs. Both arose from similar causes and both produced like results — ^the concentration of wealth in the hands of the few ; the bankruptcy of the small business man and of the farmer; unemployment, distress and lowered wages for the worker; cmire, suicide and murder. The great deposits of gold which had been poured into the currency of the world by the discoveries in Califomia in the early fifties endangered the mortgage- holding classes of all the capitalist nations. Chevalier, one of the most prominent financiers of Europe, published a book in which he contended that gold must be demonetized ; that the continuous use of gold as money would work universal repudiation ; that it was dishonest and wicked to pay debts in gold under such a flood as was coming from California and Aus tralia. His voice was potent. Germany and Holland — creditor nations — closed their mints to gold and adopted the silver standard. Maclaren of England, 50 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON representing the bondholders of the British Empire, made the same argument in the eariy fifties against the use of gold, which has since been used by gold standard contractionists for more than sixty years against the use of silver. In his argument in favor of the bondholders. Chevalier said: V "Our neighbors of the Continent received the announcement of these remarkable discov eries in a different spirit. From the first they have considered them of the greatest impor tance and have expressed great solicitude for the maintenance of the standard value." Immediately that the fact of a great increase in the production of gold was established, the Government of Holland — "a nation justly renowned," says M. Cheva lier, "for its foresight and probity," discarded gold from its currency, "They may," says the same author, "have been rather hasty in passing this law, but in a matter of this nature it is better to be in advance of events than to let them pass us." France appointed a monetary commission which con sidered the question of demonetizing gold for several years and, finally, reported that it was necessary to demonetize one or the other of the percious metals— that the supply was violating contracts by depreciating money with which debts were paid. Up to this time the creditor classes in England, France and the United States had accepted bimetallism. The rush of Califor nia gold endangered their monopoly. The discovery of the Comstock lode threatened to deluge the world with silver, and Mr. Lindeman, Director of the United States Mint, reported in London that there were fifteen hun dred millions of silver in sight in one mine on the Comstock. When gold became very abundant in the middle of the century, the creditor classes wanted to demonetize that metal in order to make money scarce. Then came MONEY 51 the flood of silver, and they feared that more than gold. John Sherman undertook the duty of carrying into effect in the United States the demonetizing of silver. John J. Knox, Comptroller of the Currency, a crafty, scheming, money-making individual, got up a codifica tion of the mint laws. John Sherman introduced the bill, and continually talked about the silver dollar, the inscriptions on it, etc. But when the bill became a law it was found that there was no provision for a silver dollar in the bill, the trade dollar containing 420 grains taking the place of the silver dollar, and thus silver was demonetized, and it was made easy for the creditor classes of the world to corner gold and thus to control money. How conscientiously this control over money has been exercised is indicated by the actions and utter ances of the bankers themselves. The American Colonies had been in the habit, for a number of years before the Revolution, of issuing what were than known as Colonial Treasury notes ; the notes were made receivable by the several provinces for taxes. These Colonial notes being adopted by all the Colonies led to an unexpected degree of prosperity, so great that when Franklin was brought before the Par liament of Great Britain and questioned as to the cause of the wonderful prosperity growing up in the Colonies, he plainly stated that the cause was the con venience they found in exchanging their various forms of labor one with another by the paper money, which had been adopted : that this paper money was not only used in the payment of taxes, but in addition it had been declared legal tender. After Franklin explained this to the British Government as the real cause of prosperity, they immediately passed laws forbidding the paymen^; of taxes in that money. In 1862, the creditors of the United States, the Bank of England, sent the following circular to every bank in New York and New England: 52 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON "Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power, and chattel slavery destroyed. This, 1 and my European friends are in favor of, for slavery is but the owning of labor and carnes with it the care for the laborer, while the European plan, led on by England, is for capi tal to control labor by controlling the wages. THIS CAN BE DONE BY CONTROLLING THE MONEY. The great debt that capital ists will see to it is made out of the war must be used as a means to control the volume of ¦ money. To accomplish this, the bonds must be used as a banking basis. We are now waiting for the Secretary of the Treasury to make the recommendation to Congress. It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to cir culate as money any length of time, as we can not control that." In 1872, the ring of bankers in Ne^ York sent the following circular to every bank in the United States : "Dear Sir : It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers, especially the agricultural and religious press, as will oppose the issuing of greenback paper money, and that you also withhold patronage or favors from all appli cants who are not willing to oppose the Gov ernment issue of money. Let the Government issue the coin and the banks issue the paper money of the country, for then we can better protect each other. To repeal the law creat ing National Bank notes, or to restore to cir culation the Government issue of money, will be to provide the people with money, and will therefore seriously affect your individual profit as bankers and leaders. See your Con gressman at once, and engage him to support \ our interests that we may control legislation." ^ \ MONEY 53 The panic of 1893 was a bankers' panic and in their interest and the ring of gambling bankers in New York sent out the following circular to every bank in the United States: ' "Dear Sir : The interests of national bank ers require immediately financial legislation by Congress. Silver, silver certificates and Treasury notes must be retired and National Bank notes upon a gold basis made the only money. This will require the authorization of from $500,000,000 to $1,000,000,000 of new bonds as a basis of circulation. You will at once retire One-third of your circulation and call in one-half of your loans. Be careful to make a money stringency felt among your patrons, especially among influential busi ness men. Advocate an extra session of Congress for the repeal of the purchasing clause of the Sherman law, and act with the other banks of your city in securing a large petition to Congress for its unconditional re peal, per accompanying form. Use personal influence with Congressmen and particularly let your wishes be known to your Senators. The future life of National Banks as fixed and safe investments depends upon immediate ac tion, as there is an increasing sentiment in favor of Govemment legal tender notes and silver coinage." Mr. Alexander is right about the strength of the^ American banking system. Under the Federal Re serve Act the vast power of the thirty thousand Amer ican banks is concentrated in the hands of a little club with headquarters in Wall Street. This club holds in its hands the power to make or to destroy any busi ness man in the United States; the power to make or wreck financial institutions and inaugurate panics; the power to issue credit, and even money. The bank- 54 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON ers at the center of the financial web are endowed with the power of govemment. The right to issue money is, as I have said, funda mental. This right is exercised by the New York Bankers' Club, thinly disguised as the Federal Reserve Board. On November 3, 1920, the amount of Federal Reserve notes outstanding was $3,568,713,000. What was the basis of this huge issue of paper money? Commercial paper! The member banks were permitted to lend money (or credit) to their patrons; to take commercial paper in exchange for their loans ; to deposit this paper under the authority of the Board and to issue currency against it. This currency was again loaned out, the paper re-deposited, etc., so that the Federal Bank of New York was able to earn, by this pyramiding of credits, over 200 per cent in the frugal year of 1920, in a market where the rate of interest never ran over 8 per cent on standard securities. Through their authority over money and credit, the bankers thus became the arbiters of the business des tiny of the United States. No one elected them. No one can recall them. There is no way in which they can be made the object of public approval or disap proval. They are as far above public responsibility as was William Hohenzollern in Germany before 1914. Self -elected dictators of American life, they make and unmake ; they wreck and rule. They are the heart of business America ; the center of the exploiting system that sits astride the necks of the people. The United States emerged from the Great War with the best credit of any of the larger nations. Its wealth was the greatest; its income the largest, and its bank assets and resources exceeded those of any other coun try; but this very economic position, centered as it is in the hands of bankers, will be used by them to ex ploit the peoples of Latin America and Asia as they have, during recent years, exploited the people of the United States. Exploitation is the profession of the banker, and those in charge of the American banking MONEY 55 institutions have the greatest exploiting opportunity that has ever come to the bankers in any of the mod ern nations. The banks are again issuing circulars and in April or May, 1920, the order went out from New York, from this club which is our government, to all the Reserve Banks throughout the United States, to call their loans and to refuse credit on all the products of human toil not controlled by the combinations. The result has been, of course, the reduction in the price of every thing that is produced in the way of food and raw material, and to a very low point, causing the ulti mate ruin of all those who cultivate the soil. And it was not because there was not plenty of money, for there is more money several times over in circulation in the United States than ever before in our history. We have secured most of the gold of Europe, and I know of my own knowledge positively that these bank ers are financing the bankrupt nations of Europe. For instance, they loaned France a hundred millions a few months ago, and within the last six months they have loaned Norway twenty millions. And so another panic is in progress. The banking system of this country is so organized and constituted as to take from the producer the result of his effort; purposely so organized; organized with the intention of controlling the volume of money ; con tracting and expanding credit so as to produce a panic, or apparent prosperity, as suits the purpose of its or ganizers and managers. This system of banking was the invention of Lord Overstone, with the assistance of the acute minds of the Rothschild bankers of Europe, and was so con structed as to enhance the importance of capital and overshadow the importance of toil. The system is one based upon a small volume of legal tender money, and the limit of this volume they would make as small as possible, in order that they may control it absolutely. Expansion by the issue of credit, not legal tender ; con traction by the withdrawal of credit. Expansion that 66 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON they may seH the property of the producers, which they have taken in with the last contraction, and then contract again in order to wreck the enterprising and once more reap the harvest of their efforts. This is the banking system of Great Britain, and the bank ing system of every gold standard country in the world today. It is the banking system of the United States. This is the system the Republican party is pledged to strengthen and perpetuate. There is no hope of relief for the people of this agricultural coun try in any possible thing the Republican party can or will do. In 1873, fearing that the value of metallic money would become too large, these manipulators of panics, these gathers of the products of other people's toil, set about to secure the demonetization of silver and make all their contracts payable in gold. The result has been, as the thinking ones of every nation agree, that in every gold standard country on the globe, agricutural prices have fallen steadily until we have reached a point where the cost of production is denied the producer. The present Federal Reserve law adopted by the United States is but a culmination of all the infamous banking systems ever invented by any age or people, and it has already produced the practical enslavement of the people of the United States. Banking and the issue of money and credit are the duties of the sovereign and should be performed by the Government for service and not for profit, and for the equal good of the whole population. Section 8, Para graph 5 of the Constitution of the United States says : "Congress shall have power to coin money, regulate the value thereof and of foreign .coins." (Congress is not by the Constitution authorized to delegate the power to any per son or corporation). The functions of money are created by law and are legal tender, a measure of value and, as a result, a me- MONEY 57 dium of exchange, and the value of the unit of money depends upon the law of supply and demand, and the volume of money should be regulated so as to maintain a steady range of prices, and this can be done by the use of index number. No substance should be used as money that has any value besides its money value. And, above all, no metal should be used that has a commodity value, as the volume of money is liable to be affected by hoarding and by being shipped away to other countries, and by being consumed in the arts. In fact, money should never be international. It is the most important tool that a nation can possess for the transaction of its business, and it is more idiotic to ship it out of the country to pay balances than it would be for a farmer to ship his implements, plows and reaper away and sell them for seed ; or a manufacturer to strip his factory of its machines and sell them for raw material. V. THE TARIFF Next, perhaps, to the money system, the tariff is the handiest weapon that the American business interests have at their disposal. I believe in a tariff, provided it is accompanied by a free and untrammeled competitive system of production. The purpose of such a tariff would be to give temporary assistance to such indus tries as are necessary to the sound economic life of a country. Once the competitive system is destroyed, however, the tariff falls to the ground, becomes merely an instrument in the hands of the Government for the plundering of the people through the agency of their ¦ monopolistic combinations. Under such circumstances a tariff cannot be justified unless a man is in favor of stealing. The tariff bills that I saw enacted, two by Republi can Congresses and one by a Democratic Congress, aimed to distribute favors and special privileges to those industries that were strong enough to demand them and to enforce their demands. The Wilson Bill, passed by a Democratic Congress, provided almost ap much protection as the McKinley and Dingley bills, passed by the Republicans. The commodities on the free list were changed, but the principle of protection was accepted by both great parties. Both were serving business and business demanded protection. It was to meet this situation that I urged (May 29, 1894) a tariff commission with power to examine the books of every protected industry in order to ascertain the cost of producing these goods in the United States ;, to compare this cost with the cost of producing themi" abroad, and thus to determine a fair rate of protectioi| for the home industries. I urged at that time that the tariff commission be established as a permanent bureau in order to make protection a science. The business interests, who were clamoring for protection, THE TARIFF 59 did not wish it to be a science. On the contrary, they looked upon it as a sinecure. I had a further reason for believing in a protective tariff as a means of preventing nations which produced similar lines of goods from trading with one another. Commerce is a tax on industry. The act of produc ing wealth has already been finished when commerce begins, A nation should therefore trade only with na tions 1^0 situated as to soil and climate that their prod ucts are different, and are naturally necessary to comfort and happiness. The United States should, therefore, trade chiefly, not with Europe, but with the countries of the tropics, and our industries should be so adjusted that our surplus would pay for those things which we cannot produce ; and this would be our condi tion today if we produced everything' to which our soil and climate are adapted. We should insist that the man who produces the things we can produce shall live here, if he wants us to buy them! shall help support our Government; shall be a taxpayer and a defender of our institutions; we should have the art and the artisan as well as the article, and thus be able to reproduce it. In this way, by varied industry alone, can we bring out all that is in our people, every trait of character, every variety of talent, and can produce an unmatched race of men and an unparalleled civilization. The United States is endowed by nature with the greatest natural resources of any equal area of the earth's surface. We have the most intelligent, free, vigorous and active people. Our wealth and prosperity depend upon the amount we -draw from nature's inex haustible storehouse and that, in turn, depends upon the industry, frugality and sobriety of the living gen eration. Little is Jeft over from one age to another; the nearer we can bring consumer and producer together, the smaller the friction and the less the wear and tear and the expense of energy in making the exchange. 60 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON and the greater the amount of production. It makes no difference what price we pay each other for our prod ucts; if our laws are just there will be an equal and fair distribution of wealth, and, as a result, universal happiness. The theory of free trade is beautiful, and if all the people on earth had an equal chance, were all equally intelligent, moral and industrious, and lived to gether under the same just laws, free trade might be univrsally enacted with profit to all. But these conditions do not exist. Therefore, if we enact free trade our great natural resources and our accumulated wealth would be dissipated throughout the earth, resulting in a slight rise in the scale of liv ing and civilization of all mankind and a great fall in the scale of living and civilization of our own people. An old illustration is apt. If you connect two ponds of water, one large and at a low level, the other small and at a high level, they will both reach the same level — the large one rising a little and the small one falling very much. So it would be with us were we to adopt free trade; for from it results the corollary that our people must do whatever they can and grow whatever they can produce in competition with all the rest of the world. What can we economically produce in competition with the starving millions of Asia or the paupers of Europe? England is trying the experiment; with what result? Great aggregations of wealth; numerous mil lionaires living in incredible extravagance; but a mil lion of her people on a average are paupers always — twenty-eight out of each one thousand of her popula tion. One person out of every twelve needs relief ;to keep from starvation; one-half of the people of Eng land who reach the age of sixty are or have been paupers. Is this a pleasant picture — an example fit to follow? India, with the oldest civilization on the globe, has reached a little worse state than England. India suffers from a widespread famine every four or five years ; eighty out of every one hundred of her people never have enough to eat ; sixteen out of every THE TARIFF 61 one hundred have' barely enough to eat ; four out of every one hundred live in idleness and luxury, and these are the castes which separate the people so that there is no chance to rise and no future but death. Free trade is not a* panacea, and not even a probable remedy ; and while a tariff will enrich us as a nation it will not cause a just distribution of wealth among our own people unless we have just laws which confer equal opportunities. Pursuant to this theory, I presented in the Senate on June 4, 1897, during the famous debate on the Ding- ley Tariff, an argument in favor of a duty on nickel (Volume 30, page 1500) to illustrate the point I was making. "The great issues that are before the people of the United States today reach further than a controversy over the amcfunt of tariff on any item in the pending bill. They are the great questions which determine whether we will march on in the course of freedom and liberty and maintain our republic, or whether we will become a plutocracy — not a plutocracy of natural per sons, but a plutocracy of artificial persons; whether we will continue to be what in fact we are today — a govemment of the corporations, for the corporations and by the corporations, or whether we will go back to what we were in the past— a govemment of, for, and by the people. "The provision of the Senate Committee in regard to nickel is equivalent to no duty at all. The Senate Committee has provided as to nickel a duty of six cents per pound, and then has inserted in brackets "except nickel matte." Of course, under that pro vision, all of the nickel would come in, for nickel matte is simply the nickel extracted from the ore, with such other metals as accompany it in the ore. Then they can be separated in this country. It would all come in free, nickel matte being free. There it is absolute free trade. That provision is a good deal like a good many other provisions in the bill — obscure; not intended to deceive, but having that effect. We can produce all 62 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the nickel used in this country, and yet whatis the history of this industry? There are nickel mines in Missouri, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Washington, North Carolina, Colorado, New Mexico, California, Oregon, Nevada and South Dakota." Mr. QUAY : "The mines in Pennsylvania have been abandoned." Mr, PETTIGREW : "The Senator from Pennsylva nia says that the mines in Pennsylvania have been abandoned. So they have been in every one of the states I have named. Pennsylvania is no exception. So would the Pennsylvania mills be abandoned if you had free trade. Open your doors to the low-paid labor of Asia, compensated in silver, and your mills will be abandoned ; the doors will be closed. There is no ques tion about it, "Let us see what is the history of nickel. We pro duced in the United States in 1885, 275,000 pounds of nickel; in 1886, 214,000 pounds; in 1887, 205,000 pounds; in 1889, 252,000 pounds; in 1890, 223,000 pounds; in- 1891, 118,000 pounds ; in 1892, 92,000 pounds ; in 1893, 49,000 pounds ; in 1894, 9,000 pounds. I have not the figures for 1896, but I understand the production went on declining, one mine after another closing throughout the country. "When they are all closed, you will pay twice what you now have to pay for nickel. What is the occasion of the decline in the industry? A deposit of nickel was discovered in Canada which is so rich in nickel and copper that the copper pays the cost of production. Therefore, the nickel costs nothing. They can put the price at any figure they choose. The moment they have destroyed the industry in this country you will pay two prices for your nickel again, and no one will dare to open the mines of the United States in view of this known competition, because they know the moment they open the mines and invest their money in the in dustry the Canadians can come in and put down the price so as to wreck their enterprise and make them lose their capital. THE TARIFF 68 "What we want, then, is a duty upon nickel suffi ciently large so that it can be produced in this country constantly and so that we shall not be in the hands of a foreign producer, and so that with our high-priced labor we can continue the production. It will not shut out the Canadian nickel, because it can come to this market anyway, no matter what the duty is. Their nickel costs nothing. We have mines in Oregon, for instance, the ore from which has taken the premium, but it is not accompanied with copper in sufficient quantity so that the copper will pay for mining both. Yet men are ready today to go ahead, but not under the provision of this bill, and put up works costing $150,000 to mine nickel in Oregon and Washington, provided a sufficient duty is placed upon the article so that they can mine it and be safe from absolute ruin by Canadian competition. I hold that there is justice in their claim. "We can mine nickel profitably in Dakota, but we cannot do it — we cannot get capital to do it — if we know that at our door is a deposit which can put the price where it will absolutely destroy all profit and not even permit us to make enough to pay the cost of pro duction. I hold it is good policy to place a duty upon nickel sufficient so that we can keep our mines open. Then we will always keep the price at a reasonable figure. Then, if the duty is enough so that it will assure the working of the American mines, we will not be at the mercy of the foreigners to double the price when our mines are closed. I hold that it is good, patriotic policy again to open the mines which pro duced almost enough nickel to supply our wants in the past, and do it by a duty of fifteen cents a pound upon nickel, and not admit nickel matte free." My argument carried no weight. The tariff was not based on any theory, nor did it appeal to science. Instead, it was an agglomeration of concessions to spe cial interests. When this became clear to me, I adopted another method of approach to the problem. These were the years when the feeling against "trusts" 64 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON was running high. I, therefore, decided to relate the two problems by introducing an amendment to the tariff bill (55th Cong., 1st Session, p. 1893), provid ing that trust-controlled products should be admitted free of duty. In the end, the amendment was rejected, but it occa sioned a lively debate, of which I reproduce a part: Mr. PETTIGREW : "Up to the last national conven tion the amendment which I have offered was in strict accord with the platform, the principles, and the poli-^ cies of the Republican party. But the last convention of the Republican party at St. Louis left that plank out of their platform. Previous to that time the Re publican p^rty had declared for bi-metallism. Bi-metal- lism is dangerous to trusts, because trusts do not thrive on rising prices, but flourish when prices de cline. Therefore, if the trusts were to be left out, and bi-metallism left out, everything would be absolute harmony. The platform accorded apparently with the policies of the conventions If this was accidental, if this provision was left out of the platform by an over sight, if it was not left out because the trusts had gained possession of the convention, and did not de sire to abuse each other, then, of course, that will be illustrated by the vote today, "In the platform of 1888 the Republican party de clared : "We declare our opposition to all combina tions of capital, organized in trusts or other wise, to control arbitrarily the condition of trade among our citizens ; and we recommend to Congress and the State Legislatures, in their respective jurisdictions, such legislation as will prevent the execution of all schemes to oppress the people by undue charges on their supplies, or by unjust rates for the trans portation of their products to market. We ap prove the legislation by Congress to prevent THE TARIFF 65 alike burdens and unfair discriminations be tween the states. "And that is good Republican doctrine. It was at that time, at the next convention, in 1892, the Repub lican party declared: "We reaffirm our opposition, declared in the Republican platform of 1888, to all com binations of capital organized in trusts or otherwise to control arbitrarily the condition of trade among our citizens. We heartily en dorse the action already taken upo^ this sub ject and ask for such further legislation as may be required to, remedy any defects in existing laws and to render their enforcement more complete and effective. "Today we have a chance to carry out the plank in that platform and enact those necessary laws, to en act one of those protective provisions to carry out this platform by declaring that every article controlled by a trust or by a combination to limit production or in crease the price shall be subject to the competition of the world, unless the trust will dissolve. The punish ment is, therefore, automatic. The trust can decide whether it will go out of existence or contest the rich American market with the manufacturers of other countries, "It is absolutely and strictly in accordance with the fundamental principles of protection as laid down by the Republican party since it came into existence, for the Republican doctrine was that by protection we re duce the price of the article to the consumer; that by protection we build up competition at home ; that com petition lowers the price and does justice to the con sumer. But, Mr. President, when you allow the exis tence of a trust to control that price and then fix a tariff by which they can raise the price to the limit of the tariff, you have overturned every principle of 66 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON protection. You cannot justify this bill without the amendment. ..." Mr. ALLISON: "I asked the Senator from South Dakota, when he introduced the amendment, to allow it to be passed over, in order that it might come in at its proper place and be more maturely considered. I and strengthened in this view by the criticisms that have already been made upon the amendment. It deals with a very important subject, and deals with it in a way that may be effective ; or, instead of working jus tice, it may work injustice. It goes upon the assump tion that the way to cure this evil is by punishing the people who are engaged in trusts by placing all the articles manufactured in the country of a like char acter upon the free list. It assumes also that the tariff itself is the author of the trust, "I remember very well, as a good many Senators on this floor remember, that we had a long debate on the question of dealing with trusts and the remedies some six or seven years ago. The venerable Senator from Ohio, now Secretary of State, introduced a bill upon that subject. It was referred, I think, to the Commit tee on Agriculture at first, and reported from that committee. That may not have been the committee. My recollection is not very distinct upon that subject. It was reported back and debated here for a week or two. Then it was referred to the Judiciary Committee and was considered for some weeks by that committee, and then reported back here and debated, and finally passed. "I submit to the Senate that a matter which may do injustice, which may be an ineffectual remedy, which may only do partially what is sought to be done, should have more mature consideration than can be given to it in debate here from day to day upon the subject. So I appeal again to the Senator from South Dakota to allow the amendment to be passed over for the time being until we have finished these schedules, and then reintroduce it when Senators on both sides of the chamber shall have an opportunity to present modi- THE TARIFF 67 fications or amendments to it. If the Senator will do that I think it will facilitate our work on the tariff bill" Mr. PETTIGREW: "I wish to make my reply at some length. Mr. President, I will say in answer to the question of the Senator from Iowa that I have no pride with regard to the form of this amendment. All I desire is to accomplish the purpose which is clearly indicated by the amendment. Neither have I any pride in its being my amendment. Let us discuss and point out what defects, if any, there are in the amendment. I think the subject is of sufficient importance for the Senate to consider it until we perfect the amendment. Where it is attacked in good faith, I believe the Sena tor attacking it should offer- an an?endment to the amendment which will cure the defect. Of course, I understand that when a Senator wishes to find an ex cuse for going against the amendment he. can find it, and he can find it in technical quibbles. Capable and able lawyers can readily raise plenty of those. . . . We have asserted in all our arguments to the Ameri can people that the tariff produces competition, and competition reduces prices. On every stump we have told the people how an imported article. Fuller's Earth, for instance, was worth from nineteen to thirty-two dollars a ton, but we discovered it in this country and began its production under a very small duty, when the price fell to twelve dollars a ton in a year and a half. It was the same with nails. It seems to me that if we wish to perpetuate the principles of protection and defend this bill, we must carry out that policy which we have so often advocated and give to the American consumer a competitive market. That is all I desire. Cannot we perfect an amendment, then, that will accomplish that object? "But, Mr. President, I have my doubts about some Senators wanting to do this. I think it has been develr oped in this debate, and in the votes that have been taken, that some Senators do not want to do this. They 68 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON do not want to give to the people of this country a com- petitive market, , , , "Mr. President, in regard to this amendment, I have this to say : I am perfectly willing it shall go over until tomorrow, so that we may discuss and perfect it. The American people are against the trust. They are not willing to allow any Senator in this body to vote against this amendment simply because its phraseology does not suit him. Neither are Senators going to crawl out by a quibble that my amendment will not ac complish the object it has in view. It is the duty of any Senator who objects to the amendments to per fect any amendment, and I shall be glad to accept such an amendment." Later in the same debate Senator Piatt of Conr necticut had a discussion over the duty on Fuller's Earth. During the discussion. Senator Piatt accused me of not being a protectionist "except in spots." To this charge I replied (Cong. Record, 55th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 2041, June 26, 1897) : "Further, Mr. President, I do not know that I care to disclaim or admit the charge as to whether I am a protectionist or not. I believe that the nation should do its own work. I believe that a varied industry is necessary to the development of the best traits of character and the highest civilization among any peo ple. I believe that it is the nation's duty to encourage that varied industry which will enable every talent among its people to be developed to its fullest extent. "Becase I refused to vote for 185 per cent duty on woolen goods, the Senator from Connecticut stands up here to say that I am a protectionist only in spots. Because I refused to vote for 700 per cent duty on the lower grades of silk, used by the poor people of this country, the Senator from Connecticut says I am a protectionist only in spots. "Well, if to be a protectionist all over a man must vote for 700 per cent duty on the cheaper articles and for 10 per cent on the higher-priced articles that are used by the rich, I am only a protectionist in spots. THE TARIFF 69 If to be a protectionist I must vote for an extra duty on sugar purely and absolutely in the interest of the most corrupt and demoralizing trust ever organized in this country, at the behest and dictation of a politi cal caucus, then I am a protectionist only in spots. If I must vote for every trust, if I must vote for every combination, vote special privileges to the few, high rates of duty, differential duty, in order that they may be encouraged in their raids upon the people of this country, then, Mr. President, I am not a protectionist all over, "Is the Republican party a protectio;n party? Why, Mr. President, the issue of protection has departed from our politics. When New England made her trade with the cotton Democrats of the South for the purpose of putting a duty on cotton, thinking to break up the Solid South, she abandoned the only principle, the only issue, that gave the party character, and it has left you nothing with which to fight the next campaign. All the Republican party stands for today, inasmuch as protection is no longer an issue and the South is broken up, is as the champion of the trusts and the gold standard, as the special representatives of the classes against the masses," Thus I had tried three lines of attack. First, I had tried to have a tariff commission to determine tariff schedules on a scientific basis. Second, I had tried to show to what extent particular schedules were work ing hardship. Third, I had attempted to rationalize the tariff by denying protection to trusts. I failed along all three lines, and I failed because the tariff was not a scientific means of regulating industry, in the interest of public welfare, but a cleverly disguised method used by certin industrial freebooters to in crease their profits. During the twelve years th^t I was a member of the Senate of the United States no effort was ever made to pass a tariff bill in the interests of the people of the United States ; they were entirely left out of consider ation. Two-thirds of the Senate were always lawyers 70 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON and they were simply interested in passing a tariff bill that would enrich their clients and at the same time humbug the American people into the belief that it was being done in their interest, Allison of Iowa was from an agricultural state, and you would have supposed that he would have looked after the interests of the people of Iowa ; but he never did. He was in the Senate as the representative of the transportation, the financial and industrial combina tions, Piatt of Connecticut, another lawer, was in the same category. The committees were all packed in the interests of business, and a majority of each committee that had charge of the tariff or any other branch of legislation were men (attorneys, as a rule) who were there to look after the exploiters of the people of the United States, I also state without hesitation or quali fication that no trust legislation was ever considered by any committee in the Senate e^icept with a view to allowing the trusts to prosper and flourish and, at the same time, so word the law as to humbug and deceive the American people. That the leaders were in the employ of the great industrial combinations and that they exercised considerable cunning in their practices to bring about this result. The tariff and the trust laws always received the fostering care of the lawyers of the Senate and House and were never framed or intended to be framed to protect the interests of the people of the United States. VI. THE TRUSTS I was in the Senate when the Sherman Anti-Trust Law was passed in 1890. I was there representing a state that was rabidly opposed to trusts in theory and trusts in practice. For twelve years I worked and voted to drive the trusts out of American politics, and yet, as if in ironical comment on the futility of my efforts, the Steel Trust — greatest of them all — ^was organized during my last year in the Senate (1901) . The people of South Dakota lived on the land and still believed in the necessity for competition. They had grown up under the conviction that our civiliza tion is founded upon the theory of evolution, upon the doctrine of the survival of the fittest, upon the law of competition. The result of this theory in the past was feudalism, or the supremacy of brute strength and physical courage, and its resulting paternalism. But feudalism, by the operation of the law of competition and evolution, destroyed itself by the subjugation of the weaker by the stronger and the creation of mon- archial forms of government in its place. My history had taught me these facts. Coming from a state that was still under the control of farm ers, small shop-keepers and professional men, I be lieved that this theory of competitive life held out the soundest answer to the many public questions then confronting the country. Despite all my efforts, I wit nessed the abandonment of the old theory and the adoption of a new practice — the practice of trust or ganization. Competition, under this theory, ceased to be the life of trade, and became an irksome form of activity that should be dispensed with at the earliest convenient moment. We, the American people, have abandoned the doc trine we often repeated and so much believed, that competition is the life of trade, and have adopted the J2 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON doctrine that competition destroys trade. The practice of this new economic theory calls for the organization of trusts and combinations to restrict production, to maintain and increase prices, until practically all of the important articles manufactured in the country are produced by combinations and trusts. Thus the fundamental principle of the early American civiliza tion is overturned, and those who do not combine — ^the farmer, thelndividual proprietor, the professional man and the toilers of the land— are at the mercy of those who do combine. The rapid growth of trusts in the United States began with the demonetization of silver, and the for mation of trusts was the means adopted by some of the most far-seeing and shrewdest men, having control and direction of capital invested in manufacturing and transportation, to avert losses to themselves by reason of falling prices, which lead to overproduction and under-consumption. They realized that the first effect of a decline in prices is to stimulate production, because the producers hope to make up the difference in price by larger sales at less expense. They also fore saw what the average producer fails to see, that when the decline of prices is general the purchasing power is less in the whole community, and therefore an in creased production can find no market at any price, so that there exists at the same time an overproduction of things which are most needed and an undercon sumption of these very things, because of the inability to purchase them. The organizers of the trusts did not go into the causes of failing prices. In most cases they knew nothing about the natural effects of throwing the en tire burden upon one metal constituting the basis of the money of the world, which had formerly rested upon both gold and silver. So they made the common error of mistaking effect for cause, and attributed the decline in prices to overproduction. Therefore they combined and formed trusts to restrict production and keep up prices. The effect of the successful operations THE TRUSTS 73 of trusts is to compel higher prices to be paid for the finished product, or for transportation, while they do not check the decline in the value of raw material nor in the rates of wages, nor do their managers wish to do so. I do not desire to be understood as charging that the trusts are able to withstand the general fall of prices. The ability of the consumer to pay fixes the limit be yond which prices cannot be forced, and that is the only limit upon the powers of a trust to regulate prices when the combination of domestic producers is so per fect as to defy competition at home and the tariff duty upon the imported article excludes the competition in our markets of foreign producers. Many people, during the nineties, insisted that there were no trusts. Today there are persons who believe that the trusts have been "busted" by our bluff and scholarly chief executives. The trusts were growing into positions of power in the late nineties; they re ceived an immense impetus through the economic and political events surrounding the Spanish-American War. The first fifteen years of the new century has witnessed a rounding out of the trusts and and ex pansion into wider fields of activity. My particular attention was attracted to the Sugar Trust because I had come into such, intimate contact with its workings in connection with my fight over the annexation of Hawaii, Prior to August, 1887, there was life and free com petition in all branches of the sugar trade. The pro ducers of raw sugars all over the world sought in the ports of the United States a market in which numer ous strong buyers were always ready to take their offerings at a price varying with the supply and de mand. There was the same healthy competition among the sugar refiners as among the producers and importers of raw sugar. This was manifested by con stant efforts to improve the product and to lessen the cost of refining by the introduction of better processes. The distribution of the raw and refined sugar to the 74 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON consumer through the usual trade channels from the importers and the refiner by way of the jobber, the wholesale grocer, and the retail grocer to the family was also untrammeled. Each bought where he could purchase to the best advantage and sold upon terms agreed upon between him and the buyer, and not dic tated by any third party. But in 1887 the enormous profits amassed by the Standard Oil Trust suggested to a few of the leading refiners the possibility of controlling the sugar trade in the same way. It was then claimed for the first time that the individual refiners through competition were unable to make suflScient money to continue in business. This seems a little strange in view of the fact that most of the refiners who had the misfortune to die or had retired from business before that time are known to have left or still posses large fortunes. Those mil lions, however, no doubt seemed insignificant in com parison to the potentialities of wealth offered by the adoption of trust methods. So the sugar trust was formed in the fall of 1887 by a combination between twenty-one corporations, some of which were formed out of existing unincor porated firms for the express purpose of entering the trust, which was called the Sugar Refineries Company. One of the first acts of the new trust was to close up the North River Sugar Refinery. This led to an ac tion by the attorney-general of New York in behalf of the people for the forfeiture of the charter of the com pany, at the end of which the Court of Appeals de clared the trust illegal, and the charter of the North River Company was forfeited. The trust was thereby compelled to abandon its organization and reorganize under the laws of New Jersey as the American Sugar Refining Company, a single corporation, in which were combined all the parties to the original trust. While my amendment to the tariff act, providing that trust-made products should be admitted free of duty, was under consideration in the Senate, Senator THE TRUSTS 75 Se\yell of New Jersey entered the debate with a re markable question. (55th Cong., 1st Session, p. 1740) : Mr. SEWELL : "How does the Senator know that there is a sugar trust? The American Sugar Refining Company is a corporation of my state, with a very large capital and doing a large business. It is not in a trust with anybody, as I understand it. They surren dered everything of that kind three or four years ago." Mr. PETTIGREW: "Mr. President, that is a strange question and a remarkable proposition. The American Sugar Refining Company was formerly a combination of twenty-one refineries. They closed the North River Refinery. The court of New York declared that com bination to be a trust. Then these same people formed a corporation under the laws of New Jersey. "I notice that almost every rotten corporation in this country is organized under the laws of New Jersey. I do not know whether the laws need fixing or not ; but something is the matter. At any rate, all such cor porations go there whenever they want to get up a combination to get away with somebody and to be sure that they will not be troubled. They formed a com bination there of all these refineries, and then they pro ceeded to close refineries, raised the price to the limit of the tariff, and took from the people of this country untold millions. Under this amendment any combina tion or corporation for this purpose, to control pro duction and increase the price, is a trust, and there fore the American Sugar Refining Company is a trust, and the courts can so decide. "What is more, Mr. President, the president of the American Sugar Refining Company testified that they controlled the price of sugar — I read his testimony yesterday — ^that they fixed the price for the custom ers, and that they fixed it for everybody else. I also showed yesterday that the American Sugar Refining Company controlled every refinery in this country but four, and then I showed by the testimony of a St. 76 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Louis grocer that they controlled those four; for when this St. Louis grocer refused to sign a contract by which he was to bind himself to buy no other than sugar made by the trust at a price fixed by them— when he refused to sign that contract to take their re fined sugar on commission — ^they refused to sell_ any sugar at all; and when he applied to the four inde pendent refineries, he could not buy a p6und of sugar from them. So that, after all, the combination ,em- braces not only all the refineries in the trust, but all the others." After we passed the McKinley law, which was par ticularly favorable to the trust, Mr. Havemeyer was called before the Senatorial investigating committee, and he gave this testimony : Mr. HAVEMEYER : "We undertake to control the price of refined sugar in the United States. That must be distinctly understood." Senator ALLEN: "And the price of refined sugar in the United States is higher to the American people in consequence of the existence of the American Sugar Refining Company than it would be if the different companies in your organizatjon were dis tinct and independent companies?" Mr. HAVEMEYER: "For a short time it is." Senator ALLEN: "And what difference does it make for the consumers in this country in a year in your judgment?" Mr. HAVEMEYER: "It has been in three years past three-eighths of a cent more on every pound they ate, as against doing business at a loss." ^ In other words, the fact that they were in a trust and that they controlled the price, according to his own statement, added three-eighths of a cent to every pound of sugar consumed in this country. Senator ALLEN: "And that would be about ho^ much in round numbers?" THE TRUSTS 77 Mr. HAVEMEYER: "It is a large sum in the aggregate." Senator ALLEN: "How many millions?" Mr. HAVEMEYER : "I should say it was close to $25,000,000 in three years." How did I know there is a trust in sugar? It has been told to everybody, until there is not a boy six years old who can read and write who does not know there is a sugar trust. Senator ALLEN: "And you intend to keep your hold upon the American people as long as you can?" Mr. HAVEMEYER: ""As long as the McKinley bill is there we will exact that profit." "We will exact that profit. Is there competition? Is there any show for competition? They say they fix the price and that they are going to continue to do it so long as you keep the duty on ; and yet the Sena tor wants to know how I know there is a sugar trust. It would be astonishing if I did not know it." That discussion took place at a time (1897) when it was still possible to feign surprise at the mention of "trusts" in the United States. After 1901, when the Steel Trust was organized, the matter was decided for good. After that everybody recognized the fact that there were trusts ; that these trusts were managed by corporations ; that the object of their management and manipulation was to increase the profits and the power in the hands of the business interests. During the twelve years that I was a member of the United States Senate Congress did nothing effective -for' the control of the trusts. The Anti-Trust Act was passed in 1890, but no effective means were ever pro vided for its enf&rcement. The act of 1890 was passed by outraged farmers as a protest against the exploitation under which they were suffering. By the time I introduced my amendment to the Tariff Act in 1897, it was taken for granted that combi nations of capital should exist, and that these combi nations should get what they could. is IMPERIAL WASHlNGTOi^ A careful review of all legislation from the passage of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law in 1890 to the present time convinces me that it was the consistent policy of Congress to protect rather than to destroy the trusts and to build up and foster the trusts and thus create these great combinations to exploit the American people. Before I left the Senate they were talking about them as "benevolent institutions" and today they regard them as one of the bulwarks of our civilization. Whatever possibilities there may have been in the act of 1890 disappeared with the "rule of reason" in troduced by the Supreme Court. Not "restraint of trade" but "unreasonable restraint of trade" was the meaning of those who framed this law. Finally, in 1920, came the decision in favor of the continuance of the Steel Trust on the ground that public policy de manded it. I know of no better comment on the situation than the interview given out by Judge Gary after the Court's decision was announced: "The decision as made will immeasurably add to the general feeling of confidence in the value of property and in the opportunities of business enterprise." (Boston "Globe," March 2, 1920,) Judge Gary summarizes the entire policy of the Federal Government with regard to combinations and trusts. They were organized to protect property, and Congress has done everything in its power, during the last thirty years, to make trust organizers feel secure and happy. VII. RAILROADS Predatory power in the United States centers in three institutions — the bank, the trust and the rail road. In previous chapters I have described my re lations with the money power and with the masters of organized industry. During my two terms in the Sen ate I had many a struggle with the representatives and bankers and trust magnates. . I also had numerous encounters with the spokesman of the railroads, which were, perhaps, the most powerful and aggressive of the vested interests during the last two decades of the nineteenth century. Before I went to the United States Senate in 1889, I had built and operated a railroad from Sioux Falls to Yankton, S. D. I also began to organize and build the Midland Pacific Railroad, from Sioux Falls, S. D., to Puget Sound, For several years I had engineers on the road locating the line through to Seattle, cross ing the Rocky Mountains near the mouth of Yellow stone Lake, Consequently I was thoroughly familiar with the costs of railroad building and operation. When I entered the Senate I was of the opinion that the highways of the United States should be owned and operated by the Government, for the bene fit of the people of the United States — operated for service and not for profit. At the beginning of my term I knew very little of the general operation of the railroads by the great combinations which then con trolled them, but a short time in the Senate clinched this conviction by showing me that the railroads were robbing the Government as well as the people of the United States. For instance, I found that J. L, Bell, who was Second Assistant Postmaster-General, had been a rail road employee at a salary several times as great as that which he received as Second Assistant Post- .80 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON master-General, and that he had resigned his position with the railroads to become Assistant Postmaster- General, and in that capacity to direct the railroad mail service. Thus the railroads had taken charge of the Post Office Department just as they have taken charge of the courts and the Interstate Commerce Commission — ^by the simple expedient of putting their man in control. This railroad man commissioned in the public service to look after railroad interests in variably proceeded to exploit the public in the in terests of the special interests for which he was work ing. Nowhere did I see this principle more amply illus trated than in the case of railway mail pay. For carrying the mail, during the time I served in the Senate of the United States, the railroads received ten times as much per pound as the express companies paid for carrying express matter on the same train, and generally in the same car. In addition, when the railway mail-cars were established, the companies rented to the Government for $6,000 per year cars that cost less than $3,000, so that the annual rental was double the value of the car. To complete the work, the railroads and their attorneys in both houses of Congress franked great quantities of Government publications and shipped them through the mails, back and forth, all over the United States, during the thirty days of each year when the mail was being weighed for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation that the railroads were to receive. From an investigation of the matter in the early years of my service I know that this practice was con tinued during the twelve years that I was a member of the Senate, and that millions of pounds of Govem ment documents were shipped back and forth every year under a frank of some member of Congress or member of the Senate, during the thirty days the mail was being weighed to determine the compensation of the railroads, and that J. Laurie Bell, Second As sistant Postmaster-General and his successors, em- RAILROADS 81 ployees of the railroads rather than of the Govern ment, superintended the job. This abuse was so open and so flagrant that I offered an amendment to the Post Office Appropriation Bill, reducing the compensation for carrying the mails twenty per cent, and an investigation verified the facts that I have stated ; yet the committee would not report in favor of reducing the pay of the railroads one cent. Two-thirds of the Senate and House were lawyers — very many of them in the direct pay of the railroads on a salary, or a fee, and nothing whatever could be accomplished. When the Senate investigated this question and brought the employees of the Second Assistant Post master-General before the Committee, they deceived the Committee in the interest of the railroads whom they were serving. I quote some of the evidence from the Congressional Record: Mr. PETTIGREW: "I will read first from the re port of the Postmaster-General under the head of 'Weighing the Mails,' from the report of 1896: " 'The Department takes every precaution at its command to insure honest weighing of the railroad mails. But this has not pre vented one or two attempts on the part of the railroad ofllicials to pad the mails during the weighing season.' "What are the facts? The Seaboard Air Line pro cured 16 tons of public documents franked by some member of the House of Representatives or of the Senate. They can secure them without the connivance at all of the persons who frank them. They ship them back and forth to their station agents. They ship this franked matter during the weighing season to a station, and have their agents take out the packages from the bags, redirect them, and mail them again. So they kept these 16 tons of frankable matter going for thirty days. The Department determined to have 82 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON a reweighing. They had a reweighing for thirty days more, and then the railroad company secured an extra edition of a newspaper that weighed 5 tons ; they shipped that .back and forth along the hne, and distributed it over the line during the thirty days, and when the Postmaster-General complained, they asked him what he was going to do about it. And Mr. Mc- Bee, the manager of the road, asked the Postmaster- General why the Seaboard Air Line had been singled out as a subject for criticism for stuffing the mails during the reweighing period, when it was well known that all railroads practiced the same fraud upon the Govemment. So it is the general practice. There is no doubt about it. Everybody knows it. We do not need to investigate the matter much to learn that fact. . . ." There is a great profit in carrying the mail which pays 2 cents postage, and so the railroads have organ ized on their own hook a postal system which de frauds the Government out of hundreds of thousands, and I believe millions, of dollars a year because that branch of the service, the carrying of letters, is profitable. The railroads did not stop with the exploitation of the Government — ^they were criminal in their treat ment of the public. The railroads gave very low rates to their favorites, and very high rates to the rest of the people. They determined which men should pros per and do business and which men should be made bankrupt by their discriminations. They also deter mined, through their rates, which town should grow and which should languish. A prosperous town could be destroyed and its industries closed by giving to its rival town a railroad rate of one-half or less^ and this was done constantly. The Interstate Commerce Com mission was created for the purpose of correcting this and similar abuses. Eleven years after the law was passed creating the Commission, I find this statement in the annual report (1898) ; RAILROADS 83 "We are satisfied from investigations con ducted during the past year and referred to in another portion of this report, as well as from information which is perfectly convinc ing to a moral intent, . . . that a large part of the business at the present time is trans acted upon illegal rates. Indeed, so general has this rule become that in certain quarters the exaction of the published rate is the ex ception. From this, two things naturally and frequently result: First, gross discrimi nations between individuals and gross pref erence between localities; and these dis criminations and preferences are almost al ways in favor of the strong, and against the weak. There is probably no one thing today which does so much to force out the small operator, and to build up those trusts and monopolies against which law and public alike beat in vain, as discrimination in freight rates. Second, the business of rail road transportation is carried on to a very large extent in conceded violations of law. Men who in every other respect are reputable citizens are- guilty of acts which, if the statute law of the land were enforced, would subject them to fine or imprisonment," Further on, the report of the Interstate Commerce Commission says: "Discriminations are alvvays in favor of the strong and against the weak. This con dition the law seems powerless to control." Thus the railroads were above the law. The United States judges, generally selected from the ranks of the corporation and railroad attorneys, go upon the bench to construe the law, which they do in the interest of their former employers. A prominent oil refiner of Pennsylvania, writing under date of October 4, 1899, after setting forth his complaint against the railway discrimination in favor 84 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON of the Standard Oil Company, gives his experience as follows : "I manufacture 35,000 barrels of oil per month. Seventy per cent of that is marketed in Europe where the railroads are controlled by the governments. We have no difficulty in competing with the Standard Oil Company in those countries, because our tonnage is carried as cheap by the Govemment as that of the Standard Oil Company, although the Standard Oil Company ships one thousand times more to the interior of the several countries than I do. The reason that I am obliged to send 70 per cent of my oil across the Atlantic Ocean to be marketed is because I cannot transport it over the railroads of the United States at the same rates as the Standard Oil Company." How much influence the railroads exerted in build ing up the trusts may be readily inferred from the following instance: The Tin Plate Trust was endeavoring to make terms with an independent producer; he replied that he felt no desire to change his methods; his com pany was making money, doing well in fact, and were quite satisfied with their plant and its owner ship. The promoter of the trust advised the presi dent of the company that it would be better to sell out; but finding his offers of no avail to secure the property he proceeded to threats. "You are enjoy ing certain concessions in your freight rates," he said, "All your profits would cease if these freight rates were withdrawn ; if you will not sell to us, we will see what we can do." In a few days the manager of the railway wrote the independent mill owner that the rates conceded the company would have to be withdrawn, because," etc. The mill-owner called a meeting of the stockholders and bondholders, ex- RAILROADS 85 plained the situation, and in two weeks the mill was turned over to the trust. So much for the attitude of the railroads toward the Government and towards the people of the United States, Now, a word as to another phase of their activity — the financing, , The railroads of the United States when they were constructed were bonded for more than they actually cost, and then those who were manipulating them issued common and preferred stock for considerably more than the amount of the bonds. Thus both bonds and stocks are simply gambling chips which can be used to swindle the American public. Railroad securities should be the most stable of all securities because the railroads are the highways of the nation, and their service is absolutely essential and reasonably uniform. Yet for many years these railroad securities have been the football of gamblers. While I was in the Senate the price of the leading railroad stocks fluctuated from 30 to 300 per cent in a single year, and the price of the bonds from 5 to 100 per cent. At the same time, the bulk of the stocks paid no dividends, and large numbers of the bonds paid no interest. To show how largely fictitious these stocks and bonds were considered, I take the following table from the report of the Interstate Com merce Commission: Per Funded debt Per cent cent of (exclusive of Of total equipment trust total Per cent paid Stocks stock obligations) funded Nothing paid . .$3,570,155,239 66.26 $ 852,402,622 15.82 Prom Ito 2. . 142,496,300 2.65 176,996,988 3.28 Prom 2 to 3. , 118,096,361 2.19 162,789,940 3.02 From 3 to 4. 96,348,397 1.79 673,945,852 12.51 From 4 to 5. , 385,381,689 7.15 1,766,290,104 32.77 Prom 5 to 6 . . 409,778,699 7.60 928,046,512 17.22 From 6 to 7. , 198,603,262 3.69 562,732,833 10.44 From 7 to 8 . . 244,736,724 4.64 299,716,648 4.26 Prom 8 to 9 . . 127,852,050 2.87 27,762,600 .51 From 9 to 10. 6,698,055 .13 5,014,300 .09 10 and above. 88,121,545 1.63 4,236,300 .08 Total. . . ,$6,388,268,321 . 100. $5,389,934,699 100. 86 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON We see from this statement that three and one-half billion of the five and a half billion of railway stock paid no dividends, while nearly a hiHion of the bonds received no interest, and six hundred millions more of stock and bonds paid only a return between 1 and 3 per cent. These facts are only noted in order that the notion of the total value of railways may not be erroneously inferred from a merely -nominal capi talization. The situation is well summed up in the case of the Union & Central Pacific Railroads which were con ceived in the womb of the Republican Party; were born into the world as the full-fledged children of corruption and iniquity, and which never for one day drew an honest breath. Ames and his associates (who were, like Ames, the most prominent bankers and business men of their day), organized the Credit Mobilier, came to Washington, and acted as mid- wives for the Congress of the United States while it gave birth to 'these tvdns. Ames and his associates distributed the stock of the Credit Mobilier among the Senators and members of the House of Representatives, every Republican mem ber with a particle of influence receiving a share, while almost all of the prominent Democratic leaders were taken care of in the same manner. Thereupon laws were passed by which the Government of the United States gave these two roads a land grant of half of all the land ten miles wide on each side of the track from Omaha to San Francisco, and in addition furnished a sum of money more than sufficient to build and equip the roads. In exchange for this grant of money, the Government received a second mortgage. The roads never paid any interest to the Government, and in 1896 when the second mortgage fell due the managers of the roads selected a re organizing committee of professional exploiters to devise ways and means to swindle the Government out of its money, — principal and interest This re organization committee consisted of Marvin Hughitt, RAILROADS 87 President of the Chicago and North Western Rail road, Chauncey Depew, President of the New York Central, and Louis Fitzgerald, T. J. Coolidge and Oliver Ames, who "represented the Goulds of New York and the Ames crowd of Boston. I met this proposal of the reorganization committee by introducing a resolution directing the Secretary of the Treasury to proceed at once to foreclose the mortgage held by the Government on the Union Pacific and the Kansas Pacific companies; to pay off the prior liens and the floating indebtedness; to as sume control of all the property of the two roads, in cluding the Federal land grants; to take possession of the roads, and to pay the necessary costs by the sale of three per cent bonds. I will let the Congressional .Record tell the rest of this story: Mr. PETTIGREW: "Mr. President, I wish to call the especial attention of the Committee on Pacific Railroads to this resolution, for I think it outlines a method by which to solve this much-discussed ques tion in a businesslike manner, and in the only way it can be solved with credit to the Government. We have only the interests of the whole people to con sider, There are no equities in this case in favor of the present stockholders of these roads, and I will show that the reorganization committee of the stock holders of the roads aire entitled to no consideration whatever, as they represent the heartless and un scrupulous scamps that have been robbing the Gov emment and the public for a generation, casting re proach upon our Government and our people that must make every honest citizen blush with shame, "The stockholders and owners of the first mortgage bonds on the Union and Kansas Pacific Railroads have appointed a committee to reorganize the road and to settle with the Government for its second mortgage upon the property. This reorganization committee proposes to issue one hundred million of 88 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON fifty-year 4 per cent bonds on about 1,900 miles of road — that is, the road from Omaha to Ogden, which is the main line of the Union Pacific, and about 400 miles of road from Kansas City west, which is the Kansas Pacific Railroad. . . . "This 1,900 miles of railroad can be reproduced for $23,600 per mile, and yet the Govemment of the United States is asked to go into partnership vv^ith a party of dishonest men, and bond and stock the road for $123,600 per mile, and the public whom this road serves is to be called upon to pay interest on this vast sum. . . . "But they go further than this, and tell us how they will distribute this vast amount of stocks and bonds. They propose that the Government shall take $34,000,000 of the bonds, which is just equal to the principal of the Government's claim against the roads, and shall take $20,000,000 of the preferred stock in full payment for all the defaulting interest; that the- first-mortgage bonds, which amount to $34,000,000, shall be taken up and a like number of these new bonds issued in their place; and for every $1,000 of bonds issued to the present holders of the' first- mortgage bonds of these roads, $500 of preferred stock shall be issued as a bonus, the remainder of the stock and the remainder of the bonds to be the property undoubtedly of the conspirators in this stupendous transaction. "Let us see who are the men who compose this re organization committee of the Union and the Kansas "Pacific railroads. This reorganization committee is composed of five members, Louis Fitzgerald, T. J. Coolidge and Oliver Ames being three out of the five members of the reorganization committee (who rep resent the old management of the road, the (Moulds of New York and the Ameses of Boston) , the other two being Marvin Hughitt «and Chauncey Depew. While every one of the receivers who are now manag ing and operating the road is in the interest of this gang of highwaymen who have plundered the public RAILROADS 89 with this instrumentality in the past, three of the re ceivers, namely S. H. H. Clark, who was formerly manager and for years president of the road, has been and is the representative of the Gould interest; Mr. Mink, of Boston, was comptroller .of the company and has been for years its vice-president, and is also an executor of the will of the late Fred L. Ames, and is of course the direct and immediate representative of the Boston crowd of highwaymen who, through the use of this highway — the Union and the Kansas Pacific Railroads — have robbed the public and the Government for the past thirty years. The third re ceiver, who has always acted w^ith this interest, is E. Ellery Anderson, who has also been for several years a Government director, and was placed there for the purpose of protecting the Government's interests, but has never undertaken to protect the Government's interests, and has always acted in the interest of the old and dishonest management. The other two re ceivers of the road, Coudert and Doane, seem to have a leaning in the same direction, for they have been Government directors, and have never remonstrated against the frauds which have disgraced the manage ment of these roads, and of which they must have had knowledge. "If this reorganization plan is carried through with the assistance of the Government the road will have to earn 4 per cent of $100,000,000 of bonds and 5 per cent at least on $75,000,000 of preferred stock, and the people along the line of the road will be charged a rate sufficient to accomplish this result, even if no dividend whatever is paid upon the $60,- 000,000 of common stock. This interest charged, then, will amount to $7,750,000 a year, which Would be an unjujstifiable burden upon the people who are served by the road. The only reasonable and proper thing for the Government of the United States to do is to take possession of the road, issue its own bonds bearing 3 per cent interest as provided by the reso lution which I have offered, pay the first-mortgage 90 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON bonds of $34,000,000, refund to the Government of the United States the $53,000,000 now due to the Government from these companies, take up and pay the floating debt of these roads of $12,000,000, and thus get possession of the bonds and stocks which are held as collateral security for this floating debt, and thus acquire title to $98,000,000 par value of the branch lines' bonds and stock, the market value of which is at least $42,000,000 at the present time, thus taking possession of all the branch lines of these roads, amounting to 4,000 miles of track, and operate the whole as one great system, "In this way the Government would realize every dollar these roads owe it. The interest charged would be only 3 per cent on $100,000,000 of bonds, or $3,000,000 per annum, instead of $7,750,000 under the plan proposed by the reorganization committee. The rates for carrying freight and passengers would therefore be much less. There would be no incentive for discrimination in favor of persons or places; every man and every town would have an equal opportunity, and the scandal of our Govemment con nected with the Union Pacific management would dis appear from the pages of our history." I have devoted more space to the Union & Central Pacific than I would were it not for the fact that their history, management and method are a true picture of the railroad situation in the United States. Before I leave the subject I should like to quote an interesting passage from the autobiography of Charles Francis Adams, who was made President of the Union Pacific Railroad in 1884. Mr. Adams, in re ferring to the dealings between the Union Pacific and the Govemment with regard to the second mortgage which the Government held on the road, on page 192 writes : "I was sent over to Washington to avert the threatened action of the Government, and then and there I had my first experience in the most hopeless and repulsive work in which I ever was engaged— RAILROADS 91 transacting business with the United States Govern ment and trying to accomplish something through Congressional action. My initial episode was with a prominent member of the United States Senate. This senator is still (1912) alive though long retired. He has a great reputation for ability and a certain reputation, somewhat fly-blown it is true, for rugged honesty. I can only say that I found him an ill- mannered bully and by all odds the most covertly and dangerously corrupt man I ever had opportunity and occasion carefully to observe in public life. His grudge against the Union Pacific was that it had not retained him. While he took excellent care of those competing concerns which had been wiser in this re spect, he never lost an opportunity of posing as the fearless antagonist of corporations when the Union Pacific came to the front. For that man, on good and sufficient grounds, I entertained a deep dislike. He was distinctly dishonest — a senatorial bribetaker." Early in my term of service in the Senate, the rail roads began to combine and to pool the freight and to agree upon rates. The combination of the rail roads was in violation of the Anti-Trust Law, but the law had been framed to make it as easy as possible for the corporations 'to evade its provisions, and the railroads cared nothing about the Anti-Trust Law because their lawyers were in the executive offices and on the bench. When the Joint Traffic Association was organized in violation of the Sherman Anti- Trust Law, and suit was brought by the Government to dissolve it on that account, it was found that the Association was a combination of thirty-two of the leading roads in the United States to pool the busi ness, agree upon the division of traffic, and have uni form rates, so far as the public was concerned; that Hobart, Vice-President of the United States, was one of the arbitrators and drew a salary as such arbi trator for this Joint Traffic Association, and when the suit was .brought before the United States Court in New York, Judge Lacombe announced from the 92 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON bench that he was disqualified from sitting on the case because he owned the stocks and bonds of the defendant railroads, and he said: I am of the opinion that there is no judge m this Circuit but that is suffering a like disqualification.'' In 1874, the Senate of the United States, in re sponse to a general demand, appointed a Special Com mittee on Transportation, composed of Williani Win- dom, of Minnesota; John Sherman, of Ohio; Roscoe Conkling, of New York; H. G. Davis, of West Vir ginia; T. M. Norwood, of Georgia; J. W. Johnson, of Virginia; John H. Mitchell, of Oregon, and S, B, Canover, of Florida. The committee occupied the entire summer of 1874 in making an exhaustive examination of the subject, and in their report we find the following: "In the matter of taxation, there are today four men representing the four great trunk lines between Chicago and New York, who possess, and who not unfrequently exercise, powers which the Congress of the United States would not dare to exert They may at any time, and for any reason satisfactory to themselves, by a single stroke of the pen, re duce the value of property in this country by hundreds of millions of dollars. An ad ditional charge of five cents per bushel on the transportation of cereals would have been equivalent to a tax of forty-five millions of dollars. No congress would dare to exercise so vast a power upon a necessity of the most imperative nature, and yet these gentlemen exercise it whenever it suits their supreme will and pleasure, without explanation or apology. With the rapid and inevitable progress of combination and consolidation, these colossal organizations are daily becom ing stronger and more imperious. The day is not distant, if it has not already arrived. RAILROADS 93 when it will be the duty of the statesman to inquire whether there is less danger in leav ing the property and industrial interests of the people thus wholly at the mercy of a few men who recognize no responsibility and no principle of action but personal aggrandize ment." All of these facts convinced me that the only pos sible remedy was the Government ownership of the railroads. I therefore prepared and introduced a bill for this purpose (Senate Bill No. 1770) on the 18th day of December, 1899. This bill provided that the railroads should be operated under the Post Office Department, and operated for service and not for profit, and "that the owners should receive United States bonds for the actual value of the property. At that time the roa.ds would have cost the Government between four and five billions, although they were capitalized at from eight to nine billions, including the stocks and the bonds. I also included in this bill a provision that all rates should be absolutely uni form, alike for everybody in proportion to the service rendered; that passenger fares should not exceed one cent per mile, and I showed conclusively that passen gers should be carried in this country at a profit at one cent per mile, provided no passes were granted. I knew the extent of the pass abuse. I knew that every politician and every lawyer of any prominence, and every judge, and every congressman, and every body else that had any pull, rode upon a pass, and that the public was charged two prices for riding, in order to pay the railroads for carrying free those people who could best afford to pay their fare. I also provided for a Commission of Transportation in this law, under the Post Office Department, to operate the roads and to remove the control, as far as possible, from political influence. The bill also pro vided that the express business should be done by the Government, and I showed that the express business 94 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON could be done at a cost to the public of less than one- half the price charged by the express companies if done by the Government through the Postoffice on Govemment railroads. When I introduced the bill and had it printed, some of my friends came to me and said : "Well, what will your friend James J, Hill think of your introducing a bill for the government ownership of the railroads?" I said: "James J, Hill is a big man; he is one, out of the whole railroad system, that is not a stock gambler, and I sent him the first copy of the bill that was printed," Some months afterward, when I met Mr, Hill, the first thing he said was : "I received your Railroad Bill, and you are entirely right about it. If the railroads are going to combine — and" said he, "they are going to combine— the only way the public can be protected from robbery is to have the Govern ment own the railroads." Needless to say, my bill received scant consider ation and little support from the champions of priv ilege who dominated the House and Senate, nor need I add that its introduction marked me as a man who should be eliminated from public life at the earliest possible moment. I am now of the opinion that the Government of the United States should take the rail roads and cancel all the outstanding stocks and bonds without making any payment to the holders of the same. There are no innocent owners. The railroads are the highways of the nation and have been built and paid for more than once by the American people, but are now in the hands of a gang of gambling scoundrels who are using these highways to enrich themselves and their favorites and to rob and ex ploit the whole population. To take the roads with out paying anything to these thieves is not confiscation or robbery, but simply returning the stolen property to its rightful owners. The Interstate Commerce Commission has just issued a report showing that, out of 627,980 stock holders in the various railroads of the United States, RAILROADS 95 the majority of stock is owned by only 8,031 persons or 1,3 per cent of all the stockholders. The Commission, through its Bureau of Statistics, has discovered that of a total of 97,475,776 shares of all the railroads, 50,873,322 shares are held by the small minority, an average of 6,130 shares each. The balance of 46,602,454 shares is owned by 649,629 stockholders, an average of 75 shares each. The 8,031 stockholders who own the majority stock include hold ing companies of railroads, as well as other cor porations. It also includes the stock held by voting trustees and estates. The Interstate Commerce Com mission's Report distributes these holdings as follows : Shares Held by other railway companies 24,638,407 By other corporations or partnerships 11,565,938 By voting trustees 5,307,043 By estates 1,333,961 By -individuals (males) 9,945,205 By individuals (females) 1,082,868 The, report shows that of 100,000 stockholders in the Pennsylvania Railroad, the largest twenty own 8.9 per cent of the total stock outstanding; that of the 27,000 stockholders in the New York Central, 25.1 per cent is held by the largest twenty stock holders. The largest twenty shareholders in the Illinois Central own 41.6 per cent; in the Southern Pacific 23 per cent; in the Southern Railway, 37.7 per cent; in the Chicago & Northwestern, 20,9 per cent; in the Great Northern 18.5 per cent; in the Northern Pacific, 19.8 per cent ;• in the Chicago, Mil waukee & St, -Paul, 18,5 per cent; in the Lehigh Valley, 18,1 per cent; in the Baltimore & Ohio, 17,4 per cent; in the New York, New Haven & Hartford, 15,3 per cent; in the Erie, 19.7 per cent; in the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe, 14.3 per cent. One hundred per cent of the stock of the Pennsyl vania Company, which owns all the Pennsylvania 96 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Lines west of - Pittsburgh and Erie, is owned by 17 shareholders, including the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, which is the holding concern. The entire stock of the Philadelphia & Reading, one of the prin cipal coal roads, is owned by thirteen stockholders, including the Reading Company; and 99.5 per cent of the stock of the C. B. & Q. is owned by the twenty largest shareholders out of a total of 326 shareholders. The largest blocks of stock of the Erie; Phila delphia & Reading; Wabash; Southern; Chicago, Mil waukee & St. Paul; Great Northern; Northern Pacific; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific and Union Pacific are held by corporations or partnerships other than rail ways. Of the Wabash stock, 46,000 shares are held in Amsterdam, Holland, and 36,000 shares by fourteen New York and one Boston concern. Of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul, 216,000 shares are held by eleven New York concerns; the bulk of the stock of the Virginia Railway is held' by the Tidewater Com pany; the stock of the Bessemer & Lake Erie is owned by the United States Steel Corporation. Virtually all the corporations that are among the largest shareholders of the various railroads do busi ness with these railroads and " obtain special advan tages. The earlier reports of the Interstate Commerce Com mission show that the largest industrial monopolies of the country were favored by the railroads to the extent of hundreds of millions of dollars in rebates, drawbacks and differentials; and that the railroads were managed largely in the interest of these monopolies as against the interest of rival con cerns and the public generally. This is particularly true with reference to Standard Oil, as disclosed by reports of the Interstate Commerce Commission and by the testimony of witnesses before Congressional Investigation Committees. The par value of railroad stocks is generally $100 RAILROADS 97 a share, which means that the 97,475,776 shares of the railroads are estimated to be worth $9,747,577,- 600. The total value of the bonds issued by the various railroads up to December 31, 1916, is esti mated at $11,202,607,096. It is obvious from this record that the control and ownership of the stocks of the railroads of the United States is concentrated in the hands of those who enjoy excessive private fortunes and there is no doubt that a similar or more acute st^e of concen tration exists in all other monopolistic corporations. It is quite evident, from the facts above adduced, that the Morgan and Rockefeller groups own the con trolling interest in the railroads of the United States. The common people who own stocks and bonds in the roads are so few in number that they have neither voice nor power in the management. THE "WIDOW AND ORPHAN" CRY IS AN OLD "WOLF" CRY OF THE BANKERS AND SPECU LATORS WHO HAVE STOLEN THEIR CONTROL OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS OF THE COUNTRY. IF THERE ARE ANY CONSIDER ABLE NUMBER OF WORTHY WIDOWS OR ORPHANS OR "COMMON PEOPLE" HOLDING STOCKS IT WERE BETTER TO PENSION THESE PEOPLE FOR LIFE AND PROCEED TO TAKE OVER THE RAILROADS. After many years of investigation devoted to this subject, I am convinced that the highways of the nation should be taken over by the Govemment and operated for the good of the people. The Government of the United States took over and operated the roads for a little over two years during the war, at the request of the railroads, under terms and conditions that were absolutely infamous, by which the government was .plundered out of billions of dollars. But before the roads were turned over to the Government to operate, these scamps (who ought to occupy cells in our penitentiaries), and I mean by 98 IMPERFAL WASHINGTON that the bankers of New York, the Federal Reserve Board, the managers and owners of the railroads, and the great industrial trust combinations, organized companies to take over the shops of all of the great railroads controlled by them. These companies were incorporated under the infamous laws of New York. and New Jersey and all of the shops of the great rail roads were conveyed to those companies, not only the repair shops, but , the great factories where they manufacture equipment for the railroads of every kind and sort, so that after the Government began the operation of the roads they had to hire all of their repairs, and buy all of their equipment of these great combinations, and they paid from four to ten times as much as the service and material was worth that they bought of these inside corporations con trolled by the biggest stockholders of the railroads. They also organized terminal companies wherever the terminals were of great value, in all the great cities of the United States, ^nd separated the termi nals from the railroads, and then they charged as rent for the use of the terminals, a rental in many instances, as high as one hundred per cent per year on actual cost of the terminal. For these terminals were conveyed to these companies for the purpose of swindling the Government during its operation and to make it appear that the operation by the Govern ment of the roads did not pay, and the enormous prices which these men compelled the Govern ment to pay, not only for terminals and switching facilities, but for repairs and new equipment, ac counts for the failure of the roads to be properly operated by the Government. But the roads were not really operated by the Government at all. Ostensibly they were. That was the talk, but the fact is that the management remained in the hands of the old crowd. I know very intimately the president of one of the great railroads. He was president during the entire time that the Government pretended to operate the roads, and he is still president of the road at a salary RAILROADS 99 of fifty thousand dollars a year. The president of that road is the operating man, and he continued to operate the road just the same as he always had, while the Government had control, and he assured me that that was the case with practically all of the roads. They were simply using the camouflage of govemment ownership and operation to plunder the Government and the public generally, and he said to me, "We have no interest in making government control popular." But while it was an infamous transaction to turn the roads over to the Government, the crowning infamy was the Cummings bill, by which the railroads were I taken back from the Government, to whom they had never been conveyed, and the Government guaranteed dividends on their stock and interest on their bonds. THE REMEDY IS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO TAKE OVER ALL THE RAILROADS WITHOUT PAYING ONE CENT FOR THEIR STOCKS OR BONDS. The railroads have been paid for by the American people over and over again, and they are the property of the American people. They are the highways of the nation. They are in the hands of a small number of gambling bankers who use the stock and bonds as chips in the gambling game to swindle the public. There are no innocent purchasers of their stocks, and if any of the stocks are owned by widows and orphans, they are widows and orphans of a gambler, and if they are impoverished by the cancellation of these stocks and bonds and the taking over the railroads by the people of the United States, and are unable to work, I am perfectly willing that an asylum should be built to take care of them as long as they live. The owners of the railroads are entitled to no con sideration whatever from the American people. They have forfeited all right to any consideration whatever. It is now nearly twenty-five years since I introduced a bill in the Senate of the United States to take over and operate the railroad companies for service, and 100 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON not for profit; operate them by the Postoffice Depart ment. I showed in an argument in the Senate that the railroads could reduce their freight rates one-half and still be operated at a profit, if all favors granted to big trusts and combinations were eliminated and the service granted to all the people on equal terms. I ^owed that the practice was for the big stock holders to become interested in some manufacturing enterprise and then cut rates to less than half what they gave to the public, to the favored enterprises. I showed that these people who could afford to pay their fare rode on a pass, and that the common people paid three to four cents, a mile, and I provided in this bill that passenger fares should hereafter, under gov ernment ownership, be one cent per mile for every body, and no passes granted to anyone. I showed that express could be carried on government owned rail roads for one-third what the public was now paying for this service. I then proposed to buy the roads and pay for them by using Govemment bonds, a sum equal to their actual physical value. But since then the conduct of the railroad managers has been such that there is no justification whatever in buying the roads. They should be taken over as the highways of the United States and operated for the general wel-. fare and their stocks and bonds cancelled and de stroyed. This is not confiscation or robbery, it is restoring stolen property to its rightful ovsmers and it would be well to put the thieves in jail so that they cannot steal something else. VIII. LABOR I have tried in the preceding chapters to describe some of the more important economic changes that have occurred in the United States during the past fifty years. All of them relate to business, to the rich, the powerful. The control of the banks; the right to issue money; the tariff-privileges enjoyed by the favored few; the organization of the trusts, and the manipulation of the railroads — ^these were the outstanding features of a system that gave property- holders first choice in all of the important economic relations of life, A visitor to the United States, during these years, would have supposed that the workers did not count for much, one way or the other, but that the very heart and soul of existence consisted in putting more money into the hands of the rich. Indeed, this was the attitude taken by a majority of my colleagues in both houses of Congress. - The whole trend of legislation was toward the granting of privilege. The lawyers, who composed both houses of Congress, were representatives of the business interests. They never asked the question: "What does the public welfare demand?" Instead, their one thought was: "What do my clients want?" Therefore, their actions were always directed toward the protection of property and never toward the pro tection of the workers. Perhaps I can best illustrate this point by reference to an experience which I had with a bill requiring the railroads to report accidents. During the whole twelve years of my service in the Senate, only one bill, even remotely in the interests of labor, became a law. All of the others, and there were hundreds of them, were either reported from the committees adversely, or not reported at all. If 10_2 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON reported and passed through the house where they originated, they were always killed in the other body. If a bill originated in the Senate and passed the Sen ate, the committee in the House would never report it. If a bill passed the IJouse and came to the Senate, the Senate committee would not report it; or, if the committee did make a report, it was done in such a manner that the bill was sure to receive no serious consideration. Although the American Federation of Labor always had its lobbyists at work, and there were other labor organizations that had their repre sentatives urging the passage of legislation, the clever manipulation of bills by bodies of. both houses offered a guarantee that nothing definite or effective would ever be accomplished. Finally, during the last year of my service in the Senate, a bill passed the House requiring railroads to file with the Interstate Commerce Commission monthly reports of accidents — ^their causes and the names of the persons injured. The bill was referred to the Committee on Interstate Commerce, Late in the session, the representative of the rail road men, who had been working for a year to have this bill passed, came to me and said he could not get the Senate Committee to report the bill. He asked me to take charge of it and see if I could not secure its passage. This was some time in January, 1901, and my term as a Senator expired on the 4th of March. L asked him to describe in detail the steps that he had taken to secure its passage. He gave me the in formation, and concluded with the observation that, in his judgment, the Senate did not intend to pass the bill. I gathered that he came to me as a sort of for lorn last hope. I finally told him that I would take charge of the bill, provided it was understood that I had full charge, and I promised him that I would make it exceedingly interesting for the Interstate Commerce Committee if it did not allow the bill to pass. I told him, further- LABOR 103 more, that it would be a hot fight in which some bit ter enemies would be made for all who supported the bill. I further told him that my method would dis courage him, but that, in my judgment, it was the only method that had even a remote chance of suc cess. If I would have his full support under these circumstances, and without any interference, I was willing to take the bill. To this proposition he heartily agreed. I then went before the Committee on Interstate Commerce at its next session and gave vigorous rea sons why the bill should be reported.* The railroad attorneys on the committee — Wolcott of Colorado and others — protested that the reports of the railroads * The bill was worded as follows : "An Act requiring com mon carriers engaged in interstate commerce to make full re port of all accidents to the Intierstate Commerce Commission. "BE IT ENACTED BY THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OP THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN CONGRESS ASSEMBLED: "It shall be the duty of the general manager, superintendent or other proper officer of common carrier engaged in interstate commerce by railroad to make to the Interstate Commerce Commission, at its office in Washington, District of Columbia, a monthly report, under oath, of all collisions of trains or where any train or part of a train accidentally leaves the track, and of accidents which may occur to its passengers or employes while in the service of such common carrier and actually on duty, which report shall state the nature and causes thereof, and the circumstances connected therewith. "Sec. 2. That any common carrier failing to make such report within thirty days after the end of any month shall be deemed gTiilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof by a court of competent jurisdiction, shall be punished by a fine or not more than one hundred dollars for each and every offense and for every day. during which it shall fail to make such report after the time herein specified for making the same. "Sec. 3. That neither said report nor any part thereof shall be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose against such railroad so making such report in any suit or action for dam ages growing out of any matter mentioned in said report. "Sec. 4. That the Interstate Commerce Commission is au thorized to prescribe for such common carriers a method and form for making the reports in the foregoing section provided. "Approved March 3, 1901." 104 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON would be examined by shyster lawyers and used to begin suits for damage. I said: "That is not the reason why you oppose this bill. Your clients have ordered you to kill this bill because they, the rail roads, are not obeying the law as to safety appliances. It costs money to stop killing, so they refuse to obey the law while they continue to kill. You know as well as I do that more people, both employees and passen gers, are killed on American railroads than by all the other railroads in the world. An amendment to the bill will prevent the report being used against the roads in damage suits." The next day the Committee reported the bill with four or five amendments, any one of which would have made the law, if passed, practically inoperative. I called up the bill for pas sage, and showed to the Senate the meaning of the amendments offered, with the result that I had the first amendment rejected by the Senate after a long discussion and bitter struggle on the floor. There upon the chairman of the Committee arose in his seat and moved that the bill be recommitted to the Com mittee, which is a motion that is always agreed to and, therefore, the bill was recommitted to what the railroad lawyers supposed would be its graveyard. At the next meeting the Committee on Interstate Commerce did not act upon the bill nor report it back to the Senate. I, therefore, introduced a resolution in the Senate to discharge the Committee from further consideration of the bill and place it immediately upon the calendar. This led to a filibuster debate which was intended to wear out the session. Whereupon the chairman of the Committee arose in his seat and said that if I would withdraw my motion he would call a meeting the next day and would report the bill. So the bill was reported frota the Committee the next day with amendments which wholly destroyed its original purpose, I moved the immediate consider ation of the bill and I stated in the Senate that I had been a member of that body for twelve years and that during the time no labor bill had passed both Houses LABOR 105 and become a law ; that this sort of a record could not be justified or defended by the Congress of the United States, especially should Congress defeat the present measure. I also stated that the railroads wanted to defeat this bill because, while the Congress of the United States had enacted laws compelling the rail roads to use certain safety appliances upon their trains, appliances which cost money — ^the railroads were not using these appliances, with the result that many accidents occurred which could be traced directly to the absence of these appliances. The bill was particularly obnoxious because its passage would make a public record of these facts. I succeeded, therefore, in defeating all of the amendments but the one which provided that the reports should not be used in court. Thereupon the chairman of the Com mittee moved to recommit the bill to the committee. The next day I offered a resolution to discharge the Committee from further consideration of the measure and place it upon the calendar. The chairman of the Committee immediately arose in the Senate and said he would call an extra session for the next morning and would report the bill if I would withdraw my motion, which, of course, I did. The next day the bill was reported with the same amendment with re gard to not using the reports against the railroads and with another amendment destroying the real intent of the bill. I defeated the pernicious amend ment in the Senate and the railroad attorneys al lowed the bill to pass with the amendment prohibit ing the use of the reports against the railroads in any lawsuit. The session was nearing a close and the opponents of the bill thought they could prevent it from going through the House of Representatives without amend ments. The Speaker of the Hquse was Henderson of Iowa, a one-legged soldier, veteran of the Civil War, an honest man — a rare quality in a Speaker of the House — whose sympathy was with the men who toil. The moment the bill passed the Senate, I went over 106 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON -to the House, for I had advised with Henderson sev eral times about the matter, and told him that I had got the railroad bill through with an amendment which would not affect the working of the law, but that if the amended bill was sent to the House Com mittee, there would be delay and the session would be over before action could be taken. I therefore asked Henderson to have the House concur in the amend ment as soon as it came over, and have the bill im mediately enrolled and returned to the Senate. Henderson asked me who had charge of the bill on the floor of the House. I told him the name of the member and when that member arose and stated to the House that the Senate had passed House Bill 10,302, with an amendment, the Speaker immediately said: "The motion is upon agreeing to the amend ment of the Senate to House Bill 10,302. All those in favor say 'Aye,' and all those opposed say 'No.' The ayes have it." A day passed, and I heard nothing from the bill. I then went to the Clerk of the House, and he told me that he had the bill enrolled and had sent it over to the Senate. I, therefore, returned to the Senate, an^, after waiting a day and finding that the bill did not come, I stated in the Senate that the bill had been lost. (Congressional Record, Vol. 344, p. 3533, 56th Con gress, 2d session, March 2, 1901.) Mr. PETTIGREW: "I am informed that the Senate amendments were accepted by the House, and that the bill was enrolled and placed in the hands of the messenger to bring to the Senate, and on the way, or somewhere, it has been lost. In other words, there seems to be an effort to steal the bill." Mr. LODGE : "In connection with what the Senator from South Dakota is saying, I djesire to say that I have been engaged in trying to find that bill. My attention was called to the fact that it was lost. It LABOR 107 was announced to the Senate that the House had con curred in the amendments of the Senate." Mr. PETTIGREW : "The bill was enrolled." Mr. LODGE : "The bill was enrolled in the House, it was signed by the Speaker, according to the records of the House, Mr. Browning, and that is the last of it. Mr. Browning says he delivered it here. There is no record of it here at all. It cannot be found. I have been personally to the room of the Committee on Enrolled Bills a'nd looked over the bunch of bills that was sent, and the bill is not there. I do not know what can be done, but the bill has disappeared between the two houses." Mr. SPOONER: "Can it not be re-enrolled?" Mr. LODGE : "The Speaker, I am told, on one oc casion, when a bill had disappeared in that way, de clined to sign the bill again. It has disappeared between the two houses." Mr. SPOONER: "It cannot be, if a bill has been lost before it has been signed by the officer of the other house that Congress is powerless about it. Both houses have passed it." Mr. LODGE : "Certainly they have." Mr. SPOONER: "I do not see any reason why it cannot be re-enrolled." Mr. PETTIGREW : "If the bill is lost, it is lost on purpose. There is no question about that. That might do for some half -civilized community, but for the Sen ate of the United States it is a pretty tough propo sition." After some discussion, the Senate passed a resolu tion which requested the House to have the bill re- enrolled, signed by the Speaker and sent over to the Senate. There was nothing further for the Senate to do, so I resolved to take the matter into my own hands. I went over to the House of Representatives, taking with me Louis Kimball, a Civil War veteran, who had 108 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON been appointed, at my suggestion, messenger to one of the Senate Committees. On the way over to the House I told Kimball what had happened, and then explained my plan to him. I proposed to go to the Clerk of the House and ask him which of his as sistants had enrolled the railroad bill. When he told me, I was to attract the attention of this as sistant while Kimball went through his desk. The plan worked like a charm, McConnel was Clerk of the House — a Republican °f rom Pennsylvania, who could be relied upon by the agents of big business to render faithful service. I knew him well. When I reached his desk I asked which of the clerks had en rolled the railroad bill. He indicated the man, and started toward him. "No," I interposed, "call him over here." I stood stock still till the clerk came. While I engaged him in conversation about the bill, Kimball went through his desk and, in the back end of the top. drawer of the desk, he found the bill, en rolled and ready to be transmitted to the Senate. "McConnell," said I to the Chief Clerk, "you knOw what this means. If that bill is not over in the Sen ate by the time I arrive there, I will recite to -the Senate the circumstances under which we discovered that bUh" Needless to say, the bill was in the Senate chamber before I got back. It was signed at once and sent to the President, who signed it on March 3, 1901, the day before my term as United States Senator expired. On the day previous. Senator Lodge made the fol lowing explanation (March 2, 1901, p. 3587) : "Mr. President, I desire to say a word in regard to the lost bill with respect to which we passed a reso lution not long ago. I am informed while the de^ bate was in progress on the North Carolina Claim Bill that the bill had been found in a desk in the en rolling room of the House of Representatives. It seems to have slipped into the drawer of the desk. I LA.BOR 109 Wish to say this in justice to the clerks and officers of the Senate. It never came here." That is the story of the one labor measure that, to my knowledge, passed both houses of Congress and became a law during the twelve years that I was in the Senate. Every means, fair and foul, was em ployed to kill it, and it was rather by good luck than anything else that we found the bill and got it through in the closing hours of the Session, During the twelve years I was in the Senate, that is, from 1889 to March 4, 1901, the Congress of the United States enacted laws upon 'every conceivable subject, which fills a volume of many thousands of pages, and these laws were enacted by the attorneys of the property interests of this country who had complete control Of both houses, and most of these laws were privileges to the owners of stolen prop erty to exploit the people of the United States. So much for the standing of labor before Congress — it had no standing at all. And why? Partly be cause of the lack of organization; partly because of the ignorance and weakness of the leaders; partly because labor can hope to gain little or nothing at the hands of a Congress composed of corporation lawyers and other representatives of the business in terests. Perhaps a word with regard to my relations with the American Federation of Labor will help to make my meaning clear. I became acquainted with Samuel Gompers, Presi dent of the American Federation of Labor, many years ago. At that time, I supposed that he repre sented the labor unions of the IJnited States in the interests of the toiling masses, and that that interest extended to the public in general. But I very soon found that Samuel Gompers and the American Fed eration of Labor were a combination something in the nature of a trust, organized, even before the great industrial combinations were formed, for the purpose of exploiting everybody except the members of their own combination. I found that Gompers was 110 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON standing in with the employers of labor and under taking to get all he could for his crowd, without ref erence to the general welfare. ^ On August 8, 1911, Mr. Almont, one of the organ izers of the American Federation of Labor, came to me at Sioux Falls, S. D., and said that he had re ceived a letter from Samuel Gompers, or fro^i the office of the American Federation of Labor, request ing Almont to secure a letter from me giving my opinion regarding the trade union movement. I thereupon wrote Gompers the following letter: "Sioux Falls, August 8, 1911. "Samuel Gompers, "President American Federation of Labor. "Dear Sir: "F. C. Almont, one of your organizers, has asked me to write you and give an opinion with regard to the Trade Union Movement. "The Trade Union should be universal and include every man who toils, not only in the factory, but on the farm. The strike and boycott are but crude and savage and war like remedies, and I am sure labor will never receive what it earns until the land and im plements of production are co-operatively or publicly owned. "Capital cannot exist without labor and is entirely dependent upon labor, while labor is independent of capital, can and does exist without^it. Yet under the present system of production capital exploits labor, and takes more than two-thirds of the earnings of labor, and, until the system is changed, labor will struggle in vain to secure what it pro duces. Yours truly, "R. F. PETTIGREW." LABOR 111 During the fall of 1911, I visited Washington and called upon Gompers, He brought up the subject of my letter, said that he had received and read it and that it was an impertinence to write him such a let ter. He began, in a rather excited way, to announce that it was socialism and then to attack the socialists and the socialist doctrine. That interested me very much, so I stayed and talked with for a long time and got a very fair insight into his theory of the labor movement. Later, I continued the investiga tion and had at least one meeting with four or five of the principal union officers of the headquarters of the American Federation of Labor at Washington, After I had thoroughly examined the American Federation of Labor and its processes and purposes, and had ascertained beyond question the relation Mr, Gompers held with the capitalistic and exploiting classes, on December 8, 1916, I wrote the following letter to Gompers : "December 8, 1916, "Hon, Samuel Gompers, "President American Federation of Labor, "Washington, D, C, "Dear Sir: "The position of the American Federation of Labor as represented by you is that of standing in with the corporations who em ploy, labor to secure a part of what labor is entitled to and make the corporations divide with organized labor what they take from the public. "You seem to be ignorant of the purpose and objects of the Civic Federation and are getting acquainted with Professor Com mons. The only way to make a federation of labor effective is to combine all those who are producers of wealth in a political or ganization and take charge of the govern- IMPERIAL WASHINGTON ment and then administer the government in the interests of the rights of man. It is now administered in the interests of the rights of property and administered by men who pro duced none of the property, but who have stolen it from those who did produce it. "I am enclosing you copy of my article on the distribution of wealth in the United States, also copy of my letter to you of August 8, 1911. "I very much hope that Congress will pass the Compulsory Arbitration laws, if that is necessary to open your eyes and the eyes of the American Federation of Labor as to what is going on. Commons is right — ^the Supreme Court will hold that it is consti tutional. "They sent Dred Scott back to slavery and if they will now hold that organized labor can be forced to work, whether they want to or not, and thus send it back to slavery, you will wake up and take possession of the Gov ernment and Congress and also of the courts, "Right after the Dred Scott decision, Lin coln made a speech at Cincinnati, using the following language with reference to the Su preme Court: " 'The people of these United States are fthe .rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitu-' (tion, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution,' "I have wondered if organized labor would still refuse to affiliate with the other labor ers — ^would finally abandon their position as the aristocracy of labor — that of looking with contempt upon their fellow-workers, I wondered if the time will come when you get sufficiently jolted so that you will organize ^ LABOR 113 labor party composed of farmers and other producers of wealth and take charge of the Govemment of the United States and ad minister it in the interests of humanity in stead of continuing to administer it in the interest of property — stolen property — ^with organized labor constantly trying to com- , promise. "Your position and the position of. organ ized labor has been a matter of great aston ishment to me for years and I very much hope that they will pass the compulsory arbi tration law, for the extreme measure is nec essary to jolt organized labor off from the pedestal upon which it has been roosting on to the ground among its fellow-men. "Yours very truly, "R. F. PETTIGREW." Gompers had always insisted that labor should not go into politics, but should select from the two old parties the good men and vote for them without ref erence as to whether they are Democrats or Republi cans, knovring full well that that policy would only result in perpetuating the system of universal ex ploitation, of which he was one of the representa tives. The people who produce the wealth and do the work in the United States are at least two-thirds of the population. A little over 2,000,000 of the American people own all of the wealth that the work ers have produced, having taken it from the produc ers through special privileges, secured by every con ceivable species of chicanery, bribery and corrup tion. Whenever the masters meet an opponent who exposes their methods and practices, and protests against the present economic system, they first un dertake to buy him by agreeing to divide with him the favors which they receive. Failing in that, they undertake to destroy him. No man can succeed ior 114 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON any length of time politically under our system if he exposes the methods of the corporations who own all of the great natural resources and artificial facili ties of the United States. Soon after the American Federation of Labor was organized and Mr. Gompers became its chief, the in terests took him into "camp'^ as they express it, and formulated for him the arguments and program by which he was to handle the American Federation of Labor, so that it would be an adjunct of the present economic system. Of course strikes were permitted where the m^n represented by Gompers insisted upon having more pay than some of the employers were willing to give. Strikes like those of the steel work ers in 1919-1920 might come and go. It was all one to the big fellows. But whenever the strike became so widespread as to seem dangerous, or when the de mands of the men were so reasonable that they made a wide public appeal, the smallest possible conces sions were made, generally through the leaders of the strikers to the men. Before making concessions, however, the great com binations would undertake to bribe the leaders ; would hire private detectives and use force, if necessary, to beat the strikers into submission. In order to justify the use of force in the eyes of the public, they would send their secret agents among the strikers, advocat ing some act of violence which they represented- to be for the welfare of the workers. They would talk violently and excite the men and advise bomb- throwing and even murder. Generally the assaults were against property, and of course immediately the army or the police, or both, were called in to restore law and order. From a close observation of the operations of the American Federation of Labor, as conducted by Mr, Gompers, I am satisfied that he was a party to the methods employed for breaking great strikes, and that the strikes advised by him were manipulated very much more in the interests of the capitalists LABOR 115 than in the interests of labor. And that is why I wrote in a second letter to Mr. Gompers : "The only way to make a Federation of Labor effective is to combine all those who are producers of wealth into a political or ganization and take charge of the local, state and national governments, and admin ister the government in the interests of those who do the work and produce the wealth, and protect the rights of men and and the rights of property in the hands of those who produced the property. "This is important and revolutionax'y, as the government is now run by and in the interest of the men who produce nothing but have stolen what others produced, for it might as well be remembered that capital is stolen labor and its only function is to steal more labor." Labor has no standing in Congress. Its acknowl edged leaders — in conjunction with the masters of in dustry and finance — ^tie labor hand and foot. The American Federation of Labor has been in existence forty years (since 1881). During the period of its power the position of the American worker has be come, on the whole, less, rather than more, advan tageous. The big rewards, the great winnings have gone to the owners, while the workers have received only the crumbs. Labor produces the world's wealth. The vast ma jority of the American people work for their living. Civilization is built upon labor, and labor is civili zation. Yet the public life of^he United Statesis so organized that the workers receive scant considera tion, while every attention is paid to the owners of the property. All our legislation has been aimed to increase the power and promote the interests of those who have. 116 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON as against those who produce. The great question then that is presented to the laboring people of the United States is: Shall the rights of man be superior to the rights of property? Inasmuch as all property is created by labor, if the rights of man are safeguarded by legislation, no laws will be required to protect the rights of property in the hands of the men who produce it, but under our present system the laborer who produces the wealth has none of it. He is exploited out of it by the land lord, by the corporation which employs him, by the corporations which furnish him public utilities, by the insurance companies and trust companies which charge three times what it is worth to do the busi ness, and by the general system of combinations of the parasites and idlers of society, who get away from the producers of wealth what their labor has created. If forty laboring men were shipwrecked upon a dis tant island in the ocean, which was practically never frequented by ships of commerce, and there were about one thousand acres of fertile land upon the island and only one spring of pure water, and one of their number should rush at once to the spring and the thousand acres of land and claim it as his prop erty because he saw it first and ihsist that all the others should pay him a portion of their products be fore they would be permitted to raise food upon the land or to drink water from the spring, the other thirty-nine people would be justified in taking it away from him, and proceeding to exercise their natural rights, giving, of course, the greedy usurper the same right which they all possessed — ^that of go ing to work and earning, with the rest of them, his own living. Of course, the exploiters of labor are always talk ing about the dignity of labor and^extolling the laborers, and the Labor Day orators — men who have never done a day's work in their life or produced a LABOR 117 dollar's .worth of wealth of the country — will speak of the laborers in the highest terms. Why then should not the producers of wealth or ganize and take possession of the Government and run it in the interests of the workers rather than to have it run in the interest of the idle few, as at present ? It seems to me that it is about time we abandoned the barbarous doctrine of "the devil take the hind most," and that, instead of universal selfishness and competition, we could found a civilization based upon the rights of man in the interest of the general wel fare for all the people. Such a step would raise the mental, physical, and moral standard of the popula tion, and would be the beginning of a new stage of civilization. This work must be done by the labor ing classes. It will never be done by the beneficiaries of a special privilege economic system now existing in the United States. IX. PLUTOCRACY. Bit by bit the evidence accumulated under my eyes until it constituted a mountain of irrefutable proof — the public domain seized and exploited by the inter ests and for their private profit; the concentra tion of power in the hands of the bankers; their manipulation of money for their own benefit; the tariff, used as a favor granted by Congress for the few to plunder the many ; the wanton and reckless creation of trusts and aggregations of capital; the vast strength of the railroads and other public utility monopolies ; the ferocious indifference of these inter ests to the public welfare and to the well being of the masses of the people — as I surveyed this evidence I could form only one possible conclusion — that the power over American public life, whether economic, social or political, rested in the hands of the rich. It is said that In the past, in the days of the Roman Empire, when a wealthy Roman wished to build a villa he purchased the right to tax and gov ern a conquered province in Asia, and returned to Rome to enjoy his fortune. But when an American millionaire wishes to build a villa, or buy a title in Europe, he purchases a tariff privilege from the Con gress of the United States, or corrupts a legislature or a city council and secures a franchise, and pro ceeds to rob his neighbors. I am of the opinion that the Roman way was the best. Plutocracy is a word that means, rule by and for the rich. The United States is a country run by and for the rich. Therefore, it is a plutocracy. ' ¦ The rich few own the United States. The rich few who own it direct its public policy. For years these facts have been apparent to the discerning. Today even the short-lighted may see them quite plainly. PLUTOCRACY 119 Read the following letter which Lincoln wrote to William P. Elkin on November 21, 1864: "I see In the near future a crisis approach ing that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of war, corporations have been en throned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed. I feel, at this moment, more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even In the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless." It has been well said by the famous English writer and philanthropist, Mr. Stead, that the modem busi ness world has adopted a new Golden Rule as fol low: "Dollars and dimes, dollars and dimes; To be without money is the worst of crimes. To keep all you get, and get all you can. Is the first and the last and the whole duty of man." That this Golden Rule has been adopted by the so- called business men of the United States is evidenced by what has been accomplished in the distribution of the wealth produced by the great toiling masses of this country. Recently it was announced that John D. Rockefel ler had finally succeeded in accumulating one billion dollars, thus making him the richest man that ever lived. The American people know how he succeeded in accumulating this vast sum. He produced none of it — he secured all of it by exploiting the American peo ple who had produced it. 120 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON The most thrifty of the American people do well if they succeed in saving $300 a year above all their expenses, and they must be busy every day In the year In order to do that. To accumulate one billion dollars at the rate of $300 a year — a dollar a day for three hundred working days — a man would have to live and labor 8,338,333 years. He would have to be older than Methuselah — he would have to start when the world was hot no matter where he ended up. But if he was cunning, unscrupulous and religious and followed Rockefeller's method of robbing his fel low-men, he could get the billion-dollar prize in fifty years. One billion dollars is equivalent to the earnings of one hundred thousand men for twenty years, pro viding they earned $500 apiece each year, and during all that time leaving nothing out for sickness, death or accident. The fact that Rockefeller could appro priate the earnings of his fellow-men and the fact that he did do it is what has caused the social and economic protest against the existing system and the cry for justice. This great and powerful force — ^the accumulated wealth of the United States — has taken over all the functions of Government, Congress, the issue of money, and banking and the army and navy in order to have a band of mercenaries to do their bidding and protect their stolen property. Immediately after the announcement that Rockefel ler was worth a billion dollars. Armour & Swift an nounced a dividend upon their capital stock of thirty- three and one-third per cent and each of these con cerns increased their capital stock from twenty mil lions to one hundred millions. It is safe to say that neither of these concerns had any capital stock for which they had paid a dollar. Their capital stock represented what they had stolen from the people of this country. Their working capi tal Is represented by bonds. The eighty-millions of PLUTOCRACY 121 stock which they have since added is also nothing but water and is issued so as to make the annual dividends appear smaller. The exploited people will object less to paying six or seven per cent on a hun dred millions than to paying thirty-three and one- third per cent on twenty millions. It looks better in print. How do Armour and Swift make their money? They are the great packers. They are in collusion. They fix the prices they pay the farmer for his hogs and cattle, and they fix the prices they will charge the consumer for their product. They are simply robbing the producer and the consumer, and their robbery is represented In their great wealth, which they did not produce but which they took from the people under the guise of law. When the bill to take the census of 1890 was pend ing before Congress I secured an amendment re quiring the enumerators to ascertain the distribution of wealth through an inquiry into farms, homes and mortages. Using the figures thus secured by the enumerators of the census of 1890, on June 10, 1918, I delivered a speech in the Senate of the United States on the sub ject of the distribution of wealth in the United States and, from the census of 1890, I showed that 52 per cent of the people of the United States owned $95.00 worth of property per capita, or $95.00 each of second-hand clothing and second-hand furniture, and that four thousand families owned twelve billions of the wealth, and that 6,640,000 familes, or 52 per cent of the population, owned three billions of the wealth, or just five per cent of the total. The facts, as ascertained by the census-takers in 1890, appear, summarized. In the following table: 122 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Distribution of Wealth by Census 1890 Class Families Millionaires ... 4,000 Rich 1,139,000 Total Rich . . . 1,143,000 Middle 4,953,000 Poor 6,604,000 Per Average Aggregate Per Cent Wealth Wealth Cent .03 $3,000,000 $12,000,000,000 20 8.97 27,000 30,600,000,000 9.00 37,358 42,600,000,000 39.00 2,907 14,400,000,000 52.00 454 3,000,000;000 51 7124 5 Grand Total..l2,700,000 100.00 $ 4,725 $60,000,000,000 100 Diagrams Showing, by Percentages, the Population and Wealth Distribution in the United States, According to the Census of 1890 POPULATION Millionaires. .03 Rich 8.97 Total.. Total.... 100% Millionaires. 20% Rich 51% Total.... 71% Middle..... 24% Poor. WEALTH Total.... 100% It will be seen from these tables, which are com piled from the census report of 1890, that 52 per cent of the people, or two per cent more than half of them, owned but five per cent of the accumulated wealth of the United States. The report ot the In dustrial Commission which thoroughly investigated the distribution of wealth in the United States dis- PLUTOCRACY 123 closes the fact that, after twenty-six years, covering half of the period in which Rockefeller and Armour and Swift and the other exploiters of the people have accumulated their vast fortunes, the number of peo ple who participated in the five per cent of the wealth of the United States has increased from 52 per cent pf our total population to 65 per cent. I have prepared a diagram illustrating the conclu sions reached by the experts of the Industrial Com mission, which pictures the stupendous inequalities that have arisenJn the United States during the past twenty-six years : Distribution of Wealth, Report of Industrial Commission, 1915 Per Glass Number Cent Rich 2,000,000 2% Middle 33,000,000 33% Poor 65,000,000 65% Grand Total..lOO,000,000 100% $ 1,400 $140,000,000,000 100% Average Aggregate Per Wealth Wealth Cent $42,000 $ 84,000,000,000 60% 1,480 49,000,000,000 35% 107 7,000,000,000 5% Total Popu- Rich 2 % or lation of 2,000,000.. 100,000,000 Middle 33% or 33,000,000 Poor 65% or 65,000,000 Total Wealth $140,000,000,000 Poor — 5% or $7,000,000,000 Rich 60% or 1,000,000,000 Middle 35% or 9,000,000,000 5% 124 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON I wish a careful examination of these tables. You will see that sixty-five per cent of- the people own five per cent of the wealth and that two per cent of the population — ^the little black line at the top of the diagram — own sixty per cent of the wealth. They did not produce the wealth. It was all produced by the sixty-five per cent of the population who have nothing. They were able to do it because they owned the Government and the courts and enacted the laws which made it possible. They have done it through manipulation, combination and exploitation. They have done it through corporations. They have done it because they own the railroads and the banks and all the public utilities, and used them all-— all of these great important public service institutions ir order to gather the products of everybody's toil into their own hands. In other words, they have stolen what others" have produced. These were the figures for 1916. Since that time there have come the war and the panic, with their huge crop of millionaires and their further concen tration of wealth and of economic power. But, you may ask, why is it necessary to turn to the figures of the Industrial Commission? Why not use the census figures? The answer is very simple. Since the publication of the 1890 figures, the pluto crats have decided that the facts regarding wealth distribution shall not be permitted to get into the hands of the American people. When I entered the Senate I believed that the ques tion of the distribution of wealth was one of the most important ones before the American people and one that was receiving ho attention whatever. While I was in the House I had made the personal acquaint ance of Senator Jones of Arkansas, who was on the Committee on Indian Affairs in the Senate, and Sen ator Berry of Arkansas, who was on the Committee on Public Lands in the Senate. So that, before the Senate convened in December, 1889 — when I took my seat in the Senate, I had talked with these two Sen- PLUTOCRACY 125 ators about securing legislation to ascertain the dis tribution of wealth in the United States, They had entered heartily into the plan and we prepared a bill for that purpose,* which was introduced by Senator Berry as an amendment to the Census Bill of 1890, The bill attracted little attention and was passed practically without opposition, but I had great diffi culty in getting the persons in charge of taking the census to go thoroughly into the question. Finally, under the head of "Farms, Homes and Mortgages," an investigation was made by Holmes and a report was issued, I think, about 1898. This report showed a remarkable economic condition in this country and disclosed the fact that 52 per cent of our population had five per cent of the wealth they had produced, and that nine per cent of our population had a ma jority of all the property in this country. I made a speech in the Senate upon this subject, going quite fully into the question, and in that speech I predicted that the number of people who had nothing would steadily increase under our system, and that the num ber of people who owned a majority of the wealth would steadily decrease. I considered the question so Important that I secured a place on the Senate Census Committee to prepar« the bill for taking the census of 1900. In the committee I urged an amendment to the bill for tak ing the census which should go fully into the question of the distribution of wealth in this country, but the committee refused to adopt my amendment or to take any notice of the question whatever. Incidentally, the committee was composed of lawyers and a lawyer is trained to believe that it is the right of property in the hands of men who did not produce the property that is sacred, and not the rights of man. Or that * The bill was worded as follows: "That a census of the population, wealth and in dustry of the United States shall be taken as of the date of June 1, 1890. Statutes of the U. S., p. 761, March 1, 1899.^' 126 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON society has any obligation whatever to those who toil. We borrowed this from England and it is so thoroughly inculcated into our whole system of educational and economic life that there is no question but that the lawyers honestly believe it to be true. After the Census Bill was reported to the Senate I offered my amendment under these circumstances : (Congressional Record, 56th Congress, 1st Session, Jan, 11, 1900, vol, 331, p. 779.) Mr. PETTIGREW: "I offer an amendment, which I send to the desk." THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE : "The amend ment of the Senator from South Dakota will be stated." THE SECRETARY: "It is proposed to add, as section 3, the following: "Sec. 3. That the Director of the Census is hereby required to collect statistics re lating to the indebtedness of individuals and corporations, public or private; also in relation to the distribution of wealth among the people of the United States; also statis tics as to the displacement of labor by machinery, and the increase of the power of production by machinery in proportion to the number of laborers employed during the last thirty years. And for this purpose the Director of the Census may employ special agents, and such special, agents shall receive such compensation as other special agents." ¦ Mr. PETTIGREW: "Mr. President, this amend ment is intended to secure statistics with regard to the distribution of wealth. It does not require the enumerator:s to gather the statistics on this subject, and therefore will not delay the purpose of the law which we have passed. PLUTOCRACY 127 "We make the Census Bureau, as I understand, a perpetual bureau of statistics and information, and to fail to gather the information referred to in my amendment, it seems to me, would be a very serious mistake. The question as to what becomes of what the toilers of the land produce, whether it goes to them or is taken from them by special privileges, and accumulated in the hands of a very few people is a very important one and reaches ultimately the ques tion of the preservation of free institutions. "The other subject in my amendment is with re gard to the displacement of labor by machinery and the increased power of production thereby. I desire this Information for the reason that I believe man's power to produce, as the result of the adoption of machinery, has increased many times more than the increase of his wages, which should have occurred as a result of his increased powers of production; in other words, that the increased power of production is the result of machinery and has inured to the ad vantage of capital many times more than to the ad vantage of labor; that this has caused in a large de gree the unequal distribution of wealth in this coun try; that the increased power of production, as the result of machinery, should go to the toiler in a much larger degree than to the capital employed; that the power to produce by machinery is a benefit to man kind if the increased power to produce goes to the toiler, because his power to consume is also increased, and thus the consumption and enjoyment of a greater measure of the luxuries and comforts of life must go to those who produce the wealth of the land. "I therefore believe these two questions are exceed ingly important; and I have asked that this infor mation be collected by special agents rather than by the enumerators, so that it will not delay a single day or a single hour the securing of that information which seems to be the prime object of the bill. "I hope the additional section I have offered will be adopted without objection." 128 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON (Jan. 11, 1900.) Mr. TILLMAN: "I will say for the information of the Senator from Georgia that if it is not taken with the first census it cannot be taken at all, without an intolerable additional expense. It is for the Senate to determine whether it will enlarge the scope of the census. If we break down the barrier erected by the Census Committee, we simply, as we were notified by the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Cockrell) the other day, open up a flood of amendments concerning each special class of inquiry any senator may wish to have included." Mr. PETTIGREW: "My amendment provides for nothing of the kind. It simply provides that this Census Bureau of statistics, which is perpetual, may, by special agents, not by enumerators, investigate this all-important subject. I think the census would be of very little value without it. It is not personal to myself, nor a subject that I am particularly or per sonally interested in, but it is a great public question. The question of the distribution of the weMth of this country is certainly a question of more importance than almost anything else that can be investigated. As the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Teller) has said, we have almost day by day a very accurate estimate of the population. We have very many other statis tics which are constantly being produced by the statistical bureau, but the question of the distribution of the wealth of this country has never been ade quately and fairly investigated. It ought to be. "I do not propose to delay the taking of the census, and my amendment does not delay it at all. It simply provides an additional section for the doing of this additional work. If the schedules are all pre pared and the work is disposed of, the enumerators can commence their operations ; and therefore the De partment will have the time to get out additional schedules for the special -agents to do the work which I desire .to have done. This work cannot commence PLUTOCRACY 129 until an appropriation is made. It is quite proper, then, that the amendment should be on this bill, be cause section 8 is in the original law, which provides a large amount of extra work to be done after the main census has been taken through the enumerators ; and if it was a proper time to provide section 8 in the law when it passed last year, it is time now for my amendment to be placed on this bill. That is all I want. I do not care to discuss it further." The reasons in favor of taking a wealth census seemed to me conclusive. Nevertheless, the amend ment met with universal opposition, and it was re jected. When the census bill was pending to take the cen sus of 1910, I wrote to Senator LaFollette and urged him to secure an amendment with relation to the dis tribution of wealth in this country, but LaFollette is a lavvver and he did nothing, I also sent him a state ment of the facts in connection with the matter and a copy of my speech delivered in 1898 on this sub ject, but I was unable to accomplish anything, as the Senate was still composed almost entirely of -lawyers who had represented as attorneys, before they en tered the Senate and who still continued to represent as attorneys after they entered the Senate, the great industrial, financial, transportation and exploiting interests. While the census bill to provide for the census of 1920 was under consideration in both Houses, I went to Washington and personally went to the committee of both Houses and urged the importance of securing statistics with regard to the distribution of wealth in this country, but neither committee would entertain my proposed amendment or listen with patience to any argument. In reply to my analysis of the situation, the mem bers of the committees insisted that it was not true. "Why," said they, "look about you and see the pros perity everywhere. How can you say then that the wealth of the country is in the hands of the rich?" 130 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON "Well," I answered, "if it is not true, and if the Census of 1890, the Industrial Commission, and all of the rest of the authorities are wrong, the thing to do is to take another wealth census and disprove all of their false statements." Still, I could make no im pression on the lawyers who made up both com mittees. The Committees of Congress, having the censuses of 1910 and 1920 in charge, refused to include in the census bills a clause requiring the enumerators to ascertain the distribution of wealth, because they, as representatives of the plutocracy, did not desire the facts to be known. The bulk of the American people have little or no wealth; the economic power of the United States is concentrated in the hands of the few, and the few are determined to keep the many in ignorance as long as they possibly can. I have gone into some detail with regard to this matter of the wealth census, not so much because of its intrinsic importance, but because of its relation to other and similar issues. Again and again, on other questions, the same men who refused to gather the evidence of wealth concentration have introduced and voted for the measures which were drawn up by the attorneys of the vested interests for the purpose of increasing wealth concentration. The economic power of the United States has been concentrated in the hands of a very few, and they are the Government. They pass the laws that in their judgment will protect and defend the property upon which their power depends; they secure the appoint ment of judges who will interpret and who do in terpret this legislation in the interest of the wealth- owning classes; control those who execute the laws, from the presidents down — indeed, for the most part, the presidents are lawyers, and either members of the plutocracy, or else paid retainers of the plutoc racy; they control all of the channels of public opinion — ^the press, the schools, the church ; they con trol the labor unions through the control of their leaders and of the policy that the leaders pursue; PLUTOCRACY 181 possessors of the land on which the farmer must work, of the mines and the machines with which the laborer must work, in order to live, the plutocracy — the wealth class^in the United States is supreme over the affairs of public life. Today this economic power is not ashamed to show its head and take its place as the master of the American Government and as the overlord of the American people. They used to talk about the In visible. Government when I entered the Senate in 1890, but it is invisible no longer. The real govern ment is not in -Washington, Its attorneys are there, but its responsible directors are in New York and in the other great centers of commerce and industry. Wealth means power in an industrial civilization, and the few, owning the bulk of the wealth of the United States, exercise their plutocratic power over the lives of the American people, who are forced, whether they will or no, to do the bidding of their wealth lords. And therefore I say — Capital is stolen labor and its only function is ta steal more labor. You ask me what is the remedy. The remedy is clear and plain — ^the same remedy you apply when a man breaks into your strongbox and takes your money. You capture him and take the stolen property away from him. It is the duty of the 65 per cent of our population who produced all the wealth to reach over and take back the 60 per cent of the wealth which the two million thieves have stolen from them, and appropriate it to the good of all, as all produced it and therefore the mass of the people are entitled to it. Take over the railroads, take over the banks and the issue of money and the public-utility concerns, and take over the title of the lands that have no value except the value the community has given it, and then use all of this property for the general welfare of the community. This is not confiscation or rob bery — it is simply taking from the thieves what they have stolen from you, and the first thing to take is to take control of the government out of their hands. X, WHO MADE THE CONSTITUTION I have written in some detail of the economic changes and of the changes in economic policy that have occurred in the United States during the past 50 years. The first year that I went to Washington (1870) the population of Chicago was 298,977; today (1920) it is 2,701,705; the population of Detroit was 79,577; today it is 993,739; the population of Minne apolis was 13,006 ; today it is 380,582 ; the population of Dakota was 14,181; today it is 1,281,569, I have watched the Middle West grow from a sparsely set tled wilderness, the home of Indians and of buffaloes, to the greatest center of agriculture and of industry in the world, I have watched the public domain slip out of the hands of the people, and into the hands qf speculators, of corporations and of -monopolies, I have seen the bankers, the trust magnates and the masters of transportation and other forms of monopoly rise from obscurity to their present position of domination in public affairs. I have watched the growth of the plutocracy — the few who rule industry, the Government and the press because they are rich. In the halls of the Capitol at Washington, I have watched these plutocrats, through their representa tives on the floor of the Senate and the House, erect the governmental machinery that they required for the preservation of their power. Step by step and move by move I fought the system of Imperialism which the McKinley administration enabled them to establish as the accepted policy of the country. The flght lasted twelve years. When it was over, the in terests that I had opposed were the triumphant mas ters of the field. When I entered the Senate, I did not understand what it was that I was facing. When I left the Senate, because Mark Hanna and the forces behind WHO MADE THE CONSTITUTION 138 Mark Hanna willed that I should leave, I knew that the forms of our government and the machinery of its administration were established and maintained for the benefit of the class that held the economic and political power. I realized that the machinery of government had been constructed by the ruling economic class to pre serve and guarantee its own economic interests. Documents like the Constitution, which I, as a child, had been taught to regard as almost divine in their origin, stood before me for what they were — plans prepared by business men to stabilize business in terests. At the time that our Constitution was drawn up, Adam Smith wrote of the government in the "mother country" (Wealth of Nations, Book V., Ch. 1, pub lished in 1776), "Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all." Again he stated (Book 1, Ch. 10), "Whenever the legislature attempts to regu late the differences between masters and their work men, its counsellors are always the masters." Concerning this same epoch a well-known modern historian writes: "During the period we are discuss ing (1760-1832) . . . the classes that possessed authority in the State, and the classes that had ac quired the new wealth, landlords, churchmen, judges, manufacturers, one and all understood by government the protection of society from the fate that had over taken the privileged classes in France." (The Town Laborer, J. L. & B. Hammond, N. Y. Longmans, 1917, p. 321). It was this government by landlords and manufacturers that the framers of the Consti tution knew, and they knew no other. Their idea of government was the British idea — a machine for pro tecting the rich against the poor; a device for safe guarding and defending privilege against the clam orous and revolutionary demands 'of the populace. 134 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Their goal was the protection of the propertied in terests and they drew the Constitution with that end in view. Furthermore, it was the leading business men of the colonists, in their own persons, who drew up the Constitution and forced through its ratification. "The movement for the Constitution," writes Charles A. Beard, the distinguished student of American Gov ernment, "was originated and carried through prin cipally by four groups of personality interests, which had been adversely affected under the Articles of Confederation — ^money, public securities, manufac turers, and trade and shipping." (An Economic In terpretation of the Constitution, New York, Mac- millan, 1914, p. 324.) These events transpired nearly a century-and-a-half ago, and ever since that time we have been building up the kind of a government that bankers, manufacturers and merchants needed for their enrichment. This point is so fundamental to a proper under standing of what I have to say about the machinery of American Government that I desire to emphasize it. School teachers talk to children and public men harangue their constituents as though the Consti tution were a document drawn to establish human liberty. By these means our ideas as to the intention of the framers of the Constitution have been utterly distorted. Anyone who wishes to know the facts should examine the Journal of the Constitutional Con vention. There the record is as plain as the road at noonday. The Constitution was not drawn up to safe guard liberty. It? framers had property rights in their minds' eye and property deeds in their pockets, and its most enthusiastic supporters were the leading bankers, manufacturers and traders of the Federated States. The Constitution was made to protect the rights of property and not the rights of man. ^hese facts are neither secret nor hidden. They are a part of the public record that may be consulted WHO MADE THE CONSTITUTION 135 in any first-class library. Properly understood, they furnish the intellectual key that will open the mind to an appreciation of many of the most important events that have occurred in the United States dur ing the past century. The convention that framed the Constitution of the United States convened at Philadelphia in 1787 be hind closed doors. All of the delegates were sworn to secrecy. Madison reported the proceedings of the convention in longhand and his notes were purchased In 1837 by Congress and published by the Govern ment nearly half a century after the convention had finished its work. These notes disclose the forces that dominated the work of the convention and show that the object which the leaders of the convention had in view was not to create a democracy or a government of the people, but to establish a govemment by the property classes in the interests of the rights of property rather > than the rights of man. All through the debates ran one theme : How to secure a govern ment, not by the people and for the people, but by the classes and for the classes, with the lawyers in con trol. Jefferson was not a member of the convention. As the author of the Declaration of Independence he was not wanted in the convention, and so he was sent to France on a diplomatic mission. I will give two extracts from these proceedings to illustrate this point; they are typical, and are as fol lows: Madison (p. 78) quotes Sherman of Connecticut as saying: "The people should have as little to do as may be about the Government. They want infor mation and are constantly liable to be misled." Again (p. 115) Mr. Gerry is quoted as follows: "Hence in Massachusetts the worst men get into the legislature. Several members of that body had lately been convicted of infamous crimes. Men of indigence, ignorance and baseness, spare no pains, however dirty, to carry their point against men who are 136 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON superior to the artifices practiced." This is the bur den of the debates through page after page of the two volumes. The chief contention in the Constitutional Con vention was over representation in the United States Senate. "The smaller states feared that they would be dominated by the larger ones and, after much de bate, it was agreed that each state, no matter what its wealth or population, should have two votes in the Senate of the United States, while the House of Rep- representatives should represent the people and the number of delegates from each state should be in pro portion to the population. As a concession to the larger states, a provision was inserted requiring that all money bills should originate in the House of Rep resentatives, and this was considered important, in view of the fact that the states of small area and small population, such as\Delaware and Rhode Island, had an equal voice with large "states like Virginia and Pennsylvania in the Senate of the United States. The southern states believed they had obtained pro tection for their peculiar institution (slavery) by securing representation in the House of Representa tives for the slave population. At the same time, the southern slave-holders and the northern slave-traders combined to secure the insertion of a clause (Article 1, Section IX, Clause 1) permitting the slave trade to continue until 1808. At the time of framing the Constitution, and for many years thereafter, it was supposed and intended that the Senate should represent the states while the House represented the people. No vested interest ever thought of gaining control of the Senate for the purpose of advancing the commercial or financial position of any combination, corporation or individual. It was not until a third of a century after the adoption of the Constitution that the southern states began to look to the Senate for the protection of their interests and to insist upon the admission of a slave state WHO MADE THE CONSTITUTION 137 whenever a free state asked for admission to the Union. The immediate purpose behind the creation of a Senate that was not elected by the people, but that came from the state legislatures and thus spoke in name of states rather than of masses of citizens, was the protection of the small colonies against the large ones. The interests that dominated both the small and the large colonies, however, were the business interests. Therefore, this struggle between those who wanted one form of Senate and those who wanted another was a struggle between contending and com peting business groups. It was not in any sense a struggle between the champions of liberty and the advocates of property rights. This fact is madp evident by an examination of the interests of these'-hien who made up the Constitutional Convention of 1787. There were fifty-five delegates present in the Convention, A majority were lawyers ; most of them came from towns; there was not one farmer, mechanic or laborer among them; five-sixths had property interests. Of the 55 members, 40 owned revolutionary scrip; 14 were land speculators; 24 were money-lenders; 11 were merchants; 15 were slave-holders, Washington, the big man of the Con vention, was a slave-holder, land speculator and a large scrip owner. Jefferson was in France! The Constitution, as framed by the Convention, says nothing about the rights of man. It contains no guarantee of free speech, of free press, of free as semblage, or of religious liberty. It breathes no single hint of freedom. It was made by men who be lieved in the English theory, that all governments are created to protect the rights of property in the hands of those who do not produce it. The revolutionary scrip-paper money, to finance the Revolutionary War, had been used to pay for supplies and to pay the wages of the men that did the fight ing. In the years that followed the war, this scrip 138' IMPERIAL WASHINGTON had been bought up by the financiers and great land owners and their attorneys for about nine cents on the dollar. The Constitution, as adopted, made it worth one hundred cents on the dollar. This Is but one of the many facts which prove that the Consti tution, as drawn up by the Convention, was made to protect the rights of property rather than the rights of man. ' Throughout the document the framers were careful to guard against too much democracy. The Govern ment was erected in three parts — ^legislative, executive and judicial — each with a check -on the other two. The House of Representatives alone was elected directly by the people, but all of its legislative acts were subject to revision or rejection by the Senate, the members of which were to be selected, not by popular vote but by the vote of the state legislatures. Thus, even the legislative branch of the Govemment did not represent the popular will. If the legislative branch had been responsible to the people, there was still the President, elected, not by the vote of the people, 'but the vote of electors, who were elected by the people; and, last of all, and by no means the least, from the point of view of the vested interests, there was the Supreme Court — ^its members selected by the President, confirmed by the Senate, sitting for life. Over these supreme judges, the people could not exercise even an indirect control. This was the Constitution drawn up while Thomas Jefferson was in France. It was submitted to the states for ratification and the states refused to ac cept it. In all probability it never would have been ratified had Thomas Jefferson not returned from France and thrown his great influence in favor of the first ten amendment^ — ^the Bill of Rights that was added to the Constitution by its business backers, as the necessary price of its adoption by the people. Article I of these Amendments reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an WHO MADE THE CONSTITUTION 139 establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the free- . dom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for redress of grievances." Article IV of the Amendments provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, paper and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall Issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describ ing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." These are the principal guarantees of liberty. In serted in the Constitution after the Convention of business men had finished its work, and inserted be cause the people insisted upon having them there. Even at that, the Constitution is a lukewarm docu ment. In it there are no such burning words as those written by Thomas Jefferson thirteen years earlier and published as the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created free and equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are insti tuted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends It is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its power in such form as shall seem to them most likely to effect their safety and happiness," It was not until 1861, when Abraham Lincoln de- Jivered hi§ first inaugural address, that the right of 140 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON revolution was definitely proclaimed by a responsible statesman, acting under the Constitution, "This coun try," Lincoln said on that occasion, "with its insti tutions belongs to the people who inhabit it. When ever they shall grow weary of the existing govem ment, they can exercise their constitutional right of amendment, or their revolutionary right to dismem ber or overthrow it," That revolutionary right, so clearly proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence and so emphatically stated by Lincoln, remains today the avenue left to the American people as a means of escape from the intolerable plutocratic tyranny that the Constitution has set up. The Constitution is the fundamental law of the United States. It was drawn up 134 years ago by a convention consisting of business men and their lawyer-retainers. It was a document designed to pro tect property rights, and, through the century and a quarter that it has endured, it has served its purpose so well that it stands today, not only as the chief bul wark of American privilege and vested wrong, but as the greatest document ever designed by man for the safeguarding of the few in their work of exploiting and robbing the many. XL LAWYERS The Constitution of the United States was made by business men. The work of managing and directing the government machinery that has been erected in pursuance of the Constitution has been placed almost exclusively in the hands of lawyers, who sit in the legislatures and make the laws; sit in the executive chairs and enforce the laws, and sit on the bench and interpret the laws. Lawyers dominate the city, state and national gov ernments to an astonishing degree. In one sense, they are the Government, at least in so far as manipulat ing its machinery is concerned. The lawyers have become a governing caste in the United States. Their official position is out of all proportion to their num ber. The total number of "lawyers, judges and justices," as given in the census of 1910 (the latest one avail able at this writing) was 114,704, The same volume of the census- reports that there were more than 88,- 167,000 gainfully occupied persons in the United States. That would make three lawyers for each 1,000 of the gainfully occupied population. There fore, if the lawyers had their proportional share of the governing positions, they would get less than one- third of one per cent of the Government jobs. The actual situation Is far different. In the affairs of government— particularly of the Federal Govern ment — the lawyer plays a leading part. He is only one one-three-hundredth of the gainfully occupied population, but he is the majority of those upon whom falls the duty of making and enforcing the laws. Take the situation in the Federal Congress. There has never been a time during the fifty years that I have known Washington when the lawyers consti tuted less than half of the membership of both houses 142 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON of Congress. Usually, they made up two-thirds of the membership. The praportion varies, but the principle holds. The present Congress (the 65th) reports in the House 263 lawyers out of a total of 388 who gave their occupations. (No occupations were given for 47.) In the Senate, there are 60 lawyers out of a total of 89 Senators who reported their occupations. The census shows that the lawyers constitute only three in every thousand of the gainful population. In the Senate, they are in the proportion of 674 per thousand; and in the House in the proportion of 677 in the thousand. Thus, two-thirds of our national law-makers are lawyers. The same thing holds true of our Presidents. Since the United States has become a government by the corporations, their presidential candidates have al most invariably been lawyers. Harrison, as Presi dent, was a lawyer, and reputed to be a good One. He had been preceded in that high office by Grover Cleve land, a lawyer from Buffalo, New York. Harrison was followed by Cleveland. Cleveland was followed by another lawyer — McKinley, who was elected and assassinated, and thus Theodore Roosevelt, who was his Vice-President, and not a lawyer, accidentally be came President. He was succeeded by another lawyer, Taft, who was not a good lawyer. He had neither the judgment nor the ability to make a good lawyer, and he was therefore a very satisfactory representa tive of the predatory and exploiting corporations which, during all of my time in public life, have been the real force in control of the Govemment. Taft was followed by Wilson, a lawyer, and after his eight years the people elected Harding, another lawyer- giving him a plurality of more than six million of votes. There is no question of party politics involved. Of all the Presidents that I have known, two were Demo crats (Cleveland and Wilson) ; the rest were Re publicans. With the exception of Roosevelt, all of LAWYERS 148 them since Garfield — ^and including Garfield — ^have been lawyers. ^ The lawyers have an even higher percentage among the successful presidential candidates than they have among the members of Congress. When it comes to the courts, the whole field is in the possession of the lawyers, who have built up a system of exalting the law above everything else in the land — life, happiness and liberty included. They have worked out a "precedent" under which no one may become a judge unless he has previously been a lawyer. As a matter of practical fact, it is not neces sary that a judge should be a lawyer. On the con trary, a lawyer trained under the present system is not fit to be a judge, but the thing has been worked out in such a way that all of the judges are lawyers. The position of the lawyers in the Government Is absurd in view of their small numerical importance. There are only a little more than a hundred thousand of them in a country of more than a hundred millions, yet they make up more than two-thirds of the mem bership of both houses of Congress; the majority of the state legislatures; most of the governors; all of the prosecuting attorneys; most of the Presidents, and all of the judges. The lawyers enact the laws; interpret the laws and enforce the laws. The Govern ment is a lawyer-government, and we are a lawyer- ridden country. Then there comes a question. If the business men of the United States run the Government, as I have asserted that they do, how comes it that they are will ing to let the lawyers hold all of the important public positions? The answer to that question is very simple: Be cause the lawyers do it so well! If the lawyers failed to do what the business men want done, the business men would soon put an end to their domination of the political machinery. The lawyers know that as well as the business men. But tJie lawyers are kept in their present position because 144 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON they are such splendid representatives of the predatory interests. A lawyer, by his training and by his practice, is calculated to serve the ruling class of the country, and, where the milers can get able servants, there is no reason why they should do the work them selves. They have ample resources. They can afford to pay, and with the lawyers at hand to do their work they are as well served as though they served them selves. The lawyers are not experts in govemment, but in debauching and corrupting and crippling the Government in the interest of those who pay them their fees. So here they sit, in the legislatures. In the executive officers and on the bench, running the Gov ernment in the interest of those who are plundering the people. Business interests support and finance their lawyer handy-men because these lawyers are able to do what the business world wants done. The lawyers have been developed into a class of professional manip ulators and wreckers of Government machinery be cause they are trained from the outset to regard the interests of their clients as of greater moment than the public Interest. A man, to become a good lawyer, must have spent his life studying "precedent." What is precedent but the preservation of the status quo, and what is the status quo but the wisdom of yesterday? The good lawyer is therefore the lawyer who is able to pre serve the shadow of yesterday and use it to darken the sunlight of today. The good lawyer, to educate himself, pores over the Common Law of England. When his head Is filled with seventeen hundred decisions handed down by judges who lived in the seventeenth century, before the American Colonies found the British rule Intoler able, he fills up the chinks of his mind with Black stone and with Kent's Commentaries. He then studies what the judges (lawyers) of the United States said during the past hundred years, and after that he is LAWYERS 145 considered as prepared to defend the interests of the exploiters of America. This precedent-fed human being is valuable to the great interests for three reasons: First, because his study of precedent has rendered him incapable of thinking into the future and has thus made him a natural protector of things as they are; Second, because the tradition of property rights in herited from the past can best be preserved through such a class, of "dead-hand" experts ; Third, because the lawyer, under the ethics of his profession, is the only man who can take a bribe and call it a fee. The real work of the world is done by those who envisage the future and prepare for it. Such an ability is the first essential in a statesman, or in any other person who assumes to play a role in the direction of human affairs. The lawyer finds it virtually impossible to look ahead. He has been trained to move forward with his eyes over his shoulder. Any ruling class, depending for its profits on some special privilege, like the ownership of land or of machinery, must see to it that these special privileges are not interfered with, otherwise its source of profit may be destroyed. At one time, under the Feudal System, it was the church that acted as the policeman for the landlord, keeping the tenants quiet with threats of dire punishment in the hereafter in case they interfered with the sacred person or with the still more sacred property of their overlords. That function, at the present time, has been taken over by the lawyers, who threaten the penalties of criminal codes and of Espionage Acts for those who transgress the sacred precincts in which the property of their clients is enclosed. All of this work is done by the simple method of allowing one man for himself and for his heirs, forever, certain corner lots and choice quarter-sections without which his fellows cannot continue to make a 146 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON living. The world marches by his door and, for the privilege of so doing, it pays the property-holder his rent. The lawyer has studied the precedents established by the land-holding aristocracy of Great Britain. From them he has derived the "common law;" and to that he has added tens of thousands of pages of statutes which are designed to perfect the system the land-holding aristocracy of Great Britain has worked so hard to establish. The traditions of English civilization are traditions ©f wealthy land-holders and manufacturers and bankers, on the one hand, and an overworked, ex ploited population of laborers on the other. No one who has seen the condition of the British workers can have any delusions as to the terrible way in which they have suffered under the "property-first" system of British society. It is this system that is being per petuated in the United States, by means of the Con stitution, the laws, the courts and the lawyers, who are the handymen of big business, in control of every important branch of the public service. The lawyer makes a good servant of the ruling class because he spends his life making the world be lieve that the property rights are more important than the human rights. Again, he is useful because he may be bribed at almost any stage of his public career, and may accept the bribe without losing his professional self-respect. During the twelve years that I was a member of the United States Senate, more than two-thirds of the members of both houses were lawyers, and those In the Senate Were generally old lawyers who had spent their lives in the service of the great interests. So far as I know, these lawyers, in both Houses, never hesitated to take a fee from any interest that wished to employ them. They satisfied their consciences by assuring themselves and their friends that no matter what the size of the fee it did not Influence their actions as lawmakers. LAWYERS 147 I know personally of one Senator who received a fee of $49,000 for representing one of the greatest of the industrial combinations in a case before a Federal court. This man was as honest a lawyer as I ever knew. His vote could not have been purchased 0r, any consideration ; yet after he had received the $49/ 000 fee, if a question had come up which involved tile interests of that corporation, or which was in the nature of an attack upon it, it is useless to insist that the thought of the fee would not have had at least some Influence in determining what he should do and how he should vote. Senator Edmunds of Vermont was chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary during the twelve years that I was a member of the United States Senate. He reported the Sherman Anti-Trust Law -f rom that Committee. Afterward, the United States Govem ment began a suit against the Joint Traffic Asso ciation, which was a combination of thirty-two rail roads running west from New York, on the ground that that combination was in violation of the Sher man Anti-Trust law, the suit having been started be fore Judge LaComb, the Circuit Judge of the District of New York. The judge announced from the bench that he was disqualified from hearing the case be cause he was the owner of the stocks and bonds of the defendant railroad, and he said. In open court, that he believed every judge in the circuit was suffer ing from a like disqualification. The railroads had put their attorneys on the bench. It was finally found that Judge Wheeler, just appointed through the influence of Senator Edmunds, from the State of Vermont, was not the owner of stocks and bonds in the defendant railroads, and the railroads thereupon employed Edmunds to go before this judge — a crea ture of his — and tell the judge that the Sherman Anti-Trust Law was not being violated. No one knows how big a fee Edmunds received, but it created no comment, for it is now well understood 148 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON that a lawyer can be bought and call the purchase price of his opinions and convictions a fee. In the case of Foraker, of Ohio, and Senator Bailey, of Texas, the amount of money paid them by the Standard Oil Company was so large, and the trans action was so under cover, that it excited no great amount of comment until the newspapers took it up, and then the matter became so scandalous that the public thought it best to call a halt. These are only illustrations. It is a universal prac tice among the lawyers of both Houses to take a fee from the industrial combinations whenever they can get it, and they boast among their fellow members if the fee is big enough to be worth while. This was the practice during the whole twelve years that I was in the Senate. From 'what I have said about the training of lawyers it must be apparent that a lawyer cannot be a statesman. First, because he is trained to look backward rather than forward and, second, because in order to be a statesman it is necessary to have some appreciation of the general welfare, and the lawyer can only represent his clients and assist them to protect and defend property rights. How is it possible to produce statesmen under the conditions that prevail in the United States, or in any of the other great capitalist countries for that mat ter? Under the system the land, the resources, the means of transportation and the money power are handed over to the favored few. They manipulate the Government, through their agents, the lawyers, and thus the machinery that should be employed to feed and care for the people is employed for the en richment of the few at the expense of the many. It is the lawyers who have acted as the go-between. They have drawn the papers under which the riches of the nation have been placed in the hands of a few, who hold legal commissions that enable them to rob the many. Under these circumstances, it is not the general welfare that is uppermost in the minds of LAWYERS 149 those responsible for the direction of public affairs, but the manipulation of public business in such a way as tp add still more to the power of those who hold the special privileges of the nation. It is only in England and in the United States that the people have been satisfied to build up a ruling class — ^the lawyers — and to put into their hands all branches of the Government, The people of Russia have provided in their consti tution that every person over eighteen years of age can vote if they are engaged in some useful employ ment, and have thus, in my opinion, disfranchised the lawyer, for a lawyer spends the first half of his life over the past, and the last half of his life trying to apply the past to the present, and lets the future go to hell; and I submit this is not a useful occupation. Lawyers should be excluded from the bench and from every legislative assembly. A well-trained lawyer is unfitted for doing anything else except de fending the cases that he is hired to defend, and he should be compelled to stick to that. Above all, he should not be entrusted with any share in the direction of public affairs. XII. POLITICS. Like most American boys I had been brought up to believe that the United States had a government of the people, by the people and for the people. My first real Impressions to the contrary were obtained during my early experiences with Dakota politics. There I learned how the machinery of government is manipulated in the interest of those who are behind it and I learned something about the manipulators. "Carpet-bag officials," as we used to call them, held the important oflftces in Dakota, while It was still a territory. The governors and other territorial officers were appointed by the President and con firmed by the Senate at Washington. Frequently these appointees lived thousands of miles from the territory in which they were appointed to serve and in many instances they had never set foot In these territories until they arrived to take up their official duties. A territory is entitled to a "delegate" In the House of Representatives. The delegate has a seat, but no vote. He may sit on the floor; listen to the phrase-- makers of the House; watch the proceedings; Intro duce bills; appear befor committees fo urge the in terests- of his territory and perform such committee work as the House may choose to assign. The dele gate may also advise as to the appointment of local people such as postmasters and. In some instances, if he is In political sympathy with the President, he may secure the appointment of a citizen of the ter ritory to a Federal post such as the land office. That, however, is very unusual. In 1880 I was nominated for the position of dele gate by the Republicans of the territory of Dakota, which at that time embraced what are now the two states of North and South Dakota. It had an area POLITICS 151 of about 150,000 square miles, with about 80,000 or 85,000 Indians included in its population. When I went to Dakota in 1869 there were only 14,000 peo ple in the whole territory outside of the Indian popu lation, but In 1880 railroads were building all over Dakota and the population was increasing with great rapidity. After my nomination, I entered actively into the campaign, visiting the small towns and mak ing speeches. Meanwhile President Hayes had appointed as gov ernor of the Territory of Dakota a citizen of New Hampshire named N. G. Ordway. During the sum mer preceding the election, Ordway came out to Da kota ^nd took possession of the office. Ordway had been for twenty-years Sergeant-at-Arms of the House of Representatives, but in 1878, when the Democrats got control of the House, he was ousted from his position. Bill Chandler, who was factotum of the Republican Party for New Hampshire, secured Ord- way's appointment as Governor of Dakota so that he might go out there, have the state admitted into the Union and then become one of the Senators. I watched the Governor's actions with a great deal of interest. His attitude towards the people of Dakota was extremely patronizing, and he talked about the people of Dakota as though, in his eyes, they were simply children entitled to his benevolent considera tion. I soon found out that he was preparing to carry out the political program that had been mapped out for him. For example, he was reported as being engaged in filling a car with the products of Dakota with the idea of sending it through the eastern States as a means of inducing the emigrants or settlers to come out to Dakota and enter lands on the public domain. Finally he announced that he had arranged with the railroads to carry this car without charge and had selected certain Dakota citizens to accompany it. It was also stated that the Governor had se cured some of the very finest samples of corn, pump- 152 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON kins, oats and other agricultural products from west ern Iowa and eastern Nebraska, placed them In the car and proposed to represent them as the products of Dakota, when questioned about this he said, "Of course, Dakota Is new, and agriculture is not far ad vanced, but we all know that we can produce just such products, and therefore it is proper to repre sent that we have produced them, in order to induce the settlers to come to Dakota and enter land." And this episode disgusted me, and in some of my speeches I made fun of the Governor's antics and alluded to him as the "Siox Chief", because having pronounced the word "Sioux" as Siox, and alluded to the town in which I lived as "Siox Falls." After the campaign was over I went to Yankton on some business, and Newton Edmunds, who had been Governor of Dakota before I went to the Ter ritory, and who in 1880 was a banker at Yankton, called on me at my hotel and advised me to see Gov ernor Ordway before I left town. Edmunds told me that the Governor was very much offended at the al lusions I had made in my speeches, and had said that unless I came and apologized, he would not issue my certificate of election as a delegate in Congress. I immediately told ex-Governor Edmunds, — rhe was a man of excellent parts, of fair ability and strict integrity, — ^that if that was Ordway's attitude I would rather reaffirm what I had said about him, and that under no circumstances would I call upon him, but would leave it for him to decide whether to per form his duty as Governor and issue the certificate of election, or to betray his office in order to punish a political rival. I added that I rather thought his failure to perform his duty would not keep me from getting my seat in the House of Reprsentatives. Before the 4th of the following March, when I would take my seat in the House, I received my certificate of Election from the Governor without comment, but I was told by friends In Yankton that the Governor remarked when he Issued the certificate that he POLITICS 153 guessed I might as well have it, as I would not amount to anything in Washington ; I would be noth ing but a wall flower, he said, while he would con trol the patronage ordinarily granted to a delegate from a territory. When I finally reached Washing ton, I found that South Dakota Post Office appoint ments were being made on the Governor's recom mendation. At least one had been confirmed at an Indian Agency. I at once insisted that the Post master General remove Ordway's appointee and put in his place a man whom I recommended. The Postmaster General was reluctant to do this because Ordway had" been very prominent in Republican politics and knew all of the leading men in the nation. He had also been the representative of the predatory interests, the railroads, the public utilities generally, the contractors, etc., about Washington, and he had acted, while Sergeant-at-Arms, as their go-between In the purchase of votes and the control of the lawyers who made up the bulk of members in the House of Representatives. Of course, the "bribe" always took the form of a "fee." Because of , his intimate acquaintance with their deals, Ord way was feared by the politicians, and the Post master General finally refused to comply with my re quest. The Post Office Department relies upon a delegate to recommend certain things that should be done in the territory that he represents, and I told the Post master General that I certainly would take no part whatever in trying to promote and protect the in terests of the Government with regard to mail routes, etc., or ever visit his department again unless I was accorded the full recognition which - belonged to a delegate, and so the matter rested until Congress convened. When Congress met I went to Senator Piatt, of New York, with whom I was well acquaint ed, told him of the controversy that had arisen over South Dakota patronage between N. G, Ordway, as governor and me as delegate and asked him to have 154 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the Postmaster General recognize me as the Repre sentative of Dakota instead of N. G. Ordway. Piatt at once said, "Yes, you are entitled to that recogni tion. The Postmaster General is from my State. I suppose I endorsed him for the position, but Ordway has been to see me about this matter and he is a very powerful factor in Republican Politics, besides being very competent as a political manipulator. Now, you are a young man and he is a man of great ex perience; why don't you get together?" I told Sen ator Piatt that was very difficult because of the Gov ernor's statement that he would not issue my certi ficate of election unless I would apologize to him for what I had said about him, my reply was that I would never do it. In a day or two, however. Senator Piatt asked if I would receive and talk with the Governor if he called upon me. I told him I would, and thereupon I made an appointment through Senator Piatt for Ordway to see me at my hotel the next evening. The Governor arrived in due time, I took him to my room and he opened the conversation by saying that he was an old and experienced politician and had been in public life for many years; that I was a young mah just starting out, but that I gave great promise for the future, and that he was anxious to form a political alliance with me to take control of the political affairs of the Territory of Dakota. He then proceeded, by way of argument and advice, to say that if I would consult him about all my appoint ments as delegates he would consult with me about his appointments as governor, and that by thus com bining our influence and working in harmony, we could become so strong and influential as to elect each other to the United States Senate, when the ter ritory of Dakota was admitted as a state. After he had completed his argument I said, "Gov ernor, this is the first time I have ever met you. I was not impressed by what I knew of you before this meeting. We are here with the idea of perfecting POLITICS 155 some kind of an alliance by which we can work in political harmony. As things stand now, that would be very difficult. I have a suggestion, however. Suppose you go back to Dakota and attend to your duties as governor, while I look after the duties of my office here, in such a way as to promote the wel fare of the people of Dakota. If you will do that, and use your office to promote the interests of South Dakota and its people, without consulting me at all, you will become feo popular with the people and so strong politically that you will easily be the most prominent man in the territory. If you make a good, honest and capable Governor, and I make a good, honest and capable delegate in Congress, the time will not be distant when we will naturally work to gether, — our common purpose being the welfare of the people." The governor did not take to that advice. He had never done anything that way and probably did not understand what I meant. He seemed to conclude that I talked that way because I wanted to make money, so he started on another track. "You know," said Ordway, "I, as Governor, have the right to appoint the Commissioners of every new county that is organized. These commissioners can locate the county seat of the county, and therefore there is always great competition among the citizens of a county to secure these appointments so that they can locate the county-seat town. You know there are a great number of new counties being or ganized every year all over Dakota.' Now, if you and I will go in together, we can so manipulate the or ganization of these counties as to get part of the land upon which the county-seat is located, or else we -can make the people pay high who have land on which they want the county seat located. "Besides that, there is something even bigger. People want a new capital city for the territory. By uniting together we might easily arrange to move the capital from its present location at Yankton to some 156 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON more central location, and make a fortune out of building the new city." I let the Governor go on developing his whole scheme, together with his method of achieving it. He seemed very enthusiastic and acted as though he were well satisfied with himself and with the impres sions that he had made. But when he had finished, I said: "The Territory of Dakota is about 400 miles square, but it is altogether too small for both of us. Either you will have to get out of it or I will. I will never have anything to do with you but will fight you as long as you remain in the territory. You are the most miserable corrupt scamp that in my brief career I have ever come in contact with." The next morning I called on Senator Piatt and told him, in detail, just what had occurred. Piatt made no comment except to say that he would have the Postmaster removed that Ordway had had ap pointed, and would ask the Postmaster General to put in whomever I recommended. Upon inquiring with regard to the Governor and his career as Sergeant-at-Arms at the House, I found that when the Democrats had got control in 1878 and had removed Ordway from the position as Sergeant- at-Arms, they had appointed a Committee to investi gate the conduct of the office of Sergeant-at-Arms under Ordway's regime. The conduct of the investi gation was in the hands of Glover, who, I think, was from Missouri. I thereupon secured from Glover a copy of the testimony taken by the Committee and of the report that the Committee had made to the House. The testimony showed that Ordway was the person who carried the funds that were used to per suade the members of the House to grant privileges to the few in order that they might rob the many. That custom has been continued ever since at Wash ington in both Houses of Congress. While I was in the Senaite, Aldrich of Rhodes Island, who was Sen ator, held this important post. He died worth, I be lieve, twenty millions. Others have done simUar POLITICS 157 work. There always are in Washington certain agen^ of big business, employed to look after the attorneys in both houses who are there to represent the great industrial, financial, and transportation cor porations — ^the real government. I also wrote the Chairman of the House Committee that investigated Ordway and he sent me the follow ing letter which I publish with a copy of the testi mony taken by the Committee: "La Grange, Mo., July 24, 1881. "Hon. R. F. Pettigrew, M. C. "My dear Sir: "Your letter of the 17th came duly to hand. You refer to N. G. Ordway, ex-sergeant-at- arms of the house of representatives, and at present governor of Dakota Territory, and ask, 'If he ever answered the damaging evi dence taken before your (my) committee to your (my) satisfaction.' I answer emphat ically. No! It was impossible for him to make satisfactory answer. I haye no hesit ancy in giving it as my opinion, in view of all the evidence developed against him, that he is one of the most corrupt and unprin cipled men that ever disgraced and degraded the public service of this country. I am con vinced that he never sought or held an office with a view of being satisfied with its honors and its legitimate emoluments, but to pros trate it to the worst robbery and fraud for money making. "It would seem simply impossible for N. G. Ordway to hold an official position and not taint and disgrace it. He belongs to a class of office seekers that infest this country now by thousands, that should be doomed to de struction by the efforts of all honest men of all parties. I am, sir, tery respectfully your obedient servant, uj ^ GLOVER." 158 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Had the Republicans continued in power, Ordway would have continued to operate in the House. When the Democrats came in, they decided to have one of their own men do his work. Consequently they staged an investigation which cost Ordway his job in the House, but which, far from destroying his public career, left him free to launch new schemes among the men on the frontier. \ After our meeting in Washington Ordway went back to Dakota and tried his hand at being governor. He entered into a scheme to move the capitol, and secured the passage through the Legislature of a bill establishing a Capitol Commission to go about and receive bids for the location of the capitol and its removal from Yankton. His purpose, of course, was to locate the capitol somewhere in about the center of the southern half of Dakota. Alexander McKin- sey, who lived in Bismarck, in the center of the north half of the Territory, was a person having very many times the ability of Ordway and was far his superior in integrity, — a man of very many powerful parts. He had managed to capture Ordway's Capitol Com mission and to locate the capitol at Bismarck, which is now the capitol of North Dakota. Ordway got nothing out of that scheme, but he was actively organizing new counties all over Dakota and the air was full of rumors of scandals. Finally, he received $10,000 in money to appoint a Commis sioner in a county where the county-seat location was of considerable importance. This performance was so scandalous and barefaced that he was in dicted for bribery and corruption by a Grand Jury of one of the counties, and his case came up before Territorial Judge Edgerton, who had been appointed through the influence of Senator Davis of Minnesota. Edgerton was an honest man — more honest than is the rule among lawyers. I do not believe he could have been persuaded by money to violate his judicial oath or do any act not In strict accordance with the duties of his office. POLITICS 159 The Governor was evidently very much alarmed. He employed Senator Davis, of Minnesota, who had been responsible for having Edgerton appointed judge, to defend him. Davis was not a criminal lawyer, but in those days the fee of $10,000, which Ordway offered Davis, was rather tempting, so. Davis went out to Dakota when the case was called, and told the judge that it should be dismissed because the only punishment that could be meted out for crimes committed by a Governor was an impeach ment and removal from office. The judge ruled that such was the law and the case against Ordway was dismissed. The episode convinced Ordway that even 160,000 square miles of territory was too small an area for both of us to live on and so he left D3,kota and came back to Washington. However, in 1882 Ordway made the greatest fight of his life to defeat me for the Republican nomina tion for delegate in Congress. North and South Dakota were already divided as the people of each half had come to believe that when Dakota ceased to be a territory it would be admitted as two separate states into the Union. In this campaign North Da kota put up a candidate, John B. Raymond, who was the United States Marshal, a young man of excellent principles, who had been appointed by the President and sent out from some eastern state. Raymond carried most of thfe Counties of North Dakota, and they endorsed him for my position. In South Dakota Ordway put up George B. Hand, from Yankton, who had been Secretary of the Ter ritory. He was a man of ordinary intelligence, but he always agreed with everybody and was affable and suave. Hand made a poor showing. I carried almost every county in South Dakota and I had an overwhelming majority of the whole territory, but Ordway contested nearly every county that I carried. He did not try to contest the county in which I lived or the adjoining counties east and west of where I lived. He contested Moody County where my 160 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON brother lived, although there were not over three members of the county convention against me, but those three felt that they had been beaten by fraud. The same practice was pursued in almost all the counties of South Dakota, so that the uncontested delegates from South Dakota, who were controlled by Ordway, united with those which Raymond had fr6m North Dakota and made a majority in the pre liminary organization of the Convention. They then selected a committee on credentials, a majority of whose members were my political enemies. That committee proceeded to seat all of the contesting Ordway delegates, knowing that my delegates would immediately form another convention and nominate me. This would have split the Republican party of the Territory into three parts and would have resulted in the selection of a Democrat. I went to their candidate, John B. Raymond, from North Dakota, and said to him, "You know that Ord way is not a friend of yours, and that if he gets con trol of this convention he will not nominate you, although you have united with him against me as a common enemy. Now, if you will agree to have the Committee on Credentials seat the delegates who are elected and were fraudulently contested, I will go into the convention and withdraw as a candidate in your favor." ''If I do," Raymond replied, "you will have a ma jority of the whole convention and can proceed to nominate yourself." "Of course," I said, "you will have to take my word for that." "Well," said Raymond, "if you will have McKinsey guarantee that you will do as you say — and McKin sey is the most prominent man in Republican politics in North Dakota and is my friend — I will take your promise and McKinsey's guarantee and do as you re quest." McKinsey promptly agreed to the arrangement and I then assembled all of my delegates in a room at Grand Forks, a little town in North Dakota where POLITICS 161 the Convention was held, and told them what I had offered to do. "In the interests of harmony," I told them, "and for the purpose of rebuking this corrupt carpet-bag Governor, I think it is the wise thing to do." ' They were unanimous in accepting my view of the matter. "All of you who were contested will be seated," I said, "and we will take control of the party ma chinery, but the success of the scheme depends upon our keeping it to ourselves. Now, there are 140 of you fellows. I don't believe there is a man among you who will tell." They promised that they would not say anything and that they would carry it out. The Committee on Credentials submitted their re port to the Convention, with a minority report, in favor of seating my delegates. When the vote was taken, the North Dakota delegates voted unani mously in favor of the minority report. County after county, as- the roll was called, voted this way, Ord way himself came into the Convention, in great ex citement, and rushed among the delegates, exclaim ing, "You are voting wrong; you don't understand what you are doing; you are voting for the wrong report," But he made no impression. After the vote was announced, I arose in the Con vention and said, "In the interests of harmony and to prevent the disrupting of the Republican party in Dakota, I conclude that it is best for me to with draw from the contest. I therefore do .so and I nom inate John B. Raymond as delegate to Congress and thus rebuke the miserable, contemptible and fraudu lent scheme wMch had been perpetrated by our car pet-bag Governor, the 'Siox Chief.' " The plan worked perfectly. Not a single one of the hundred and forty delegates had told what was to be done, and the Ordway crowd had no chance to prepare a counter offensive. Raymond was almost unanimously nominated as territorial delegate to 162 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Congress. Of course, a majority of my friends were placed on each of the party committees selected for the Convention, and my friends were selected as chairmen in all cases. Ordway had had some mea sure of revenge. I lost my place in Congress, but gained control of the Party. The episode lost him both standing and popularity. This story of political intrigue in a sparsely settled mid-western territory Is not unique. It could be matched, in every essential detail, out of the political experiences of men in every state of the Union. That is why I tell it — ^because it is so general In its appli cation. But more important than that, I tell it be cause it reveals some of the forces that were at work underneath the surface of the machinery of govern ment. There was ambition, of course,, and trickery, and jealousy, and revenge; but beneath and beyond these personal traits there were the economic forces that have played so large a part in shaping the Govern ment of the United States. The men who exhibited the greatest abilities and who displayed the most faculties were selected and used as the tools and spokesmen of big .business. Bribery and corruption were not crimes — unless they became too blatant. Ordinarily they were businesses in which the capital was furnished by the "interests" and the work was performed by officials sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Later in my, political experience I was to learn that the whole structure of our government, from the Constitution onward, had been framed by business men to further business ends ; that the laws had been passed by the legislatures and interpreted by the courts with this end in view ; that the execution of the laws was placed in the hands of executives known to be safe and that these things were more true of the national than they were of local and state political machinery. XIII. THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. The Convention of 1787 that framed the Constitu tion of the United States was dominated by lawyers, money-lenders and land owners. It did its work behind closed doors, all members being sworn not to disclose any of the proceedings. Madison reported the proceedings in long-hand; his notes were purchased by Congress and published in 1837, nearly half a century after the convention had finished its work. These published notes dis close the forces that dominated the work of the con vention. All through the debates ran one theme: how to secure a government, not by the people for the people, but by the classes for the classes, with the lawyers In control. This was the burden of the debates, page after page, through all of the 760 pages of the two volumes of Madison Notes. The Constitution thus framed did not create a gov ernment of the people; its whole purpose was to pro mote and protect the rights of property more than the rights of man. Two extracts from these pro ceedings Illustrate this point; they are typical, and are as follows : P. 78. Sherman of Connecticut said : "The people should have as little to do as may be about the Government. They want infor mation and are constantly liable to be mis led." Gerry, of Massachusetts : "The evil we ex perience flows from the excess of democ racy." P. 115. Mr. Gerry: "Hence in Massa chusetts the worst men get into the legis lature. Several members of that body had lately been convicted of Infamous crimes. 164 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Men of indigence, ignorance and baseness spare no pains, however dirty, to carry their point against men who are superior to the artifices practiced." Jefferson was not a member of the convention. He was the author of the Declaration of Independ ence; he was not wanted, so he was sent to France. There were 55 delegates in that convention. Let us see who they were: A majority were lawyers; most of them came from towns; not one farmer, me chanic or laborer; five-sixths had property interests. Of the 55 members, 40 owned Revolutionary scrip; 14 were ' land speculators ; 24 were money-lenders ; 11 were merchants; 15 were slave-holders. Wash ington was a slave-holder, a large land-owner, and a holder of much Revolutionary scrip. % ¦ WHAT THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT CON TAIN. Jt is not strange that the Constitution as framed by that convention said nothing about the rights of man. It was made by men who believed in the Eng lish theory of government — ^that all governments are created to protect the rights of property in the hands of those who do not produce the property. Revolutionary scrip was Issued to finance the Rev olution, and used to pay for supplies and the wages of the men who did the fighting; it had been bought up by the financiers and great land-owners and their attorneys for about nine cents on the dollar. When the Constitution was adopted, it was made, at once, worth one hundred cents on the dollar. , Jefferson was in France. THE TEN AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITU TION. Against the Constitution, as thus framed, seven of the thirteen states protested, but five of them were UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 165 finally induced to ratify in reliance upon the "Bill of Rights" being promptly added by amendments. The first eight amendments were speedily formulated and soon the ninth and tenth were added", to be submitted by the first Congress to the States, and that was promptly done. It is certain that the Constitution could never have been adopted without these amend ments for the protection of fundamental human rights. Thomas Jefferson had retumed from France. AMENDMENT I. The First Amendment is as follows: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof; or abridging the free dom of speech, or of the press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a re dress of grievances." It is amazing that this great basic principle of civil and religious liberty should have been left out of the Constitution as framed by the convention. It could not have been overlooked or omitted by accident; it is obvious that it was done deliberately. AMENDMENTS II.-VIII. The next seven amendments protect the people against military rule in defiance of civil authority; against the search or seizure of their persons, homes, papers, etc., except by authority of a warrant duly issued under proper legal restrictions; against being put in jeopardy of trial and conviction; without the alleged charge being investigated and approved by a grand jury, or the taking of life, liberty, or prop erty without due process of law; against trial and conviction except by an impartial jury where the al leged crime was committed, with information as to 166 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the cause and nature of the offence, faced by accus ing witnesses, and the right of counsel for defense; against the courts overturning a jury's verdict; against excessive bail, or "cruel and unusual punish ments." Jefferson had retumed, and his tongue and pen were in action; the priceless Bill of Rights was thus saved and made a part of our organic law. But Jefferson, with foresighted wisdom, based on a deep knowledge of men and things, knew that it was nec essary to protect liberty and all human rights by clear and positive safeguards; therefore, the ninth and tenth amendments were added for this purpose. The Ninth Amendment was as follows: AMENDMENT IX. "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." A wonderfully wise provision; a recognition and declaration of the great fundamental fact that all rights and power are inherent In the people them selves, and are not derived as concessions from usurpers masquerading under the "Divine rights of Kings." But the enemies of human freedom in high places have often betrayed this trust and ignored and trampled under foot this great basic principle of the divine right of the people, as I will show below. Jefferson also foresaw that the time would come when an ambitious Federal executive, a usurping Federal court, or a reckless Congress would take the position that the people and the States had no power or rights which were not subordinate to the Federal power and authority. He knew that when that time came our great representative Democracy, created by the amended Constitution, would be dead, and that on its grave there would rule, with a tyrant's hand, the worst autocracy of plutocracy that the world has ever seen. To prevent such usurpation, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 167 the Tenth Amendment was submitted and adopted along with the other amendments. It is worded as follows : AMENDMENT X. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited , by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people." This amendment, in such clear and concise lan guage, was the greatest possible victory for prevent ing encroachments on the reserved rights and liber ties of the people and the independence of the States necessary for State sovereignty. It made our Fed eral Government one of defined, expressed powers, limited definitely to the powers enumerated and granted. One of the great dangers which Jefferson feared, and which he was sure had been forever killed by this amendment, as shown by his later writings, was the usurpation by the Supreme Court of the power to supervise the Executive Department or to declare a law enacted by Congress unconsti tutional, or to construe the Constitution so as to take from or add to the powers granted by the States and the people. He knew no such power had been granted to the Judiciary Department and, on the other hand, he knew (though Madison's notes had not then been published) that every effort made by the enemies of Democracy in the Constitutional Con vention to get such a dangerous provision in the Con stitution had been defeated; yet he determined to affirmatively deny that power and every other power not expressly delegated to each of the three depart ments respectively of the Federal Government, and this was done by the plain and precise words of the Tenth Amendment. In this connection, I call attention to Madison's Notes, p. 533, which show that the proposition to confer upon the Supreme Court the power to declare an Act of Congress void was squardy at issue; and 168 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON that Maryland, Delaware and Virginia voted aye; while Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia voted nay. The proposition was brought up in the convention on several other occasions, but was each time decisively defeated. While the members of the Constitutional Conven tion were ultra-conservative, serving property rights with a contempt for human rights, and always try ing to hobble and gag the rule of the people, yet they were familiar with the fact that when an Eng lish court, about three hundred years before, held an Agt of Parliament void, the Chief Justice, Tras- sillian, had been hanged and his associates on the bench had been banished from the country. They also knew that since that time no English court had dared to usurp such unconstitutional authority. It was this fact, no doubt, which deterred such a Con stitutional Convention from conferring upon the Su preme Court the power to declare an Act of Congress unconstitutional. With the Constitution thus amended, Jefferson de clared that the Bill of Rights, buttressed by the Tenth Amendment, were the "two sheet anchors of our Union." He felt sure that a government of, for, and by the people was assured for all time. He saw a great representative Democracy launched, with every delegated power necessary for national purposes, and the rights and liberties of the people enthroned and safe beyond successful attack or encroachment. But he soon had a rude awakening. THE FIRST ACT OF JUDICIAL USURPATION. Chief Justice Marshall, who was an Englishman, in the case of Marbury vs. Madison, usurped the power to interpret the Constitution and to instruct another co-equal and co-sovereign department of the Govern ment as to its powers and duties. Jefferson denounced that decision as a bald usurpa-- tion and a glaring unconstitutional encroachment on UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 169 the powers and duties of another independent de partment of the Government. He lamented the fail ure of the House of Representatives to bring the Court to trial under impeachment proceedings. In a letter to Judge Spencer Roane, under date of Septem ber 6, 1819, he said: "In denying the right they usurp of exclu sively explaining the Constitution, I go fur ther than you do, if I understand rightly your quotation, from the Federalist, of an opinion that the 'judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the Government, but not in relation to the rights of the parties to the compact under which the judiciary is derived.' If this opinion be sound, then indeed is our Constitution a com plete felo de se. For intending to establish three departments, co-ordinate and independ ent, that they might check and balance one another, it has giVen, according to this opin ion, to one of them alone, .the right to pre scribe rules for the government of the oth ers, and to that one too which is unelected by, and independent of the nation. For ex perience has already shown that the im peachment it has provided is not even a scarecrow. . . . The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please. It should be remembered, as an axiom of eternal truth in politics, that whatever power in any government is independent is absolute also; in theory only, at first, while the spirit of the people is up, but in practice, as fast as that relaxes. Independence can be trusted nowhere but with the people in mass. They are inherently independent of all but moral law. My construction, of the Constitution is 170 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON very different from that you quote. It Is that each department is truly independent of the others, and has an equal right to decide for itself what is the meaning of the Con stitution in the cases submitted to its action; and especially where it is to act ultimately and without appeal." In a letter to Judge William Johnson, under date of June 12, 1823, commenting on the same decision, he said: "But the Chief Justice says, "there must be an ultimate arbiter somewhere.' True, there must; but does that prove it is either party? The ultimate arbiter Is the people of the Union, assembled by their deputies in convention, at the call of Congress, or of two-thirds of the States. Let them decide to which they mean to give an authority claimed by two of their organs. And It has been the peculiar wisdom and felicity of our Constitution to have provided this peaceable appeal, where that of other na tions is at once to force." In a letter to William Charles Jarvis, under date of September 28, 1820, reviewing a book which at tempted to defend this court usurpation of power, he said: "You seem, in pages 84 to 148, to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiter of all constitutional questions — a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have, with others, the same passion for party, for power and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem,' and their power is the more dangerous as they UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 171 are not responsible, as the other function aries are, to the effective control. The Con stitution has created no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign with themselves."' No one ever has or ever can question the truth of this statement that "the Constitution has erected no such single tribunal" to supervise and to veto the acts of the other two "co-equal and co-sovereign de- partinents of our government; therefore Congress inertly surrendered its co-equal and co-sov.ereign powers when it failed to impeach the Judicial De partment of the Government for this contemptuous usurpation of powers, over which the people reserved to themselves elective control. Further on in the same letter, Jefferson says: "The Constitution, in keeping three de partments distinct and independent, restrains the authority of the, judges to judiciary organs, as it does the executive and legis lative to executive and legislative organs. The judges certainly have more frequent occasions to act on constitutional questions, because the laws of meum and tuum and of criminal action, forming the great mass of the system of law, constitute their particular department. When the legislative or execu tive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of the judges from that is quite dangerous enough. I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people them selves ;¦ and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise THEIR CONTROL WITH A WHOLESOME DISCRETION, THE 172 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON REMEDY IS NOT TO TAKE IT FROM THEM, BUT TO INFORM THEIR DIS CRETION BY EDUCATION. THIS IS THE TRUE CORRECTIVE OF ABUSES OF CONSTITUTIONAL POWER. PARDON ME, SIR, FOR THIS DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. MY PERSONAL INTEREST IN SUCH QUESTIONS IS ENTIRELY EX TINCT, BUT NOT MY WISHES FOR THE LONGEST POSSIBLE CONTINUANCE OF OUR GOVERNMENT ON ITS PURE PRINCIPLES: IF THE THREE POWERS MAINTAIN THEIR MUTUAL INDE PENDENCE ON EACH OTHER IT MAY LAST LONG, BUT NOT SO IF EITHER CAN ASSUME THE AUTHORITIES OF THE OTHER." I have already shown that the Constitution con fers no power on the Judiciary Department of the Govemment to question the legality of an Act of Congress, and that every time the conferring of such dangerous powers on that department was proposed in the convention it was voted down. I have also shown that the stafes would not, even then, accept the Constitution until the ten amendments w^re formulated and satisfactory assurances were made that they would be at once submitted for adoption; and also that these amendments, after including the great Bill of Rights, concluded with the most im portant Tenth Amendment, which affirmatively and positively reserved to the people and to the states all powers and rights not expressly granted to the Fed eral Government, and which expressly inhibits the taking away of or the adding of any powers by con struction or by implication. On these clear and con cise reasons, Jefferson correctly asserts that the power to determine the constitutionality of a law is reserved to the people. They, and they alone, have the power to pass on the legality of any law of Con- UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 173 gress, and they can use that power at any and every election. This is the plain truth of the whole matter. In another letter, under date of December 25, 1820, to Thomas Richie, commenting on a book by Colonel Taylor, which vigorously criticized the extravagance of the Government and the greatly increased appro priations and taxes called for by the Treasury Depart ment, Jefferson said: "If there be an3rthing amiss, therefore, in the present state of our affairs, as the form idable deficit lately unfolded to us indicates, . I ascribe it to the inattention of Congress to their duties, to their unwise dissipation and waste of the public contributions. They seemed, some little while ago, to be at a loss for objects whereon to throw away the supposed fathomless funds of the Treasury. ., . . The deficit produced, and a heavy tax to supply it, will, I trust, bring both to their sober senses. "But it is not from this branch of govern ment we have most to fear. Taxes and short elections will keep them right. The Judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working underground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric. They are con struing our Constitution from a co-ordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet, and they are too well versed in English law to forget the maxim, boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem. We shall see if they are bold enough- to take the daring stride their five lawyers have lately taken. If they do, then, with the editor of our book, in his address to the public, I will say that 'against this every man should raise 174 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON his voice,' and more, should uplift his arm. . . . That pen should go on, lay bare these wounds of our Constitution, expose the decisions seriatim, and arouse, as it is able, the attention of the nation to these bold speculators on its patience. Having found, from experience, that impeachment is an im practicable thing, a mere scarecrow, they consider themselves secure for life; they skulk from responsibility to public opinion, the only remaining hold on them, under a practice first introduced into England by Lord Mansfield. An opinion is huddled up In conclave, perhaps by a majority of one, de livered as if unanimous, and with the silent acquiescence of lax, or timid associates, by a crafty Chief Judge who sophisticates the law to his mind by the turn of his own rea soning. A judiciary law was once reported by the Attorney General to Congress, re quiring each judge to deliver his opinion seriatim and openly, and then to give it in writing to the clerk to be entered in the record. A judiciary Independent of a king or executive alone is a good thing; but Inde^ pendence of the will of the nation Is a solecism, at least in a republicap govem ment." Such criticism of this startling usurpation by the Judiciary Department and talk of the impeachment of the judges were effective to prevent the court from again usurping the power to declare an Act of Congress void for over fifty years. THE SECOND ACT OF USURPATION. It was not long, however, before this same court overstepped its defined powers and. In defiance of every principle of law, equity and morals, rendered the notorious Dartmouth College decision. In which UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 175 it was held that property interests, past, present and future, had vested rights, under a special privilege granted in a private charter, which it was impossible for the people, through legislation, to change, no mat ter how injurious to the public interests the terms of the charter might be. It has been claimed, in excuse for the Court, that it was hypnotized by the overpowering but false reasoning of Daniel Webster; but, let that be as it may. It is gratifying that such an unsound doctrine, based on such a decision, has been repudiated by nearly every state in the Union, and by nearly every civilized country In the world. A BALD DEFIANCE OF CONGRESS BY THE JUDICIARY. In 1857 Judge Taney, for a majority of the court, held an Act of Congress in the Missouri Compromise case unconstitutional. There was, however, no in dignation or threat of impeachment of the court for this bold usurpation, so ever since the Supreme Court has made a plaything of the acts of Congress as often as it has pleased them so to do. This is what Jefferson said they would soon become bold enough to do If they were not called to account for usurpation of power. It was against the first usurpation by the court that Jefferson said: "I will say that against this every man should raise his voice, and more, should uplift his arm." THE SUPREME COURT DESTROYS THE TENTH AMENDMENT. The pitiable surrender by Congress to its "co-equal and co-sovereign powers" has emboldened the Supreme Court not only to continue to declare Acts of Congress unconstitutional, but also to go further and wipe out completely the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. This has been done not only to give to the Federal Government powers never granted by the- people or by the states, but also to take from the Federal Government powers clearly granted, when 176 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON necessary to do so in order to confer special privileges on big property interests. A striking example is the famous, or rather infamous, income tax decisions. In the case of Pollock vs. Farmers Loan & Trust Com pany, the Supreme Court, after one of Its judges, Shiras, had changed his opinion overnight, decided, by a majority of one, that the constitutional power to levy a fair and just tax on incomes, which Con gress has exercised for a hundred years, was uncon stitutional. This startling decision did not arouse Congress to its duty to impeach the court; but it so aroused the people everywhere that a movement was at once started all over the country which resulted in the adoption of the Sixteenth Amendment to the Con stitution. Judge Shiras was a Pennsylvania lawyer and had for years, so I am informed, been the attorney of many of the chief beneficiaries of his change of position as a judge on this question; but I know a lawyer is the only person who can legally take a bribe — ^he calls it a fee. This amendment again conferred upon Congress the power which the Court, by an unconstitutional and revolutionary decision, had attempted' to take away. Under the broad terms of this Sixteenth Amendment, which, in specific language, makes all incomes from whatever source derived, liable for an income tax. Congress passed another income tax law. The court, not daring to again declare an income tax unconstitutional, then proceeded to render a legis lative decision in which it holds that an Income re ceived in the form of a "stock dividend" is not liable for a tax on such income. This opened the way to relieve all the largest incomes in this country from any tax whatever. All the big corporations at once began declaring stock dividends instead of cash divi dends, and thus they are robbing the Treasury of the United States annually of hundreds of millions of dollars, which must be made up and paid by the people of less means and less capacity to pay. ' UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 177 This monstrous decision was rammed through the court by a majority of one, four of the justices dis senting; Mr. Justice Brandeis, in his dissenting opinion, said: "If stocks- dividends representing profits are held exempt from taxation under the Sixteenth Amendment, the owners of the most successful business in America will, as the facts in this case illustrate, be able to escape taxation on a large part of what is actually their income." How quickly this prophecy was fulfilled is indi cated by the volume of stock dividends that have been declared since the court delivered this opinion. Mr. Justice Brandeis, in the same dissenting opinion, adds : "That such a result was intended by the people of the United States when adopting the Sixteenth Amendment is inconceivable." The same conviction is expressed with pungency by Mr. Justice Holmes in his dissenting opinion in the same case. In which he says: "I think that the word incomes in the Six teenth Amendment should be read in 'a sense most obvious to the common understanding" at the time of Its adoption,' .. . . for it was for public adoption that it was pro posed. . . . The known purpose of this amendment was to get rid of nice questions as to what might be direct taxes, and I can not doubt that most people, not lawyers, would suppose ,when they voted for it that they put a question like the present one to rest." This is a strong and timely indictment of such judicial usurpation, A MOST BRAZEN DECISION. The Supreme Court, by this decision, had protected their rich friends from paying an income tax, but 178 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON had not protected themselves, since their salaries from the Govemment were paid in cash, and not in stock dividends; so another decision was rendered, declaring the income tax law unconstitutional as far as it requires the judges and the President to pay an income tax. This raw personal decision was rendered by Judge Van Devender, a sage-brush lawyer from the cowboy country of Wyoming, who was appointed by Roosevelt, and whose only qualification seems to be that he had been an attorney for the Union Pacific Railroad. I have seen no reputable citizen who has attempted to defend this outrageous decision, ren dered in the interests of their own personal pockets. THE JUDICIARY DRUNK WITH POWER. In short, the court, having become drunk with un restrained power, has boldly entered the field of legis lation, and now does not hesitate to alter, amend, or repeal any act of Congress. The court could not find any grounds on which to declare the Anti-'Trust law unconstitutional, so it proceeded to amend the law. The act makes unlawful "a conspiracy in restraint of trade"; but the court amended it by inserting the word "unreasonable," so restraint of trade is no longer unlawful unless it is "unreasonable" restraint. Highway robbery is no longer a crime unless it is "unreasonable" robbery. ' The cases of such judicial juggling with legislation are too numerous to mention; but I will cite one other case which caps the climax of flagrant usur pation — ^the notorious Steel Trust case. The Steel Trust was indicted and tried for violation of the Anti-Trust law. The evidence of guilt was over whelming and conclusive. The court admitted it was clear that the Steel Trust had been violating the law in a wholesale manner; yet it held that it was not committing any new acts of lawlessness just at that time, and, therefore, that no good purpose would seem to be served in now punishing the trust for past gross violations of law. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 179 I quote the following from the decision of the court in that case: "A holding corporation which by its for mation united under one control competing companies in the steel industry, but which did not achieve monopoly, and only at tempted to fix prices through occasional appeals to and confederation with compete itors, whatever there was of wrongful intent not having been executed, and whatever there was of evil effect having been discon tinued before suit was brought, should not be dissolved nor be separated from some of its subsidiaries at the suit of the Govern ment, asserting violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act — especially where the court cannot see that the public interest will be served by yielding to the Government's de mand, and does see in so yielding a risk of injury to the public interest, including a material disturbance of, and, perhaps, serious detriment to, the foreign trade. "In conclusion, we are unable to see that the public interest will be served by yielding to the contention of the Government respect ing the dissolution of the company or the separation from it o^ some of its sub sidiaries; and we do see in a contrary con clusion a risk of injury to the public interest, including a material disturbance of, and, it may be serious detriment to, the foreign trade. And, in submission to the policy of the law, and its fortifying prohibitions, the public interest is of paramount regard." But you must remember the judges are lawyers, and a lawyer is the only person who can legally take a bribe — he calls it a fee. So the public has been robbed in a wholesale man ner, but. Inasmuch as the robbers are not just now doing any stealing, and they promise to use some of 180 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON their stolen money for charity, it is not deemed to be in the public interests to punish them; they are allowed to go scot-free with their ill-gotten gains, and not even put under bond not to violate the law again. Of course, a court that will render such a line of decisions could be depended on to declare unconsti tutional the law passed by Congress making "profi teering" illegal during the war, which thing the court has just done; and now all the profiteers, big and little, who have been indicted for most treasonable profiteering on the Government, contributing to the suffering and death of thousands of soldiers, whose lives otherwise would have been saved, are discharged with honor and are permitted to go scot-free with their blood-money fortunes. Jefferson is dead; and Congress is comppsed of lawyers, HOW ALL THE TEN AMENDMENTS ARE BEING DESTROYED. These cases illustrate how the Federal courts have usurped powers in order to shield and confer special privileges on big property interests, in flagrant vio lation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, But the courts have gone further, and have attempted to destroy all the ten amendments, which were put into the Constitution to safeguard and protect human rights. In the Abrams case, recently decided by the Supreme Court, it was held that Mollie Steiner and Abrams and two others were guilty of violating the Espionage Act because they circulated in New York a pamphlet urging the raising of the blockade against Russia. The lower court had sentenced Mollie Steiner to prison for fifteen years — a mere slip of a girl, a little over twenty years of age — ^and the three men, who had also circulated this petition protesting against the blockade, for twenty years each to the Federal penitentiary. This monstrous decision, which is clearly in violation of the First Amendment^ UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 181 guaranteeing freedom of speech and of the press — and which is also squarely in defiance of the Eighth Amendment, which provided that cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted, was affirmed by a majority of the Supreme Court of the United States. I quote from the dissenting opinion of the court ren dered by Justice Holmes and concurred in by Justice Brandeis : "To hold such publications can be sup pressed as false reports, subjects to new perils the constitutioaal liberty of the press, already seriously curtailed in practice under powers assumed to have been conferred upon the postal authorities. Nor will this grave danger end with the passing of the war. The constitutional right of free speech has been declared to be the same in peace and in war. In peace, too, men many differ as to what loyalty to our country demands, and an in tolerant majority, swayed by passion or by fear, may be prone in the future, as it has often been in the past, to stamp as disloyal opinions with which it disagrees. Convictions such as these, besides abridging freedom of speech, threaten freedom of thought and of belief. ... In this case, sentences of twenty years' imprisonment have been im posed for the publishing of two leaflets that I believe the defendants had as much right to publish as the Government has to publish the Constitution of the United States now vainly invoked by them." Such an Infamous and inhuman decision requires no further comment from me. Similar cases are so numerous in the recent de cisions of the Supreme Court that it is astonishing that Congress has not acted to call the offending members of the court to accountability for such flagrant usurpations, in violation of the basic rights pf a free people guaranteed by the first and other 482 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON amendments to the Constitution. The President of the United States should have removed these offend ing judges for want of "good behavior," which is the constitutional qualification for a Federal judge'. A judge should not be permitted to remain on the bench until he commits offenses so great as to make him guilty of the grave crimes, named ^ by the Constitution for impeachment. But the offenses here cited amount to "high crimes and misdemeanors," and also to "treason" against free government, and therefore call loudly to Congress to apply the impeachment remedy of the Constitution, since the President has "failed to- remove for want of "good behavior." I will mention one more case: In the Gilbert case from Minnesota, the Supreme Court held outright that the expression of opinion is a crime. In that case, the speaker had simply stated that the people had no voice, really, in the selection of any of their officers, but that they were selected for them ; that voting was no particular remedy for any of the evils of which we complain, because the candidates and the platform were prepared in advance by big business interests ; and that people could vote or not vote, just as they chose, it making no difference in the result. The indictment in that case charged that Gilbert in time of war used the following language in a public speech in the State of Minnesota : "We are going over to Europe to make the world safe for democracy, but I tell you we had better make America safe for democracy first. You say, 'What is the matter with our democracy?' I tell you what is the matter with it: Have you had anything to say as to who should be President? Have you had anything to say as to who should be Governor of this state? Have you had anything to say as to whether we would go into this war? You know you have not. If this is such a good democracy, for Heaven's sake why should we not vote on conscription of men? UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 183 We were stampeded into this war by news paper rot to pull England's chestnuts out of the fire for her. I tell you if they conscripted wealth like they have conscripted men, this war would not last over forty-eight hours, ..." It was for expressing these opinions that he was sent to jail for ,three years arid fined five hundred dollars. What has become of the Bill of Rights guarantee ing "freedom pf speech"? Le us read again the First Amendment to the Con stitution : FIRST AMENDMENT. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the free dom of speech, or of the press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances," When the court convicted Gilbert for the expression of such an opinion, it repealed, by judicial fiat, this amendment to the Constitution. Hear Judge McKenna roar, and hear the other little judges join in the chorus: ", , . The war . . . was not declared in aggression, but in defense, in defense of our national honor, in vindication of the most sacred rights of our nation and our people," (Words of President Wilson In his War Message to Congress, April 2, 1917,) "This was known to Gilbert, for he was informed in affairs and the operations of the Govemment, and every word that he uttered in denunciation of the war was false, was deliberate misrepresentation of the motives which Impelled it, and the objects for which it was prosecuted. He could have had no 184 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON purpose other than that of which he was charged. It would be a tragedy on the con stitutional privilege he invokes to assign him its protection." This language of the court needs no comment, be cause it shows on its face utter want of judicial rea soning; it is not expressive of any legal principle; it is an assertion of naked power, avowedly guided by emotion. Here is a court — ^the Supreme Court — ^the court of last resort, depriving an American citizen of his liberty, and founding their opinion on emotion and hysteria; on instinct without -logic, without sense Or reason, overturning the Constitution and violating their oath of office, while Congress fails to act be cause it is composed of lawyers. It is needless to cite or examine other decisions of a court which has become so Irresponsibly drunk with usurped power as to render two such monstrous de cisions. They are flagrant violations of the basic guarantees of the Bill of Rights and the ten amend ments, and are revolutionary in the extreme. It is such treasonable judicial tyranny as this that breeds anarchy. Let us read" again the earnest and warning words of Jefferson: "The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners con stantly working underground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric, ... I will say, that against this every man should raise his voice, and, more, should up lift his arm." But Jefferson is dead, and Congress is composed of lawyers who are the attorneys of big business. A lawyer is the only person, whether a judge or Con gressman, who can legally take a bribe — ^he calls it a fee. Against this ugly and most dangerous thing, I, as one American citizen of this generation, have con- UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 185 tinned and will continue to raise my voice. It must stop ; if neither the President nor Congress will exer cise their constitutional power and duty to remove such judges from such inhuman usurpations, the peo ple will uplift their arm. WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH. THE U. S. COURTS? In answer to that question, Jefferson said that the judges of the United States courts "are as honest as other men, but not more so" ; that they have the same passions for party and for power; that their power is all the more dangerous because they are appointed and are not responsible, as the officials of the legis lative and executive departments are, to elective con trol; that, when on the bench they become indoc trinated with the false and dangerous English doc trine, that "it is the part of a good judge to enlarge his jurisdiction," which is squarely prohibited by our Constitution. JEFFERSON FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT SUCH JUDGES, AS SOON AS THEY SHALL FEEL THAT THERE IS NO DANGER OF IMPEACHMENT BY CONGRESS, "WILL BECOME BOLD ENOUGH TO USURP POWER AND BE COME DESPOTS TO DESTROY OUR LIBERTIES!" IT WAS FOR THESE REASONS THAT JEFFER SON WARNED THE PEOPLE OF OUR COUNTRY THAT "THE JUDICIARY OF THE UNITED STATES IS A SUBTLE CORPS OF SAPPERS AND MINERS CONSTANTLY WORKING TO UNDER MINE THE FOUNDATIONS OF OUR CON FEDERATED FABRIC." These were Jefferson's fears after he saw the Supreme Court, composed of men of average ability and honesty, usurp power for the first time to wipe out the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. What would he say if he could see the kind of men who now fill most of the Federal Judiciary, and the flagrant lengths of usurpation and despotism to which 186 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON they have gone to serve mammon and to trample upon the rights and liberties of the people? I am of the opinion that the Supreme Court of the United States, by a long line of decisions, has be come ridiculous, absurd and contemptible. 'They can not go to any greater length and, if Congress was not composed of lawyers, the Supreme Court would be abolished at once. They should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and banished from official life forever. If the present court is impeached it will not remedy the evil. The only remedy is to abolish the courts created by Congress and thus re duce the Supreme Court to impotency. One of the additional things which is the matter with the Federal courts is an evil which has developed under our modern reign of plutocracy in the selection of attorneys of corporations and special privilege, who , are obviously disqualified to be judges because they are necessarily prejudiced in favor of the ever-in creasing selfish demands of big business and, there fore, prejudiced against the rights and welfare of the general public. In fact, as a rule, corporation lawyers who have spent their lives conniving with cunning skill to enable the great combinations to evade the law of the land, alone are selected to be judges of the United States courts. The judges of the United States courts are ad vanced in years before they are appointed, having spent their lives in the employ of the exploiters of the people of the United States. They all believe that property rights are sacred and not human rights. A concrete illustration of this state of affairs arose in New York in 1895. The General Traffic Asso ciation, which was a combination of all the railroads between New York and Chicago, was attacked by- the United States District Attorney for the Southern Dis trict of New York on the ground that it was a combi nation in violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law. Mr. McFarland, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, appeared before the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 187 Interstate Commerce Committee of the United States Senate and, under oath, made the following state ment: "When the case came up. Judge LaCombs stated in his opinion he was disqualified to hear. the case, or any proceedings in it, as at that time he owned bonds or stocks in some one of the railroads, and he also stated that he understood that most, if not all, of the judges of that circuit were under the same disqualification." It was finally decided that Judge Wheeler, the Dis trict Judge of the Vermont District, was apparently the only judge in the circuit who was not under a disqualification similar to that which Judge LaCombs had stated he was under, namely, the holding of some bonds or stock of the railroads. The case was finally tried before Judge Wheeler, and as he was a creature of the political system then in vogue, that is, had been appointed through the influence of the senators from Vermont, one of those senators — Edmunds, of Vermont — was employed by the railroads as one of their attorneys and filed a brief in the case. Judge Wheeler decided the case in favor of the railroads. An appeal was taken by the United States to the Circuit Court, and then Judge LaCombs stated, from the bench, that he was now qualified to try the case because he had disposed of his stocks and bonds in the defendant railroads. He thereupon affirmed the decision rendered by Judge Wheeler and the case went to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court reversed the decision, but, as several years had elapsed since the case was commenced, the railroads had found out another way to do it, so it created no embarrassment for them whatever. Very prominent lawyers in more than one circuit have told me that when a circuit or district United States judge had a son, who had been graduated and was ready to practice law, it was quite common for the judge to call upon some law lirm employed by 188 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON some trust or combination and say that his son was now ready to enter upon the practice of law, and ask if they knew of an opening, and of course the answer was: "Send him right over here — we have been looking for just such a man." So, in many cases, the United States judge sits upon the bench, himself having been graduated from the office of attorney for some great industrial com bination, and listens to the reading- of a brief, pre pared by his own son, in the interest of the cor poration for whom the judge has served before he went upon the bench. Thus we see today a Federal judiciary is composed, very largely, of corporation lawyers, who have spent their lives conniving in the interests of the great cor porations whose attorneys they were, and who with out scruple have done whatever their clients de manded in order to carry their point and more suc cessfully exploit the people of the United States. When such lawyers get upon the bench their former practice and training asserts itself in every act. Such men are disqualified to sit on a jury, and all the more are they disqualified to sit on the bench. Chief Justice White is a man of little ability and no genius. He was a Louisiana lawyer and attorney for the sugar interests ; he was elected to the U. S. Senate in 1890 and was assigned to the Committee on Public Lands, I was a member of that committee, so I be came very well acquainted with White as a senator. He was a man of very ordinary capacity and in no way qualified for the Supreme bench, and indeed so much so that I was very much surprised when Cleve land even made him Associate Justice of the Supreme Court in 1894. The lawyers who serve monopoly and special privi lege try to create the impression that the Supreme Court in infallible ; that its decisions are the final law of the land, even when in violation of the Consti tution, and that no one must criticize or Question the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 189 sanctity of the court. Yet the present Supreme Court of the United States is a most ordinary body of men. No matter who their predecessors were, they cer tainly were not selected because of their wisdom, genius or learning. They are a long way from being infallible. In fact, the records of the Supreme Court show that they are exceedingly and wilfully fallible. In all our history, no judge ever voted other than with the political party frorn which he came. In short, the obvious and ugly truth is that the United States courts have become the greatest enemy to justice, and the greatest menace to a free govern ment. THE REMEDY FOR JUDICIAL USURPATION AND TYRANNY. The time has come when this growing and over shadowing evil must be checked. There are today but two checks on the Federal judges. First, the power of impeachment, which the Constitution vests in Con gress; second, the power of removal, which the Con stitution vests in the President, by and with the ad vice and consent of the Senate. To impeach a judge and remove him from the benc"h by that means makes it necessary for the House of Representatives to formulate and present impeach ment charges, and to convict the judge of treason or of high crimes and misdemeanors, and by a two- thirds vote of the Senate. Congress has never exercised that constitutional power and duty, and probably never will, unless there shall be a revolution at the polls, on that specific issue, against some judge or judges, whose corruption and guilt are known to all men. The other check, the power of the President to re move a judge by and with the advice of the Senate, would be very effective if we had a President who would exercise the power when and where it is needed. It is a common error that Federal judges are 190 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON appointed for life. The words of the Constitution are that the President, by- and with the advice and con sent of the Senate, has the power to appoint judges "who shall hold their offices during good behavior"; the commission which every judge holds today so Thus the Constitution clearly puts the Federal judges in a class by themselves, and requires of them a higher degree of accountability than is required of other Government officials. Other public officials, from the President down, cannot be removed from office until they can be convicted, by a two-thirds vote of the Senate, of being guilty of the "high crimes" which are prescribed for impeachment. But a Fed eral judge may not stay on the bench until he has reached that degree of knov/n unfitness ; he must live and act on the bench, and off, up to the high standard of "good behavior'' which he was deemed to possess by the President and the Senate when he was appointed and confirmed. When a judge ceases to be a man of "good behavior," such as he was required to possess to qualify him for appointment as judge, he at once becomes disqualified, under the Constitution, to serve longer on the bench. Since the Constitution does not prescribe some other way of determining want of "good behavior," that power remains in herently in the appointing powers, and Congress may, by law, define what is bad behavior, If Congress chooses to do so. Therefore, the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, has vested in him primarily the constitutional power and duty to determine when a Federal judge becomes disqualified to serve for want of "good behavior." The procedure is simple: The President, having determined that a certain judge no longer measures up to the standard of "good behavior," so informs the Senate, when nominating his successor. If the Senate concurs and confirms the nomination, then the judge in question is pro-tanto removed for want of "good behavior," and the new judge takes the office thus vacated. It is UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 191 most remarkable that no President has, so far, ever exercised this plain constitutional power when the frequent occasion for its exercise has made it a most vital presidential duty. If we can ever elect a President who will remove .judges who shall fall below the standard of '-good be havior," which the Constitution makes an essential qualification for a man to continue to serve as judge, then the people will be able to exert at each presi dential election their reserved power for the cor rection of judicial usurpation and abuses. When neither of these constitutional checks on the judiciary is exercised, then the Federal judges, realizing that they are free from any kind of check or restraint, and responsible to no one, boldly usurp power and become despots of the most vicious and dangerous kind. This is the condition today, and this is what is the matter with the Federal judiciary. There is a growing popular demand for an amend ment to the Constitution to make the judiciary de partment of the Government responsible to the people, as are the executive and legislative departments. But that is a slow and uncertain remedy. AN IMMEDIATE REMEDY THAT WILL BE EFFICIENT. There is, however, an immediate remedy before us, without amending the^ Constitution, which shall be effective to check and cure most of the evils and abuses from which we now suffer. It is simply to repeal the act of Congress creating all United States courts inferior to the Supreme Court, thus abolishing all Federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court, and thus confining the operations of the Supreme Court to its original jurisdiction, as clearly defined by the Constitution. The language of the Constitution is as follows : "The judicial powers of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as the Congress may 192 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON from time to time ordain and establish. , , . In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which the State shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original juris diction. In all other cases before men tioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction both as to law and facts, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make," It is clear that if Congress will repeal the act creating the United States courts inferior to the Supreme Court, then the Supreme Court will be at once stripped of all appellate jurisdiction from the circuit and district courts. This will leave in the State courts the constitutional jurisdiction which Congress has conferred upon the inferior United States courts. This will take from the Supreme Court the oppor tunity to use the judicial legerdemain by which it has contrived to usurp the power to declare acts of Con gress unconstitutional and to render legislative de cisions. There will then be no hocus-pocus by which the court can get an act of Congress, before it to be repealed, amended or juggled. This will be perfectly safe, and is indeed the only way to safety ; because if Congress shall make a mistake about the Constitution, the people can correct it at the next election; but if the Supreme Court makes a mistake, or is corrupt as it surely must have been in the cases herein cited — the income tax and in many other grievous cases — then the unanimous vote of the whole electorate is powerless to correct it until the Constitution is amended. It took the people twenty years to, do that in the income tax case, and now the Supreme Court has attacked and tried to destroy the Income TaJi Amendment to the Constitution. Such usurpation will never stop unless this remedy is applied. Last April I sent the following letter to every mem ber of Congress and to every judge of the Supreme Court: UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 193 "Washington, D. C, April 10, 1920. "I enclose a pamphlet which I prepared some years ago with regard to the United, States courts. I will be much pleased if you can find time to read it. You know the Supreme Court of the United States is pro vided for in the Constitution, but its original jurisdiction is limited to con troversies between states and to the con sular and diplomatic service, though Con gress may provide certain appellate juris diction ; and that afterwards Congress, by an act, provided for the United States Circuit and District Courts. It is through this con gressional act that constitutional questions have been raised so as to reach the Supreme Court. "The framers of the Constitution never intended that the courts should have power to nullify an act of Congress, by declaring it unconstitutional. That was supposed to be the only ground for veto by the President. But the courts have usurped this authority and in the recent decisions they have nullified the Constitution and usurped legislative functions by declaring that it is not expedient to dissolve the steel trust, although its con duct is in plain violation of the statutes ; and in the Abraham case they have sent three men to prison for twenty years for doing what the minority opinion of the court says they had a perfect right to do. As a result of these decisions. Senator LaFollette and perhaps others have proposed an amendment to the Constitution of the United States changing the method of selecting our United States judges. I submit that an amendment to the Constitution is not necessary. Besides, that method of securing relief from such obvious usurpations of power is slow, diffi- 194 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON cult and possibly impossible of accomplish ment. Now, what I propose and all that Is necessary, is that Congress repeal the law creating United States district and circuit courts, and leaving the cases hereafter that arise between citizens of the United States to the courts of the various states for final decision. This will leave the Supreme Court clothed simply with authority and juris diction given them by the Constitution. "Courts of the various states are elected by the people. There is no place in a de mocracy for officials appointed for life; and when they usurp power and authority and violate the Constitution and assume legis lative powers, it becomes intolerable. "Very truly yours, "R. F, PETTIGREW, "Raleigh Hotel," The Supreme Court, as I have shown, was created by the Constitution, while the United States circuit and district courts have been created by an act of Congress, These inferior courts were established by Congress upon the theory that a citizen of one state could not get justice in the courts of another state. We all know that a citizen of Massachusetts can secure justice in the courts of Illinois, If a citizen of the United States goes to a foreign country, he and his property submit to the courts and laws of the coun try where he happens temporarily to reside,- and, therefore, there is no reason why these United States courts should exist. These courts do not properly belong to our system of Government. There is no place in a representative republic for an officer who can usurp power and be come a despot. Therefore, these courts should be in stantly abolished, and in their place courts substituted UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 195 that are elected by the people subject to recall; that is, courts of the several states. If the people are capable of enacting laws, they are capable of saying what they meant by those laws when they enacted them. Abraham Lincoln, in a speech at Cincinnati, on September 15, 1859, declared: "The people of these United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." Lincoln said, in his first inaugural address, March 4, 1861 : "This country with its institutions belongs to the people who inhabit, it. WHENEVER THEY SHALL GROW WEARY OF THE EXISTING GOVERNMENT, THEY CAN EXERCISE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF AMENDMENT, OR THEIR REVOLUTIONARY RIGHT TO DISMEM BER OR OVERTHROW IT." The Federal courts are perverting the Constitution ; they are undermining the foundations of free govern ment; these usurpations and despotism must be stopped. This question is so important and so funda mental that immediate action, in my opinion, must be had to take the Govemment out of the hands of the lawyers and the judges, and restore it to the people, if we wish to prevent a revolution in this country. The United States courts, created by act of Con gress, can and should be abolished by act of Congress. They do not belong to democratic institutions. XIV. SENATES AND SENATORS. The control of the machinery of the Government by the business interests of the United States is nowhere better exemplified than in the Senate of the United States. I was a member of the Senate for twelve years. During that time the Senate never legislated for the American people and had not the slightest regard for their interests. I was intimately ac quainted with many of the Senators. I came into daily contact with them, until I learned how they act ed, under a given set of circumstances, and why. During my term of service in the Senate, lawyers always made up the majority of the senators. At times as many as three-quarters were lawyers. Hence follows that everything I have said about lawyers applies generally to United States senators. Indeed, it was my two terms in the Senate that helped me to form my opinion of lawyers and their practices. The representatives of business, who held seats in the Senate, were not satisfied to pass the laws that their clients demanded. They went out of their way to, attack any other senator who held a brief for the interests of the American people. After I had gained the reputation of being anti-privilege and in favor of human rights above property rights, they came at me again and again. From the moment that I took sides against the rail roads, the trusts and other forces of imperialism, I was a marked man. Senator after senator felt it his duty to go on record against me personally, as well as everything that I stood for. Depew, representing the New York Central ; Lodge, representing the conserva tive propertied interests of New England, Wolcott, representing every interest that would buy him, and David B. Hill, a representative of the New York busi ness interests, scored and denounced me. SENATES AND SENATORS 197 Chauncey Depew, as one of his first acts in the Senate, delivered a speech (February 7, 1900, p. 1602) , in which he denounced my attitude toward the Philippines. Even more personal and vindictive was the attack of Senator Wolcott (January 15, 1900, pp. 810-12). , In reply, I merely said: "Mr. President, the senator from Colorado says that I never speak a kind word of my fellow-senators. I am not going to dispute that assertion except to say that my relations are most pleasant with almost all of my fellow-senators, and I hope he will not under take to hide the whole Senate behind his large per sonality. I have not spent much time in laudation of him because I never saw anything in his public career or private life worthy of praise ; but I will confess one thing, and that now, which ought to be to his praise and his advantage — he has a loud voice. It seems to me that his attack upon me Is not worthy of a reply, and I shall not reply to it." With most of these men, personally, I was on good terms, but when it came to political and economic views, we were enemies. Probably under such cir cumstances I may judge the Senate and the senators more harshly than they deserve. At the same time, I do not see how it would be possible to exaggerate their utter fealty to business, and their supreme fail ure to do anything or even think of anything that was in the public interest. Naturally, to such a generalization, there were a number of honorable exceptions as, for example, that furnished by Senator John P. Jones, of Nevada, and Senator Butler, of North Carolina. Marion Butler was fleeted to the Senate of the United States in 1894V,and took his seat in 1895, which was the beginning of my second term. So he served with me for six full years. He was elected on the people's ticket as a Populist. He was but 30 years of age, a lawyer by profession, having grad- 19g IMPERIAL WASHINGTON uated from the University of Virginia, and was the youngest man in the Senate at that time. Butler was a man of very decided ability and of strict integrity. He discharged the duties of his office with great credit to himself and to the state that he represented. He voted with me on almost every ques tion, always against the predatory interests. He made really the most brilliant career of any man I ever knew in the Senate during his first term. He was the author of the Rural Free Delivery service of the Post Office Department, which he secured; also the appropriation for the building of the first sub marine. He attacked and exposed the infamy of (Cleveland's administration, and his bond sales, and also assisted me in the fight with regard to the rail- 'way mail pay, and in the armor-plate controversy he showed up many remarkable and startling facts. He was a member of the Committee on Naval Affairs, and was a sturdy opponent of graft and extrava gance. John P. Jones was one of the American delegates tq the "International Monetary Conference," held at Brussels in 1892, His fellow-commissioners were James B. McCreary, Henry W, Cannon, president of the Chase National Bank of New York, and E, Ben jamin Andrews, These gentlemen knew more or less about money and finance, and they signed the report. There were other members of the commission, among them Senator Allison of Iowa, He did not sign the report. If he attended the Brussels Conference it must have been as an onlooker, for, if he had under taken to discuss the question, he certainly would have been the laughing stock of the financiers of Europe. The great speech of that conference was made by John P. Jones of Nevada, who was the ablest man in the Senate of the United States during the twelve years that I was there. He was a careful student, had a great intellect, and understood the science of political economy and the money question. His speech In the Senate of the United States, delivered in Octo- SENATES AND SENATORS 199 ber, 1893, is by all odds the greatest contribution to the science of political economy now in print. He was seven days delivering that speech, which is a marvel of eloquence, composition and logic, and yet there were never more than three or four senators listening to it. a,As soon as Jones arose to speak, everyone would leave the Senate chamber in order to be sure not to possess any knowledge upon the ques** tion which he was presenting. Statesmen or schjilars are rare in the Senate of the United States and ^h^n, by accident, one does get in there he is treated ^ke a pariah. He is "not their kind" to the rest of the senators who are typical products of a political sys tem under which It is impossible to produce scholars, for the senators, as the representatives of the great inllustrial and financial combinations who own and run the Government entirely, are expected to have, not scholarship, but facility in managing public af fairs in the Interests of the classes. The rights of the people are never considered. Few senators ever stop to ask the question, "What is the public wel fare?" Rather, they ask, "What does my client want?" Senator Jones was brought up on a farm near Cleveland, Ohio., When about twenty years of age he joined with others, secured a sailing vessel of 250 tons, sailed down Lake Erie through the Welland Canal, across Lake Ontario, and out into the ocean through the St, Lawrence River, and went around the end of South America to Califomia in search of gold. It was fortunate that Jones did not have a college education ; he had less to forget. Our colleges do not develop to any great degree the only human faculty that distinguishes men from the animals — ^the power to reason. On the contrary, the college cultivates the memory and develops a veneration for the past. JoAes attended the "University of Hard Knocks," which is a pretty good school for a man who possesses any genius, because his mind is not filled up with the do ings of the dead past, and he has not learned to ven- 200 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON erate war by reading Caesar until he thinks that war is the only road to fame. Jones was a self-made man if ever there was one, and he surely did an excellent job. After the bill had passed, authorizing the sending of commissioners to the Brussels Monetary Confer ence, I was in New York and the president of the Ohase National Bank, Mr. Cannon, whom I had known in the West, told me that President Harrison had offered to appoint him one of the commissioners to the Brussels Monetary Conference. He wanted to consult with me as to whether he could _aff ord to lower his dignity by accepting the appointment in view of the fact that "the cowboy senator from Nevada" (Jones) was to be one of the commission ers. In reply I told Cannon that he would do well, before going to Brussels, to read Jones' report on the Brussels Monetary Conference of 1876. This, I told him, would give him some information on the subject. If he could not find time to read that re port, I advised him to make the acquaintance of Jones at the earliest moment and to talk with him all he possibly could on the trip, so that he would not make himself ridiculous when he came to speak at the con ference. I told him, further, that Jones knew far more about the subject than any other man in the United States, and that he could express what he knew more logically than anybody else. I did not tell Senator Jones until after he had re turned to this country what Cannon had said, because I wanted to give Cannon a show, but, after our com missioners had returned and had made their report (and the report was written by Jones), I asked the senator one day what he thought of Cannon. "Well," he replied, "Cannon, you know, like all bankers, has no knowledge of the subject of money; but theh I got along all right." Then I told Jones that Cannon had consulted with me before they went to Brussels as to whether it would comport with his position as president of the SENATES AND SENATORS 201 Chase National Bank to accept an appointment as a commissioner to the Brussels conference in company with the cowboy senator from Nevada. Jones simply smiled. "Well," said he, "you know a banker has no time to spend informing himself on the money question. Cannon probably went into a bank when he was a boy and grew up there. He learned, or knew as much about the money question, as the average banker, but he is not to blame for that." Jones chuckled, and then added : "A little in cident occurred after we returned to London, at the close of the Brussels conference, which, in this con nection, might amuse you. Rothschild, the great Lon don banker, was a delegate to the conference, listened to my speech and, immediately upon our return to London, gave a dinner in my honor. The guests were the great financiers and economists of England — and Cannon was not invited. In introducing me at the dinner, Rothschild referred to my speech on the money question at the Brussels Monetary Confer ence as "the greatest recent contribution to the science of political economy.' " The next time I saw Cannon I questioned him about the Brussels conference and his relations with Jones. He said that Jones was a very pleasant and agree able gentleman, but that he was of the opinion that there were other men at the conference far better in formed upon the question than Jones. I finally said : "By the way. Cannon, did you attend the dinner given by Rothschild in London to Jones, at which he, in introducing Jones to the guests, said that Jones' speech was the greatest recent contribution to the science of political economy?" "Why, no," answered Cannon, "I didn't know there was such a dinner." I relate this incident to show that even in the United States Senate there are men whose attain ments can command respect in^the capitals of Europe. But such men are as rare as genius. The rank and file members of the Senate are such stuff as political 202 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON bosses and political henchmen are made of. Of this Knute Nelson, of Minnesota, is an excellent example. Knute Nelson was elected to the United States Sen ate from a country town in Minnesota, where he was practicing law and earning about $500 a year by patching out with insurance and writing deeds. He took his seat in 1895 at the commencement of my second term in that body. Since he arrived ih the Senate he has been a sub servient tool of the exploiters, never failing to vote in their interest. He is a representative of the two per cent of. our population who own sixty per cent of the wealth. Needless to say, he has done better in the Senate than he did practicing law in the Minnesota village. In 1897, when the McKinley tariff was under con sideration in the Senate, I introduced an amendment providing for the admission, free of duty, of all artic les that competed with trust-made products. This amendment was printed and laid upon the tables of the senators to be called up at the proper time. About a week afterwards, Knute Nelson introduced an amendment of the same import as my amend ment, and had it printed and laid upon the tables. He waited for a few days and then .came over to my seat and said that he would like to have me withdraw an amendment and have the vote taken on his amendment. "Nelson," I said, "why not let my amendment be voted down, for it surely will be, and then call ,up yours, and I shall surely vote for it." "But I want you to withdraw yours so that I can have the credit of this effort to break the trust." I looked at him for a moment and said : "Nelson, I would withdraw my amendment if I felt certain that after I had done so, you would ever offer yours or bring it up for consideration." He seemed offended at this and turned away. When the time came to call up my amendment there was a long discussion on the whole question of SENATES AND SENATORS 203 tariffs and protection. During this discussion I showed that the duty in the McKinley bill on oil and sugar was a special duty intended to raise the price of both of these commodities in the interest of the trust magnates, I read from Havemeyer's testimony passages showing that they controlled the price com pletely, I also showed that the oil trust was in the same situation, and I charged that these two trusts received the special fostering care of the Republican party because of their large campaign contributions and because of the fact that their stocks could be manipulated to buy the votes of the lawyers in the Senate. My amendment to the McKinley Tariff Bill finally came up for a vote and was defeated and Nelson voted against it. ^ I then went to Nelson and asked him if he was going to offer his amendment. I stated that I would like to have him do so and I would like to discuss it and urge its adoption, but he would give me no answer; I waited until the next day and then I offered Nelson's amendment. Nelson voted against his own amendment and it also was defeated. It was as I had suspected. He offered his amend ment as a means of getting me to withdraw mine. He had no intention of fighting any trust. On the contrary, he was as favorably inclined toward them as any one I ever knew. During the same debate on the tariff, ex-Governor Grier, of Iowa, showed himself a special champion of the sugar-oil combination. He was outshone, how ever. In this role, by Senator Wolcott, of Colorado, a lawyer with little knowledge of the law and a great reputation as a phrase-maker. Wolcott was also a special champion of all railroads. Wolcott entered the Senate without property. He had extravagant tastes and habits. His salary was far less than enough to pay his current bills. Yet, when he died, he left a large fortune, I was on the committee charged with deciding the 204 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON membership of the Committees of the Senate. Senator Teller, of Colorado, an old senator and a man of in tegrity and character, came to me and insisted upon having Wolcott placed upon the Committee on Fi nance, which was the most important committee in the Senate for a lawyer wishing to make a fortune. Although Wolcott had just entered the Senate, I knew something of his character and caliber and I told Teller that I would not put him on that committee, because I believed that he would use that position for corrupt purposes. I stated that I should be very much pleased to put him (Teller) on the committee, but that Wolcott should not go on. But Teller in sisted, explaining that he was a candidate for re election and that Wolcott would help him, and that he vouched for his character and integrity. As a result of Teller's guarantee, Wolcott went on the Interstate Commerce Committee and the Finance Committee, which possibly accounts for the gre^t for tune he accumulated while he was in the Senate, Nelson and Wolcott were individuals. Their trea son to the best interests of the American people was not confined t6 them. It was a part of the atmos phere in which senators lived. The disgraceful lengths to which the Senate was used as a bulwark of the vested interests is well il lustrated in the fight over the ratification of the Spanish Peace Treaty, , While the Spanish treaty was pending, there was bitter opposition to it because, under it, we were to acquire the Philippine Islands. So strong was the protest against annexing the Philippines that the ad ministration leaders were unable to round up the two-thirds vote necessary to pass the treaty, I, as leader of the opposition, had canvassed the field thoroughly, and knew that they would have to use some means to secure votes in order to pass the bill, Aldrich, who was paymaster of the • financial combinations, the trusts and the railroads, was exi SENATES AND SENATORS 205 ceedingly active, moving around among the senators and talking to them at their desks. One day Senator Hoar of Massachusetts, a lawyer, came to me and said that he thought we had better ratify the treaty and then we could give the Philip pines their independence afterwards. He had made a speech against the treaty and had promised to fight it to the end, John Spooner, of Wisconsin, had made speeches against the treaty and promised to help me fight it to "the bitter end, and even to filibuster if that proved necessary. He voted for the treaty. When his term expired, he went to New York and began the practice of law. The next time he ap peared in Washington it was as the attorney for J. Pierpont Morgan & Co, Senator Hoar voted against ratifying the treaty with Spain after everybody knew that Aldrich had votes enough to pass the treaty. In order to give Hoar an excuse for voting against the treaty, it was agreed that he should offer an amendment to the treaty which would be rejected, and then he could vote against the treaty because of the rejection of this amendment. In pursuance of this agreement. Hoar offered an inconsequential amendment which was re jected by the Senate without debate or even a roll call. Immediately thereafter the vote was taken on the treaty and Hoar voted against the treaty and gave as his reason that his amendment had been rejected. Billy Mason, of Illinois, and McLaurin, of South Carolina, had both made long speeches against the ratification of the treaty. Both of them finally voted in favor of it. Aldrich used to go and talk with them over their desks and he evidently succeeded in convincing them. The day before the vote was taken on the ratification of the treaty, I went to Davis, who was chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and who had represented the United States at Paris when the treaty was drawn up. Of course, he was pushing for the ratification of his work. "Davis," I said to him over his desk in the Senate, 206 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON "you are going to ratify this treaty, but it Is the most terrible thing I have seen in my twelve years' service in this body," "What do you mean?" he asked. "I mean," I replied, "the open purchase of votes to ratify this treaty right on the floor of the Senate and before the eyes of the senators and all the world." Davis became decidedly serious. He looked at me and said in a steady voice, "They came into my office and tried to tell me about it and I said, 'Gentlemen, get out of here. You cannot open your stinkpot in my presence,' " "Well," I said, "I can guess who came to your room and whom you ordered out. It was Aldrich, of Rhode Island," To this Davis did not reply. The next day the treaty was ratified by a majority of one. Great crises like this one seldom arise in the Sen ate, but when they do there are always enough law yers on hand to do the work that the corporations want done. Spooner, Mason, McLaurin were all of them lawyers. The Senate is as safe for plutocracy and imperial ism on small issues as it is on big ones — even to the alteration of the record of official and Senate pro ceedings. In January, 1901, Queen Victoria died. When the news was transmitted officially to the Senate of the United States, Senator Cockrell, of Missouri, a mem ber of the Committee on Foreign Relations, came to me with the following resolution: "RESOLVED, That the death of her Royal ahd Imperial Majesty Queen Victoria, of noble virtue and great renown, is sincerely deplored by the Senate of the United States." I read the resolution and then told Cockrell that I certainly did object to It. I added that if it were of fered I would tell the whole story of the opium war and all its infamies on the floor of the Senate. I pro posed to show how the English Govemment had SENATES AND SENATORS 207 forced opium upon China at the point of the cannon ; had bombarded and captured her ports and mur dered her people, in order to compel the Chinese Gov ernment to allow the English Government opium monopoly to carry on its nefarious business among the Chinese people. I proposed to show, further, that every package of opium had upon it the coat of arms of Victoria, Queen of England. In consequence of this opposition, the resolution was not presented by the Committee on Foreign Relations and never was passed, at least as long as I was a member of that body. However, the following appears in the Congres sional Record of January 22, 1901 (p. 1288) : "Death of Queen Victoria." Mr, ALLISON: "Mr, President, I offer a resolution and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consid eration. The resolution will be read." The secretary read as follows: "RESOLVED, That the death of Her Royal and Imperial Majesty, of noble virtue and great renown, is sincerely deplored by the Senate of the United States of America." THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE : "Is there ob jection to the present consideration of the resolu tion? The Chair hears none. The question is on agreeing to the resolution. Mr. Allison submitted the following resolution which was considered by unanimous consent and agreed to. "RESOLVED, That the President pro tempore of the Seriate causes to be conveyed to the Prime Minis ter of Great Britain a suitably engrossed and duly authenticated copy of the foregoing resolution." The above proceedings never occurred in the Senate and Allison never asked or received unanimous con sent to pass the above resolution in relation to Queen Victoria. The Senate had a practice of allowing any 208 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON member to make any correction in the record, which he might desire to make, at any time within three days, and the bound volumes or permanent record are made up from this corrected record. Allison, of Iowa, who was known as a "pussyfoot" among his fellow-senators, evidently had that item put into the permanent record in this way, and then notified the English Government that we had passed the, above resolution in relation to the death of Queen Victoria, and thus prevented me from exposing to the world her infamy and the infamy of the British Empire. These are but instances of the manipulation that I have witnessed in the Senate. I have seen senators change long-held convictions over night; I haye seen men enter the Senate poor and leave it rich! I have seen situations saved by money, and imperalism pro tected by an altered record. Each time that these changes of mind have occurred over some momentous issue, the change has taken place in the direction of the wealth-owners and other interests. Not once was the public weal ever so much as an alleged cause of action. The Senate is declining in importance. It can now be ignored by business, whereas, twenty years ago, it had to be reckoned with. It has become a sort of storage plant for the preservation of mediocre intel lects and threadbare reputations. The senators them selves proclaim this. I quote from the official record of a United States Senate Committee. The Com mittee was investigating conditions in Russia and had called Louise Bryant, John Reed's widow as a witness: SENATOR OVERMAN: "The Committee will come to order. Miss Bryant, do you believe in God and in the sanctity of the oath?" Miss BRYANT: "Certain, I believe in the sanc tity of the oath." SENATOR KING: "Do you believe in God?" Miss BRYANT: "I suppose there is a God. There is no way of knowing." SENATES AND SENATORS 209 SENATOR NELSON: "Do you believe in the Christian religion?" Miss BRYANT: "I believe all people should have any sort of religion they wish." SENATOR NELSON: "You are not a Christian, then?" Miss BRYANT: "I was christened in the Catholic Church." SENATOR NELSON: "What are you now— a Christian?" Miss BRYANT : "Yes, I suppose I am." SENATOR NELSON: "And do you believe in Christ?" Miss BRYANT: "I believe In the teachings of Christ." SENATOR OVERMAN: "Do you believe in God." Miss BRYANT : "Yes, I will concede that I believe in God, Senator Overman," SENATOR KING: "This is important, because a person who has no conception of God does not have an idea of the sanctity of the oath, and the oath would De meaningless," SENATOR WOLCOTT: "Do you beheve in a pun ishment hereafter and a reward for duty?" Miss BRYANT : "It seems to me as if I were being tried for witchcraft," SENATOR OVERMAN: "That is not so at all." Miss BRYANT : "Very well;^^ I will concede even that there is a hell." SENATOR OVERMAN: "Now, I want to find out about matters in Russia and what you have observed there. What is your name? Where have you been living since you have been in Washington?" Miss BRYANT: "I stopped for. a while at the Na tional Woman's Party Headquarters. ..." SENATOR NELSON: "Did you belong to the picket squad?" 210 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Miss BRYANT : "I do not know what that had to do with Russia, but I did. I believe in equality for women as well as for men, even in my own country." SENATOR NELSON: "Did you participate In the burning of the President's message?" Miss BRYANT: "I DID." SENATOR NELSON: "Did you participate in the burning of the effigy?" Miss BRYANT: "I did, and went on a hunger- strike." SENATOR OVERMAN: "What do you mean by that?" (The Senators are told just what a hunger-strike is.) SENATOR KING : "Where did you live before you lived in New York? You lived in Oregon, did you not?" Miss BRYANT : "Yes, sir, but I do wish you would let me tell you something about Russia." SENATOR KING: "And your husband and Mr. Rhys Williams were on the staff of the BolshevikI for the purpose of preparing propaganda for — — " Miss BRYANT: "A revolution in Germany." SENATOR KING (Shouting) : "For the Bolshe vikI!" Miss BRYANT : "No, for a revolution in Germany. ... If you will allow me, I will show you the kind of papers they printed there. There has never been any secret about this propaganda. For instance " SENATOR NELSON: "We do not care about that." Miss BRYANT: "You do not care about it?" SENATOR NELSON: "About those papers. We want facts!" Miss BRYANT: "These papers are facts and you must admit the facts. Here Is an illustrated paper in SENATES AND SENATORS 211 German prepared for sending into the German lines in order to make " SENATOR NELSON: "Don't be so impertinent" Woodrow Wilson must have had episodes like this in mind when, on his return from Paris in the spring of 1919, he said: "The senators of the United States have no use for their heads except to serve as a knot to keep' their bodies from unraveling." During the winter of 1918 I went upon the floor of the Senate, and Lodge, of Massachusetts, who had served with me in the Senate for several years, got up from his seat and came over and shook hands with me. * "Pettigrew," he said, "I wish you were here." "What for?" I asked. "Why," he answered, "I would like to have you here to shake up this rotten and contemptible Demo cratic administration." That rather amused me, because I was not pre pared to hear so emphatic and pronounced an ex pression from the historian of Harvard. A few minutes afterwards I went over to the Democratic side to shake hands with Senator Tillman, of South Carolina, who had also served several years with me in the Senate. Tillman was at that time an invalid and unable to stand upon his feet. When I shook hands with him he pulled me down near to him and said: "Pettigrew, I wish you were back here." "What for?" I asked. "We need you to shake up this rotten and corrupt Republican party in the Senate," he replied. Then I went over to Lodge and brought him to Tillman's chair. First I told Lodge what Tillman had said to me and then I told Tillman what Lodge had said to me. "Gentlemen," I concluded, "if I were back here I am sure you would both be entirely sat isfied." Perhaps I can best conclude what I have to say 212 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON about the United States Senate by quoting an item from the Washington "Post" of May 29, 1902 : "SENATE PASSES WATER POWER BILL WITH 25 MILLION LOCAL ITEMS OMITTED. The Senate yesterday approved the conference re port on the water power bill without the appropria tion for $25,000,000 for the development of the Great Falls water power project. The conference report, however, carries $25,000 for further investigation of the project. The vote was 45 to 21. The measure now goes to the President." A determined, though futile, attempt was made by Senator Norris to have the Great Falls item restored in the conference report. He said that since 1894 eleven investigations had been made,'the most compre hensive by Colonel Langfitt, now General, in 1913, and, in his opinion. Congress should authorize the de velopment of the project at once. Senator Norris said that, with the development of the Great Falls project, there would be twice as much power as would be needed to light every home and turn every wheel in the District of Columbia, He added that there should have been no coal shortage during the war or last winter, nor would there have been a water shortage if the work recommended In 1913 had been pushed. At this juncture of his speech. Senator Norris was interrupted by Senator Nugent, who asked why Col onel Langfitt's report had not been followed, "In my opinion, the first reason is the Potomac Electric Power Company," replied Senator Norris. "The second reason is the Potomac Electric Power Company, and the third reason is the Potomac Elec tric Power Company. There were certain other out side interests opposed to it also." Senator Nugent then asked if it was not a fact that the Washington Railway and Electric Company and its allied corporation, the power company, have block- SENATES AND SENATORS 213 ed every effort of Congress to develop the Great Falls project. "Yes, that is my. opinion," replied Senator Norris. It is the old story. The august Senate of the United States in leading-strings to a public utility company that has held its grip on the city of Wash ington for a generation. In this little thing, as in many a greater thing, the Senate of the United States has proved itself a faithful servant of predatory wealth. Charles Francis Adams had some experience with the United States Senate, as he was elected president of the Union Pacific Railroad by the Goulds and other gamblers who controlled the road in 1884. These men chose Adams to go to Washington and make a settle ment with the Government for the second mortgage which the Government held on the road. Ames had been in Washington before and had organized the Credit Mobilier and had bought both the House and Senate when the bill was passed giving the Union Pacific Road the land grant and the money to build the road, and so it would not do for Ames to go to Washington. The Goulds, who owned the road with Ames, were the most disreputable gamblers in the United States. They cOuld do nothing in Washing ton, so the scamps^ythese leading financiers— selected Charles Francis Adams to go to Washington and see what could be done. Adams failed because he refused to corrupt the Houses of Congress or the members thereof, and be cause he would not do their kind of work. He was at once removed as president of the Union Pacific Railroad, I quote from page 192 of Charles Francis Adams' autobiography : "I was sent over to Washington to avert the threat ened action of the Government, and then and there I had my first experience in the most hopeless and re pulsive work in which I ever was engaged — ^transact ing business with the United States Government and 214 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON trying to accomplish something through congressional action. My initial episode was with a prominent member of the United States Senate. This senator Is still (1912) alive, though long retired. He had a great reputation for ability and a certain reputation, somewhat fly-blown, it is true, for rugged honesty. I can only say that I found him an ill-mannered bully and by all odds the most covertly and dangerously corrupt man I ever had opportunity and occasion carefully to observe in public life. His grudge against the Union Pacific was that it had not retained him. While he took excellent care of those competing con cerns which had been wiser in this respect, he never lost an opportunity of posing as the fearless antagon ist of corporations when the Union Pacific came to the front. For that man, on good and sufficient ground, I entertained a deep dislike. He was distinct ly dishonest — a senatorial bribe-taker." I have tried to decide who this senator was and I am of the opinion it was Edmunds of Vermont. Adams should have given the name of the man, but I do Edmunds no injustice by stating that, in my opin ion, he was the man, although there were many other lawyers in the Senate at that time that would answer Adams' description, and would do just what Adams describes— and I know them all personally. XV. TEN PRESIDENTS. I have been personally acquainted with every presi dent of the United States from Andrew Johnson to Woodrow Wilson. With some of them my acquaint ance was very slight Others I knew intimately for many years. I saw enough of all of them to form a pretty definite idea of their qualities. These ten presidents were not brainy men. They were not men of robust character. They were pliable men, safe men, conservative men. Many of them were usable men, who served faithfully the business interests that stood behind them. All but two of them were lawyers, and they took into the presidency the peculiar limitations under which lawyers suffer. I met Grant first In his first term^ — in the winter of 1871-1872 — and our acquaintance lasted as long as he lived. Grant was a soldier — not a president — ^ but he filled the office as acceptably as a general could be expected to do. Among the ten presidents, I am of the opinion that Benjamin Harrison was pre-eminent in ability and character. He was elected in 1888, beating Cleve land, who was then a candidate for a second term. Although Harrison was a strong man, he was not a leader. He misjudged the political machinery of the Republican party and had a reputation of being the most ungrateful person that ever occupied the White House. At the outset he proclaimed his opposition to bosses and to machine control in the Republican party. As soon as he was elected president, he be gan to build up a machine of his own, using his pat ronage as a bait and a whip, and disregarding the leaders and bosses entirely. Soon after I came to the Senate, in December, 1889, I went to see the President about some of the appointments in the State of South Dakota, which 216 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON had just been admitted into the Union. The^ Presi dent immediately gave me to understand that he thought I was the political boss of Dakota and that he would have to look into the recommendations which I made. I do not think he ever appointed any one to any political position because of my endorse ment. I am informed that he treated the leaders in the other states in the same manner. Any sort of president, Republipan or Democrat, can renominate himself for a second term. The pow er that he holds through his patronage and his veto enables him to appeal to the personal interest of a large number of influential men and thus to compel their support. The Republican leaders were strongly opposed to Harrison and to his re-election. Quay and Cameron, of Pennsylvania, Farwell, of Chicago, Tom Piatt, of New York, and a large number of others held con ference after conference with a view to choosing his successor. They knew the power of the machine that the President had built up and knew It was diffi cult to accomplish their purpose, but, after much con sideration, they finally decided, at a meeting which I attended, to persuade Blaine to be a candidate. It had been the ambition of Blaine's life to be presi dent, and we had hoped to get him into the field as the only person who could beat Harrison. He was at that time a member of Harrison's Cabinet and Secre tary of State. I was delegated to see Blaine and to report on his attitude. I went to Blaine's house on McPherson Square, in front of the White House, and had several conversations with him. In every in stance he said that he would accept the nomination but that he would not seek it, nor would he be a can didate. At the last interview, just before we went to Minneapolis for the National Convention, he told me that, in his opinion, if he were nominated he would not live through the campaign, because of the bad state of his health. Therefore, he was resolved to do nothing to aid in securing his nomination. TEN PRESIDENTS 217 When we arrived at the convention we found every thing cut and dried for Harrison's renomination, and he was nominated almost immediately. After the nomination had been made, a committee of his fol lowers came to us — ^by "us" I mean the political managers of the Republican Party in the various states of that date — and wanted us to name the vice- president. We replied that we would do nothing of the kind. It was their ticket, nominated without even consulting us, and it was their job to elect it. Levi P. Morton was Vice-President and President of the Senate during Harrison's first term. He was a capable and cordial gentleman of whom we were all very fond, and we supposed, of course, that he would be nominated by Harrison's crowd, but he was passed over and WHITELAW REID was nominated in his place. There was a great deal of discussion over the mat ter and reporters tried to interview us on the out come of the convention. We all refused to be inter viewed but one reporter did get into Quay's room, and asked him what he thought of the ticket put up at Minneapolis. Quay gazed out of the window, and in his quaint way said, "It looks as though it might snow !" I returned to Washington before any of the other senators and the moment I went upon the floor of the Senate, Morton, who was in the chair, came over to where I was sitting and, in a very hurt tone of voice, wanted to know why he was not nominated with Harrison. I told him the facts — ^that Harrison's followers had sent a delegation to us asking us to name the vice-president; that we told them it was their ticket ; and that they would have to elect it and, therefore, they should designate Harrison's running mate. I added, "We supposed of course that they would nominate you, but we also believe that Har^ risen will be defeated and, therefore, we did not wish to participate in the nomination." Harrison selected, for the important post of Chair- 218 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON man of the Republican National Committee, Senator Carter, of Montana. Tom Carter was a bright man. He was a lawyer of considerable ability and had a wide knowledge of the law, but he was ignorant of the methods employed by the Republican Party ma chine to win a campaign. Carter did not know how to go about reaching the bankers, the railroad financiers, the trust magnates and the other exploiters who controlled the surplus of American wealth. He did secure a contribution of $400,000 from Cramp, the shipbuilder, by telling Cramp that if he put up $400,000 it would, beyond a doubt, elect Harrison. He also told Cramp where the money would be laid out in order to secure this result, and assured him that he would see that Cramp got the money back out of building ships for the Gov ernment as soon as Harrison took office. Campaign funds were not usually raised In this rough fashion. Instead, the campaign managers went to the real government, the managers of railroads, the great industrial, financial and transportation in? terests, and secured their contribution without any direct promise as to the method of using the funds, leaving that to come along as a matter of course in case of success. Had the Republican managers been In control of the campaign, none of these sources would have been neglected. As it was, while Tom Carter's crowd was fooling around, these sources of funds were pre empted by Grover Cleveland, who was the Democratic candidate against Harrison. As a result of this mis management, Harrison was badly beaten at the polls and Grover Cleveland was elected in his place. Never do I hope to deal with a more difficult hu man being than Grover Cleveland. His naturally perverse disposition was supplemented by personal habits that made it next to impossible for anyone to work with him. In the Senate of the United States, on June 3, 1896, I made a speech on the River and Harbor Bill TEN PRESIDENTS 219 that was then under consideration. Cleveland had vetoed the bill, and while I was opposed to it I felt bound to vote for its passage over the veto, because I believed that the President had violated his oath of office by vetoing the bill. I believe that the veto pow er was never intended by the Constitution or its framers to be used as a legislating instrument. In that speech I referred to Grover Cleveland as fol-' lows : "The present occupant of the White House is not cbntent with the violation of the Constitution by the e;!cercise of the veto power alone, but with an utter disregard of his sacred oath of office, as well as the Constitution, he overrides the laws, influences con gressmen with patronage, enriches his favorites at the public expense — in fact, permits no restraint but his imperial will. I think he might fairly be charged with high crimes and misdemeanors. He has exer cised the veto power in direct violation of the Con stitution. He has appointed men to, office without the advice and consent of the Senate. He has defied the Senate and the Constitution alike by appointing men to official positions after the Senate has twice refused its consent, and still retains them in office. "During his first term he openly used his appoint ing power to intimidate members of Congress, and during his second term he had given appointments to members of Congress for the purpose of securing their votes upon measures pending in the two Houses. "On -his own motion he has undertaken to over throw the Hawaiian Government, doing acts in di rect violation of the Constitution. He has borrowed money in violation of the law for ordinary expenses of the Government, and then falsified the facts in re lation thereto in a message to Congress. , He has re fused to remit taxes as required by law, and has collected taxes unlawfully. He has refused to en force the laws of Congress so often that the list of violations is next only to the list of his vetoes. He has sold bonds at private sale to his favorites and 220 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON former associates upon terms and at a price many millions of dollars below the market price of the bonds- on the day of such private sales. In view of these facts it is time for Congress to give some atten tion to these usurpations. If this Government is to survive, we can no longer look with indifference upon the shameful autocracy of Grover Cleveland." In this connection, I referred to his veto record as unparalleled in our history, and showed that he had vetoed up to the first of May, 1896, 551 bills in his two terms as President, while all the other Presidents of the United States together had vetoed but 109 bills passed by Congress. Cleveland was reputed to have certain rugged vir tues. The only one that I remember his friends boasting about was that he would do as he agreed. He continued his career as a vetoer until the end of his term, or, rather, until the end of January, 1897. During February he was reported to be So drunk that he was incapacitated from public business. A promi nent Democratic member of Congress told me, at that time, that he went to the White House to see the President and found Cleveland lying on the floor in a rather hilarious state of intoxication. Many other stories of a similar character — many of them worse — came to our ears during the last days of this dis graceful administration. Most of the great appropriation bills are passed dur ing the closing days of Congress. An act of Congress, having been sent to the President, must be vetoed by him within ten days, otherwise it becomes a law with out his signature if Congress is in session. If Con gress expires during the ten days, the unsigned bill is not a law, and this is called a pocket veto. Cleve land thus vetoed all of the bills which were sent to him during the last ten days of Congress. Thus he made it necessary for his successor, McKinley, to call an extra session of Congress immediately, in order to TEN PRESIDENTS 221 pass the appropriation bills and thus secure sufficient funds for- the running of the Government. On the 4th of March, Grover Cleveland came to the Senate, as is the custom, to see his successor in augurated. My seat was the first seat on the main aisle. Grover Cleveland was brought in by two or three men and placed in a chair right across the aisle from me. He was still stupidly intoxicated, his face was bloated, and he was a sight to behold. He did not seem to know what was occurring, but looked like a great lump of discolored flesh. When McKinley had delivered his address and had taken his oath of office, Cleveland was carried out of the Senate by the men who brought him in, and I understand was loaded into a carriage and taken to the wharf in Washington and there loaded on a yacht— and I think it was Benedict's yacht (he was a very wealthy man, a citizen of New York, and was one of the chief factors in running Cleveland's administration in the interests of big business). The yacht sailed down the Potomac with Cleveland for a few weeks so that he could wind up his spree. I have not written about Grover Cleveland for the purpose of attacking him or his private life, or from any feeling of personal animosity or ill-will, but be cause these things are a part, and a vital part, of his public and official life as President of the United States, and account for his erratic conduct as chief executive of his great nation, and no accurate history of his career as President can be written and fail to consider the two Clevelands — drunk and sober. His ultimatum to England in the Venezuela affair; his conduct with regard to Hawaii, and his hundreds of vetoes and his bond sales, in violation of his oath, and of the Constitution, can in this way only be ac counted for. None of his successors approached Cleveland in personal uncleanliness, but the political records of some of them were far from enviable. 222 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON McKinley. I took my seat in the Senate in December, 1889, During that session of Congress the McKinley Tariff Bill was under discussion in the House of Repre sentatives, and I think the only thing for which I was interested in having tariff protection was metallic tin caciterite, I interviewed members of the House Committee, of which William McKinley was chair man, and asked that a certain duty be placed on metallic tin, LaFollette, of Wisconsin (now Senator LaFollette), was a member of this committee, I had known him from boyhood and we were good friends; conse quently, he promised to attend to the matter of the tariff on tin for me. However, I saw nearly every member of the committee, including the chairman, Mr, McKinley, and I got from McKinley a' definite promise that he would do all he could to secure the tariff I wanted on metallic tin. Dalzell, of Pennsylvania, was a member of the committee from Pittsburgh, where they made tin plate. His clients wanted a very high tariff on tin plate but wanted the metallic tin to come in free of duty so that the manufacturers of the black plates might make an added profit, Dalzell told me that he was opposed to any tariff upon metallic tin, which made me still more active until I thought I had the promise of the majority of the committee to stand for a tariff on metallic tin. When the matter came up for a vote In the com mittee (I think the whole committee was present), the vote on the tin schedule was a tie. The chair man, McKinley, was compelled to cast the deciding vote, and he voted against the duty and against what he had specifically promised me, LaFollette imme diately wrote down the names of the committee mem bers who had voted for and against the tariff on tin and also the fact that McKinley had cast the deciding TEN PRESIDENTS 223 vote against me, and sent It by a page over to the Senate. I went over to the House of Representatives and, as I went upon the floor of the House in the direction of McKinley's seat, I met McKinley in the aisle com ing from the session Of the tariff committee. "McKinley," I said, "how are you getting along with the duty on metallic tin?" He was very patronizing and conciliating. "Well, Senator," he said, "I do not believe we can get it through my committee." "How in the devil do you expect to get it through your committee," I replied, "when you vote against it yourself?" He shrank a little under my remark, then he rallied and said: "Well, I concluded that it was not best to put a duty on metallic tin." "If you had told me that in the first place," I an swered, "instead of lying to me about it, I would have some respect for you. That would have given me a chance to have worked a little harder and to find someone on the committee that would tell the truth." The incident gave me an insight into McKinley's character and may possibly have had something to do, in addition to other things, with my walking out of the St. Louis Convention In 1896, after McKinley's nomination. I always had the impression that the course pursued by McKinley in the committee of the House was characteristic of the man, and I am still of the opinion that as President he continued the same practices. There is nothing that better illustrates President William McKinley than this agreement with the Sultan of Sulu, and his double dealing In connection with the same. I quote from the Congressional Record of January 21, 1900. "Manilla special, July 12, 1899.' "General Bates, in the capacity of agent of the United States Govemment, sailed for Jolo this morn ing to negotiate with the Sultan of Jolo regarding the 224 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON future relations of the Jolo (or Sulu) Archipellgo, including the Basilians, as a naval station. The Sultan assumes that the Jolos reverted to him, the evacuation of the Spaniards nullifying the treaty of 1878. General Bates will explain to the Sultan that the Americans succeeded the Spaniards in the treaty assuming its obligations and continuing the annuities it provides for. He will also present to the Sultan $10,000 in Mexican money as an evidence of good will. The local administration of the Jolos will re main unchanged. The Sultan will enforce the law, and also be expected to fly the American, flag con tinuously and co-operate with America to maintain order and suppress piracy, "General Bates then entered Into the following agreement : " 'Agreement between Brig, Gen, John C. Bates, representing the United States, of the one part, and His Highness, the Sultan of Sulu; it being understood that this agree ment will be in full force only when con firmed by the President of the United States, and will be subject to future modifications by the mutual consent of the parties in interest.' "I deem it proper to state that this agreement has been confirmed by the President of the United States in a letter transmitting the treaty to the Senate. However, this is a treaty apparently with a quasi sovereign power, over which the Senate, according to , our new doctrine of imperialism, has no other authority and no control, and it requires no ratifi» cation by the Senate and no consideration on our part. " 'Article 1. The sovereignty of the United States over the whole archipelago of Sulu and its dependencies is declared and ac knowledged. " 'Article 2. The United States flag will TEN PRESIDENTS be used in the archipelago of Sulu and Its dependencies on land and sea. '"Article 3. The rights and dignities of his highness the Sultan and his datos shall be fully respected; all their religious cus toms shall be respected, and no one shall be persecuted on account of his religion. " 'Article 4. While the United States may occupy and control such points in the archi pelago of Sulu as public interests seem to de mand, encroachment will not be made upon the lands immediately about the residence of his highness the Sultan unless military necessity requires such occupation in case of war with a foreign power, and where the property of individuals is taken, due com pensation will be made in each case. " 'Article 10, Any slave In the archipelago of Sulu shall have the right to purchase freedom by paying to the master the usual market value. " 'Article 12, At present Americans or foreigners wishing to go into the country should state their wishes to the Moro authorities and ask for an escort, but it is hoped this will become unnecessary as we know each other better, " 'Article 13. The United States will give full protection to the Sultan and his sub jects in case any foreign nation shall at tempt to impose upon them. " 'Article 14. The United States will not sell the island of Sulu or any other island of the Sulu Archipelago to any foreign nation without the consent of the Sultan of Sulu. " 'Article 15. The United States Govem ment will pay the following monthly salaries : " 'To the Sultan, $250 ; to Dato Muda, $75 ; to Dato Attik, $60; to Dato Calbe, $75; to Dato Joakanain, $75 ; to Dato Puyo, $60 ; to 226 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Dato Amir Haissin, $60; to Habji Buter, $50; to Habib Mura, $40; to Serif Saguin, $15. " 'Signed in triplicate, in English and Sulu, at Jolo, this 20th day of August, A. D., 1899 (13th Arakuil Akil 1817), " 'The SULTAN SULU Dato RAJAH HUDA Dato ATTIK Dato CALBE Dato JOAKANAIN '"Signed: J. C. BATES, Brigadier-General, U. S. V.' "The annual aggregate of these salaries is $9,120. The Spanish agreement was for $6,300 a year. This agreement was one we offered to the Sultan, not one that he insisted upon. It is our own proposition that we are to maintain slavery in the Sulu Islands. "Farther than that, Mr. President, an investigation would show that, although this agreement was made on the 20th day of August, it was not possible to secure from the State Department a copy of the agreement until after the election in Ohio. "I say this agreement, when the Associated Press tried to get a copy of it before the Senate convened, was furnished in Arabic, and an Arabic used in the Sulu Islands. Therefore it was not possible to have it translated in the United States, and we only got this copy which I have read after Congress convened and after the elections last fall were over. This is on a par and in line with the whole business of conceal ing from the American people the facts in regard to our maiden foreign venture. We are unable to pro cure the truth through General Otis. Mr. Collins, of the Associated Press, says the censor told him he was to send nothing and they were going to allow nothing to be sent that would injure the Administration or help Mr. Bryan. TEN PRESIDENTS 227 "Here is an agreement by which we are to main tain not only slavery, but polygamy in the Sulu Islands. Here is an agreement by which our flag is made to float over two crimes; and we further solemnly agree that no nation in the world shall be permitted to interfere. It is the chief part of the business of the Sultan of Sulu to get into quarrels with the natives of the interior in the island of Mindanao; then to declare that they are in revolt against this authority. Upon this pretext he takes prisoners and sells them into slavery, the planters of Borneo being the purchasers. That has been his busi ness heretofore whenever he needed money. We now propose to maintain that sort of thing under the flag of the United States, and we stipulate, and the stipulation is approved by the President, that no foreign nation shall be permitted to interfere." MR. SPOONER: "Does the Senator wish to be understood as asserting that the President approved article 10 of this agreement, which refers to slavery in the archipelago of Sulu?" MR. PETTIGREW: "I do." MR. SPOONER: "Well, the President says In his message — and if the Senator will permit me I will read it — " 'I have confirmed said agreement, sub ject to the action of the Congress, and with the reservation, which I have directed shall be communicated to the Sultan of Jolo, that this agreement is not to be deemed in any way to authorize or give the consent of the United States to the existence of slavery in the Sulu Archipelago. I communicate these facts to the Congress for its information and action.' " BY MR, PETTIGREW: "The President approves of an agreement which provides that the slave may purchase his liberty at the usual market price, and 228 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON according to the first paragraph of the agreement it goes In full force upon the approval of the President and cannot after that be altered except by another agreement. This transaction is on a par with all the other inconsistencies attached to this miserable busi ness. He then says that he wants the Sultan to un derstand that he does not authorize slavery; though he has approved the agreement which ratifies slavery. How could he transmit the agreement to us with his approval and then send back word to the Sultan that he did not wish to be understood as approving slavery? Who knows whether or not the word will ever get to the Sultan? "Almost everything we receive here in regard to this matter is on a par -c^ith the transmittal to the Associated Press of a copy of the Sulu agreement in Sulu Arabic to conceal the infamy until after the elections were over last fall. It is on a par with the statement of the commissioners who made this agree ment, which I shall proceed to read. Mr. Schurman in an interview says: " 'It seems to me that were it not for the ignorance displayed the present hue and cry about polygamy and slavery in these Islands would be absolutely criminal.' "If it were not for the ignorance displayed, the present hue and cry about polygamy and slavery would be absolutely criminal I suppose the hue and cry about slavery before our civil war was criminal. Many people so assejrted, many people honestly so be lieved, and I presume that Mr. Schurman honestly be lieves that the hue and cry about polygamy and slavery again existing under the flag of the United States would be criminal but for the ignorance of the people who cause it. "In taking over the Sulu group we have acquired no rights of any sort there except those bequeathed us by Spain. TEN PRESIDENTS 229 "And yet the President, time and again during last fall in his speeches everywhere made to the people, asserted that the flag meant the same thing every where, meant the same here, in the Sulu group, and in Hawaii ; that it meant in every place the same, and that its presence conferred liberty and happiness upon the people under it, "She was bound by her agreement with the Sultan not to interfere with the religion or customs of the fslands, and it would be most unwise for us to at tempt this by force when it can be ultimately accom plished by the slower method of civilization and edu cation. "Mr, President, we tried the slower method of dis posing of slavery and polygamy in the United States, also the slower method of civilization, but finally we resorted to war — ^the greatest war in modern times — and thereby succeeded in destroying slavery under our flag. It has been restored by the act of a Presi dent elected by the Republican party. How will it strike the Veterans of that war to annex slavery after all these sacrifices and then propose to abolish it when the slaveholders conclude it is wrong and give their consent?" "The Sulu group proper contains about 100,000 in habitants. They are all Mohammedans, To attempt to interfere with the religion of these people would precipitate one of the bloodiest wars in which this country has ever been engaged. They are religious fanatics of the most pronounced type, who care noth ing for death and believe that the road to heaven can be attained by killing Christians. Polygamy is a part of their religion, and slavery, about which so much is being said just now, is a mild type of feudal homage. The Sultan believes from what he has seen of Americans that they are ready to be friendly and deal honestly by him. "Mr. President, I will show what kind of feudal homage this slavery in the Philippines is. Owing to the fact that those people will fight, we prefer to 230 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON enforce slavery and polygamy, and we attack the Christians in the island of Luzon and compel them to surrender — ^what? Surrender their desire for a gov ernment of their own. We prefer to tum from polygamy and slavery and endorse them, put our flag over them, and declare that nobody shall interfere with them, and then turn our armies and our navies to the destruction of the independence and freedom of a Christian population, which we also purchased from Spain. "I will read from the second edition of Mr. Fore man's book, which was published in 1899, and brought up to date. He says: ' " 'The Sultanate is hereditary under the Salic law. The Sultan is 'supported by three ministers, one of whom acts as regent In his absence (for he might have to go to Mecca, if he had not previously done so), the other is minister of war, and the third is minister of justice and master of the ceremonies.' " 'Slavery exists in a most ample sense. There are slaves by birth and others by con quest, such as prisoners of war. Insolvent debtors, and those seized by piratical ex peditions to other islands. A creole friend of mine, Don A. M. was one of these last. He had commenced clearing an estate for cane growing on the Negros coast some years ago, when he was seized and carried off to Sulu Island. In a few years he was ransomed and retumed to Negros, where he formed one of the finest sugar haciendas and factories in the colony.* "I now read from Social History of the Races of Mankind, by Featherman : " 'Slavery exists on Sulu Island, and the slaves, who were formerly brought from the Philippines, are not well treated, for their TEN PRESIDENTS 281 masters exercise the power of life and death over them, and sometimes kill them for trifiing offenses. The datos frequently punish a disobedient or fugitive slave by drawing their campilan or kris and cutting off his head at one strike without process of law,' "And this is the mild form of feudal homage Schur man would have us believe should enjoy the pro tection of our flag until we can persuade the slave holders that it is wrong, "Why did Schurman make this statement? The reason is plain. He did it just before the elections; about the time the State Department gave out the Sulu Arabic copy of the treaty for the information of the people of the United States, I contend that after this statement, made at the time it was made by Mr, Schurman with an evident purpose to deceive, he has forfeited all right to be believed by anybody here after, and that his statements on all subjects in re lation to the Philippines are not worthy of credence. "I read also from St. John's Far East, volume 2, page 192, as follows : " 'The slaves are collected from all parts of the archipelago, from Acheen Head in New Guinea, and from the south of Siam to the most northern parts of the Philippines. It is a regular slave market,' "Then he describes the people. Not only have the slaveholders the right of life and death over their slaves, but the monarch himself has complete and full right to take the life of any of his subjects when ever he chooses. There is no restraint upon him." Roosevelt. I was intimately acquainted with Roosevelt for a great many years, having met him first at Bismarck, in 1884 and 1885. About 1909 I was the guest of Robert Hunter at a 232 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON dinner at the Alden Club in New York City, At this dinner, Arthur Brisbane, Morris Hilquit, Professor Giddings, of Columbia University, and others were present. After discussing many questions with these radicals and socialists — questions that covered a wide range of socialism, imperialism and social and economic justice — ^Professor Giddings turned to me abruptly and asked, "What do you think of Roose velt?" I replied that I had known him intimately for years and that when I was with him he made me believe that he was sincere and honest in his ex pression of his views as to what should be done and what he wanted to do, but that when I was away from his presence he did or said something that made me doubt. Thereupon Professor Giddings replied that he had known Roosevelt from boyhood and watched him from every position and that when he was with him and talked with him face to face he always came away- convinced that Roosevelt was the greatest faker in the world, but that when he was not present with him, Roosevelt did or said something that made him doubt. We continued to talk about Roosevelt and I finally told the company that I had just been to Washington at Roosevelt's request, he having written me that he was very anxious to see me. On arriving in Wash ington I went to the White House and called upon Roosevelt, and as I came in he rushed across the room, extending both hands, and said at once that he wanted me to secure Democratic votes enough to pass the Hepburn Railroad bill through the Senate, He said that Aldrich was opposing it and trying to amend it so that it would amount to nothing. I immediately replied that I was not in favor of the Hepburn Bill in any form, that the only remedy was the Govemment owership of the railroads — ^that the railroads were the highways of the nation, and should be operated for the benefit of the whole people of the United States and not for private profit. Roosevelt immediately said: "I have the bill here at TEN PRESIDENTS 233 the White House which you introduced for the Gov ernment ownership of the railroads; also the argu ment you made in support of the same." And he went and brought out both the argument and the bill. Then he said: "We cannot pass a bill for Govern ment ownership at the present time and I am there fore very anxious to try regulating the railroads." I replied that regulation was entirely futile and useless for the reason that, if the power to regulate the railroads and to fix the rate were placed in the hands of any commission, the railroads would at once own the commission — that a railroad man, J. Lowery Bell, who was receiving $12,000 a year as superin tendent of a railroad, was the second assistant Post master-General at $4,000 a year, in charge of the Railway Mail Service of the Postoffice Department during the whole twelve years that I was in the Sen ate, and therefore it was perfectly idle to try to regulate the railroads and their rates through any commission, no matter who selected it, for it would ultimately be selected by the railroads themselves, I said, "Do you know the Hepburn Bill cuts off broad court review and only allows the courts to re view as to the law but not as to the facts? The Hep- bum Bill also empowers the Interstate Commerce Commission to make rates; in fact, to initiate rates," And I added, "Do you want these two things? Are they what you desire?" Roosevelt jumped up and said, "Yes, that is just what I want." "Well," I said, "if you will stand for that I will see what can be done," The next day I took two senators to the White House — two Democrats — and told Roosevelt that these two men would assist him in getting others, and that they could furnish votes enough to put the bill through in spite of Mr. Aldrich. But I added— "Roosevelt, you are so partisan a Republican that I feel that we run great risk in dealing with you at all, because you are liable, after you see you can pass the 234 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON bill, to make a deal with Aldrich and abandon your democratic allies in the interests of party harmony," He thereupon pounded the table and declared he would never surrender, but would stand to the end. When I had finished this statement. Professor Gid dings remarked that he knew Roosevelt far better than I did, and that Roosevelt would sell me out to gether with the democratic senators and make a deal with Aldrich, and pass the bill in the form which would be satisfactory to the railroads. That is exactly what Roosevelt did. This episode convinced me of what I had before suspected — ^that Roosevelt never stood for anything that was against the settled interests of those who were exploiting the American pe6ple. After Taft had been nominated, in 1912, Roosevelt asked me to come to his home at Oyster Bay on Long Island, as he wished to talk with me about the political situation. Accordingly I went to Oyster Bay and spent the day with him. When I went into the library at Oyster Bay, Roose velt rushed across the room, put out both hands and said: "Pettigrew, you were right about Taft. Are you going to support me?" I said, "Why, ROosevelt, I didn't know you were running for anything." He said: "I am going to run as an independent candidate for President." I said, "Well, I don't think I will support you; there is no sense in your running — all you can ac complish is to elect Woodrow Wilson, and that will be a national disaster," He said: "Oh, well, we might as well suffer four years under Wilson as four years more under Taft." I said, "No, there is a great difference. Taft is amiable imbecility. Wilson is wilful and malicious imbecility and I prefer Taft." Roosevelt then said : "Pettigrew, you know the two old parties are just alike. They are both controlled by the same influences, and I am going to organize TEN PRESIDENTS 235 a new party — a new political party — in this country based upon progressive principles. We won't win this year, but four years from now we will elect the President, and you are going to support me." I said, "Roosevelt, if you mean that you will stand for a new party — I recognize the great necessity of It — ^the two old parties a!re absolutely dominated by the predatory interests, and if your platform suits me I will certainly support you," Roosevelt then said, "What do you want in that platform?" And I began to tell him that I wanted government ownership of the railroads; I wanted a reformation of the flnancial system by which money would be Issued by the Government arid the Govern ment alone, and many other radical things. In fact, Roosevelt and I set down that afternoon and drew the platform. When we had finished, Roosevelt said: "Now are you going to support me?" And I said: "If your convention adopts that plat- ' form I will support you, and when the convention afterward adopted the platform I wrote Roosevelt I would give him my hearty support ; and I did, and I carried South Dakota for him in the election. I told him that I considered the issue and the con trol of money of great and vital importance, and we finally agreed on the plank that appeared in his plat form, I. e,, that the issue of money should not be sub ject to private manipulation, but should be controlled absolutely by the Government in the interests of the people. We then talked about the labor planks as related to men, women and children. After the convention had adopted a platform and nominated Roosevelt as a Progressive, I received a letter from him asking i me if I intended to support him and if the platform was satisfactory. I answered briefly that I would support him because of his state ment to me that he would organize a permanent party in the interests of social and economic justice, and be- 236 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON cause of the progressive principles that he had placed in his platform. I am now convinced that he never had any real in tention of organizing a permanent progressive party. As an egoist his chief interest centered around his own personality ; the nomination of Taft was so sharp a blow to his self-love that there was nothing for him to do except to throw himself into the limelight in another direction. His over-regard for himself, which had grown so rapidly during his later years, tended to make him, par excellence, the monumental faker of the world. In playing this role, he was simply fol lowing out the line of conduct established during his early years in public life. When the battleship MAINE was blown up in Havana Harbor, just previous to the war with Spain, Col. Melvin Grigsby was at Fort Pierre, S. D. Fort Pierre is on the west side of the Missouri River and in the very heart of the greatest cattle r^nge in America. Here it was that Catlin met the Sioux chiefs and thousands of Indians in 1832, In this country were the greatest buffalo pastures in the world. Col. Grigsby was a veteran of the Civil War, hav ing seen four years of service — a man of great cour age and superior intelligence. And from Fort Pierre he telegraphed President McKInl^ that the sinking of the MAINE meant war, and that the best soldiers that could be secured on short notice for the war vdth Spain were the cowboys of the plains. He offered his service in this connection. Shortly after ward. Col. Grigsby came to Washington and secured an amendment to the bill, which had already passed the House, authorizing the raising of volunteers for the Spanish War, which provided that 8,000 men of special fitness might be recruited independently, the officers to be appointed by the President. At this time, Theodore Roosevelt was Assistant Secretary of the Navy. Leonard Wood was a contract surgeon In the army of the United States, located at TEN PRESIDENTS 237 Washington and detailed to attend to Mrs. McKinley. He applied to be appointed one of the colonels of one of the Rough Rider regiments of cowboys, and Theodore Roosevelt applied to be appointed Lieu tenant-Colonel of the same regiment. These two doughty soldiers, with no experience except Mr. Roosevelt's experience as a cowboy one season on the little Missouri River, and Wood's experience as a contract surgeon, received their respective appoint ments. They raised a regiment of so-called cowboys in the eastern states and went to Florida, From Florida they embarked for Cuba, leaving their horses behind. They landed east of Santiago and started through the jungle for San Juan Hill, General Wood being colonel of the regiment and Mr. Roosevelt acting as lieutenant-colonel. About ten miles from San Juan Hill, they^ were ambushed by the Spaniards and some of the Rough Riders were wounded in what was called the El Caney fight. They would have been cut to pieces, but General ¦. , in command of some regi ments of Negro troops, rushed in these colored regu lars and rescued Wood and his doughty lieutenant- colonel from the hands of the Spaniards. The Rough Riders — all on foot, for they had left their horses back in Florida — ^then proceeded to a field near the foot of Kettle Hill, which blanketed San Juan Hill, and remained there until General and his colored tijoops took San Juan Hill from the Spaniards. After San Juan Hill had been captured. Col. Wood and Lieutenant-Colonel Roosevelt charged up Kettle Hill, where there was nothing but an old Kettle which had been used for evaporating sugar can juice. There were no fortifications or trenches or block-houses, or Spaniards, dead or alive, on Kettle Hill. Yet Roose velt, in his book "History of the Spanish War," says that he charged up San Juan HiU and found the trenches full of dead Spaniards with little holes in their foreheads, and that two Spaniards jumped up 238 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON and ran away, and that he missed one of them but killed the other with a shot in the back from his re volver. I refer to the records of the War Department, which show that Roosevelt had nothing to do with the taking of San Juan Hill. I refer also to a pamphlet by Colonel Bacon, of Brooklyn, in which he says that he secured affidavits of one hundred soldiers and officers who were in the campaign to take Santiago, and that all of them testified that Roosevelt was not in the battle of San Juan Hill, or. In fact, in any other battle except the ambush at El Caney. Afterwards, when Roosevelt became President of the United States, he posed on horseback at Fort Meyer, and had his picture painted by a famous Ger man artist, charging up San Juan Hill. After the Spanish War was over, Mr. Roosevelt located in the city of Washington, and, having in herited a fortune, the tax assessors ¦ of New York placed him on the tax list for a large sum as resident of New York State. Mr. Roosevelt thereupon swore off his taxes, swearing that he was not a resident of the State of New York, but of the city of Wash ington, and, not being a citizen of New York, was not liable to taxes under thff-laws of that state. Shortly after taking this oath. Boss Piatt called upon Mr, Roosevelt and proposed that he should be a candidate for Governor of New York, Roosevelt promptly replied that he could not run for Governor as he was not a citizen of New York, and related the incident of his swearing off his taxes, Piatt there upon remarked : "Is the hero of San Juan Hill going to show the white feather?" Mr, Roosevelt answered, in his dramatic and elo quent way, that he was no coward, and would be a candidate. After election, when he came to take the oath of office as Governor of New York, he had to swear that he was a citizen of the State of New York. But sufficient time had not elapsed for him to acquire TEN PRESIDENTS 289 citizenship since he had sworn that he was not a citizen of the state. The difficulty was overcome by Elihu Root's statement that domicile in Washington for the purpose of escaping taxes in the State of New York was not a sufficient loss of citizenship to dis qualify Roosevelt for governor. Root was afterwards much pampered and petted by Roosevelt when he be came President of the United States. Having by accident become President, Roosevelt served out McKinley's term and was then nominated and elected. At the end of four years more, having named Taft as his successor, Roosevelt concluded to emulate the exploits of the Romans and add Africanus to his name. Scipio had conquered provinces in Africa and led their kings and princes and potentates in triumph. Roosevelt's triumph was graced with elephants' feet and leopards' tails, and, on his Way back to his own country to enjoy his triumph, he stopped in Paris long enough to address the great literary and scientific society founded by Voltaire, whose president was Pasteur, the discoverer of many scientific marvels. And to this body of students of science and biology and literature Teddy delivered his oration of thirty minutes in length, advising them to raise babies! And this was not the end of his achievements. He examined the map of South America and found a strip of country marked upon all the geographies as unknown or unexplored — a little east of and south of the mouth of the Madeira River. He went in by way of Paraguay, and striking this unknown region at its southern extremity passed down through the tropical jungle of this country to the mouth, and announced to the world that he had discovered a new river of great importance — a new and unknown river, thus adding to his exploits as a conqueror in Africa the proud name of discoverer. But, after he had an nounced to the world his great discovery, it was found that at the mouth of this river there was a small Spanish town which had existed for two centuries 240 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON and that for over a hundred and fifty years the river had been navigated to the first falls by the Spanish gatherers of rubber. Roosevelt was a dramatic artist first and a presi dent afterwards. All of his actions were strongly colored by his love for effect. He posed. That was his life. Of his successor, Taft, nothing need be added to the characterization — "an amiable man weighing 250 pounds." Woodrow Wilson was not a Democrat after 1896. In that year he left the party for the same reason that I joined it. He came back and voted for Parker in 1904, and for the same reason that led me not to vote for Parker. Wilson did not support Bryan in 1908. At no time was he an advocate of the prin ciples of progressive democracy. I first met Woodrow Wilson the year before he was nominated. It was in August, 1911, that I received a letter from him saying that he would like to see me. He was residing at the Governor's summer home on the Atlantic coast of New Jersey, about eighty miles from New York. A friend of mine — I think it was ex-Senator Towne, had been down to see him and had told Wilson that I was in New York. Wilson thereupon wrote me that he was very anxious to meet me, and that, if I could not come down to his home, he would come to New York. So I went down to see him. I went early and remained all day, and we talked on very many subjects. He told me that he was an active candidate for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States and, thereupon, I be gan discussing public questions with him, for I was prejudiced against him because of his attitude in the Bryan campaigns. Late in the afternoon of my visit, Wilson asked me if I would support him for the Democi^atif nomi nation and take charge of his campaign in the West I said that I did not know; that I had come down there prejudiced against him; but that he had sajd TEN PRESIDENTS 241 things during the day that Interested me very much, and that if he would send me all of his recent speeches and every one of his veto messages, so I could study his attitude of mind upon public ques tions, in about a month I could tell him whether I could support him or not. In our conversation I had discovered that Wilson knew nothing about the practical working of the Government. He had boasted that he was educated and trained as a lawyer and had practiced in his native state, Georgia, and this did not leave a good impression " upon my mind, because any man well learned in the law has come honestly to believe that the rights of property and not human rights are sacred and is, therefore, unfitted to serve the inter ests of the people. But Wilson had declared for the public ownership of public resources — ^that is, iron and oil, and had suggested the single tax as a method of taking the raw material from the trusts and combinations, such as the iron, oil, etc. I left the Governor's house after dinner, and as I reached the door Tumulty — he was then the Gover nor's secretary — was at the door with an automobile and said that the Governor wished him to talk with me and that, if I would permit him, he would take me back to New York. I therefore got into the auto mobile, and he took me back to Newark. We dis cussed the same questions I discussed with the Gov ernor, and he said that the Governor wanted my sup port, and wished me to take charge of his campaign in the West. About the time the thirty days had expired, I re ceived a letter from Tumulty saying that the Gover nor was anxious to know what my decision was, and I promptly replied that I had read all of the Gov ernor's recent speeches and his veto messages, and most of his works, and after carefully considering the same I was of the opinion that he was the worst Tory in the United States and that he used camou flage tp conceal his settled opinion, and that I woyia 242 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON not support him for the office of President even if no one else was a candidate. I had many reasons for taking this stand. For ex ample, in a speech which was carefully prepared and deliverd before the Society of Vii;ginians in New York City in 1904, he had made the following state ment : "The real opportunity of the South is of another sort. It had now a unique opportunity to perform a great national service. As the only remaining paft of the Democratic party that can command a majority of Its votes in its constituency, let the South demand a rehabilitation of the Democratic parly on the only lines that restore it to dignity and power. "Since 1896 the Democratic party had permitted its name to be used by men who ought never to have been admitted to its councils — ^men who held prin ciples and professed purposes which it had always hitherto repudiated. "There is no longer any Democratic party either In the South or in any northern state which the dis credited radicals can use. The great body of one-time Democrats that musters strong enough to win elec tions had revolted and will act with no organization that harbors the radicals — as the radicals did not in fact act with the organization they themselves had discredited In the recent campaign when the whole country felt that the Democratic party was still with out definite character and makeup. "The country, as it moves forward in its material progress, needs and will tolerate no party of discon tent or radical experiment, but it does need a party of conservative reform, acting in the spirit of the law and ancient institutions.' ^ wish to call especial attention to the fact that Wilson wished to throw the Populists and Silver Re publicans and radicals out of the party; and to this paragraph : "The country, as it moves forward to its progress, needs and will tolerate no party of discontent or TElSf PRESIDENTS 243 radical experiment, but it does need a party of con servative reform, acting in the spirit of the law and ancient Institutions." This is Woodrow Wilson's whole political creed. His position with regard to labor is well expressed In his baccalaureate address of June 13, 1909: "You know what the usual standard of the employe Is In our day. It is to give as little as he may for his wages. In some trades and handicrafts no one i^ suffered to do more ,than the least skilful of his fel lows can do within the hours allotted to a day's labor. It is so unprofitable that in some trades it will pres ently not be worth while to attempt at all. He had better stop altogether than operate at an invariable loss. The labor of America is rapidly becoming un profitable under its present regulation by those who have determined to reduce it to a minimum. Our economic supremacy may be lost because the country grows more and more full of unprofitable servants." And he was reported in the. New York "World" as saying: "We speak too conclusively of the capitalist class. There is another as formidable an enemy to equality and freedom of opjiortunity as it is, and that is the class formed by the labor organization and leaders of the country, the class representing only a small minority of the laboring men of the country, quite as monopolistic in spirit as the capitalist, and quite as apt to corrupt and ruin our industries by their monopoly." One of the veto messages which he sent me re vealed the true Wilson point of view. He wrote a long message in vetoing the bill to elimfnate grade crossings on the railroads of New Jersey. The bill by the New Jersey legislature had provided that every railroad in the state should eliminate one grade crossing for each thirty miles of track each year un til they were all eliminated. Wilson vetoed this bill on the ground that it would be a hardship for the railroads to comply with the provisions. In the 244 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON state of New Jersey at that time the railroads ran through the main streets of the principal towns — right on the surface — and large numbers of people were killed and injured at grade crossings. The bill was a mild and "evolutionary" method of eliminat ing the crossings — it permitted the killings to con tinue for many years before the last grade cross ing was eliminated. Even that mild provision proved to be too strong for Wilson who, true to his lawyer training, and his attitude of mind where the ques tion of property rights- was involved, vetoed the bill because it involved a hardship on the shareholders," These and many other facts which I had discovered in my study of his writings and his speeches led me to write, early in the campaign of 1912: "If Mr, Wilson becomes President he will oppose any legislation that interferes with big property or in any way curtails its profits. He has behind him an ancestry of . slave-holders and he has no sympathy with labor. He thinks the Chinese are much better than the European immigrants that come crowding in from Europe, "He is bitterly and sneeringly opposed to every man who toils and to every progressive principle; he knows little or nothing about the purposes of social ism, does not comprehend the great evolution going on in the minds of men which must shake to the very foundation our social and economic structure. His effort will be to check, to turn aside and to neutralize this movement, and he will do it all in the interests of the capitalistic classes, "He will undertake some reforms. He will rail about the bosses; he will talk about purity, but he is absolutely owned by the great moneyed interests of the country who paid the expenses of his campaign for the nomination and will now furnish the funds for the election. No progressive Democrat should vote for him under any circumstances," Wilson was nominated by the usual influences that control a Democratic convention. He had almost a TEN PRESIDENTS 245 solid South at his back. The South is behind the world in ordinary civilization, in social and economic thought. This mass of ignorance and barbarism joined with the corrupt exploiting bosses of the North and brought about Woodrow Wilson's nomination. Murphy, the exploiter of vice in New York; Sullivan, the exploiter of the people of Chicago, through the gas franchise; Ryan, the exploiter of the street rail way franchise of New York, and Taggart, who for years ran a gambling house at French Lick, Indiana, and Bryan, of Nebraska, were all actively at work to bring about Woodrow Wilson's nomination, Wilson, as President, more than fulfilled the prom ise of Wilson as Governor. His first public surrender to the interests came in the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, His real abdication accompanied his declaration of war with Germany, On the 26th of February, 1917, President Wilson, in an address to Congress said : "I am not now proposing or contemplating war, or any steps that may lead to it." The President made this declaration eleven days after the Advisory Council of Big Business, appointed by him, had in its secret session, as now disclosed by an examination of the records of the meetings, dis cussed the exclusion of labor from military service, and discussed the draft law months before it had been intimated to Congress or the country that we were to raise an army by draft to fight a foreign war, William J. Graham, of the Select Committee of the House of Representatives at Washington on Expendi tures in the War Department, examined the minutes of the meetings of the Council of Defense. He made copious extracts from these minutes. Based upon that investigation. Chairman Graham reported to the full committee as follows : "An examination of these minutes discloses the fact that a commission of seven men chosenliy the Presi dent seems to have devised the entire system of pur- 246 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON chasing war supplies, planned a press censorship, de- signedsa system of food control, and selected Herbert Hoover as its director, determined on a daylight sav ing scheme and, in a word, designed practically every war measure which Congress subsequently enacted — and did all this, behind closed doors, weeks and even months before the Congress of the United States de clared war against Germany." For months before the United States declared war, Wilson was planning war with a secret committee of New York representatives of Big Business that he, Wilson, had appointed for that purpose. W. P. G. Harding, president of the Federal Re serve Board, gives the reason why the United States went to war in a statement published on March 22, 1917: "As banker and creditor, the United States would have a place at the pelace conference table, arid be in a much better position to resist any proposed repudia tion of debts, for it might as well be remembered that we will be forced to take up the cudgels for any of our citizens owning bonds ''that might be repud iated." Harding, as a representative of the New York bankers, , knew what the secret committee was doing with the President at its head. He could, with per fect confidence say, weeks before the United States went into the war, "It might as well be remembered that we will be forced to take up the cudgels for any of our citizens owning bonds that might be repud iated." Wilson went to Paris as the representative of the New York banks. That he was their representative and consulted with them all through the conference is proven by the fact that Thomas W. Lamont (of J. P. Morgan & Co.) was chief financial adviser in Paris, and that the New York banks had a copy of the treaty weeks before the United States Senate received its copy. It is not an inspiring record— this story of tei^ TEN PRESIDENTS 247 presidents — all of them actively or passively serving the interests that have been plundering the American people. Very few Americans now living have known ten presidents. Very few have had my opportunity for observation. If they had, I think they would be compelled to agree with me that the control of the American plutocracy is exercised as directly and as effectively over and through the Presidents of the United States as over any other department of Amer ican Government, ' XVI. POLITICAL PARTIES. In these descriptions of the relation between busi ness and Government in the United States, I have not tried to draw any sharp distinctions between the Re publican and the Democratic parties. Indeed, such an effort would be quite futile, since no real distinc tion between them exists. Historically, the two par ties represent varying points of view as to the best method of robbing the workers. The Democrats fa vored slavery as a method. The Republicans pre ferred the wage system. But those differences were ironed out during the Civil War, During more than half a century both parties have accepted the system of wage labor as the most practical and remunera tive system of exploitation. Today Republicans and Democrats are alike the spokesmen of big business. This assertion I can make without the slightest fear of contradiction, as I have known the leaders of both parties for fifty years and have worked in the inner circles of both party machines. I was elected to the United States Senate as a Re publican when the state of South Dakota was ad mitted to the Union. I was re-elected in 1894, also as a republican. I listened to the debates in 1890 on the Anti-Trust Law which was presented by Senator Sherman of Ohio. The trusts were at that time be ginning to show great strength and both parties had declared against them in their platforms. The Sher man law was a Republican measure,, but I observed to my great surprise that the leaders of the Republi can party were very careful not to include anything in the bill that would interfere with big business. In deed, the anti-trust legislation was so framed as to encourage rather than discourage combinations in restraint of trade; I also observed that those amend ments which were offered to the Sherman Anti-Trust POLITICAL PARTIES 249 Law in order to make it effective by preventing com binations in restraint of trade, were promptly de feated by a solid Republican vote. This opened my eyes, and I began to wonder if I was really a Repub lican. Out on the prairies of Dakota there was a strong protest against the exploitation of the people by eastern bankers and railroad operators, and I had never for one moment supposed that the Republican party which always claimed to be the opponent of slavery and the champion of freedom was present ing a united front to any measures looking to a diminution of this exploitation, _ In 1896 I was elected as a delegate to the Republi can National Convention which assembled at St, Louis for the purpose of adopting a platform and of nominating a presidential candidate. After the St. Louis platform had been adopted, twenty-two of the delegates, I among the number, left the convention and the Republican party. Our reasons for leaving were, first, that the party, in its platform, declared for a very high protective tariff and made no pro nouncement against trusts and combinations in re straint of trade, but left out the plank on that sub ject which it had included in every National Con vention for at least eight years previously. The tariff wall for which the platform provided was so high as to make the trusts absolutely secure against foreign competition, which was the only competition they had to fear. The convention also declared for the gold standard and at every opportunity announc ed that it was in favor of the great industrial com binations, whose attorneys not only dominated the convention, but made up two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, In other words, the grand old party that had come into existence as a protest against human slavery had, after forty years, decided to abandon its great record as the champion of black slaves and become the champion of the trusts and in dustrial and transportation combinations which were enslaving men. Seeing this change as clearly as I 250 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON did, there was only one course for me to pursue — I left the party. Still I was a Republican at heart. I never voted but for one Democrat. After the St. Louis Convention I attended the Democratic Convention at Chicago, and was on the platform when Bryan made the great speech which resulted in his nomination. He was endorsed by the so-called Silver Republican Convention, which was composed of those who bolted the St. Louis Conven tion of the Republican party and their adherents. In the campaign of 1896 I supported Bryan and made a great many speeches advocating his election. Partly as a result of my activity he carried the State of South Dakota. He was beaten throughout the nation by the industrial combinations which had backed the nomination of McKinley and had adopted the St. Louis platform. These interests put up many millions to purchase and corrupt the voters of the country and to defeat Bryan, so that they could go along with their work of concentrating in the hands of a few the result of the toil of the American people. Again in 1900 I supported Bryan, who was running on a platform which declared against trusts and com binations in restraint of trade, against the acquisi tion of colonies to be exploited in.the interests of trade; against an enormous army and navy — in fact, which declared against everything that the Republi can party in the campaign of 1900 stood for. After the campaign of 1896 a debate took place in the Senate with regard to free homes on the public domain. In this debate I was contending that the Republican party boasted during the campaign of 1896 that it was the author of the Homestead Law; and that in the convention at St. Louis the party had declared in favor of the Homestead Law. As an ad vocate of the restoration of the Homestead Law, I told the Republicans that they had put the free home stead plank in their platform at St. Louis and now they were refusing to live up to it. By quoting the plank in the Republican platform and comparing it POLITICAL PARTIES 251 with the bill that the Republicans were trying to enact, I showed conclusively that they had abandoned it. During this debate, the whole question of party relations and affiliations came to the surface, and above all, the spokesmen of business, who were lead ing the fight against the bill in the Senate, said plainly and emphatically that they were not there to do the will of the people or to represent them, but that they were rather serving their real masters who paid the party bills. I quote the Congressional Record : -Mr. PETTIGREW : "That is the measure which the St. Louis Convention specifically and in terms en dorsed and said they were in favor of. The Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Piatt) says to me they did not do any such thing. Let us see whether or not they did. This bill was reported to the Senate on the 16th of May, 1896, and on the 18th of June, 1896, the St. Louis platform was adopted. Now, let us see what the platform says: " 'We believe in an immediate return to the free homestead policy of the Republican party and urge the passage by Congress of a satisfactory free-homestead measure, such as has already passed the House and is now pending in the Senate.' " Mr. PLATT, of Connecticut : "Did they endorse the bill which passed the House?" Mr. PETTIGREW : " 'And is now pending in the Senate.' What bill was pending in the Senate? The bill reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs, the bill I have read here in terms and words." Mr. PLATT: "What did they endorse? Did they endorse the bill which passed the House or the bill that was pending in the Senate?" Mr. PETTIGREW: "Both; the bill 'such as has already passed the House and is now pending in the Senate.' " 252 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Mr. PLATT: "Does the Senator think they knew what was pending in the Senate?" Mr. PETTIGREW: "I think they did." Mr. PLATT: "Or that this bill was any different from the bill pending in the Senate?" Mr. PETTIGREW : "They knew all about it. There is no question about it. Here is the difference be tween the two bills. The House bill provided for free homesteaders in Oklahoma, every bit of which had been bought from Indians, and the Senate bill pro vided that the same provisions should extend to the other states of the "West. Now, the Republicans went into the campaign in South Dakota and on every stump they told these people that they should have free homes if the Republican party won and that they could not get them if they did not, and you pointed to the record of the Republican party as be ing the party in favor of free homesteads, and you showed them that the Democratic party had voted against it 'way back in 1860, You gained thousands of votes by that pretense and by that plank in your platform, and now you go back on it, "It is not the only plank you have gone back on. You have gone back on your whole record as a party. You have left the side of the people of this country. You have abandoned the principles that made your party great and respectable and have become the champions of everything that is corrupt and bad In American politics. "What is more, we passed this bill as a separate measure at the last session of Congress and it went to the House of Representatives exactly in words and terms as in this bill, being the same measure. Has the House done a thing with it? It is referred to the Calendar — ^the graveyard of the House. They will not even amend It and pass the provision in regard to Oklahoma; and one of the prominent members of the House stood up the other day and stated that it was made for the purpose of getting votes. One of POLITICAL PARTIES 258 the most prominent members of the House said that the plank was put in the platform, but the election was over. I wish I had his speech here, I should like to put it in the RECORD along with my state ment in regard to it, Mr. GALLINGER : "If my friend, the Senator from South Dakota, will permit me, we ought to be some what exact in these historical matters. Do I under stand that that plank was in the platform of the Re publican party in 1896?" Mr, PETTIGREW: "YES," Mr, GALLINGER: "And the campaign was waged In South Dakota in behalf of that plank by the Re publican party?" Mr, PETTIGREW : "YES." Mr. GALLINGER : "And the Senator who is speak ing fought the Republican party in that campaign." Mr, PETTIGREW: "I did." Mr. GALLINGER :_ "The Republican party had not gone back on that plank at that time. How does it happen that the Senator was with the opposition in that campaign?" Mr. PETTIGREW: "Oh, Mr. President, that is a long story, but I am willing to answer it. I left the Republican party at the St. Louis Convention, and I am proud of it. There has never been a day from that time to this that I have not been glad of it. I stated in that campaign that if McKinley was elected 1 never could return to the party, because the forces which would control his administration would make it impossible, but there was a chance to return to the party if he was defeated. Repeatedly on the stump I made that statement. I left the St. Louis Conven tion, first because it declared for the gold standard, which will ruin every producer in this country and every other country that adopts and adheres to it. I left the Republican party because the trusts had captured your party and had complete control of 254 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON your convention, and you left out the plank against trusts, which you had heretofore adopted, because the trusts, owning you and your party, were in possession of your convention and did not want to abuse each other. Reason enough, reason sufficient to justify my course before the people I represent, and enough, in my opinion, to consign the Republican party to eternal oblivion. "What has been your course since? It is known throughout this country that vast sums of money are collected and that you are in alliance with the ac cumulated and concentrated wealth of this country, and that you rely upon them not only to carry your campaigns and furnish money to corrupt the elec tions, but to elect your senators; and after you have done it, after you have elected by corrupt means a man to this body, the great convention of the state where it occurs passes resolutions congratulating themselves upon the infamy and declaring that they are glad of it." Mr. GALLINGER: "Will the Senator permit me again? He seems to be somewhat specific now, and he says that a man has been corruptly elected to this body and that the party has not only not condemned it, but applauded. I wish to ask the Senator if there is any proof that any man occupying a seat on this floor as a republican was corruptly elected?" Mr. PETTIGREW: "Oh, yes; and the proof Is with the committee on elections. The proof is be fore the people of the United States, and they all know it, and it is conclusive and the Senator refer red to is Mark Hanna, of Ohio. Mr. GALLINGER: "That might be said of an ac cusation against somebody whose case was before a grand jury and where the grand jury had not re ported. I do not understand that the committee on elections has made a report to this body giving it as their deliberate conviction, after proper inquiry and investigation, that any accusation against a republi- POLITICAL PARTIES 255 can occupying a seat here has been proved; and un til that is done I think the Senator ought to be a little more careful about his statements on that point, with all due deference' to his rights as a Senator." ~ Mr. PETTIGREW: "I am willing that the state ment I have made shall go to the country. The proof was sufficient to satisfy the Senate of Ohio, and they sent the case here weeks ago. An innocent man would demand that our committee act before we ad journ. Why does the case sleep in the Senate Com mittee?" That was my statement to the Senate twenty-five years ago, and during those years, every contact that I have had with the Republican party organization has strengthened my conviction that I understated the case at that time. It did not need the revelations of the 1920 campaign to convince the American peo ple of these facts. Those revelations simply em phasized knowledge that was already common. But do not let it be supposed for an instant that the Democratic party has been less eager to play handy-man to big business. It has been the oppor tunity and not the will that was lacking. And even at that, it is a matter of common knowledge that the Wilson Campaign millions in 1912 and again in 1916 were greater than the funds at the disposal of the Republicans, and the bulk of them did not come from either workingmen or farmers. On the contrary, the Democrats, like the Republicans got their funds from the only source that yields them In large amounts — the exploiters of the American people. Bryan was the last of the Democratic leaders to make a stand against the vested ' interests and while his intentions were of the best, his knowledge of economics was woefully limited. Furthermore, he was far from being the master of Democratic party policy. The Democratic Convention at Denver (1908), nominated Bryan for the third time. I was a dele gate from South Dakota to that convention and was 256 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON chairman of the sub-committee on the tariff and chairman of the F-uU Committee on Insular Affairs. In connection with this second committee, I brought in a plank declaring in favor of the independence of the people of the Philippines and against the policy of acquiring colonies peopled by another race for the purposes of commercial exploitation. I brought into the full committee, composed of over fifty members, a tariff plank which resulted in a very active de bate. The wheel horses of democracy were all for a high protective tariff and I had introduced a plank which was not sufficiently protective to satisfy their purposes. That debate satisfied me that the differ ence between the two old political parties was not one of principle. As a result of it, I saw quite clearly that they both were owned by the exploiting interests and that the contest between the two was over which one should hold the offices, dispense the patronage, and collect untold millions for campaign purposes. From that time until now the two have been as like as two peas in a pod. There has never been more than a difference in the wording of their respective platforms, and since 1918, as if to prove that they were one and the same, they have fused in those districts (notably in Wisconsin and In New York) where the Socialist candidates would have been elected in a three cornered fight. Before the Denver Convention, I was invited by Mr, Bryan to his home near Lincoln, Nebraska, where I spent a week with him. He expected to be nominated, and we put in our time going over a plat form for the Denver Convention and discussing and planning the campaign. I had great admiration for Bryan because of his sterling qualities as a man, and because of his ability to state what he had to say in a forceful and eloquent manner, and because I be lieved that he had the moral courage to stand by his "principles. The week that I spent with him gave me an op portunity to know the man intimately. I had access POLITICAL PARTIES 257 to his library and conversed with him every day. We walked and drove together and in the course of our conversation we covered many topics. I found that he was fairly well versed in the law; that hp had studied Blackstone and Kent and the English prece dents, but that he was utterly ignorant of almost everything else except the bible and the evils of In temperance ; that his library contained almost no books whatever of value to a man fitting himself to be President of the United States, or even member of a state legislature. I also found that, while his personality was charming, whatever .ability nature may have endowed him with had been badly dwarfed and crippled by a narrow education, and that he was not big enough to overcome his training by con tinuing his investigations of men and affairs after he entered public life. Bryan asked me to return by way of Lincoln after the Denver Convention and go into greater detail with regard to the campaign. He knew that I was well acquainted with Roger Sullivan, of Chicago, who had become the democratic boss of Illinois and who was reputed to be very rich. He was also aware of the fact that Sullivan for some years had been a resident of South Dakota when a very young man and that I had had his brother, who was a re publican, made surveyor-general of the State of South Dakota. He knew, furthermore, that I was well acquainted with Murphy, of New York, the boss of Tammany Hall, as well as with Arthur Brisbane, the editor of the Hearst newspapers. Bryan wished me to see Sullivan, Murphy and Brisbane and author ized me to say to Sullivan and Murphy that he de sired their support in the campaign and that they should receive due and -proper consideration If he were elected President of the United States; that they would be consulted about affairs in their re spective localities and that their political importance would be recognized. I had no trouble with Sullivan and Murphy and easily secured their pledges to stand 258 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON by the ticket. I then talked with Arthur Brisbane, hoping to receive the support of the Hearst news papers of which he was the editor. Brisbane, in my opinion, has more general knowl edge of the past and present and of books than any other man in America, and he seems to have the ma terial ready for use. I have always had a high re gard for his ability and experience. When I ap proached him and urged his support of Bryan, he turned to me and said, "Bryan doesn't know enough to be President; he is a provincial fellow, prejudiced by his training. He has none of the knowledge that a man must possess in order to be fit for the position of President of the United States." I then asked Brisbane how much money he had made the preceding year through his writings. He replied that It was about $70,000. Then I said, "That is nothing. Bryan made $100,000 from the sale of his books and through his lectures, and yet you say Bryan doesn't know enough to be President." I could make no impression upon Brisbane, how ever, for he still adhered to his position that Bryan was impossible. So far as I know, he is still of tiiat opinion; There are other incidents — ^many of them — ^that have transpired during the past few years, that I could cite if more prOof were necessary to establish my point. But it seems to me that on this score, I have said enough. The able men as a rule, do not go into politics. They stay in business, and with the wealth that they derive through their special privileges and monopolies they support one or both of the old parties — turning their contributions into the channel that will yield the largest net returns. XVIL CHAUNCEY M. DEPEW. The Union and Central Pacific Railroads, from Omaha to San Francisco, had been constructed by a company organized by Ames, of Boston, and his as sociates. They had succeeded in getting Congress to give a Jand grant consisting of the odd numbered sections of land — for a strip ten miles wide on each side of the main track from Omaha to San Francisco. Besides that the Government had appropriated money enough to more than build and equip the entire road. In return for this money the Govemment was given a second mortgage on the property. The road never paid any interest to the Govem ment, but allowed it to accumulate. They established freight rates that were confiscatory, as far as the public was concerned. For example, on goods ship ped from Omaha to Nevada they charged the rate from Omaha to San Francisco and then added the local rate back, from San Francisco to the point in Nevada. The same was true in Utah, except that in Utah the Mormon Church fumished one of the direc tors of the road and received favorable rates, so that their entire influence was with the railroad and its system of exploitation. In 1896, the Government's second mortgage was about to mature, and the people controlling the Cen tral and Union Pacific railroads put them in the hands of a receiver and then appointed a re-organi zation committee. In the meantime a through line had been created by a combination between the Union and Central Pacific from San Francisco to Omaha, the Northwestern Railroad from Omaha to Chicago, and'the New York Central Railroad from Chicago to New York. The reorganization com mittee was appointed for the purpose of swindling the Govemment out of its entire claim by foreclos- 260 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON ing the first mortgage and by separating the Union Pacific from all its branch lines. This reorganiza tion committee included Marvin Hughitt, the Presi dent of the Northwestern Railroad and Chauncey Depew, President of the New York Central Railroad. It was, I think, in connection with my efforts to head off this robbery that Chauncey Depew's name first appears in the Congressional Record. So complete was my exposure of the rascality that the promoters were unable to carry through their scheme. My stand naturally aroused the hostility of the New York Central and the Northwestern Rail road Interests. Nor were these my only offenses against the sacred railroad privileges. I have already related the es sential facts concerning my fight on the railway mail pay, duriijg which I showed that the Government paid the railroads for carrying the mail ten times as much per pound as the express companies paid the railroads for carrying express on the same train, in the same car, under almost exactly identical condi tions, and that the New York Central Railroad in particular received from the Government, for carry ing the mail between New York and Buffalo, a sum sufficient to pay the interest at six per, cent upon the total cost of building and equiping a double-tracked railroad from New York to Buffalo. Finally I moved to reduce the railroad mail pay by 20 per cent, and introduced a bill providing for government owner ship of the railroads and the fixing of passenger rates at one cent a mile, which I proved would be possible if all passes and other forms of free transportation were eliminated. It was to^ guard against such dangerous tendencies that the New York Central Railroad sent Chauncey M. Depew to the Seriate in 1898. Depew was not sent to represent the State of New Yorfc, or the peo ple of the United States, but to protect and foster the interests of the railroads in general and of the New York Central in particular. CHAUNCEY M. DEPEW 261 Depew had been in the Senate a little less than sixty days when he found occasion to attack me. I reproduce his entire speech of February 7th, 1900: Mr. DEPEW: "Mr. President, on the 81st of Jan uary, the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Petti grew), in the course of his speech on the Philippine question, made the following remarks in reference to the president of the Philippine Commission, Presi dent Schurman, of Cornell University. He said: " 'Mr. Schurman, in his Chicago interview (and this is the only "authority I will read which is not vouched for by official docu ments) August 20th, 1899, said: " ' "General Aguinaldo is believed on the island to be honest, and I think that he is act ing honestly in money matters, but whether from moral or political reasons I would not say." (Oriental American, Page 99.) " 'The fact of the matter is that he tried to bribe the insurgents, as near as we can ascertain, and failed; they would not take gold for peace.' "The speech of the Senator from South Dakota was brought to the attention of the president of Cor nell, and I have from him the following letter, which I will read. I do, it for the purpose of having the Record corrected by his statement : " 'Cornell University, Office of the President, Ithaca, N. Y., February 3, 1910. " 'Dear Senator Depew : I see, from page 1862 of the Congressional Record, that Sen ator Pettigrew, speaking of myself, says : " ' "The fact of the matter is that he tried to bribe the insurgents, as near as we can ascertain, and failed; but they would not take gold for peace." " 'Had this preposterous statement been 262 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON made ansnvhere else I should not have paid any attention to it; but as it has been made in the Senate of the United States, I desire to say to you that It is absolutely without foundation. " 'Very truly yours, "'J. C. SCHURMAN. " 'Hon. Chauncey M. Depew, United States Senate, Washington, D. C "Now, Mr. President, at the time this speech was being made. President Schurman was in this city upon business connected with his report and the re port of his commission on the Philippine matter. He was at that very hour in conference with the Presi dent at the white House, and therefore competent to be summoned. "It seems to me that the alleged facts which have been brought forward by my friend, the Senator from South Dakota, in order to substantiate his conten tion that the President of the United States is a tyrant and that Aguinaldo is a patriot fail in the important consideration that his alleged facts never turn out to be true, x "He has summoned the two witnesses who were more competent than any others to testify on the question of the original understanding had with Aguinaldo and of the position of the Philippine peo ple, one Admiral Dewey and the other President Schurman, the president of the Philippine Commis sion. "Any evidence, any statement, in regard to this matter made by Admiral Dewey would be received at once by the people of the United States without further question and the same can be said of any statement made by the president of Cornell Univer sity. "But instead of presenting his evidence by calling CHAUNCEY M. DEPEW 263 the witnesses themselves, he calls others for the pur pose of proving what they have said. "With Admiral Dewey here in the city, his house well known, himself the most Accessible of men, he reads, as proving what Admiral Dewey has said and what his position is, an alleged proclamation of Aguinaldo, translated by an unknown translator and published without any certificate of its authenticity in a New England newspaper; and Instead of ascer taining, when President Schurman is in the city, what his views really are and what he really did say and what he really did do, he reads a report of an anonymoqs and unknown reporter in a Chicago news paper. Admiral Dewey at once branded the state ment affecting him as absolutely and unqualifiedly false, and now President Schurman repudiates the testimony attributed to him. "I submit, Mr. President, that having, amid the mass of newspaper reports, of anonymous remarks, of testimony of no consideration and no value, sub poenaed the two greatest and most prominent wit nesses in the country, he has done it in a way which discredits all the alleged facts which are presented on his side or the contention which Senator Petti grew and his friends endeavor to make in behalf of Aguinaldo and in discredit of the President and of the Philippine policy of the administration, "These facts, or alleged facts, cited by the Sen ator from South Dakota, are like the army of Aguin aldo. Whenever the United States troops appear, there is no army of Aguinaldo. And whenever the truth is let in, as Admiral Dewey and President Schur man let it in, these alleged facts vanish in thin air. The basis of their whole contention has no better foundation than the seat of the Aguinaldo govern ment, which, as far as I can ascertain, is nowhere except in the hat of Aguinaldo." To this I replied at once and showed by the Record that Mr. Schurinan, president of Cornell University, who was the head of the commission that went to the 264 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Philippines, sent by the Government to try and pacify the islands, had offered Aguinaldo a Government posi tion with a salary of $5,000 per year if he would cease hostilities. I showed also that the commission had offered to pay a_large bounty to any of the Fili pinos who would come in and surrender their guns. Furthermore, I showed that Aguinaldo had never talked anything else but absolute independence and that he had talked with Dewey time and again on the point. Finally I charged the following facts as proved by the official records in regard to our con duct of affairs in the Philippine Islands: I charged the suppression of information, the cen sorship of the press and tampering with the mails; I charged that the press was censored, not because there was fear that the enemy would secure Impor tant information, but to keep the facts from the American people, and I proved it; I charged that the President began the war on the P"'ilipinos, and I proved it by Otis' report; I charged that Aguinaldo, after hostilities had been inaugurated, asked for a truce, with the purpose of endeavoring to settle differences without further bloodshed, and that the administration answered: "War, having commenced, must go on to the grim end;" I charged that Otis changed the President's procla mation to the Filipinos with the purpose of deceiving those people and concealing our real Intention of re maining in the islands ; I charged that the Filipinos were our allies; that we armed them, fought with them, recognized their flag and surrendered Spanish prisoners to them; that despite these facts Dewey finally captured Agui- naldo's ships of war in September or October, 1898; that Otis, on September 8, 1898, threatened to at tack the Filipinos, and that we finally did begin the fighting; I charged that we made a covenant with the Sultan of Sulu, by which the President agreed to sustain CHAUNCEY M, DEPEW 265 slavery and polygamy and pay the Sultan over $700 a month for running Old Glory up over his slave mart every morning and taking It down every night; Finally, I pointed out that we could not have a re public and an empire under the same flag — ^that one or the other must go down ; that the attempt to gov ern any people without their consent was a violation of our theory of Govemment and of the Declaration of Independence; that all governments derived their just powers from the consent of the governed; that satisfying greed of empire by conquest had caused the downfall of every republic and every empire in the past. To all of this the junior Senator from New York announced, with his incomparable after-dinner, spirited and effervescent logic, that these allegations were all answered and disposed of, because Depew said that Aguinaldo's statement in relation to him was a tissue of faisehoods and Schurman declared that he did not offer Aguinaldo gold for peace. That was our first contest. After that, from time to time, as long as I remained in the Senate, Depew went out of his way to attack me. He took the death of Mark Hanna (1904) as a favorable occasion. In the course of a funeral oration, delivered over the re mains of Hanna, who had been the factotum of the Republican party and the principal partner of Aldrich as the representative of the corrupt financial inter ests in the Senate, Depew made the following state ment : "Quite as suddenly as he grew to be su preme In political management Senator Hanna became an orator. He had been ac customed In the boards of directors of many corporations, where the conferences were more in the nature of consultations than arguments, to influence his associates by the lucidity with which from a full mind he could explain situations and suggest policies or remedies. He did not dare, however, ex- IMPERIAL WASHINGTON cept on rare occasion, to trust himself upon his feet. We, his associates, can never for get the day when a mighty passion loosed his tongue and introduced Into the debate of this body an original and powerful speaker. It was June, 1900. The presidential campaign for the second nomination and canvass of President McKinley was about to open. Senator Pettigrew, an active and persistent laborer In the ranks of the opposition, was seeking material in every direction which would benefit his side. Without notice he suddenly assailed Senator Hanna in his ten derest point. He attacked his honesty, truth fulness and general character. He accused him of bribery, perjury, and false dealing. Hanna's reply was not a speech but an ex plosion. It was a gigantic effort, in his al most uncontrollable rage, to keep expres sions within the limits of senatorial pro priety. He shouted In passionate protest: '"Mr. President, the gentleman will find that he is mistaken in the people of the United States when he attempts, through mud-slinging and accusations, to Influence their decision when they are called upon at the polls, next November to decide upon the principles that are at issue and not the men. When it comes to personalities, I will stand up against him and compare my character to his. I will let him tell what he knows ; then I will tell 'what I know about him.' "The new-born orator carried his threat into execution by a dramatic and picturesque speaking tour through South Dakota, in which, without mentioning Mr. Pettigrew or referring to him in any way, he took away his constituents by convincing them that the doctrines of their Senator were inimical to their interests and prosperity. The titanic CHAUNCEY M. DEPEW 267 power the Dakota Senator had evoked was his political ruin." I have given my version of this story in some de tail in another chapter (Chapter 21, "A Lost Elec tion") ; I need, merely say at this point that Mark Hanna's "Explosion" was produced by my calling the attention of the Senate to a report submitted by the Ohio legislature to the Senate Committee on Elec tions in which careful and detailed data was pro duced showing that Mark Hanna had been directly implicated in buying his way into thei United States Senate. I read from the majority report of the Committee of the Ohio State Senate, which showed that Mark Hanna purchased the vote of a member of the Ohio legislature for the sum of $20,000; $10,000 to be paid down and $10,000 after he had voted. The testi mony disclosed that Mark Hanna had personal knowl edge of this purchase and was a party to it and sent the money from Columbus, where the legislature was in session, to Cincinnati to be paid to the purchased member of the Ohio legislature. The testimony also showed that Mark Hanna was negotiating . for the purchase of two or three other members of the leg islature and through this system of bribery and cor ruption he succeeded in getting his seat in the Senate of the United States. I then read the minority report of the Committee on Elections in the Senate which went into the sub ject fully and disclosed the facts. The Republican members of the Committee on Elections in the Sen ate — and they were in the majority — simply alluded to the testimony laid before them by the Ohio State Senate and refused to investigate, and gave as a reason that the Ohio State Senate had not sent a man down there to prosecute the case. In other words, Mark Hanna was such a factotum in the Republican party in all its councils that it did not disturb the Republicans at all, as so many of them were used 268 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON to using money to secure their election. Besides, Mark Hanna at that time was Chairman of the Re publican National Committee. Depew says: "Mark Hanna's reply was not a speech, but an explosion. It was a gigantic effort, in his almost uncontrollable rage, to keep expression within the limits of Senatorial propriety. He shouted in passionate pro test: " 'Mr. President, the gentleman will find that he is mistaken in the people of the United States when he attempts, through mud-slinging and accusations, to influence their decision when they are called upon at the polls next November to decide upon the principles that are at issue and not the men. When it comes to personality, I will stand up against him and compare my char acter to his. I will let him tell what he knows; then I will tell what I know about him.' " And this is Chauncey Depew's idea of oratory. In other words, the Bowery response, "You're another!" Hanna admitted that he was all that I said he was, but he could show I was a little worse, which con vinced me 1;hat Chauncey Depew was a phrase-maker pf but little intellect, to balance considerable avoirdu pois. For Depew's part in this whole transaction his name ought to go down in history and he should put a halo on his own statue which he has already erected and presented to his native town in New York. I should suppose it would be appropriate to have a dove come down from Heaven and perch upon his shoulder and say: "I am from the boodle crowd in New York who run the Government of the United States, and this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased." XVIII. BRYANISM. It is not easy to characterize a complex political situation in a brief and comprehensive manner. If such a thing can be done at all, I believe that it can be done most successfully through the personality of two men who typify the two extremes of American political life. One of these men that I shall select for the purpose is William Jennings Bryan. The other is Joe Cannon of Illinois. The first is a Demo crat — ^the second a Republican. I have known' both of these men for many years. Neither is a statesman in any sense of the word. Both are lawyers and suffer from the disqualifications that go with the study and practice qf the law, Bryan has integrity, of a sort; Cannon has a keen mind. Both understand the political game, and both play It according to their lights, Bryan plays prohibition politics; Cannon plays plutocratic politics. Neither has any real grasp of the meaning of the phrase "the public welfare." In the previous chapter, I have referred to the sup port which I gave Mr. Bryan in his fight against the eastern bankers and trust magnates. The fight ended in failure because Mr. Bryan was very weak while the trusts were very strong. Since that fight, Bryan has showed himself for what he is — an American politician, vacillating, uncertain, overlooking the fun damental things, ignorant of the forces that are shap ing American public life, incapable of thinking in terms of reality, but making phrases as a substitute for thought. Mr. Bryan is weak, not corrupt. That is why I wish to describe some of his public activities during the past few years. He Is a type of the "good man" that so often fools the American people. By way of illustration, let me refer to two incidents which show 270 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Mr. Bryan's attitude toward public questions and his method of judging of personal conduct. When the Spanish Treaty was pending in the Sen ate of the United States and we believed that we had it defeated beyond a question, Sryan came to Wash ington from his home in Nebraska and urged a rati fication of the treaty. He saw several Senators, be^ fore he came to me, and urged them to vote for ratification. Bryan knew the grounds upon which I was opposing the ratification of the treaty and yet he had the temerity to come and ask me to vote for rati fication of the treaty. He urged that the treaty would entirely end our troubles with Spain and that, once it was ratified, the nation would have an op portunity to perform a great moral dutyr— the grant ing of freedom, under a wise and generous protec torate, to the people of the Philippines. His chief argument was that should the Republicans not give the people of the Philippines their independence, but, instead, should undertake to conquer the islands and annex them to the United States, such a course would and ought to drive the Republican party from power. The Filipinos had been our allies in the war with Spain, and he held that our repudiation of an al liance by such an act of bad faith as that implied in the conquest of the islands would wreck any admin istration that attempted it. Bryan thus made the ratification of the Spanish Treaty an act of political expediency, and did not seem to realize that every person who voted to ratify the treaty at the same time endorsed the doctrine of purchasing a country and its people without their consent — the very doctrine on which he proposed to pillory the Republican administration before the country. Neither did he understand that a Senator holding my views and voting for ratification would be guilty of the most outrageous moral turpitude and depravity. I called Mr. Bryan's attention to the fact that, if we voted for the treaty, it would be fair for the admlnis- BRYANISM 271 tration to assume that the Senate sympathized with the spirit of the document which, as pointed out, be sides violating every principle of free government, contravened the Constitution which I had sworn to support. I told him that I would sooner cut off my right arm than cast my vote for the treaty. I was so incensed by his effort to induce me, on the score of expediency, to change front on a matter of prin ciple and stultify myself, that I finally told him em phatically that he had no business in Washington on such an errand; that his stand reflected on his char acter and reputation as a man, and Indicated a lack of knowledge of human affairs which must make his friends feel that he was not a suitable person to be President of the United States. Despite the vigor of my statement, I doubt if Bryan understood what I was driving at. He was seeking political capital and he was willing to take it where he found it, without paying too much attention to nice questions of principle. The treaty was ratified by one more vote than was necessary. I do not believe Mr. Bryan's visit changed the result, although several Democrats, who made speeches against it, voted for the treaty. The only effect of his visit was to give an excuse for Democrats, for a cash consideration, to sell out to Aldrich and vote for the treaty. Andrew Carnegie, in his autobiography, on page 864, refers to this subject as follows : "Mr. Bryan had it in his power at one time to defeat in the Senate this feature of the Treaty of Peace with Spain. I went to Wash ington to try to effect this, and remained there until the vote was taken. I was told that when Mr. Bryan was in Washington he had advised his friends that it would be good party policy to allow the treaty to pass. This would dis credit the Republican party before the people ; that 'paying twenty millions for a revolution' 272 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON would defeat any party. There were seven staunch Bryan men anxious to vote against Philippines annexation. "Mr, Bryan had called to see me in New York upon the subject, because my opposition to the purchase had been so pronounced, and I now wired him at Omaha, explaining the sit uation and begging him to write me that his friends could use their own judgment. His reply was what I have stated — ^better have the Republicans pass it and let it then go before the people, I thought it unworthy of him to subordinate such an issue, fraught with de plorable consequences, to mere party politics. It required the casting vote of the Speaker to carry the measure. One word from Mr, Bryan would have saved the country from the disaster, I could not be cordial to him for years afterwards. He had seemed tb me a man who was willing to sacrifice his country and his personal convictions for party advan tage," This is a significant verification of my conclusions, but it is rather amusing to read Carnegie's comments on the perfidy of Bryan, The facts in his own case do not permit him a great deal of latitude in criticizing others. , Carnegie was a very active opponent of the treaty and of the doctrine of imperialism. He was a member of the conference which met at the Plaza Hotel (New York) on the 6th of January, 1900, and he took a prominent part in its discussions (see Chapter XXIII) . The conference was called by the New Eng land Anti-Imperialist League, to organize an Anti-Im perialist political party for the purpose of compelling the old parties to agree to the Independence of the Philippines; and for the purpose of opposing the acqui sition of tropical countries. The conference was called ostensibly to discuss the annexation of the Philippines and the Spanish West BRYANISM , 278 Indies and Hawaii. Its real purpose was to meet the broader question as to whether we should start on the course of empire. In a vigorous speech Mr. Carnegie urged upon the conference the necessity of a new politi cal party for the purpose of opposing the imperial policy of both the old parties, and said that he would give as much money, dollar for dollar, as all the rest of us could raise toward promoting the campaign. As a pledge of good faith, he subscribed twenty-five thou sand dollars on the spot. Afterward, he withdrew com pletely from the movement because the organizers of the steel trust served notice on him that he must choose between a comfortable berth with them and an Anti- Imperialist party, which threatened the whole success of the steel trust movement; and the organizers of the steel trust told Carnegie that, unless McKinley was elected, they would not attempt to form the trust, as they needed a McKinley tariff in order to justify its great overcapitalization. It was a case of imperialism and a tariff or no trust and Carnegie lined up with the imperialists. Despite Mr. Carnegie's comments, he and Bryan measure up very much alike, Bryan was willing to sell his convictions for a supposed political advantage ; Carnegie sold his for gold; Bryan's act was one of intellectual stupidity, Carnegie's act was prompted by what big business calls enlightened self-interest. Bryan has the point of view of an ordinary American business man. His ruling passion is "safety first" — not the financial safety of a manufacturer, but the political safety ,of a visionless manipulation of party machinery. This trait appeared very clearly in his activities during the Baltimore Convention of 1912, where Woodrow Wilson was nominated for President of the United States, with Champ Clark, Speaker of the House, as his chief opponent. The custom in Dem ocratic conventions had always been to disregard the two-thirds rule and give a candidate the nomination wberi he had secured a majority and held It for several ballots. 274 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON At Baltimore, after Clark had for several ballots re ceived the votes of a majority of the delegates, Bryan, who had been instructed at the primaries to vote for Clark and use all honorable means to secure his nomi nation, arose In the convention and said that he would abandon him and violate the instructions of the Demo crats of Nebraska as long as the Democratic delegates in the convention from the state of New York continued to vote for Clark, This occurred after the delegations from New York, Virginia and Illinois had voted in the convention with Bryan to seat the Wilson delegates and oilst the Clark delegates from South Dakota, al though Clark had carried South Dakota in the prima ries by twenty-five hundred majority, Bryan could vote with Roger Sullivan of Chicago, and Ryan of Virginia, and the Tammany Democrats of New York, to throw Clark delegates out of the conven tion and seat Wilson delegates, but his pure soul would not permit him to vote for Clark while New York dele gates were voting for him. The whole performance branded Bryan as not only a hypocrite, but also as a man lacking in character and intellect. Immediately upon Brj-an making the announcement, I gave out the following interview which was published in all the leading newspapers of the United States : "Mr, Bryan's statement that he will support no can didate for President who has the support of New York is the rankest hj'pocrisy. It is the excuse of the dema gogue who believes that such a statement will be popu lar among the western voters, and has been seized upon by Mr. Bryan as an excuse for doing what he has intended to do ever since he was elected as a delegate to this convention by the Democrats of Nebraska. "He was not only instructed by the Democrats of Nebraska to vote for Mr. Clark, but instructed by the State Convention to use all honorable means to secure his nominaiton. After that, he stumped Ohio, Mary land and Florida in Wilson's interest. While claiming that he maintained strict neutrality between Clark and Wilson, during the last week in May, Wilson's man- BRYANISM 275 agers sent a letter to every Democratic voter in South Dakota saying that Mr, Bryan had endorsed Wilson and made speeches in Ohio and Maryland in support of him. "This letter was circulated with Mr. Bryan's knowl edge and consent. Mr. Bryan was thoroughly familiar with the campaign made in South Dakota, He was familiar with the primary law of that state and knows that there were two Clark tickets in the field and that one of these was put up by Wilson's managers to divide the Clark vote, hoping to give Wilson a plurality. "He knows that this bogus ticket was not supported by the men who put It into the field, and he is fully aware that Clark carried the state by over twenty-five hundred majority over Wilson. Yet he voted to seat the Wilson delegates in this convention, joining with the ninety votes from New York and the fifty-eight from Illinois and the Virginia delegation, of which Mr.' Ryan Is a member, to oust the Clark delegates from South Dakota. Yet Mr. Bryan would now have us believe that no honest Democrat can co-operate with New York, Illinois and Virginia in this convention." The publication of this interview regarding Bryan's hypocrisy and the other facts connected with the Bal timore Convention ended his political career, and yet he still hopes that he will be nominated by the next Convention, for he honestly believes that he was pre destined from his birth to be President of the United States. This is the William Jennings Bryan, who "led" the Democratic party until he was succeeded by Woodrow Wilson — ^the Bryan of political expediency and politi cal chicanery. He has traveled around the world, yet he knows little of international affairs. He has been from one end of the United States to another, yet he is ignorant of America. Furthermore, this is Bryanism — a fluent tongue, a resonant voice, the plausible statement of half truths, an appeal to the passions and prejudices of the mo ment, a mediocre mind, and a verbal fealty to "right," 276 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON "justice;' "liberty" and "brotherhood." An ignorant electorate has always followed after such superficial qualities. Bryan has never told any of the real truths of mod ern life, because he does not know them. He has never made a fight on an issue of principle because he has no abiding principle. He listens. He watches his au dience. He gauges its intelligence and then he makes his point. Mr. Bryan is reputed to be one of the best speakers in the United States, His reputation in this regard has been won not by what he says but by the way in which he says it. Nothing in his public career, with the possible exception of his resignation as Secre tary of State^ has been based on a hard-fought or hard- won principle. Rather he has yielded to the necessity of the moment, trusting that in the end all would be well, but without foreseeing the end or understanding its import, Bryanism carries with it no taint of corruption — ^no suggestion of willful wrongdoing. It is the politics of an ignorant, unimaginative and of a rather vain mind that is quick In trifles and impotent before major issues. Reform politics in the United States has never existed on any other basis, and therefore reform politics has always proved an easy mark for the machinations of big business. XIX. CANNONISM. So much for the weak Mr. Bryan. Now for the cor rupt Joe Cannon. Bryan never knowingly served the vested interests. He fought them to the extent of his ability and interspersed his political battles by giving lectures on "Prohibition" and "Immortality." Joe Can non, on the other hand, was one of the most faithful servants that the vested interests of the United States ever had in either house of Congress. He is a type of those all-too-numerous public men who are the political body-servants of big business. Joe Cannon is still in Congress. For over forty years he has been a member of the House of Representatives, and, as chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and, as Speaker, has had more to do with shaping legislation than any other man in the House^ In fact, he was one of the leaders of the band of plunderers that, in both Houses of Congress, for two generations dominated the public affairs and made the Govemment of the United States one of the most corrupt in the world. Under the guidance of this clique of men all legisla tion was directed to the granting of special privileges to corporations, giving them power to tax and exploit the people of the United States. The tariff became tlie chi^ vehicle for the robbery of the public and its beneficiaries were the chief contributors' to the great campaign funds collected by the Republican party to demoralize the voters of the nation. Under the regime of Cannonism concessions and privileges of every sort, not only for the public service and industrial corpora tions, but for the financial institutions of the country, received the chief attention of Congress, and these privileges were so profitable that the halls of the House and Senate swarmed with innumerable lobbyists whose vocation it was to appeal to the ordinary members of 278 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON both branches with whatever argument was necessary, being assured in advance of the ardent and powerful support of Joe Cannon and the other leaders. The granting of these concessions and privileges, by which the few planned to plunder the many, is the essence of Cannonism. Elected to office of trust by the franchise of their fellow-citizens, Cannon and his like utilize their position to serve, not the people who elected them, but the great Interests which proVide the campaign funds and other forms of compensation. Thus a new profession arose — ^the profession of pub lic lackeying to the plutocracy. To enter this profes sion it was necessary, first, to buy or fool the people, and, second, to convince the leaders of the plutocracy of your sincere intention to serve their interests. Thus was perfidy coupled with venality by these "public serv ants" who had taken an oath to support the Constitu tion and then busied themselves in robbing the people. Most of the leaders among the political spoilsmen were content with a reasonably extravagant living, but Cannon in the House and Aldrich in the Senate were not thus easily satisfied. The powerful positions which they held enabled them to become enormously rich. > These men became rich because, through their posi tions of pi^.blic trust, they were able to betray the Gov emment and the people into the hands of the exploit ers. Let me cite a few illustrations of the way in which this was done. During the nineties there was much talk about the "land frauds." These frauds were the product of legis lation especially secured by Cannon and some of his aids in order that the railroads might secure valuable forest and mineral lands in the West and Northwest without paying anything for them beyond the cost of securing the legislation. I was the author of the law for the regulation and control of the forest reservations of the United States. (See Chapter IL) It was adopted by the Senate and, as adopted, contained a clause which Sermitted any homesteader, whose homestead was em- raced within a forest reservation, to release his home- CANNONISM 279 stead to the Government and be accredited with the time he had lived upon it, and allowed to take land from the Govemment in some other locality. Mr. Cannon was chairman of the Committee on Appropriations of the House, and chairman of the Conference Committee, and he inserted the words, "or any other claimant," so that, if the lands of a land grant railroad were en- braced within a forest reservation, the railroad com pany could exchange them for any other lands the Government might possess. I did not observe this interlineation In the conference report, which was read rapidly and approved without first being printed. Afterward I found that the Northern Pacific Railroad was receiving scrip for the sections of land of its grant which were on the top of Mount Tacoma in Washing ton. Lands that were absolutely worthless were ex changed in this way for lands of the greatest value. I stated these facts in the Senate and suggested an appraisal of those lands that were embraced in the for est reservations on top of snow-capped mountains, and proposed that the exchange be made according to value. If they exchanged a section on top of one of these mountains that wasn't worth over a cent an acre for land worth ten or twenty dollars per acre, they should not get acre for acre, but exact value after appraisal ; and I also moved that all operations under the law be suspended pending an investigation by the Interior De partment. The Senate passed my amendments, but with a full knowledge of all the facts, showing just what frauds had been practiced and how they were practiced, the House refused to agree to the Senate amendments, and, as is customary, the bill was thrown intd conference. Cannon was chairman of the Commit tee on Conference, and chairman of the Committee on Appropriations in the House, and he insisted upon 'Standing by the railroads and continuing the frauds, and so refused to agree to the Senate amendment, but inserted a provision that thereafter railroads could only exchange for surveyed lands. However, as the law provided that, when three settlers in a township petl- 280 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON tioned for the survey of the township the Government was bound to make the survey if the settlers deposited money enough to pay for the work, these railroad thieves would send three men into, a township, would have them file three homestead entries, and then make affidavit that they were residing there and wanted the township surveyed; would deposit the money necessary — four or five hundred dollars to get the survey made — and then the railroads would locate their scrip upon these lands all over the township, and when this was done the three men would move on and locate in an other township, and so continue the fraud. Cannon and his henchmen in the House and Senate made the frauds possible, and thus enabled the raiU roads to secure many millions of dollars worth of the best land in the West for a small fraction of their true value. Thus the timber and mineral wealth of the public domain was turned over to the great corpora tions whose handymen were maintained in Congress for just such purposes. Cannonism is the profession of selling the country to the rich so that they may be enabled to grow still richer by the exploitation of the poor. Another instance of Cannonism is found in the armor-plate scandals. For several years the Senate of the United States limited the price to be paid for armor-plate. The armor- plate manufacturers were in a trust Everybody ad mitted that. There were only two plants In the United States that could manufacture armor-plate. One was the Carnegie Steel Company; the other the Bethlehem Steel Company. The Carnegie Steel Works and Beth lehem Steel Works were in a combination, and each always bid for just half of what the Government wanted, and always bid the same price. , The Senate passed a bill limiting the price of armor- plate to $300 per ton, and under that provision no arinor-plate was purchased because the companies re CANNONISM 281 fused to sell at that price. Two years afterwards the Senate passed an amendment to the Navy Appropria tion Bill limiting the price of armor-plate to $425 per ton. The Carnegie and Bethlehem companies were asking the United States Government $550 per ton, and were selling the same plate to the Russian Government for $200 per ton. The Senate amendment therefore provided that if the Secretary could not buy armor- plate for $425 per ton, the (Government should imme diately commence to construct an armor-plate plant and make its own armor-plate. Joe Cannon was chair man of the Committee on Conference in the House, and he absolutely refused to submit to the Senate amend ment, but insisted that the armor-plate makers should have their price, although they were in a trust and in collusion. These facts were well known to him and to every member of both Houses. I could go ?nto the details of the Congressional Rec ord with regard to the duty on white pine. The Senate reduced the duty from $2, the price fixed by the House, to $1 per thousand. Cannon refused to agree to the Senate amendment, but insisted upon $2, which was finally allowed. Urtder it, the lumber dealers of the whole country formed a combination and plundered the consumers, according to their own statement, of thirty-five million dollars per year. These facts were known to Cannon and to both Houses when this duty was put on white pine. It was well known that the duty would not furnish any rev enue to the Government or any protection to the build ing up of an Infant industry, but it simply put $2 a thousand into the pockets of the owners of the white pine timber. The statement of Mr. Winchester and other lumbermen that if they could get $2 on lumber it would be worth thirty-five miUion dollars each year was read in the Senate. And yet Mr. Cannon stood pat on the tariff. When the tariff was revised, it was revised in the interest of the plutocracy and not in the interest of the 282 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON people of the United States. Cannon's work in Con gress was done in the interest of the scheming jobbery that has cursed and controlled the Republican party for the last thirty years. I have used Cannon's name, not because I wish to discredit him as an individual, but because his story is so typical of the record of the many who are today holding offices of trust under the (Jovemment, and faithfully serving the American plutocracy. XX. BUSINESS AND POLITICS. At a number of points in this discussion I have sug gested that business men used politicians for the ad vancement of their interests, and the politicians served the business interests first and the public afterward. My experience showed this to be true in a general way, but there were times when the combination of busi ness and politics rose to the surface of public events and became a gross and scandalous plundering of the public treasury in the interest of some specially favored business group. One such instance, involving the sale of Govemment bonds to a New York syndicate, is espe cially deserving of notice. Grover Cleveland, a New York state lawyer, was closely associated with the big business interests be fore he became President of the United States. During his second term as President, the gold reserve in the public treasury fell to a very low point. To meet this emergency, the President, through Carlisle, his Secre tary of the Treasury, issued bonds which were to be exchanged for gold and thus keep up the Federal gold reserve. The Wilson Tariff Bill was passed on August 14, 1894, for the purpose of saving the situation, but the mischief had been done. On November 14, 1894, the Secretary of the Treasury issued a call for $50,000,000 five per cent, ten-year bonds under the Resumption Act. The bonds sold in January, 1894, had been absorbed at home. The Stewart syndicate, which handled these bonds, had been treated fairly by the Government, and there was a disposition on the part of these bankers freely to subscribe for the new issue. Mr. Stewart and Mr. J. P. Morgan visited Washing ton in the interest of the syndicate, and it is repre sented, and generally believed, that Mr. Stewart, at least, had a distinct understanding with the President 284 IMPERLA.L WASHINGTON and with Mr. Carlisle that nothing would be done by the administration in any way whatever to interfere with the marketing of the bonds. These bankers, therefore, went back to New York and forwarded a bid for the whole amount of the bonds at $117. The total offers for these $50,000,000 of bonds amounted to $58,500,000. The award was made to the Stewart syndicate on the understanding that the gold to be paid for the bonds would not be taken from the treasury. Payment for the bonds was made promptly, $20,000,000 having been turned into the Sub-Treasury by the end of November. The syndicate immediately arranged to sell the bonds they had bought, and offered a lot of $5,000,000 at 119. It is believed that this amount was sold at the price named, but, before they had an opportunity to dispose pf any additiorial bonds, the President's message and the report of the Secretary of the Treasury recom mending changes in the currency law effectually stopped the marketing of Government bonds. This act, which was very apparently one of bad faith on the part of the administration, resulted in the disso lution of the syndicate and a great depression in the prices of bonds. When it came to subsequent bond issues, the administration turned over the bonds to certain financial groups in New York at a price far below their true value and thus enabled the new syndi cate to make millions of dollars without taking any risk, investing any capital or importing any gold. Senator Peffer, of Kansas, introduced a resolution to investigate the Cleveland bond sales. No sooner had this resolution appeared than David Bennett Hill, of New York, began a fight to prevent its passage. In the course of this struggle he attacked everyone that advo cated it, and defended the bond sales with great vigor. I would not mention Senator Hill in this connection were it not for the fact that his brief career is such a typical illustration of the relation between business and politics. ' BUSINESS AND POLITICS 285 Hill ( a Democrat) came to the Senate with the repu tation of being a lawyer of decided ability, and a politi cal manipulator of some cunning and skill, having served as Governor of the state of New York.* He remained in the Senate only* one term, for, at the end of his six years, Tom Piatt— Boss Piatt, as he was called — took Hill's place. Among the private jobs which Hill undertook to put through was an amendment to the Indian Appropria tion Bill, which practically confiscated the reservation of the Seneca Indians. He made the effort to rob the Indians of their homes under the guise of an old agree ment of some sort with the Ogden Land Company, by offering an amendment to the Indian bill, in which It was provided that $300,000 should be paid to the Ogden Land Company out of the sale of the land of the reser vation. He was exceedingly persistent, and offered this amendment on the floor of the Senate. The amend ment was clearly subject to a point of order and, after a considerable discussion, I stated in the Senate that there was present a lobby of adventurers who were interested in this claim, and that the only result would be that they would divide this money among them ; and I finally told Hill that, unless he accepted my amend-. ment which specifically provided that the lands of the Indians of New York should not be sold or any part of * Some idea of Hill's position in New York State politics may be gained from the following article appearing in a Demo cratic paper (The Times), February 23, 1896: "Senator Hill is a Democratic statesman of high degree, as statesmen go in that party. His term as senator will close next March and, during his nearly six years in the Senate, he has been responsible for but one bill, and that has not yet become a law, although it has passed the Senate and had been favor ably reported from the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. And what think you is this great and momentous piece of legislation that is to be the only remii^er to posterity—that is, if it becomes a law — that David B. Hill served six years in the Senate? It authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to detail a revenue cutter to ^(^ntrol excursion and other boats which attend yacht races. Now, doesn t that prove the statesmanship of Hill?" 286 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON them, or any of their property whatever appropriated for the purpose of paying this claim, I would insist upon a point of order and let it go to the House of Rep resentatives for their consideration. He accepted the .amendment and it was adopted in conference. After wards, the Indians in council passed a resolution thank ing me for preventing Hill from plundering them from their property, t After a careful study of the facts and an investiga tion of the circumstances surrounding the Cleveland bond sales, I made a series of charges against the ad ministration. (May 5, 1896, Cong. Record.) I charged that the President, through the Treasury officials, sold sixty-two millions of bonds at private sale for $104% to his former clients, and that on the day of such sale the market price of these bonds, as quoted in the New York papers, was $117. I charged that the purchaser and others associated with them, the plutocrats and autocrats of New York, sold these bonds to the public in a short time at a profit of $8,418,000. tThe following is a copy of the Resolution of the New York Indians: "At a council of the Seneca Nation of New York Indians, assembled at the Council Home at Gold Springs, on the Alle gheny Eeservatlon, on the twelfth day at April, in tihe year one thousand eight hopdred and ninely-flve, the following resolution was adopted: "RESOLVED: That we sincerely tender our thanks to the Honorable Richard F. Pettigrew, of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, United States Senator, for his valuable services ren* dered to our delegates while on their visit to the United States Congress at Washington, D. C, and for the deep interest he has taken in the welfare. of his red bi-ethren in opposing the passage of the amendment to the Indian Appropriation Bill relative to the claims of the so-called Ogden Land Company to the lands of the Senecas on the Cataraug^is Reservations. "A true copy. "William C. Hoag, President, Seneca Nation of Ihdians. "Alfred L. Jimson,- .^^ ,„ , . ., « Clerk, Seneca Nation of Indians. "Great Seal of the Smeca Nation of New York, 1876." BUSINESS AND POLITICS 287 I charged that the syndicate was to pay in gold for these bonds sixty-two million dollars, and that one-half of the gold was to be imported and that part of the con tract requiring the gold to be imported was not carried out and that less than fifteen millions of gold was im ported, I charged that a secret agreement was made with the syndicate by which they were released from im porting the gold and allowed to sell exchange against the gold received for the bonds in England to the great profit and advantage of the syndicate. I charged that negotiations were completed to sell this same syndicate one hundred millions of bonds at $104% and it would have been carried out but for the protests of the public. I charged that after the public arid the Senate had protested against the sale of any more bonds at private sale, the administration delayed action until the syndi cate of bankers could get together and corner the gold so that the public could not bid, and then the President offered the bonds at a pretended public sale, and that the bonds were sold at about $111, mostly to the syndi cate, while, if there had been an honest effort before the gold had been cornered they would have brought $117 at least I charged that about five millions of the bonds were not taken by the bidders and the Secretary of the Treasury could have sold these bonds for $117, but that he gave them to Morgan & Company for $110.68, caus ing a loss to the Treasury of several hundred thousand dollars. I had summarized the matter, as I understood it, in the following words (April '29, 1896, Cong. Record, p. 5004) : "Mr. President, the plain statement of the facts con nected with the several bond issues by the present ad ministration constitutes an arraignment which no elo quence cculd make stronger. First, there atos the attack upon the credit of the United States by the inspired object lesson from the banks of New York; 288 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON then the extra session of the Fifty-third Congress; then the passage of the Wilson tariff for a deficit ; the further depreciation of the national credit by the dem onstration that the revenues were not equal to the necessary expenditures of the Gk>vernment; then the endless chain— the first bond issue of $50,000,000 of five per cent ten-year bonds at a fixed price of $117.077 ; the depreciation of the market value of these bonds by the recommendation to Congress that a bill be passed discontinuing the use of them as a basis of bank-note circulation ; then the secret contract with the Belmont- Morgan syndicate for the sale of $62,000,000 of thirty- year ^our per cent bonds at $104%, which bonds were quoted last December at 121 ; finally the attempt to give to the Morgan syndicate the last loan of $100,000,000 at the same figure, and the actual award to them at their bid of $110.6877 of about $5,000,000 upon which default was made in payment for whichother parties offered 116, and which were quoted in open market at a higher price. "Upon this record, Mr. President, the administration and the Democratic party must go before the people next November, and the verdict of the people will be even more emphatic in condemnation than it was iri 1894 and in 1895." Nor was I alone in making a fight to have the facts regarding this infamous transaction brought to light. A number of western senators, backed by Populist con stituencies, were as eager as I was tb have the facts placed before the country. And in their case, as well as in mine, it was David Bennett Hill that "talked back." In the debate over the Seneca Indian Reservation I had characterized the claim which Hill was supporting as robbery. This had very much offended Mr, Hill, who waited about three months and, in the meantime, having sent to Dakota for information, he secured some Sioux Falls newspapers containing editorials by J. Tomlinson, Jr., attacking me personally and politically in the most outrageous manner. In the course of a BUSINESS AND POLITICS 289 speech on the Cleveland bond sales Hill read these edi torials into the record. After reading several of the edi torials himself, he asked the clerk to do the reading. As the clerk read. Hill stopped him frequently with such exclamations as "What's that? Read that over," By this trick he had each abusive statement read twice. Throughout the episode he behaved like an endman in a minstrel show. I had said in my speech in regard to the bond sales that the President and the Secretary of the Treasury were evidently enriching their favorites, for the pur chasers of these bonds were all prominent New York people, and they cornered all the gold there was in the country, and were giving for the bonds from ten to fif- '^een per cent less on the dollar than they would sell for in the open market, and I charged that they had thus made about eighteen millions of dollars, and that it looked like a very disreputable and dishonest job. And so, when Hill had finished his attack upon me by read ing these editorials, I simply arose and said that; I had charged the administration and the financiers of New York with acting in collusion to plunder the people of the United States in connection with this bond transac tion, and that Mr. Hill seemed to think that the com plete answer to charges was to read scurrilous political editorials with regard to myself. I said if he was sat isfied with the answer I was entirely satisfied, and that Hill had honored me by his attack in the only way he could honor anybody — ^he had convinced the Senate and the country that we had nothing in common. Senator Peffer's resolution to appoint a special com mittee to investigate the bond sale was finally amended to request the Committee on Finance of the Senate to make the investigation through a sub-committee of four senators, that is, Harris of Tennessee, Walthall of Mississippi, Vest of Missouri and Piatt of Connecticut, all lawyers, three of them Democrats and in sympathy with the administration. This committee made some investigation, but never made a report to the Senate.- Who were the chief actors in this scandalous bond 290 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON transaction? First, the President of the United States, Grover Cleveland, a Buffalo lawyer ; second, John Car lisle, a lawyer from Kentucky, who had been a great advocate of bi-metallism and who sold his convictions in order to get Cleveland to appoint him Secretary of the Treasury ; David Bennett Hill, a lawyer from New York, who was the champion on the floor of the Senate ; John Sherman, a Republican and a lawyer from Ohio. During the twelve years that I was in the Senate, two- thirds of both Houses of Congress wer6 lawyers and the Presidents were all lawyers — Harrison, Cleveland and McKinley. The consequence was that all legisla tion was framed in the interests of the exploiters of the people of the United States, whether it dealt with bond sales, armor-plate, railway mail pay, land grants of the public domain, ship bounties — the rights and in terests of the people of the United States were never considered. In fact, we have become a government ad ministered by lawyers who were acting as the attorneys and representatives of the great exploiting combina tions of banks, railroads and industries. I have gone into the question of these bond sales because they illustrate one of the methods by which the people of the United States are exploited in the inter ests of the capitalists. Several millionaires were made as the result of the transaction and the American peo ple footed the bill. It was a comparatively small deal — probably thirty millions were made out of it — but it illustrates very well the operations of the system, and the way the machinery of government is manipulated to accumulate the wealth of the country in the hands of the few. XXI. A LOST ELECTION. Before leaving the subject of American political life and its control by big business, I want to refer to one more incident— the election that cost me my place in the United States Senate. Mark Hanna managed the campaign of 1900 and after McKinley took office Hanna managed the Presi dent even more successfully than he had managed the campaign. Through ten strenuous years I had fought Hanna and all that he stood for. I had opposed him on the gold standard issue ; I had led the opposition to the schemes of the imperialists for annexing Hawaii ; I had opposed the acquisition of the Philippines and the other Spanish colonies. I had opposed the trusts, the extor tion of the railroads, the armour plate thieves, and had tried to save the public domain for the people. Consequently, when it came to the election of 1900, Mark Hanna spared no pains to insure my elimination from public life. The incident which inspired Hanna with a particu larly strong desire to have me out of the way arose out of a charge concerning a campaign contribution to the Republican party. In 1895 I went to Europe and stayed several months. I returned on the American Line steamship "St. Louis" in company with Cramp, the shipbuilder and owner of the line of ships. During the voyage I became well acquainted with Mr. Cramp and we talked a great One day he told me that he had paid $400,000 to Tom Carter, chairman of the Republican National Commit tee, to re-elect Harrison in 1892, He said that he was assured by Carter that his $400,000 would certainly elect Harrison, Carter told him where he was going to spend the money, and that he "could get it back out of building ships for the Government after Harrison 292 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON was elected." "Harrison was defeated," said Cramp, "and I lost my money. I have since looked the matter up and have found that Mr. Carter did not spend the money where he said he would spend it, and I feel that I am a victim of misrepresentation." Mr, Cramp wanted to know of me how he could re cover the $400,000, and I told him I knew of no way except to make terms with the next administration and increase his contribution, , In December, when the Senate had convened, I went one day over to Tom Carter's seat and told him what Cramp had said to me. Carter smiled and replied, "Well, we did hit the old man pretty hard." Some time afterward, in a discussion with regard to the building of an armor-plate factory, I told on the floor of the Senate what Cramp had said to me about the $400,000. Carter, ex-chairman of the Republican National Committee, and Mark Hanna, then chairman of the committee, were both in their seats, but neither of them made any reply or took any notice of my state ment. Some time afterwards Senator Bacon, of Geor gia, interrupted a speech by Senator Hanna to say : Mr. BACON: "In this connection I want to call the attention of the Senate to the most remarkable thing I ever heard and the most remarkable thing I ever saw in the Senate. I fancy that the country has never been the witness to what we saw and heard in this chamber a few days ago. "A senator in his place in this chamber stated as a fact that the manufacturer of ships, a' prominent and the most prominent firm engaged in the manufacture of warships for the Govemment, had stated that in 1892 he was approached by the officers of the Republi can party and induced to give $400,000 to the campaign fund of that party upon the assurance that the money would be returned to him or made good to him in the contracts which he should have in the building of war- iships. ''Now, Mr. President, the remarkable thing that I want to call the attention of the Senate to is this: I A LOST ELECTION 293 heard that statement. I did not doubt that it would then and there be promptly challenged. I did not be lieve that such a statement could be made in the Sen ate of the United States in the presence of the leaders of the Republican party and no one deny it or call it in question. ' "Now, that was not made in a thin Senate; it was made In a full Senate. It was made when the chair man of the National Committee of the Republican party in the campaign of 1892 was in his seat and heard it, as well as the chairman of the Republican National Committee at the time, Mr. Hanna, and yet no one either challenged it or denied it, "Mr, President, in the absence of such a challenge and such a denial, the country must believe it is true," And Mr, Hanna made the following reply : Mr, HANNA: "Mr President THE PRESIDING OFFICER: "Does the Senator from Georgia yield to the Senator from Ohio ?" Mr. BACON: "I do, with pleasure." Mr. HANNA: "The Senator alludes to the fact that the chairman of the Republican Committee was in his seat and did not deny the statement made." Mr, BACON : "If I am incorrect in that, I certainly made it in good faith. I think I saw the Senator pres ent" Mr. HANNA: "If I undertook to reply to all such statements made upon this floor, I would occupy more time than the Senator from Georgia does in the Senate. I consider it unworthy of notice and decline to dignify it by a reply." It may well be noticed that Mr. Hanna did not under take to deny my statement and for this reason : Imme diately after I had made the statement in the Senate several of the prominent Republican members of the Senate and a number of newspaper men went to see Cramp, and Cramp told them that what I had said was true ; that he did tell me that he made a contribution 294 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON of over four hundred thousand dollars to Harrison's campaign ; that he made it upon the misrepresentations of Tom Carter; that he consulted with me as to how to get the money back; that he had not told it to me in confldence, but for the purpose of securing my assis tance in getting the money returned to him. One of the newspaper men reported what Cramp said. Of course. Cramp's statement to ¦'.hese Senators and newspaper men left the Republicans where it was impossible for them to meet my charge except by ignoring it. After Hanna had said that if he answered such statements he would take more of the Senate's time than was occupied by the Senator from Georgia, and "that the source from which the report came was un worthy of notice, I rose and said that perhaps I had something that would be of interest to the great man from Ohio, and that did come from a source worthy of his notice. I thereupon stated to the Senate that I had in my hand a petition from the Ohio State Senate, signed by four out of the five members of the Commit tee on Elections of the Ohio State Senate, asking the United States Senate to investigate the election of Mr. Hanna to that body. I said that this petition charged that Mr. Hanna, to secure his election to the United States Senate, had purchased the votes of two members of the Ohio Legislature from the city of Cincinnati; that the purchasing was done by Hanna agents under Hanna's direction ; that the sum of ten thousand dollars had been paid to one of the legislators ; and I said that this petition had been referred to the Committee on Elections to the United States Senate. After I called the attention of the Senate and the country to this venal and corrupt practice on the part of Mr. Hanna in pur chasing his seat in the Senate, the majority of the Senate Committee on Elections made a report and stated that, as no official person came from the Ohio legislature to present and to prosecute the case against Mr. Hanna before the Committee on Elections, they had concluded not to. look into the matter. But the A LOST ELECTION 295 minority of the Committee on Privileges and Elections in the Senate made the following report : "We cannot concur in the report of the majority of the Committee on Privileges and Elections in the mat ter of the report of the committee appointed by the Senate of the State of Ohio to investigate the charges of bribery in the election of the Hon. M. A. Hanna to the Senate of the United States. "The charge is that early in January, 1898, an at tempt, was made by H. H. Boyce and others to bribe John C. Otis, a member of the House of Representa tives of the General Assembly of the State of Ohio to vote for Marcus A. Hanna for the Senate of the United States." Among other things, the majority of the committee had reported: "Moreover, it sems clear to this committee that it would not be justified in recommending any action to be taken by the Senate without further testimony to be taken by the committee. The question whether addi tional evidence should be taken has been the only diffi cult question which the committee has considered. It is clear that Mr. Otis never had any intention of yield ing to bribery. He encouraged Mr. Boyce by the advice of others only in order to entrap him. Then he care fully withdrew and substituted his attorney, Mr. Camp bell, to continue the negotiations. Mr, Campbell labor ed to induce Mr, Boyce to offer money and, finally, as he says, obtained $1,750 from him as part payment on $3,500 to be paid for Mr. Otis' vote for Mr, Hanna, leaving $6,500 to be paid if Mr, Hanna was elected. At this point, public exposure, through Mr, Otis, Mr, Campbell and their associates, took place, Mr, Boyce disappeared, and the incident was closed. '"That Mr, Boyce, operating in Cincinnati, where Mr. Otis lives, has relations with Mr. Hanna's representa tives at Columbus, the state capital, the State Commit tee undertook to prove by the evidence of various de tectives, professional and amateur, who listened at telephone wires and shadowed Mr. Boyce, Mr. HoUen- 296 IMPERLA.L WASHINGTON beck and others. The effort of the committee was care. fully and skilfully made. It was not wholly devoid of results ; it raises pregnant suspicions that Mr. Hanna's representatives at Columbus knew what Mr. Boyce was doing. But this whole line of inquiry would require verification by testimony to be taken by the Committee on Privileges and Elections before that committee would be willing to found conclusions thereon." The quotation is from the report of the majority of the committee. Now we will see what the minority further say: "The attempt on the part of Boyce to buy Otis' vote for Mr. Hanna is clearly proven by Campbell who, from his testimony, seems to have been a lawyer of large practice. One thousand seven hundred and fifty dol lars was paid in cash by Boyce to Campbell as attorney for Otis. Boyce agreed to pay $1,750 more when Otis reached Columbus, and a balance of $6,500 more if Mr. Hanna was elected. . . . "We think that the evidence to which we have al ready referred, standing as it does uncontradicted and unexplained, shows that certain of Mr. Hanna's man agers at Columbus not only knew the purposes which Boyce had in view in Cincinnati, but also that they aided, abetted, and advised him in carrying out these purposes, and that this state of affairs existed while Mr. Hanna was present at his headquarters. . . . "First, That many of the witnesses, whose testimony apparently would have thrown much light upon the subject under inquiry, denied the jurisdiction of the committee and refused to testify under the advice of counsel, who stated that they represented the interests of Majors Rathbone and Dick and Senator Hanna ; and, "Second, That Mr. Hanna and his representatives had subpoenas. "The report of >-the majority says they 'do not doubt that if facts appeared from the report of the commit tee of the State Senate requiring the United States Senate, out of a proper regar^ for its own reputation, to take further testimony concerning Mr. Hanna's elec- A LOST ELECTION 297 tion, it would be the duty of the Senate to proceed without waiting for further prosecution of the case coming from residents of the State of Ohio.' "We think such facts do appear from the report of the committee of the State Senate, and that this body should direct further inquiry and investigation to be made." The minority who signed this report was composed of Senators Turley, Pettus and Caffery. After reading this and much more of the same kind of evidence to the Senate, I said : "Mr. President, these things are known to the Amer ican people. It will not do for the Senator from Ohio to stand up here and say that charges of this sort — ^if he answered all that were made he could not do much else — are unworthy of consideration or notice. From the Senate of his own state come these charges ; from a minority of the committee of this body come these charges, and yet the Senator from Ohio says they are unworthy of his notice — that they are little things." This report of the Senate Committee is rather a re markable document; all who signed the majority re port were Republicans and Mark Hanna was chairman of the Republican National Committee, and the general factotum of the whole Republican party." He repre sented the interests of great business and was a busi ness man. He had collected vast sums of money to corrupt the voters of this country and elect McKinley in 1896. So accustomed had the Republicans of the Senate become to the use of money that it did not dis turb them at all that Mr. Hanna had purchased his seat in that body. The facts which I presented did not cause even a ripple of interest, and the Senators did not seem to care if the public knew all about it. During the quar ter-century that has elapsed since this episode the pur chase of seats in the Senate has become so common that it attracts no public attention. Why should it when even the presidency of the United States is put up at auction in the Republican National Convention and knocked down to the highest bidder? 298 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Mr. Hanna was furious at what I had said about him and he determined that he would have revenge! My term in the Senate would expire in 1901, and Mark Hanna made up his mind to prevent my re-election, I was not running as a stalwart Republican in the election of 1900, for I had walked out of the St. Louis Republican Convention in 1896. I was running as a Bryanite on the Bryan Free Silver Republican ticket in South Dakota. Mr. Hanna raised a vast sum of money to corrupt the voters of South Dakota, and put iri charge of the work Hen;ry Payne, of Milwaukee, one of the well-known hangers-on of every Republican cam paign. Payne came out to South Dakota with $30,000 and in conjunction with the Republican organization of the state and the help oi: A. B. Kittridge, a Sioux Falls lawyer, afterwards a Republican United States Sen ator, they polled the state of South Dakota on the prob ability of my election. This task was not a great one. The total population of the state at that time was only 401,570, with a total vote in 1900 of 96,124. Payne sent out 200 teams and visited every farmer and voter in the state. When they had finished the canvass they found that I had the state by several thousand ma jority. This greatly alarmed Mr, Hanna and the Repub lican campaign managers, for they considered it of great political importance to get rid of me. Senator Allison, of Iowa, came to Dakota to see how the campaign was going on. He made no speeches, but simply looked over the possibilities of eliminating me from public life. -He was being entertained in my , home town, when C, 0. Bailey, a prominent attorney, asked him about me. Allison replied that I had the greatest power for making trouble of any man he ever knew, and that the interests of the party and the peo ple of this country would be best served by getting me out of the Senate. Senator Nelson of Minnesota also came to South Dakota and canvassed the State and in his speeches A LOST ELECTION 299 said Mr, Pettigrew should be defeated because he had opposed the great business interests that controlled the Government and the Republican party and therefore, if South Dakota wanted to get anything out of the Gov ernment, they should elect a man that would train with the gang, Theodore Roosevelt also joined in the contest against me as the candidate of the Republicans for vice presi dent on the ticket with McKinley, and sent the follow ing telegram to Senator Piatt in October, 1900 : "Good Lord, I hope we can beat Pettigrew for the Senate. That particular swine seems to me, on the whole, the most obnoxious of the entire drove," Why was Roosevelt opposed to my election? Be cause he was the candidate of the predatory interests that own the Government of the United States, Charles Edward Russell answered my question. Asserting that many public men of value to the country have been cried down by the clamor of sub sidized newspapers, Mr. Russell says further: "I have seen this happen a thousand times. Every observer, particularly if he has been a newspaper man, must be familiar with it. Years ago there was a man in the United States Senate that certain news papers did not like, because he had attacked the inter ests that owned these- newspapers. The newspapers covered that man with ridicule by misrepresenting everything he did or said. They convinced a large part of the country that he was a wild, erratic,, absurd, visionary ; when, as a matter of fact, he had one of the coolest, clearest and steadiest minds I have ever known in a long acquaintance with public men and affairs. Yet, the news columns drove him out of public life, to the great detriment of the public interests, I have no objection to mentioning his name. It was R, F, Petti grew, I "He was ahead of the times, for his vision was clearer than most men now occupying positions of pub lic trust, and he realized then that the interests were 300 IMPERLA.L WASHINGTON weaving the web of autocratic control about the several departments of the Government "Possessing the courage of his convictions, he stood almost alone as a target for the shafts of mendacious newspapers, many of them instigated by the sudden command ot great wealth. They were merciless and the people believed them rather than the man who had interceded in their behalf," After Henry Payne's canvassers had reported the re sults of their poll of the people of the state of Dakota, Hanna went out among the railroad interests, the trust interests and the financial interests of this coun try, and raised a special fund of $500,000" to be ex pended in the purchase of Dakota votes, I did not be lieve that it could be done because I had great confi dence in the farmers of Dakota and I had underesti mated the resources of the business interests, overesti mated th4 possibilities of ordinary human nature, Hanna himself came to South Dakota and stumped the state with Senator Fry, of Maine, The railroads fur nished a special train. The State Committee had been lavish with its publicity and great crowds met the Hanna special at every station. . At Madison, where there is a normal school, Hanna began his speech by taking off his hat and saying, "You see, I have no horns." The next day I addressed the same crowd-— largely composed of farmers — and said, "Of course Mark Hanna has no horns, I dehorned him In the Senate." And then I told the story of how he had bought his seat in that body. A day or two after my speech at Madison, Hanna came to Sioux Falls and addressed a large outdoor meeting and someone in the crowd yelled to Hanna to take off his hat and show the crowd where Pettigrew dehorned him. I was very badly beaten in the election. After it was over I made an investigation to determine how the work had been done. The Republicans had visited every banker in every country town In the State ; had deposited a sum of money with him, and had given him A LOST ELECTION 801 minute instructions as to the part that he was to play in the campaign. The local representatives of the Republican party would then take a list of the farmers, and watch for each man. When he came into town they would take him over to the bank and the banker would hand him ten dollars in cash. "That is yours," the representative of the Republican party would state, "and if Pettigrew loses this town ship (or county) in the election there is ten dollars more for you at the bank that you can get by coming in and asking for it after election." In some. cases, in several cases of which I know per sonally, the sum was twenty dollars before election and twenty dollars after election. Hanna boasted, after the election, that my name was never mentioned in any of his campaign speeches by either himself or Senator Fry. But his statement is false in this respect, for a Roberts County paper pub lished the following just after Mark Hanna's visit: "Mark Hanna at Sisseton Indian Agency, South Da kota, in an address to Two Star, chief of the Sissetons, chaperoned by Mr. Sapackman, chairman of the Rob erts County Republican Committee : " 'I understand that half of you Indians are going to vote for Bryan and Pettigrew. I understand that your annuities from the Government, due in about six weeks, are $22 per capita. That is enough for Indians who vote against the Great Father. If all the Sisseton In dians will vote the Republican ticket, I will have the Government increase their annuities $75 per, head. This will give to the Sisseton Indians $75 apiece instead of $22 apiece. Do you tumble?' "They turiibled and God did not forbid that citizen Mark Hanna should attempt to divert the will of the sovereign people or tamper with the sanctity of their ballots." I have since talked with many of these Indians who heard Mark Hanna's statement to them, and who cor roborate this story from the local newspaper. They 302 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON also told me that Mark Hanna never made any eff?!** to secure for them seventy-five dollars per capita which he had promised them if they would vote against me. I also learned that, during the campaign, the Repub lican Committee of South Dakota had trunkfuls of blank passes from every railroad in the country. Upon these passes they could send a man and his family to any point in the United States or the adjacent countries and return, free of cost and at the expense of the rail road. I know of several prominent Democrats who made long excursions after the election, one of them taking his family to the Hawaiian Islands. Mark Hanna had secured these passes by appealing to the railroads and by showing them my attack upon the Union and Central Pacific when they made their effort to swindle the Government out of the money which had been advanced to build the roads. He had also cited my bills for the Government ownership of all the roads in the United States, as well as my ex posures of the swindles in connection with the Railway Mail Pay. Consequently the railroads not only fur nished transportation, but a considerable amount of the money used against me. James J. Hill, president of the Great Northern Road, told me afterwards that Mark Hanna had assessed him fifty thousand dollars, and he told Hanna that he not only would not give a single dollar towards trying to defeat me in South Da kota, but he would not give the Republican National Committee any money whatever if they were going to undertake the purchase of the voters of South Dakota. After the election, I was in the Auditorium Hotel, in Chicago, getting lunch one day, when a young man came in and asked, 'Is this ex-Senator Pettigrew?" "Yes," I said, "it is." "Well," said the young man, "I want to tell you of an inci'^ent that might be of interest to you. I was Mark Hanna's private secretary in 1900, and on elec tion day Hanna left Chicago and went back to Cleve land to vote, leaving me in charge of the Republican headquarters. About ten o'clock election night, Hanna A LOST ELECTION 303 called me up over the phone and wanted to know about the election. I told him that McKinley was undoubted ly elected, and Hanna replied, 'Oh, I know that; but how about Pettigrew?' I thereupon replied, 'Pettigrew is undoubtedly beaten,' and Hanna said,/'If you are sure of that I can go home and go to bed and to sleep. I wanted to accomplish two things in this election^ — ^to elect McKinley and to beat Pettigrew, and I did not know which I wanted the worst.' " I think that was the most striking compliment that was ever paid to my work in the Senate. I had kept up my attacks upon the plutocracy until their spokes man was as anxious to defeat me as he was to elect a president. . I sent thousands of copies of the following letter to the voters of South Dakota in my campaign for re-election to the United States Senate in 1900 : "Sioux Falls, S. D., July 24, 1900. "Dear Sir: "I enclose herewith a copy of the platform adopted at Kansas City. It is a new Declaration of Independ ence. It is the platform upon which I am running for re-election to the United States Senate. I have been twice elected to the Senate from South Dakota, receiv ing the united support oi the Republicans of the state, and in both instances also of very many of the Demo crats and Populists. "I am now a candidate for re-election upon the plat form which I enclose, because I think it embraces the best settlement of the great principles involved in the coming political contest that I have seen. I am not therefore a candidate for re-election as a Republican, for the reason that I believe this contest is not one be tween political parties, but is a contest between those who wish to preserve Republican ¦ institutions in this country and prevent the Republic from becoming an aristocracy. It is a battle between the Man arid the Dollar ; between concentrated wealth in the hands of a few people and the great mass of the people who have produced the wealth, but who are unable, owing to a 304 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON pernicious system of transportation and combination of capital, to enjoy that which they produce. "The Republican party has been captured by the evil elements, by the great transportation companies, the great money trusts, and the great combinations of capi tal which have gained control of our manufacturing industries. It is therefore for the interest of the Re publican party to perpetuate that legislation which has produced the condition in regard to the distribution of wealth in this country, against which I protest. "I have not changed my views upon these great is sues since I ceased to act with the Republican party politically. My votes in the Senate on all these ques tions have been the same during the past four years as they were during the previous seven years. If I had changed my position on thesje questions my enemies would have ample proof of the fact in the Record of the Sen.ate ; but the votes which I have recorded show that rny position has not been changed, but the position of the Republican party has changed completely— so much so that, when I offered an amendment to the last Re publican Tariff Bill, refusing protection to articles con trolled by the trusts unless they dissolved the trusts, and allowed free competition within our own country, every Republican Senator voted against it and defeated the measure. "When the War Revenue Bill, to pay the expenses of carrying on the war with Spain, was under considera tion, I offered an amendment to tax the products of the trusts as a means of raising revenue, or compelling the dissolution of the trusts, and every Republican Sena tor voted against my amendment, "We offered an amendment to levy a tax upon in comes to support our armies in the contest with Spain, and all the Republican members of the Senate voted against it, and the bill was so framed as to lay the entire burden of taxation upon the individual — upon consumption — so that the poor man would pay just as much as the man of enormous wealth, "Against this unequal and unfair distribution of the A LOST ELECTION 80S burdens of taxation I protested, on the ground that It tended to the unequal distribution of wealth ; and that where the wealth of a country was once gathered into the hands of a few men the manhood of the masses was destroyed and the institutions of our country endan gered. But the Republican party, controlled by evil influences and headed by Mark Hanna, persisted in their policy, which has made it impossible for me to act with them politically, v "I left the Republican party in 1896 for the reason that I felt that the party had left the side of the people in its abandonment of bimetallism; but, above all, be cause of the fact that it omitted from its platform at St. Louis all allusion whatever to the trusts. Since that time, its course has been more and more in the direction of plutocracy, more and more in the direction of the government of the few to the disregard of the many, and their interests ; and it has culminated in an effort to conquer people Hving in the tropics, and to annex to this country territory that will never be or ganized into states, and in the establishment of a colo nial policy in violation of the Constitution of the United States and of the Declaration of Independence, and of every theory of Government we have advocated as a people. "I believe that colonial possessions mean a standing army of great proportions, and a vast horde of office holders serving a long distance from home, governing an unwilling people, which must result in constant con flict, and end In the curtailment of the right to vote among our own people, and a suppression of all protest by the armed forces assembled and equipped in the first instance for the purpose of conquering these distant possessions. "Under these circumstances, no matter what may be the consequences to^me personally, I feel it my duty to do everything in my power to overthrow at the polls the dominion and control of the Republican party, and thus restore this country in letter and in spirit back to the principles and (Joctrines of its founders, so that it 306 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON may continue to be an example to all people who believe in the doctrine of self-government, and that govern^ ments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, "I thus write you this long letter, hoping to make my own position clear, and stimulate you to greater .activity and effort in the coming campaign. I should like very much to hear from you on this subject, "Yours truly, "R. F. PETTIGREW." XXII. HAWAII— A REVOLUTION TO ()RDER. During the years of my acquaintance with Amer ican public life, I have seen the center of power move from Washington to Wall Street. When I first entered the Senate they talked of the "invisible empire of busi ness." During the nineties that empire ceased to be invisible — it came out in the open, and through its rep resentatives and attorneys on the floor of the Senate and the House it fought its battles for privilege and plunder^ — fought them and won them. . The plutocracy established its right to plunder the people of the United States. Through the banks, the railroads and the trusts, it robbed them openly and shamelessly, and those few of us who fought on the side of the people and against these masters of privi lege, were driven out of public life for our pains. Laws aimed to promote the general welfare were not so much as considered in Washington. The work of Congress was, first and last, to protect and safeguard the inter ests of big business. . I saw this thing and faced it. I fought it in the Senate during twelve years with all the strength and ability at my command, and when those twelve years of struggle were ended, the business power was im measurably stronger than it was when they began. The real strength of big business came over the issue of imperialism. The right to plunder at home had been pretty firmly established by the time the Sherman Law was passed in 1890. Tbe right to plunder abroad had never come up for serious consideration. From 1870 to 1890 the business interests of the United States were busy building railroads, opening mines and establishing factories. Even as late as the nineties there were only a few of the business groups that were looking outside the country for a chance to exploit and rob. Among these few were the sugar men. 308 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON The United States has never provided its own sugar supply. The sugar business is a profitable one, how ever, and the American business men made up their minds that if profits were to be made in sugar they might as well have them. The fight turned on Hawaii. . The Hawaiian Islands have a climate well adapted to sugar-growing and the soil, a deep volcanic ash over lying l^ulders, is the best sugar-cane soil in the world. In Hawaii they raise eight tons of sugar to the acre. Hawaii was owned by foreign capitalists among whom the Americans were the largest single holders. I had an investigation made when I was in Hawaii of the books of the interior department, for their law required that every sugar corporation should file a re port giving the names of the stockholders. All of the corporations did not comply with the law, but several did comply. I had their reports studied and from them it appeared that the holdings in sugar corporations, ar ranged by nationality, were : American, $8,225,750 ; British, $1,642,850; Hawaiian, $792,000; German, $458,700; and Portuguese, $1,200, making a total of $6,120,000. In short, more than half of the sugar plantation values were American owned. The estimates of taxable property in the Islands showed that the Hawaiians, who numbered together '89,504 individuals, owned taxable property to the amount of $8,101,701, while the American, British and Germans, 6,768 in number, owned taxable property to the amount of $26,701,908. The "foreigners," while numbering only one-seventh of the taxpayers, owned more than three-quarters of the taxable wealth in the Islands. Foreign economic interests on the Islands were para mount, and it was these interests that fostered the Revolution of 1893. I need not go into this matter in detail, as I have elaborated on it elsewhere (The Course of Empire, Chapter V) . Let it suffice to say that the United States Minister, resident at Honolulu, entered into a conspiracy with a few business men and their HAWAII— A REVOLUTION TO ORDER 309 representatives for the purpose of overthrowing the native government, and deposing the reigning queen. As a part Of this conspiracy, the United States Minister used American marines to protect the conspirators while they organized a govemment, which was imme diately recognized by the United States Minister. A treaty, based on this disgraceful incident, was sent to the Senate of the United States for ratification on the recommendation of President Harrison, and was re ported favorably by the Committee on Foreign Rela tions. The report of the Committee on Foreign Relations did not tell the facts regarding the overthrowing of the Hawaiian Govemment ; neither did the message of the President transmitting the treaty give the essential tacts, and it was with great difficulty that the facts were obtained. But the infamy of the whole transac tion was finally disclosed and, after a great many months of controversy, the treaty failed to command the two-thirds vote necessary for its ratification. I was the leader of the fight in the Senate against the treaty and Its ratification. The question excited wide spread attention. Most of the great newspapers were outspokenly in favor of ratifying the annexation treaty. They fiUed their columns with false headlines on the subject, and even resorted to the practice of making up press dispatches purported to coma from the Islands. Despite all their efforts, however, the treaty could not pass. There is no longer any dispute over the material facts of the Hawaiian Revolution. What were the essential facts behind the revolution that led the United States to make its first annexation of non-continental territory. There is no longer any serious dispute concerning them. George W. Merrill, who was our Minister to Hawaii, wrote Mr. Secretary Blaine, September 7, 1889, as follows: . •it is also noticeable that among the American resi dents here there are several who, from personal mo- 310 IMPERIAL WASHINGTaN tives, contemplate with satisfaction periodical dis quietude in this kingdom, hoping that frequent revo lutionary epochs will force the United States Govern ment to make this group a part of its territory and to absorb into its body politic this heterogeneous popula tion of 80,000, consisting of Chinese, Japanese, Portu guese, native Hawaiians, half castes, and only about 5,000 of those who may be properly denominated the white race. "In order to keep affairs in as much turmoil as pos sible, baseless rumors are constantly put in circula tion, many of which find publication in other coun tries." This was from our minister who was superseded shortly afterward by Mr. Stevens. Mr. Stevens was appointed minister in October, 1889. Harrison had been elected President. One of the issues of the campaign was free sugar. The McKinley Act became a law August 27, 1890, On August 20, 1891, Mr. Stevens wrote to Mr. Blaine as follows : "The probabilities strongly favor the presumption that a United States warship will not be pressingly necessary in the two or three immediate months. But as early as the first of December, without fail, the month preceding the election, and for some time there after, there should be a United States vessel here to render things secure. . . . There are increasing in dications that the annexation sentiment is growing among the business men. The present political situa tion is feverish, and I see no prospect of its bging per manently otherwise until these islands beconie a part of the American Union or a possession of Great Brit ain'." Here, then, is our minister, accredited to a friendly government, contemplating the destruction of that gov ernment and the annexation of its territory. Further on, in his next dispatch, he asked the State Depart ment to keep secret his statement in regard to the over throw of that government ; and he says in the dispatch HAWAII— A REVOLUTION TO ORDER 311 that it would be uncomfortable for him if the facts were known in Hawaii. On November 20, 1892, Stevens again writes : "I think it understating the truth to express the opinion that the loss to the owners of the sugar planta tions and mills, etc., and the consequent depreciation of other property by the passage of the McKinley Bill, has not been less than $12,000,000, a large portion of this loss falling on Americans residing here and in Cali fomia. "Unless some positive measure of relief be granted, the depreciation of sugar property will go on. . . . "One of two courses seems to me absolutely neces sary to be followed, either bold and vigorous measures for annexation, or a "customs' union," and ocean cable from the California Coast to Honolulu, Pearl Harbor perpetually ced^d to the United States, with an implied, but not necessarily stipulated, American protectorate over the Islands. I believe the former to be the better, that which will prove much the more advantageous to the islands, and the cheapest and least embarrassing in the end for the United States." Here, in 1892, two months before the final revolution, our minister outlines the reason for it and advises an nexation as a remedy for the situation. This state ment of Minister Stevens is supplied by ample evidence published in the official investigation which President Cleveland caused to be made of the whole situation. The American Minister had been converted into an advocate of the overthrow of the friendly govemment to which he was sent ; and what was done by these con spirators, few in number, having vast wealth — ^for tunes made absolutely out of the people of the United States in the profit upon sugar? The American Minis ter having been secured, the next step was to find an excuse for overthrowing the existing government. On the 14th of January, 1893, being Saturday, the Queen took steps to promulgate a new constitution. Pe titions had been received by her signed by two-thirds of all of the voters of the island, protesting against the 812 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Constitution of 1887 and asking that a new one be pro mulgated. The Constitution of 1887 deprived a large per cent of her people of the right to vote for members of the Senate or any voice in the government. The Constitution left the control of the country in the hands of the foreign business men and the people resented It. Immediately on the proposition being made to adopt a new Constitution, nine business men had a meeting in Smith's office. Smith was a lawyer in Honolulu. Later, he became an attorney-general of the so-called republic. There they began to plan and plot for the overthrow of the Queen. But, finding that there was opposition to her movement, the Queen abandoned the idea of issuing a new Constitution and, on Monday, January 16, 1898, she issued a statement to that effect. On Saturday, the 14th, a committee of safety com posed of thirteen members had been organized at W. V. Smith's office. At this meeting the feeling was ex pressed that this was a good time to get rid of the old regime and provide for annexation to the United States. There was no fear of disorder, no thought that life and property were in danger. Mr. Smith stated that the committee at his office debated whether they would ask the United States to establish a protectorate. They concluded that as the Queen had an armed force it was bes^ to appoint a com mittee to see the United States Minister, and ascertain what he would do.. After the meeting. Smith went to see the American Minister and arranged with him as to what should be done if Smith and his conspirators were arrested. He secured the required assurances and the call for troops was issued. These conspirators then held a public meeting and Thurston made some lurid remarks — ^talked about free dom, etc., and about liberty and tyrannical government — and after his fiery speech they passed the tamest sort of resolutions embodying their protest against the new Constitution, but said not a word about overthrowing the government or establishing a new government. HAWAII— A REVOLUTION TO ORDER 818 At every step in the proceeding great care was taken to consult the American Minister and to know just what he would do in case the conspirators were ar rested. There was a great sense of fear and appre hension of danger on the part of these thirteen men only. All honest citizens felt safe and secure in life and property. Troops were landed from the United States gunboat in the harbor, and distributed, not for the purpose of protecting Americans or American property, but to guard the government building and show the Queen that they were assisting the revolutionists. This was Monday evening. On Tuesday morning the Committee of Thirteen met again and signed the proclamation de claring the establishment of a new government, and about two o'clock started, in twO parties on different streets, to go to the government buildings, now guarded by United States troops, to read the proclamation, ac cording to a previously arranged plan with our minis ter. Without a single armed man they proceeded to the govemment building and, in front of it, within seventy- five yards of the 150 marines landed from the United^ States vessel, they proceeded to read the proclamation declaring that they were the government. They, how ever, took the precaution to go in two parties, one party going up one street and the other party another street, so as not to attract attention. They took the precaution to send one of their number up to see if there were any armed men likely to Interfere. The proclamation having been read at the govern ment building, guarded by United States troops, the United States Minister proceeded at once tp recognize the new government. They had not an armed man — they had proceeded to the goverriment building where there were clerks and officers of the Hawaiian Govern ment, with not even a policeman present. They stood up in front of that building within seventy-five yards of the Catling guns of the marines from an American battleship, and read a paper declaring that they were 314 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the govemment. Three-quarters of a mile away the Queen had Ave hundred men under arms and, without waiting, the moment they read the proclamation our minister recognized these thirteen men as the govern ment of Hawaii — without any armed forces whatever, loibwing the precedents followed by all civilized na tions, and he undertook to falsify the facts. , He claimed that he recognized the government after the Queen had surrendered — after the old government had given up — after she had abdicated and said that she would submit her case to Washington. An investi gation of the facts proved that this statement is false. After the recognition of this so-called govemment, before the surrender of the Queen or the armed forces which she had, a delegation was sent to her and she surrendered to the armed forces of the United States, saying: "I yield to the superior force of the United States of America, whose minister plenipotentiary. His Excel lency John L. Stevens, has caused the United States troops to be landed at Honolulu and declared that he would support the said provisional govemment." To avoid collision and bloodshed, she submitted the question to the Government at Washington, surren dering to the armed forces of the United States ; sur rendering after Stevens had recognized the so-called govemment; surrendering because she was told that the Government of the United States, whose people she had always been taught to reverence and respect, wpuld do justice and restore her to the throne, and they cited a precedent in Hawaiian history as a justification for this claim: "On the loth of February, 1848, the British frigate Carrysfort, commanded by Lord George Paulet, ar rived at Honolulu and showed displeasure by withhold- ing the usual salutes. "He proceeded at once to take the King prisoner and make such demands upon him that he surrendered his crown on condition that the question would be sub- HAWAII— A REVOLUTION TO ORDER 315 mitted to the British Government. The "History of the Hawaiian People" says : "Under the circumstances the King resolved to bear it no longer. 'I will not die piecemeal,' said he ; 'they may cut off my head at once. Let them take what they please ; I will give no more.' "Dr. Judd (he was an American) advised him to forestall the intended seizure of the islands by a tempo rary cession to Lord Paulet, pending an appeal to the British' Government. The event proved the wisdom of this advice. "On the next day the subject was discussed by the King and his council, and preliminaries were arranged with Lord Paulet for the cession. On the morning of the 25th the King and premier signed a provisional cession of the islands to Lord George Paulet, 'subject to the decision of the British Government after the re ceipt of full information from both parties. "At 3 o'clock p. m., February 25th, the King, stand ing on the ramparts of the fort, read a brief and elo quent address to his people." Then they submitted the question to Great Britain, and the English Government promptly restored the King to his throne, refusing to accept an usurpation of that sort. So, in this case, the Queen, having in mind this historic incident, said : "I, liiliuokalani, by the grace of God and under the Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Queen, do here by solemnly protest against any and all acts done against myself and constitutional Govemment of the Hawaiian Kingdom by certain persons claiming to have established a provisional government of and for this kingdom. "That I yield to the superior force of the United States of America, whose minister plenipotentiary. His Excellency John L. Stevens, has caused United States troops to be landed at Honolulu and declared that he would support the said provisional govemment. "Now, to avoid collision of armed forces and perhaps the loss of life, I do, under this protest, and impelled by 816 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON said force, shield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon the facts being presented to it, undo the actions of its represen tatives and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the constitutional sovereign of the Hawiian Islands." When Kamehameha, in 1843, surrendered and ceded the islands to the British admiral, because he could not resist the forces of an armed ship of war, the English Government promptly repudiated the act and restored him to the throne; and when Queen Liliuokalani, de prived of her authority by the armed forces of the United States, proposed to submit the question to this Govemment, she had good reason to suppose that the great republic would preserve its honor and dignity among the nations of the world and restore her to the throne. Yet, in the face of these facts, the treaty made with this revolutionary government of business men was passed by the Congress of the United States and this country took title to Hawaii against the will of the majority of the people in that country. ()n January 31st, thirteen days after the revolution, President Dole wrote Mr. Stevens that his govemment could not maintain itself, and asked for the protection of the United States troops. Stevens complied, and our flag was put up, over the public buildings, and re mained up until April 1, 1893, when Mr. Blount ordered it taken down. If there was a government that had been able to create and establish itself and to main tain itself with an armed force, why was it that thir teen days afterwards they begged of Mr. Stevens, admitting their impotency to maintain their govern ment, to again land the troops of the United States and put the United States flag upon the buildings? This was done on the 31st of January, and the flag remained there sixty days. The flag went up in dishonor. When it was raised under such circumstances it was a dis grace to the Republic. During the sixty days while our flag remained upon this building, the provisional government brought in foreign mercenaries from San Francisco, collected an HAWAII— A REVOLUTION TO ORDER 317 armed force, gathered up every gun upon the islands, passed the strictest penal laws against the importation of guns, and made it a criminal and penal offense to have a gun. The so-called republic was surrounded by armed men. Back and forth in front of the public offices marched men with Winchester rifles. The new government proceeded rapidly to enact laws. It consisted, not of a legislative body, but of nineteen men, self-constituted, supported by our armed forces. They provided that no one should be eligible to be a senator, a representative or a juror until he should have subscribed to the following oath or affirmation : "I do solemnly swear (or affirm), in the presence of Almighty God, that I will support the constitution, laws and govemment of the Republic of Hawaii ; and will not, either directly or indirectly, encourage or as sist in the restoration or establishment of a monarchial form of government in the Hawaiian Islands." On the 31st an act concerning seditious offenses was published. This law made it an offense to speak, write or print anything which niight bring hatred or con tempt against the govemirient. On the same day was published a law prohibiting the importation of firearms and ammunition without first obtaining the permission of the govemment On the same day an act relating to contempts became law : "Any person who shall publish any false report of the proceedings of said council, or insulting comment upon the same," etc., was liable to imprisonment for thirty days. What did this revolutionary government do? It set up a republic ! For nearly a year after the govemment was created they had no constitution. But after a year the nineteen concluded tc organize the Republic of Ha waii. Such a republic was never known to history before. An election was called for a constitutional con vention. The call provided that the people who would take an oath to support their govemment might elect eighteen delegates to the constitutional convention. The revolutionists, nineteen of them, constituted themselves members of the convention without any election, mak- 818 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON ing the election of delegates absolutely a farce. What kind of a constitution did they adopt? Their constitu tion provided for an oligarchy. It provided that the government should consist of Mr. Dole as president — he was named in the constitution — who was to hold office until the year 1900, a senate of fifteen members and a house of representatives of fifteen members, and the senate and house sitting together were to elect Mr. Dole's successor president after the year 1900, but no successor was to be elected unless he received a ma jority of the senate; and, if no successor was elected. Dole continued to hold the office. Underv.this constitution no person could vote for a senator unless he was worth $3,000 in personal prop erty or $1,500 in real estate, according to the last as sessment for taxation, or unless he had an income of $600 a year. These provisions shut out everybody in the Hawaiian Islands from the right of suffrage except the sugar planters and their fellow business and professional men. Such a qualification would have disfranchised ninety per cent of the voters of the United States. The constitution created a council of state, five of whom were to be selected by the president, five by the senate and five by the house of representatives; and this very constitution provided that a majority of the council could do business. Then it provided that they could make laws and appropriations when the legisla ture was not in session, and that their laws and their acts and their appropriations should hold good until the last day of the session of the legislature. They put into the constitution a provision for a union, commercial or political, with the United States, Did that come from the people ? They had no voice in it. The constitution was not endorsed by the pebple or submitted to the people. After this self-constituted convention had adopted its constitution, it declared the document the constitution of the Republic of Hawaii, and never submitted it to a vote at all. And yet it was Hawaii— A revolution to order 319 from this gang of sugar-raising conspirators that we took the Islands. The annexation of Hawaii was the first big victory won by the business interests In their campaign to plunder outside of the United States, It was the prece dent that they needed — ^the precedent that made easy the annexation of Porto Rico, the Piatt Amendment to the Cuban Treaty, the conquest of the Philippines and the other Imperialistic infamies that have sullied the good name of the United States during the past twenty years. When I entered this fight against the annexation of Hawaii, I had a vague impression of the power that could be exerted by big business. The fight lasted five years, and when it was ended. I had a clear, full knowledge of the methods and the strength of the American plutocracy. I entered the fight, knowing that it would be a, hard one. I left it, wondering that we had been able to hold off the interests for as many as five years. XXIII. ANTI-IMPERIALISM. The Senate debates over the annexation of Hawaii had roused millions of Americans to the imperial men ace that was threatening the life of the Republic. Be tween 1893, when the revolution occurred in Hawaii, and 1898, when the annexation of the islands was finally approved under the stress of the war frenzy that possessed the country, I carried on almost a con tinual fight against the policy of those who were advo cating annexation. The friends of the treaty were not able, during those five years, to secure anything like the necessary two-thirds of the Senate, and the fight against annexation might have been won but for the Spanish-American War with its tidal wave of patri otic frenzy. It was on July 7, 1898, after the war had been in progress for more than two months, and after the public attention had been turned from the problems of imperialism to the celebration of victory, that Hawaii was annexed, and even then the imperialists still lacked their two-thirds of the Senators, so that it was neces sary to provide for annexation by a joint resolution which required only a majority of both Houses Of Con gress. With the end of the war there was a swing back toward sanity and a vigorous protest rose from all parts of the country. Millions of the plain people were eager to stem the tide of imperialism that was running so strongly in favor of the big business interests and their policies. As one means of checking imperialism an Anti- Imperialist League was formed about 1899. The league had a large popular membership — about half a million, I believe — held mass meetings and conferences in all parts of the country — adopted a platform that re nounced the imperialism of the McKinley adminlstra- ANTI-IMPERIALISM 321 tion, and pledged itself to enter politics and fight the issue through to a finish in every voting precinct in the United States. Pursuant to* this program, a conference was called at the Plaza Hotel in New York, for the 6th of Janu ary, 1900. The national elections were due in Novem ber of the same year ; it seemed certain that McKinley would seek a second presidential term on his record as an advocate of annexation and conquest ; there was, therefore, an excellent chance to make a clear Issue and to organize a large enough sentiment within the ranks of both old parties to administer a severe rebuke to the business interests that were behind the Repub lican party and its imperial policies. The meeting of January 6th turned out to be an eventful one, Andrew Carnegie was present, as well as Carl Schurz, ex-Senator Henderson, Brisbane WaiKer, Gamaliel Bradford, Edward Burrett Smith, Prof, Franklin H, Giddings, and about ten others. All were prominent men, and all were radically opposed to any movement that looked towards the holding of colonies against the will of the inhabitants and in vio lation of the principles enunciated In the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, I was the only Senator or member of the House present at this meet ing. We had our meals brought to us, and talked all day. Finally we decided that we would organize a third political party. It was agreed by Carnegie and Schurz and Hender son and by Prof. Giddings that the two old political parties— Democratic and Republican — were just alike; that as parties they were simply the servants of the great combinations and corporations who were the real rulers of the country; that it was foolish to depend upon either of them to oppose a policy which was being pushed by their financial backers and, therefore, it was decided to start a third party and to organize it in every county in the United States. Mr. Carnegie, in a vigorous speech, urged the neces- 322 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON sity of a new political party for the purpose of oppos ing the imperial policV of both of the old parties, and said that he would give as much money, dollar for dol lar, as the rest of us could raise toward promoting the campaign. As a pledge of good faith, he subscribed twenty-five thousand dollars on the spot. The others present subscribed a like amount, elected Edward Burrett Smith, of Chicago, chairman of the political organization which they were forming, and authorized him, in consultation with the commit tee which had been appointed, to take charge of the campaign, to secure an organization in every county in the United States, and to have national committee men from every state. Camegie paid $15,000 of the $25,000 he had sub scribed. The others paid in the whole of their sub scription ($25,000) and active work was begun within a month. Shortly after the New York meeting Car negie came to my house in Washington, talked about the whole matter to me, and expressed great earnest ness and anxiety about the success of the movement I had every reason to believe that Carnegie meant to stand by the movement, and I felt convinced that his financial position and influence would enable us to raise a sufficient amount of money to carry on an effective campaign against McKinley and his imperialist backers. I had known Andrew Carnegie very well for many years. I first became intimately acquainted with him during the contest in the Senate over the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands. I led the opposition to the annexation of those islands ehiefiy because the annexa tion would mean that we were starting upon a colonial system, acquiring a territory inhabited by a people not suited to our form of govemment, and that such a move would be the first step in the course of empire. Camegie was of the same view, and, during the con test, often came to my house in Washington and dis cussed the question with me. At the same time, I was investigating the question ANTI-IMPERLA.LISM 328 of the distribution of wealth in the United States, and I discussed the matter with him and, finally, made a speech in the Senate on that question. Carnegie agreed with me that the concentration of wealth in a few hands and the move for imperialism were both serious menaces to the American people and their liberties. Carnegie was not then so enormously rich as he after wards became Carnegie was a rich man even in 1900, but he had liberal views. I had known him for years, and had known during all of that time that he was vigorously opposed to imperialism. His support of the anti-imper- rialist movement, therefore, seemed to represent a very substantial part of the foundation upon which the movement was built. The story of our plans was soon noised ahroad, and it became known that an effort was being made to organize a third political party with the backing of Andrew Carnegie. About the middle of February I received a letter from Mr. Smith urging me to come to New York. I went at once, and was told by Mr. Smith that Carnegie had refused to pay- in any more money after his first fifteen thousand dollars, and that he had refused to have anything to do with the mem bers of the committee, although they had made re peated efforts to see him and to get Into communica tion with him. In view of my acquaintance with Carnegie, Mr. Smith thought that I was the best per son to see him and ascertain why he had abandoned the project about which he had been so enthusiastic only a month before. I called upon Mr. Camegie, but he refused to see me. I then went down to Wall Street to see some friends and acquaintances who were interested in the business side of national affairs, and to inquire why Camegie had abandoned his effort to organize a third party, and had gone back on the whole anti-imperialist position of which he was an acknowledged advocate. I was not long in discovering the real difficulty. The steel trust had been talked about and planned 824 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON by the great capitalistic combinations of this country, and Carnegie was one bf the parties to the negotiations. The matter had gone so far that the following proposi tions were agreed up: First, they were to organize a corporation with one billion dollars of stock, none of v/hich was to be paid for; second, they were to issue four hundred million dollars of bonds to pay for the properties and furnish working capital. Carnegie was to receive one hundred and sixty millions of this four hundred millions of bonds and, in addition, a like amount of the stock, and he was, of course, very anxious to consummate this deal which was of enor mous financial advantage to him. No sooner was it noised abroad that Carnegie was actively engaged in organizing a third political party, which would oppose Mcis-inley and his imperialist pol icy, than he was waited on by a committee, with the Ultimatum that they would go no further with the organization of the steel trust unless he abandoned his third party activities and stopped his contributions towards the movement. The members of the commit tee told him that it was absolutely necessary that they should have a protective tariff in order to justify the organization of the steel trust ; that in order to have a tariff satisfactory to them, McKinley must be elected ; that the organization of a third party would jeopardize his election, and, consequently, the tariff, and as they were going to capitalize the tariff by the Issue of stock for which they paid nothing, they would have nothing further to do with the steel trust if Carnegie insisted upon pursuing the political course he had outlined. The issue was a very clear one — apolitical principles on one side and immense financial profits on the other. After weighing the matter, Carnegie abandoned the whole third party movement and went in for the elec tion of McKinley. Subsequently, the steel trust organization was com pleted and Camegie received his quota of the bonds and stock of the combination. He then retired from ANTI-IMPERIALISM 325 active business and began to build monuments to him self all over the world. The anti-imperialist movement, which had depended so largely upon Carnegie's support, worked on for a time, -hampered by a shortage of funds and a lack of effective interest in influential quarters. Its efforts were virtually nullified by Carnegie's withdrawal and the lukewarm support from other sources. The Repub licans won the election. The steel trust secured the tariff it needed. The combination was perfected. The Imperial policy of the preceding four years was con firmed by the election, and the hopes of those who had worked so loyally against the change of national policy were destroyed. Undoubtedly we made a mistake to pin so much faith on the actions of one man — particularly in view of his business connections. On the other hand, his friend ship, his determination and his appa,rent sincerity gave us every reason to believe that he could be relied upon to see the movement through. We had made the issue — in Congress and out. We had set the Declaration of Independence against the conquest of the Philippines and the Constitution against the Hawaiian Treaty. We had placed the rights of man against the interests of the plutocracy. We had done everything that human ingenuity and energy and foresight could do to make our fight effec tive, and we had lost out. McKinley, the steel trust, big business and imperialism had won. XXIV. CRIMINAL AGGRESSION IN THE PHILIPPINES. The annexation of Hawaii and the Spanish Treaty, which provided for the acquisition by the United States of Porto Rico, Guam and the Philippines, started this country definitely on the course of empire. From that time — the years 1898 and 1899 — ^we were committed to an imperial policy. "Imperial policy" is a phrase with a pleasant sound and a dismal echo — dismal for the rights of man and women. The moment we adopted an imperial policy we coirimitted ourselves to certain lines of national conduct that are as far from the principles of the Declaration of Independence as the east is from the west. In our new possessions is was necessary : First, to beat into submission any of the native pop ulation which displays a spirit of independence ; Second, to extend the imperial boundaries in order to have more opportunity for exploitation ; Third, to establish measures that will insure the ef fective exploitation of the native population. Our first Imperial duty — ^that of beating the native population into submission — was presented only in the Philippines. The Cubans were nominally self-govern ing; the inhabitants of Porto Rico had welcomed the Americans as saviors. The Filipinos had followed the same course at first, but, when they found that they were not to be free, they turned about and fought as stubbornly for their inde pendence of American rule as they had fought during the preceding century for their independence of Span ish rule. It was thp strength of the American army, not the justice of the American cause, that reduced the Filipinos to submission. Perhaps nowhere in American history is there a rec ord so black as that which describes our dealings with AGGRESSION IN THE PHILIPPINES 327 the Filipinos. Before the seizure of the islands by Admiral Dewey, McKinley had taken a high moral stand on the subject of forcible annexation. In his message to Congress (April 11, 1898) he had said: "I speak not of forcible annexation, for that cannot be thought of. That, by our code of morals, would be criminal aggression." So it would, but we practiced it toward the Filipinos with the same zest that the Brit ish have displayed in India or the Japanese in Korea. When we decided to attack Spain, when Dewey was ordered to sail from Hongkong and to destroy the Spanish fleet, a rebellion was going on in the Philip pine Islands. The inhabitants of those Islands were trying to throw off the Spanish yoke. Knowing that at Singapore there was a man, the most capable among the Filipinos, who had led a former revolt, our officers in the East induced this man to go back to Manila and organize the insurgent forces. Aguinaldo arrived on the 17th day of May, 1898. He immediately organized the insurgent forces. He purchased arms in Hong kong. Admiral Dewey furnished him with arms taken from the Spanish forces, and he attacked the Spanish garrisons all over the province of Cavite and secured arms from his prisoners. He pursued this course dur ing the summer of 1898, until he had captured the entire island of Luzon except two Spanish garrisons — very small ones — and before winter he captured those. Dewey, in his report, says his progress was wonderful. He took 9,000 prisoners. After having captured the entire island, he set up a govemment, which was a peaceful government, a govemment suitable to those people, a government which protected life and property throughout the entire area of that country. He also captured the Southern Islands, the Island of Panay, of Cebu, and Negros, and organized governments there. He assembled an army of 30,000 men and surrounded Manila. His army was intrenched. He invested the city on the land side while our navy blockaded the port on the ocean side. We acted in absolute concert with each other, consulted together, and, when Manila was 828 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON finally taken, onr troops landed, asking the insurgents to give up aSoux a quarter of a mile of their trenches. They marched out and allowed our troops to occupy a portion of their works. They believed that they were to act in concert with us in the attack upon Manila, When the attack was ordered their troops marched into the city along with ours. They took the principal suburb of Manila. We took and occupied the walled city. When they came to the walled city, which con tained less than one-fifth of the population of the city of Manila, they found our bayonets turned against them. They were told ?^nat they could not enter. They had lost thousands of lives in their contest with Spain; they were in possession of that entire country, and yet, although in the assault upon the city they had lost more men than we did, ihey were denied admittance to the city, and they yielded and occupied the suburbs for some time. Finally, we requested that they retire from the sub urbs and they retired. Aguinaldo asked that he might be permitted to retire slowly, as it was difficult to govern his people and convince them that it was right that they should surrender possession of territory which they had conquered and for which many of their comrades had laid down their lives. He also asked that, in case we made a treaty with Spain, the territory which he had conquered should be restored to him ; and this we refused. So we did not conquer the islands from Spain, for Spain had been conquered and driven out by the government of Aguinaldo. We had simply helped to take the city of Manila. Therefore, we took no title by conquest from Spain, for, at the time of making the treaty with Spain, we had not conquered any territory from her. We did not acquire title by purchase, because title by purchase required delivery of possession and, as Spain was not in possession, she could not and did not deliver the islands to us. By what right are we there? By no right in morals or law ; by no right that can be defended before God or man. We are there as conquer- AGGRESSION IN THE PHILIPPINES 329 ors ; we are there as armed banditti that would enter your premises in daytime, and we have no more right to be there than the bandit ha? to enter and despoil your home. In October Aguinaldo was again asked to give up more territory. He was again asked to retire his troops beyond not only the city of Manila, but the adjoining towns. Then he called the attention of General Otis to the fact that the towns which Otis desired him to surrender were not a part of Manila — you will find it on pages 20 and 21 of General Otis' report. General Otis said, "You are right; the territory which I now demand I cannot find as embraced in the city of Manila or its suburbs, but," he said "that makes no difference ; I insist on the possession of the territory anyway." So our lines were pushed out constantly, creating irrita tion and bad feeling. Finally Dewey seized the ships of the Filipinos in the harbor. Was not that an act of war? Why talk Ipnger about who commenced the war in the Philip pines, when in October we seized the vessels of our allies — and they were vessels of war — dismissed the men who manned them, took down the Filipino flag, and removed it from the sea? On the 24th of November, Otis again wrote to Agui naldo, saying that he must retire beyond the village of Santa Mesa, and that if he did not he would attack him. On the 21st of December the President sent a proclamation to be published in the Philippines, telling the inhabitants that the United States has assumed sovereignty over the islands — a proclamation which was a clear declaration of war — a declaration that we would extend our military control, then existing In the city of Manila, throughout the entire area of the group. This proclamation was published in the Philippines on the 4th of January, 1899. We seized their ships in October; we drove them beyond the territorial limits of the city of Manila — ^the only country we had occu pied or had any right to occupy under the protocol with 330 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Spain; we, on the 4th day of February, attacked their forces and fired the first and second shots, and killed three of their people. After that, on the 5th day of February, the day after hostilities were inaugurated, Aguinaldo asked to have hostilities cease, and said that he had no notion of making an attack on our people and had not done so. The reply was that fighting hav ing once Commenced, it should go on to the grim end. Under these circumstances, we are precluded from taking any other position than that we betrayed and attacked an ally; that we conquered and reduced to subjection an unwilling people; that because we are mighty and because our army is strong enough to de stroy the independence of an ally, we have deliberately taken possession of territory that was desired by our hig business men for their enrichment. By our "code of morals" our very presence in the Philippines, after the natives had established their own government, was an offense. By the same code, our greatest crime in the Philippines was the denial by the Washington administration, backed by the army and navy, of the right of self-government. The Filipinos not only desired self-government, but they actually established it before the American army began the conquest of the islands. One of Lincoln's most famous remarks is as follows : "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves ; and under the rule of a just God cannot long retain it," I believe that is true. I believe the reflex action upon our own people of the conquest of other peoples and their government, against their will, has undermined the free institutions of this country, and has already resulted in the destruction of the republic President McKinley urged the conquest of the Philip pines because he said they were not fit for self-govern ment. I believe that there are no people fit for any other form of government. Governments are insti tuted, not bestowed, and therefore derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. AGGRESSION IN THE PHILIPPINES 881 Any nation of people is capable of maintaining as good a government as they are entitled to have. When people can maintain a better government they will evolve it. It is impossible to give them a better gov ernment than they can maintain for themselves. A form of government will be as good as the average of the Individuals composing the community are willing to have. The American Indians maintained a government and, for them, a better one than we have been able to bestow upon them. The Esquimaux in the arctic region maintain a government of their own suited to their condition and their circumstances, and it is a better govemment than anybody else can give them. Would their condition be improved by sending them foreign governors and a foreign council to enact laws and direct their course and method in life and to guide them in their civic and civil affairs? So it is with every other people the world around. There is nothing in the his tory of the colonies of the so-called Christian nations of the world to encourage the idea that we can give to this people a better government than they can maintain by themselves. Is it an old doctrine that all govemments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed? Some have said that it was a nursery rhyme sung around the cradle of the republic The doctrine is new. It was announced littie more than a century ago, a day in the birth and life of nations, and yet this great republic deliberately abandoned it for the old doctrine and the old theory and the old idea of selfishness. Lincoln, in his speech at Springfield on June 26, 1857, thus defined his notions of the Declaration pf Inde pendence : "In those days our Declaration of Independence was held sacred by all and thought to include all ; but now, to aid in making the bondage of the negro universal •ind eternal, it Is assailed and sneered at, and construed, and hawked at, and torn, till, if its framers coidd rise from their graves, they could not at all recogrnize it All t^e powers of earth seem rapidly combining against 382 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON him, mammon is after him, ambition follows, philoso phy follows, and theology is fast joining the cry. . . ^ "I think the authors of that notable instrument in tended to include all men; they did not mean to say all were equal in color, size, intellect, moral develop ment or social capacity. They defined with tolerable distinctness in what respects they did consider all men created equal — equal with 'certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happi ness.' This they said, and this they meant. They did not mean to assert the obvious untruth that all were actually then enjoying that equality, nor yet that they were about to confer it immediately upon them. In fact, they had no power to confer such a boon. They meant simply to declare the right, so that the enforce ment of it might follow as fast as circumstances should permit. "They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society, which should.be familiar to all, and revered by all, constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and, even though never perfectly attained, constantly ap proximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its infiuence and. augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors everywhere. The assertion that 'all men are created equal' was of no practical use in effecting Our separation from Great Britain, and it was placed in the Declaration not for that, but for future use. Its authors meant it to be as, thank God, it now Is proving itself, a stumbling block to all those who, in after times, might seek to tum a free people back into the hateful paths of despotism. They knew the proneness of prosperity to breed tyrants, and they meant that when such should reappear in this fair land and commence their vocation they, should find left for them at least one hard nut to crack." It seems to me that Lincoln, with his prophetic vision, must have foreseen this day when prosperity, breeding tyrants, should undertake to declare that the Declaration of Independence no longer applies to any^ AGGRESSION IN THE PHILIPPINES 383 body but the people whom we decide are capable of self-government. The holding of tropical dountries, the conquest of unwilling people, their retention in subjugation by a standing army, means of necessity not a republic where all the people must be consulted, but a despotism where the will of one man can march armies, declare war and act with great rapidity. A republic is naturally slow in action, because the people milst be considered and must be consulted. We took on many of the semblances of monarchy and of imperialism during the McKinley administration — concealment of facts from the people, denial of news and information, no knowledge of what is going on, no announcement of piallcy and purpose; and the excuse for it all was that if we should allow the people to know the facts there was danger of creating disapproval of the course of our monarch, and if the enemy should secure these facts it would be of some assistance to them. This is necessary in a monarchy. Press censor ship too is a necessary adjunct of imperialism — one of the things our forefathers would not have tolerated for a day. And yet our people are becoming so numb that they are willing to accept it, and even criticize men who protest. We annexed t^e Philippines forcibly. That, accord ing to the principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence, is criminal aggression. We departed from the foundation principles of this country ; violated its most sacred obligations to the world, and pursued the same brutal, unjustified policy that Great Britain has pursued wherever her conquering armies have mowed down naked savages with machine guns. XXy. IMPERIALISM AT WORK. The story of our criminal aggression in the Philip pines makes bad reading for the liberty-loving Ameri can, but it is not the only shameful page in American imperial history-r-r-far from it. The United States has been following the course of empire for many a year. Since the days when the white man first came into con tact with the American Indians, the English-speaking people of North America, after the example of their cousins across the water, have been robbing weaker nations of their property and calling it civilization. Our first aggressive war after the Revolution, which made us a nation, was the war in 1846 with Mexico. We invaded Mexico without any provocation and stole from Mexico half her territory and annexed it to the United States. General Grant, in his Memoirs, writes : "The occupation and annexation of Texas was, from the inception of the movement to its final culmination, to acquire territory out of which slave states might be formed for the American slave-holders. Even if the annexation of Texas could be justified, the manner in which the subsequent war was forced upon Mexico could not" (Vol. 1, p. 33.) At another point Grant holds that "the war was one of conquest in the interest of an institution." (Vol. 1, p. 115.) Again he states : "It was an instance of a re public following the bad example of European monar chies in not considering justice in their desire to ac quire additional territory," (Vol,, 1, p, 32,) These are the .sentiments of a man who was an officer in the American army that conquered Mexico and who later distinguished himself in the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, in the House of Representatives, voted against and denounced the war with Mexico as a great wrong. (See his speech in the House of Repre sentatives, January 12, 1848. Later in the san^e year. IMPERIALISM AT WORK 885 in a letter to J. M. Peck, Washington, May 21, 1848 (Complete Works, N. Y. Century Company, 1894, Vol. 1, pp. 120-122), he writes: "It is a fact that the United States army, in march ing to the Rio Grande, marched into a peaceful Mexi can settlement, and frightened the inhabitants away from their homes and their growing crops. It is a fact that Fort Brown, opposite Matamoras,-Wa3 built by that army within a Mexican cotton field. ... It is a fact that when the Mexicans captured C?iptain Thorn ton and his comipand they captured them within an other Mexican cotton field." We went into Mexico because we had taken a fancy to some of Mexico's territory. After a war that lasted two years we helped ourselves to nearly nine hundred thousand square miles of land. That was the first great military triumph of the American Imperialists. Our next performance was the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands, and this was closely followed by the conquest of the Philippines. This robbery did not inure to the benefit of the laboring people of the United States, but exclusively to the advantage of the exploit ing speculators and plunderers. - The Mexican War occurred more than seventy years ago. Between that time and the Spanish War exactly fifty years elapsed without a single act of aggression or a single war of conquest waged by the United States, Those were the years during which the slave oligarchy of the South was replaced by the power of an exploiting plutocracy of the North — ^the years that saw the rise to power of a new ruling class in the United States, The new rulers were busy with their internal affairs at first. By the time of the Spanish-American War, however, they had found their stride and they have been length ening it ever since. We had scarcely reduced the Philippines to subjec tion when the Roosevelt administration became in volved in the taking of Panama, one of the most infa mous episodes that ever disgraced American history. The Republic of Colombia is situated on the north 836 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON coast of South America and embraced the whole of the Isthmus of Panama. It has a government modeled after that of the United States, and is composed of several independent states having governors and legis lative bodies of their own. The Isthmus of Panama was the State of Panama, one of the states composing this Republic of Colombia. In 1903, while Roosevelt was President, he negoti ated with the French company that held the franchise for the purchase of the then uncompleted canal across the Isthmus and approached the Republic of Colombia with an offer of ten million dollars if they would cede to the United States a strip ten miles wide across the Isthmus. The cession was to grant sovereign rights and thus give the United States exclusive control over the Canal. At the same time this cession would cut the State of Panama in two.- Colombia was afraid to deal with us for fear that we, having obtained a foothold at Panama, might take the whole country. She therefore declined to sell the Canal Zone. Roosevelt thereupon sent our navy and our marines to Colon, which is the port on the Gulf side of the Isthmus of Panama, and secretly notified the govern ment of the State of Panama that, if they would set up a republic and revolt against the Republic of Colombia, he would give them the ten millions of dollars for the canal strip, arid would also see that Colombia did not send any troops to suppress their rebellion. The Gov ernor of Panama agreed to this arrangement, and, at the proper time, started a rebellion to set up an inde pendent govemment. The Republic of Colombia sent sufficient troops to overthrow and suppress the rebellion, but Roosevelt had instructed the officers in control of the American marines not to allow Colombia to land any troops in Panama or to interfere with what went on there. Pur suant to their instructions, our officers refused to allow the Colombian troops to proceed to the scene of re bellion, but, instead, turned them back and compelled them to return to Colombia. IMPERIALISM AT WORK 337 On November 2, 1903, the Department of State at Washington telegraphed the naval authorities at the Isthmus as follows : " (a) Keep the transit free and uninterrupted. Should there be a threat of interruption by armed force, oc cupy the railroad line; prevent the landing of any armed force having hostile intentions, whether the government or insurgent, at Colon, Portobelo, or any other point. Prevent landing if in your judgment it might precipitate a conflict, "(b) In case of doubt regarding the intentions of any armed force, occupy Ancon Hill and fortify it with artillery," About 3 :40 P. M, on November 3, 1903, Loomis, Act ing Secretary of State, sent the following telegram to the person in charge of the United States consulate at Panama : "We are informed that there has been an uprising on the Isthmus; keep this department informed of everything without delay," The Consul of the United States answered on the same day : "The uprising has not occurred yet ;.it is announced that it will take place this evening. The situation is critical,"* Later on the same day (November 8) at about nine o'clock, Loomis sent the following telegram to the United States consulatp at Panama: "Troops which landed from Cartagena must not continue to Panama," At 10:30 the same day, another telegram was sent to the same official : "If the cablegram to the Nashville (one of the war vessels then at Panama) has not been delivered inform her captain immediately that he must prevent the government troops from continuing on to Panama or from assuming an attitude which might result in bloodshed," On the same day, November 3, the following tele gram was sent to the Secretary of the Navy by the * This correspondence will be found in House Document 8, 58th Congress, 1st Session, which contains the official corre spondence connected with the Panama Revolution of 1903. 888 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON commander of one of the war vessels stationed at Colon : "I acknowledge receipt of your telegram of Novem ber 2 (above referred to). Before receiving it, there were landed here this morning by the Colombian gov ernment about four hundred from Cartagena. There is no revolution on the Isthmus, nor any disturbance. It is possible that the movement to proclaim independ ence may take place in Panama this evening." At about 10 o'clock P, M, of the same day, the De partment of State at Washington received from the Vice-Consul of the United States in Panama the fol lowing telegram : "The revolt took place this evening at six; there has been no bloodshed. The government will be organized this evening and will be composed of three consuls and a cabinet. It is believed that a simi lar movement will take place in Colon." On the same day. General Tovar arrived at Colon with a battalion of sharpshooters from the Colombian army, a force more than adequate to handle the upris ing on the Isthmus. On the following day, November 4, Hubbard, com mander of one of our war vessels at Colon, sent the Secreatry of the Navy the following dispatch: "Gov emment troops (Colombian) now at^ Colon. I have prohibited the movement of troops in either direction. There has been no interruption of transit yet. I shall make every effort to preserve peace and order." On November 6, the Secretary of State at Washing ton, telegraphed to the Vice-Consul in Panama in the following terms : "The people of Panama by an appar ently unanimous movement have severed their political bonds with the Republic of Colombia and have assumed their independence. As soon as you are convinced that a de facto government, republican in form and without substantial opposition on the part of its own people, has been established on the Isthmus of Panama, you will enter into relations with it as the responsible gov ernment of the territory." Here, then, was a rebellion by one state against a IMPERIALISM AT WORK 889 sister republic — a rebellion which we helped to or ganize, a rebellion which was assisted by our troops and navy, which were sent in advance to help make the rebellion a success. Is there any more glaring chapter of infamous conduct in the treatment of one nation by another than this proceeding on the part of "the United States? I know of nothing that parallels it in its in famy except the annexation of Texas, the acquisition of Hawaii and of the Philippines. Let me cite one more illustration of the Imperialistic methods employed by the United States in its recent dealings with Latin-America. Central America is a country about four times as large as the state of Ohio, and has a population of a littl^ over five million people. The country is divided into five republics — Guatemala, Honduras, Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica. Dur ing Taft's administration the United States intervened during a difficulty between some of the Central Ameri can states, in which Nicaragua was involved. The United States thereupon said : "Let us have a confer ence," and the result was that all of the states of Cen tral America except Nicaragua sent delegates to Costa Rica to attend the conference, the object of which was to make perpetual peace in Central America. The president of Nicaragua refused to send a dele gate because the conference had been called by the United States, and he would not recognize the right of the United States to interfere in Central American af fairs. Thereupon the United States sent down troops and drove him out of office and put a puppet in his place. Afterwards a meeting was held in Washington of the Central American states, and Nicaragua partici pated. At that meeting a League of Nations was formed of the Central American republfcs, and it was agreed to arbitrate all their differences and thus to end war for ever. There was to be an international court to decide the international problems of Central America. Car negie hailed the proposition with delight, and furnished 340 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON one hundred thousand dollars to build a marble peace building in Costa Rica. Meanwhile, the puppet we had set up in the place of the duly elected president of Nicaragua began looting the treasury of Nicaragua, and was finally forced to borrow money. The United States Government there upon notified their puppet that the New York bankers would let him have all the money he wanted. In 1912 the people of Nicaragua revolted against the government set up by us, and in order to support our man in authority we landed marines in the capital of ISiicaragua, and we have kept them there, and our creatures have been ruling there ever since. Nicaragua contracted further debts, until at last they could not meet their interest payments. In 1916^Nicaragua was very hard up, and we said to her: "Your case is practically hopdess. You cannot pay interest on your debt. The United States may some time want to build a canal up the San Juan River and through Lake Nicaragua to the Pacific Ocean. Give us the San Juan River and the lake, with the privi lege of building the canal when we get ready to do it, and give us that splendid bay of Fonesca, and a little island for a naval base, and we will loan you the money to pay your interest and put things on a new basis." The result was that Nicaragua, having a president of our choice, maintained by our blue jackets, said : "Very good. We will give you the right of way and we will sell you the island, and will take the funds to pay the interest on the money we owe you." Costa Rica claimed a partial right in the San Juan River, which is the boundary between the two nations. We were therefore proposing to purchase from Nica ragua a part of the territory belonging to Costa Rica. There was a long debate over the subject, and it was finally appealed to the United States during the ad ministration of Grover Cleveland. Cleveland was the judge and gave a clear-cut decision that was just and equitable and satisfactory to all parties. Another nation now came into the case — San Sal- IMPERIALISM AT WORK 841 vador. The Gulf of Fonesca abuts Nicaragua and it abuts San Salvador. An island in that bay commands the shores of San Salvador, and San Salvador said: "We object to giving away any naval base in Fonesca Bay, even to the United States, because it threatens our coast." So the case came before the court at Costa Rica — before the League of Nations — and was thor oughly considered and a decision rendered, which was against Nicaragua and the United States and in favor of San Salvador and Costa Rica. Yet, Nicaragua, backed by the United States, refused to recognize the decision of the court. The League of Nations, formed to secure perpetual peace, vanished into thin air. In 1917 the president of Costa Rica was overthrown, and another president took his place. The matter was referred to President Wilson, and he refused to recog nize the rebellion which had occurred over the question of an election during which it appears that Timco, the new president, represented the majority of the people. At any rate, the matter was purely a local one. But Wilson said, "I will not recognize him," Thereupon, the Costa Rica Congress met and recognized the ad ministration of the new president ; but Wilson still re fused, although the new president had been recognized by every Latin- American country except Panama, Nic aragua and Cuba — -all three dominated by the Presi dent of the United States, Recently we have purchased the Danish West Indies, which He on the ocean side of the Caribbean Sea, with out asking the consent of the people living there. We have taken over Santo Domingo ; we collect the customs of the country; the finest building in the republic is our customs house, built with Dominican money by Americans and officered by Americans, Haiti, the other half of the island, without any declaration of war by the United States Congress, was seized by President Wilson and is now being administered in every detail by the United States. The excuse given for this action by the Wilson administration was that the Republic of Haiti owed money to the National City Bank of New 342 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON York. On their account the United States Invaded the island, placed it under martial law, suppressed the newspapers, dispersed the legislative assembly, domi nated the elections and murdered several thousands of the people.* The Declaration o| Independence holds that "All men are created equal ; that they are endowed by their Cre ator with certain inalienable rights ; that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, govemments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." I should like to call Jefferson as a witness and have him tell us what he thinks of these disgusting perversions of American foreign policy. Again and again the United States has fastened its eyes on a desirable piece of territory and then sent its armies to fulfill its territorial ambitions. Again and again the American flag has floated over battlefields where the victors were invaders from the United States, while the men, fighting desperately in defense of their homes, their children and their liberties, were the inhabitants of small, weak, defenseless countries that could not stand before the organized might at the disposal of the great northern empire. "The essence of imperialism is the extension, by armed force, of the rule of one people over another — as we extend our rule over the southwest; over the Philippines; over Haiti and over Nicaragua. Such armed conquest is recorded among the acts of imperial ists in every age. During the past two generations our American iriiperialists have greatly extended the list. One annexation leads to another annexation. One act of aggression is followed by a second. "The princi ple of expansion established by Jefferson, and which he considered to be "beyond the Constitution," is ac claimed by Roosevelt with enthusiasm. Meanwhile, Roosevelt, who boasted of the taking of Panama from Colombia, scores "the feeble diplomacy of Jefferson's * General Barnett placed tbe number killed by the American forces at 8,250. IMPERIALISM AT WORK 843 administration" (Winning of the West, Vol. VI, p. 261) and refers to Jefferson and Madison as "peaceful men, quite unfitted to grapple with an enemy who ex pressed himself through deeds rather than words," and as "two timid, well-meaning statesmen." (Ibid. p. 271.) In 1808 the Constitution was still virile and re spected. Even a President of the United States hesi tated to transgress it. Exactly a century later a Presi dent could act as Roosevelt acted in Panama ; could con sider himself an exemplary American, and could taunt those who had tried to observe the Constitution during an earlier generation with being "peaceful," "timid," and "well-meaning." Between Jefferson's hesitancy over the purchase of Louisiana in 1808 (a contiguous territory) and Roose velt's eager seizure of Panama in 1903, there stretched a century that witnessed a slow, but steady shifting from the principles of Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence to the principles of Caesar, Napoleon, McKinley, Roosevelt, Wilson, the Piatt Amendment and the Peace Treaty of Versailles. Since the annexation of Hawaii in 1898 the United States has been speeding away from her old policies; abandoning her old positions and devoting herself to a venture in imperialism that drags her down to the level of the British Empire, the Japanese Empire, the Roman Empire, the great empire of Alexander, or of any other conquering people, past or present XXVL BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION. During the five eventful years that intervened be tween the Hawaiian Revolution and the passage of the treaty of annexation, I did all that a man could do to prevent the American people from taking this fatal step. As a reward for my efforts I was denounced, vilified and condemned. The lawyers in the Senate, representing the business interests that were seeking the ratification of the treaty, put Everything possible in the way of my work. Still I succeeded in blocking the ratification of the treaty for five years. Then came the break with Spain, When the Spanish War fever swept the country I knew that the fight on the Ha waiian Treaty was lost. Since that day in July, 1898, when the Hawaiian Treaty was ratified, for twenty- four years I have watched the progress of the United States along the path of empire. Through these years, likewise, I have done what I could to bring the real facts of the situation to the attention of the American people. It may be too late to save them from the fate that hangs over them, but at least I want them to know where they are going, and why, I want the American people to know what to say when they are told that United States business men and United States soldiers are in the Philippines, Porto Rico, Santo Domingo and Panama to bless the inhabit ants of these countries. I want them to know that it is an oft-repeated story — the plea of "helping the back ward nations," The cry that we have entered upon our imperial course in order to benefit the native populations in the lands that we have conquered or annexed is an old one, Dickens personified it splendidly in his character, the Reverend Mr. Chadband. Dickens' description of the encounter between the reverend gentleman and a street waif is as follows : BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION 345 "Stretching forth his flabby paw, Mr. Chadband lays the same on Jo's arm and considers where to station him. Joe, very doubtful of his reverend friend's inten tions and not at all clear but that something practical and painful is going to be done to him, mutters, 'You let me alone. I never said nothing to you. You let me alone.' "'No, my young friend,' says Chadband, smoothly, 'I will not let you alone. And why? Because I am a harvest laborer, because I am a toiler and a moiler, because you are delivered over unto me and are become as a precious instrument in my hands. My friends, may I so employ this instrument as to use it to your advantage, to your profit, to your gain, to your wel fare, to your enrichment. My young friend, sit upon this stool.' "Jo, apparently possessed by an impression that the reverend gentleman wants to cut his hair, shields his head with both arms." How well Dickens knew human nature ! How char acteristically he describes the crafty gentry who use fair words to cover up foul deeds. Had he lived today and watched the practice of American imperialism, he would have been satisfied to let Mr, Chadband give way before his betters. I have before me McKinley's proclamation to the Filipinos, and I have placed it side by side with a proc lamation of the King of Assyria, written eighteen hun dred years before Christ. A man would think that McKinley had plagiarized the idea from Asshurbanipal, Ragozin, in his History of Assyria, gives a literal translation of a proclamation issued by Asshurbanipal to the people of Elam, The Elamites had gone to war. Rather, their country had been invaded by Asshurbani- pal's forces, which had overrun the land, cut down the trees, filled up the, wells and killed the inhabitants. Asshurbanipal captured the capital city of the Elam ites, killed their king, took 208,000 of their people into captivity as slaves, drove off most of the cattle belong- 346 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON ing to those that were left, and then sent them this affectionate greeting: "The will of the king to the men of the coast, the sea, the sons of my servants. "My peace to your hearts ; may you be well. "I am watching over you, and from the sin of your king, Nabubelzikri, I separated you. Now I send you my servant Belibni to be my deputy over you; I have joined with you, keeping your good and your benefit in my sight." McKinley writes to the Filipinos : "Finally, it should be the earnest and paramount aim of the administration to win the confidence, respect and affection of the inhabitants of the Philippines by insur ing to them in every possible way the full measure of individual rights and liberties which is the heritage of a free people, and by proving to them that the mission of the United States is one of benevolent assimilation, which will substitute the mild sway of justice and right for arbitrary rule. In the fulfillment of this high mis sion, while upholding the temporary administration of affairs for the greatest good of the governed, there will be sedulously maintained the strong arm of authority to repress disturbance and to overcome all obstacles to the bestowal of good and stable government upon the people of the Philippine Islands." This reads very much like King Grcorge III of Great Britain, who said, with reference to the rebellious American colonists : "I am desirous of restoring-to them the blessings of law and liberty equally enjoyed by every British sub ject, which they have fatally and desperately ex changed for the calamities of war and the arbitrary tyranny of their chiefs." Every conqueror, every tyrant, every oppressor, utters just such pious phrases to justify his course of action. The English-speaking people are particularly adept at this form of hypocrisy. Each act of aggres sion, each new expedition of conquest is prefaced by a pronouncement containing a moral justification and an BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION 847 assurance to the victims of the Imperial aggressiori that all is being done for their benefit. What are we about in the United States? Why this rush to control the Philippines, Haiti, Costa Rica? The answer can be given in one word — rexploitation ! It is the search for markets ; the search for trade ; the search for foreign investment opportunities that is leadihg us to the South and to the East. The plutoc racy is after more profits — that is the cause behind American imperialism. The imperialists' aim is to assimilate, not the people of these possessions, but their lands and their wealth. If the people will work, the American plutocrats will Exploit their labor as well as the resources of their respective countries. If the people refuse to work, they will bei brushed aside, and men and women who will be more amenable to discipline will be imported from some other country to take their places. Who was responsible for the Hawaiian revolution and for the subsequent annexation to the United States? The American and other capitalists who had gained posses sion of the best land on the islands. What interests led the State Department to interfere in Haiti and in Nicaragua? The same business forces. Imperialism is imperialism the world over. Occasionally it is suffi ciently enlighted to have some regard for the welfare of the exploited populations. At other times it is as blind and ignorant and ferocious as the policy of the British imperialists in China. I spent a portion of the year 1898 in China and Japan, traveling extensively over both empires. At first hand, and from the best authority, I leamed the policy that the British Government had pursued with regard to the traffic in opium, and I submit it as an excellent example of the way in which the empire builders act where they have an opportunity to make profits out of the wretchedness and suffering of a weaker people. In Pekin, I had several conferences with LI Hung Chang, who was then an old man, having been the vir- 348 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON tual ruler of China for very many years under the Empress Dowager, In one of the conferences I asked Li Hung Chang why he did not stamp out opium smok ing in China, He replied that he could not because the English Government refused to allow the Chinese to interfere with the trade. He then told me that in some of the provinces of China (for China is divided into a number of States) the Governors were raising poppies and making opium, in order to beat the English out of the trade in China. He said that he had tried to securre an agreement with the English under which he was to stop the raising of poppies in China provided the Eng lish would stop importing opium. This he had been unable to do, as the trade in opium was an English monopoly conducted by the Government itself. According to his statement, the English had set apart a million acres of the best land in India for the pur pose of raising poppies, and had compelled the people of India to raise the poppies and sell, the product ex clusively to the English Govemment, The English had built a factory to manufacture the opium, and every package that left the factory was decorated with the coat of arms of Queen Victoria. Opium was little used in China until the English introduced it early in the nineteenth century. The Emperor had protested against the opium trade, but the English Government insisted upon its right to sell opium to the Chinese. Finally, the Emperor of China sent his men aboard some English'ships that were lying, loaded with opium, in the harbor of Canton and threw the poison into the sea. Seventy years earlier the American colonists had set the precedent for this Canton opium party by going aboard the British ships in Boston Harbor and throw ing the tea overboard. Today the anniversary of the "Boston Tea Party" is one of the fete days of the peo ple of New England. The British liked the exploit as little as the other, however, and they began a war with China (1840). This war, sometimes called the First" Opium War, went against China, and she was com pelled to cede Hongkong to the British, to open four BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION 349 other ports to British trade, and to pay an indemnity of 5,525,000 pounds sterling into the British Treasury. The matter came in for a good deal of comment in Parl iament, but eventually it was dropped.* In 1857 a new controversy arose, and the Emperor again undertook to exclude English opium, giving as the reason that it was destroying his people ; that the drug was a deadly drug and was causing great injury, and he enacted laws making it a criminal offense for the people of China to smoke opium, or for anyone to import the drug. Iri connection with this campaign he confiscated the opium that the English had already imported and imprisoned the people who handled it. England thereupon declared another war upon China which was called the Second Opium War (1858-1862). Again China was defeated. Canton was bombarded; Pekin was threatened ; and, after a disastrous struggle, the Chinese made a treaty under which several new • ports were opened to British trade ; a British Ambas sador was received at Pekin, and China paid an indem nity of 4,000,000 pounds sterling to the British. After each war, the British were able to bring opium Into a few more Chinese ports. Li Hung Chang spoke with great bitterness of this conduct on the part of a so-called Christian nation, and went quite largely into the question of the injurious use of opium. He also presented me with a copy of the treaty made between China and Japan after the China- Japanese War, which had occurred only a few years before I visited Pekin. This treaty was written in English and Chinese, and the book handed me con tained Li Hung Chang's picture and autograph, and the entire record of the conversation held at Shimonoseki between the ruler of China and Count Ito, the repre sentative of Japan. ?"Ashley even brought forward a resolution for the sup pression of the opium trade, but withdrew it after a debate turning on the inability of the Indian Government to part with a revenue of 1,000,000 pounds sterling or more."— The History of England. Sydney Law and L. C. Sanders. Longmans. 1913, VoL 12, p. 41. 850 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON The terms of the treaty compelled China to cede to Japan the Island of Formosa, which had an area of 13,000 square miles, and was inhabited by four million Chi;iamen. In the conversation which preceded this treaty. Count Ito asked Li Hung Chang why he did not stamp out the opium traffic in Chins^, as he had prom ised to do at Tientsin ten years before. Li Hung Chang answered that he could not do it because the English Government would not allow it. "Furthermore," said he to Count Ito, "if you take the island of Formosa and stop opium smoking, it will result in a war with Eng land." To this Ito replied: "That may be true, but we will stamp out opium smoking even if it does result in war." When I heard that story, told impressively by a member of the race that had suffered such wrong at the hands of British imperialism, I could not help compar ing it in my mind with the participation of America in the slave trade, and wondering what new infamies the imperialist policy in which we were then, and still are engaged, would lead us to in the course of the present century. The British had nothing against the Chinese. They Bold them opium because there was money in it. If there had been no profits in the trade there would have been no opium war. Our imperial ventures, like those of the British, are financial. We are in the imperialist business because it pays the plutocrats to be there. I never realized this so completely as in the winter of 1900, when a delegation from Porto Rico visted the city of Washington for the purpose of having the products of Porto Rico admitted free of duty to the United States. The delegation came before the Com mittee on Insular Affairs, of which I was then chair man, and asked for a hearing. I therefore called the members of the committee together so that they might hear the Porto Rican delegation present its case. There were five members in the delegation— two Englishmen, two Spaniards and a Frenchman. I had one of the Englishmen take the stand first and asked BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION 351 him what it was he desired the Congress of the United States to do. He answered that the delegation desired to have the products of i-'orto Rico — sugar, tobacco and ¦tropical fruits — admitted to the United States free of duty. I then asked him. "Are you a citizen of the United States?" "No," was his reply. "I am a citizen of England, but a resident of the United States." "Are you going to bec®me a citizen of the United States ?" I asked. He replied that he was not. I then asked what interest he had in Porto Rico. He answered that he owned 200,000 acres of land. "You are working your land at the present time?" I asked. "Not to any great extent," he replied. He then ex plained that the land could raise great crops of sugar that might very nearly supply the United States if the industry were encouraged by having the sugar admit ted free of duty. In answer sto a question about the people that were occupying his lands in Porto Rico, the Englishman explained that they were "natives". "Are they your tenants?" I said to him. "Do they ¦rent the land from you?" "Yes," he answered. "They live in single-room houses as a rule, elevated from the ground on posts, one post at each corner. As a rule the houses are from six to eight feet from the ground." He then told us how the natives built a floor on top of these posts and then made a palm-leaf hut in which they resided. For support they planted yams and dry-land bananas and raised chickens and pigs. They paid their rent for the use of the land by a certain number of days' work on the Englishman's plantation. To my question as to the character of the people, he replied that they were "good people." When I asked him whether they could read or write, he said they could not, since there were no provisions on the island for their education. 352 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON I then put the other Englishman on the stand. He told the same story. After that I questioned the ^two Spaniards and the Frenchman. They all owned several hundred thousand acres of land, which were being used more or less in the way already described. All spoke of the native inhabitants as "good people," as mostly white people, and as entirely illiterate. I asked if there were any of the natives who owned their own land. All agreed that there were very few such. After I had taken their testimony in full, and had showed up the enormities of the economic system then existing in Porto Rico, I told them that the hearing was closed; that as long as I remained chairman of the Committee on Insular Affairs they would get no legis lation enacted admitting their product free of duty; that if I could have my way about it I would cancel their title to every acre of the lands of Porto Rico and malce the title out to the people of the United States, That. I would then give an inalienable title to every person in Porto Rico for all the land that he could actually use, and levy taxes upon them for the com pulsory education of their children, "What !" they exclaimed, "Take our property with out paying us for it?" "It is not your property," I answered. "The land of Porto Rico belongs to the people who' inhabit it and who work it. I would not pay you a dollar for your pretended title or allow you to remain there for one day to exploit the inhabitants of that island or to hold a single acre of that land in excess of the amount actu ally occupied and cultivated by you in person." Of course, when my term of office expired in 1901 these foreign highwaymen, waiting to prey upon the people of Porto Rico, returned to Washington and secured the legislation they desired. They also secured control of the Government of Porto Rico, and made arrangements for a large armed police force to pre serve law and order. They also appealed to Congress to put a duty on Cuban sugar in order to prevent it BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION 358 from competing with Porto Rican sugar. They then retumed to the islands and began their work of "eco nomic development." About the first thing they did was to cancel the leases of the inhabitants who occupied the land. Then they compelled them to work for wages, raising sugar and tobacco, and they refused them the use of any land to raise yams, bananas, pigs and chickens, and they fixed the wages at 50 cents a day in silver. Little provision was made for the education of the people, and the wages were so low that, with their large families, the laborers found it impossible to buy adequate food and clothing. Consequently, their children grew up with out clothes — ran naked in the fields and 6ven in the towns — and were put to work as soon as they grew old enough to be of use. Shortly after this beautiful plan of "economic devel opment" was put in effect, the owners of Porto Rico began to boast of the great things they had done for the people. They told how they had furnished employ ment ; had put up the mills and factories and brought in the machinery to make the sugar out of the raw cane, and to manufacture the tobacco, so that Porto Rico exported $150,000,000 worth of the product per annum to the United States. With it all, the miserable peons of Porto Rico went naked and starving in one of the richest spots of the whole world. After the first few crops had been harvested, the laborers of Porto Rico went on strike, leaving the cane to sour in the field. Thereupon these foreign pirates, the English, the Spanish, the French and the American planters, called in the police force and the armed men of the United States and shot up the strikers and arrested them and put them back to work in the fields — ^those they had not wounded or murdered. Thus, economic development pursued Its imperial course in Porto Rico, where conditions are as bad today as they v/ere when we took possession of the island twenty-two years ago, and always will remain as bad until the 354 IMPERDU. WASHINGTON system of exploitation at home and abroad is aban doned and labor is given its just reward. Lest anyone should think that I am exaggerating, I should like to call attention to a report recentiy pub lished by the United States Department of Labor, giv ing a full description of the working and living con ditions in Porto Rico. (Labor Conditions in Porto Rico, by Joseph Marcus, Washington, 1919.) The spe cial investigator who wrote the report for the Labor Department, as a result of a careful study of condi tions, states that : The American flag has been flying over the Island of Porto Rico for twenty years, yet the percentage of illit eracy is still abnormally high. During the years 1917 and 1918 "only 142,846 children out of a total of 427,- 666 of school age actually enrolled in the public schools." "The difficulty," says Mr. Marcus, "lies in the bad economic condition" in which the worker finds himself. "Porto Rico is an island of wealthy land -pro prietors and of landless workers. There is a law in Porto Rico prohibiting any single individual from own ing more than 500 acres of land. * * * With the American occupation the price of, cane land rose very high — from thirty to three hundred dollars per acre — and this induced many a small holder to sell his land and join the ranks of the laborers." Under the circum stances, the law limiting land holdings was >not en forced, ^nd at the present time "of the best land of Porto Rico, 537,193 acres are owned and 229,203 acres are leased by 477 individuals, partnerships, or corpo rations from the United States, Spain, France and oth er countries." The total wealth of the island is in the hands of fifteen per cent, of the population. Fourteen per cent of the wealth is in the hands of native Porto Ricans. Sixty-seven per cent is own6d by Americans. Four-fifths of the people of Porto Rico live in the rural districts. They build their little shacks on land that does not belong to them ; they work when work is to be had on the nearest plantation; the men dress in a pair of trousers, a shirt and a stra'V hat. "Throughout BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION 355 the island thousands of children of the ages from one to seven years go naked, in the towns as well as in the rural districts." When the laborer is at work he and his family share the following diet : Breakfast — Black coffee, without milk, and quite often without sugar. Lunch — Rice and beans, or rice and codfish, pr codfish and plantins. Supper — The same as lunch. This diet holds good while the laborer has steady work, but, during a large part of the year — ^five or six months — there is no work. "How he pulls through the slow season is a mystery to many who are interested in the welfare of the laborer." The Porto Rican laborer is a sick man. "Hookworm disease, anaemia, etc, are very widespread," The low energy value of the diet, together with the prevalence of sickness, has so undermined the endur ance of the Porto Rican laborer that a number of ex periments in scientific diet, carried on by the employ ers themselves, resulted in increasing the work capacc- ity of the men from 50 to 100 per cent. Mr, Marcus finds that, with ah increase in wages which would en able the laborer to purchase some meat and dairy products, the charge of laziness and inefficiency, which is frequently lodged against the workers, might well be withdrawn. The investigation upon which Mr. Marcus bases his report was made during the year 1919. At that time machinists in the sugar mills received about one dollar per day. Laborers in the busy season were paid ninety cents per day; in the slow season seventy cents. The working day is from ten to twelve hours. On the to bacco plantations men's wages during the busy season are from sixty to eighty cents a day and, during the dull season, from forty to sixty cents a day. Women receive from thirty-five to forty-five cents a day in the busy season and from twenty-five to thirty-five a day 356 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON in the dull season. On the coffee plantations wages are lower. Men receive from fifty to sixty cents per day in the busy season and from thirty-five to fort^'-five cents per day in the dull season. Mr. Marcus reports that the needle industry is mak ing considerable headway in Porto Rico. Men's and children's suits are manufactured by women operators who earn from three dollars and fifty cents to five dol lars per week. Embrodiery manufacturing, lace-mak ing and drawing work pay from one dollar and twenty- five cents to four dollars per week. The work is done exclusively by women. Detailed descriptions are given of living and work ing conditions in these and other industries. Enough has been said here to indicate very clearly that the American people, having assumed the responsibility for directing the lives of 1,118,012 Porto Ricans, are far behind the standard of "health and decency" which civilization prescribes as the minimum below which human being cannot be expected to live and to work. Here are two examples of the work of modern em pires. Great Britain fought two wars in order to force the drug habit on China. The United States took Porto Rico away from its "Spanish oppressors" and then turned the island over to absentee landlords, whose sole interest in the island was to make out of it all the money they could. This is imperialism at its worst — hard, grasping, western imperialism. With it I should like to contrast an instance of imperialism among the "heathen" of the Orient. Japan took the Island of Formosa from China about 1897. Formosa is a very fertile island lying off the coast of China in the Pacific Ocean. Its population is almost exclusively Chinese, and it has been a part of the Chinese Empire for over four thousand years. The inhabitants nearly all fmoked opium which had been forced upon them by England as a result of the two "Opium wars." When Japan compelled China to relin quish her right to the Island of Formosa (she had al ready occupied the island during the war) she sent BENEVOLENT ASSIMILATION B5l eight hundred surveyors to the island and surveyed all of the land in Formosa. When the survey was com pleted she made maps showing who occupied each tract and describing the title by which it was held. The Japanese found that the land in Formosa was owned in great tracts by Chinese mandarins, most Of whom lived over in the cities on the main coast of China, many of them in Amboy. The holdings of these absentee landlords were from 200,000 to 500,000 acres. On the island itself practically all of the 4,000,000 in habitants were landless and were paying rent to own ers who lived abroad. No provision whatever was made for the education of the Formosan children. Japan at the same time registered every opium smoker in Formosa and ascertained the amount of opium he smoked each day. She also destroyed every poppy field in Formosa and built an opium factory and purchased the raw opium from the Indian (English) Government to supply the registered opium smokers each day with the amount they smoked. She then passed a statute making the raising of poppies a crime and making it a criminal offense for any person except a registered opium smoker to have any opium irt his possession. Consequently, when all the registered opium smokers died off, opium Smoking was wiped out all over the Island. Having surveyed the land and ascertained just who owned it, Japan passed a law taking the title of the Island of Formosa from the landlords and conveying it to the Empire of Japan. As compensation to the land lords, Japan issued 4,000,000 yen of Formosan trust bonds and divided these bonds arbitrarily among those who had owned the island. Then she gave to each farmer who tilled the soil in Formosa the land he occu pied and used, as well as the improvements which he already owned, and accompanied this gift with a pro vision that the farmer might dispose of his improve ments to any other person who actually used and occu pied the same, or that his improvements might descend to his children. In the case of the land, however, he 858 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON v/as denied the right to alienate any portion of it. "Rie Japanese also established schools all over Formosa for the compulsory education of the people. I cite these facts because they present a picture of imperialism at its best — as it was practiced by ^Japan — in 'contrast with imperialism at its worst, as it is practiced by Great Britain and the United States. At bottom, however, imperialism is imperialism and is the same in principle, wherever it is found. After all, why talk nonsense? Why lie to others? Why seek to deceive ourselves? An imperial policy has as its object the enrichment of the imperial class. The plain man — ^the farmer, the miner, the factory worker — is not the gainer through imperialism. Rather the monopolist, the land owner, the manufacturer, the trader, the bariker — ^who have stolen what there is to steal at home, devote their energies to the pursuit of empire because the pursuit of empire gives them an opportunity to exploit and rob abroad. We annexed Hawaii, not to help the Hawaiians, but because it was a good business proposition for the sugar interests. We took the Philippine Islands be cause the far-seeing among the plutocrats believed that there was a future economic advantage iri the East. For the same reason we are in Haiti, Costa Rica and Panama, Each step along the imperial path is taken for the economic advantage of the business men of the United States and at the expense of the liberty and the lives of the natives over whom we secure dominion. XXVII. THE U. S. AND THE COURSE OF EMPIRE. The United States has entered upon the course of empire. , There is no limit to imperial policy ; if we can justify the taking of the Philippines and governing them against their will — if we can justify conquenng countries where our Constitution cannot go — our armies will soon be marching across Mexico, down the Isthmus to South America, leaving death and desola tion in their track, rearing upon the ruins of those free governments a tyrannical, despotic power. Let a free people once set out on an imperial course and the institutions that are dear to every lover of liberty disappear like April snow. Imperial power cannot possibly be maintained with out an immense navy and a standing army. Do not the very existence of such an army and such a navy constitute a denial of all that the old America stood for? Armies and navies are fighting machines. If they are to be successfully operated there must be one man to whom is given supreme control. If there is to be an empire, there must be a dictator, so that he can move with rapidity ; so that decisions can be made in a day and armies marched and ships moved where danger is seen. Is despotism what the people of America desire? If so, they will hkve it — indeed, they now have it under the imperial realities that are cloaked under the guise of republican names and republican traditions. Is it freedom that the American people seek? Then they must abandon the course of empire. It is impossible for a republican form of govemment to function as an empire. Republican institutions in variably are corrupted when imperialism is establish ed. Creasy, in his Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, puts the matter tersely in these words: "There has never been a republic yet in history that 360 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON acquired dominion over another nation that did not rule it selfishly and oppressively. There is no single excep tion to this rule, either in ancient or modem times. Carthage, Rome, Venice, Genoa, Florence, Pisa, Hol land and Republican France, all tyrannized over every province and subject-state where they gained author ity," Imperialism is tyranny and in the process of destroy ing liberty abroad you crush it effectively at home. Senator Hoar saw the peril. When the question of imperialism was up for discussion in the Senate he said (January 9, 1899) : "We have now to meet a greater danger than we have encountered since the Pilgrims landed at Ply mouth — the danger that we are to be transformed from a republic, founded on the Declaration of Independ ence, guided by the counsels of Washington, into a vul gar, common-place empire, founded upon physical force." Read history! The record is unmistakable. Among the plutocracies and the monarchies of the past, whenever property and power have been gathered into the hands of the few and discontent has appeared among the masses, it has been the policy to acquire foreign possessions, to enlarge the army and the navy, so as to keep discontent occupied and thus distract its attention. A foreign war has cut many a domestic tangle. The recent record of the United States in its acquisition of foreign territory, coming as it does with an increase ef the army and the navy, tells the sinister story of the decision which the ruling classes of America have made to pursue an imperial policy. The growth of the army and navy of the United States during the past twenty years has been phenom enal. When I entered the Senate, the authorized strength of the army was 28,417 men and the annual army appropriation was $44,582,838. Today the au thorized strength of the army is 175,000 and the appro priation requested by the War Department is $935,- 000,000. The navy, which received an appropriation THE U. S. AND THE COURSE OF EMPIRE 361 of $22,006,206 in 1890, is asking this year for $695,- 000,000. A generation has seen the army and navy of the United States increased from defensive organ izations to the powerful, imperial fighting machines — the dogs of war, larger, stronger and better fed than those belonging to any other nation in the world. Rome was organized as a republic. For the first six hundred years of her history she had the best govern ment then existing on the globe. To be a Roman citi zen was a greater honor than to be a king in another country. Rome consolidated her power until she ruled all Italy. Then she began to spread out along the northern coast of the Mediterranean to reach into Asia Minor and Africa. But, when the policy of acquiring and ruling peoples who could have no part in her republi can form of government began, Rome ceased to exist as a Republic and became an Empire, From that point the historian dates the ruin of hter government, and the misery of her population. When Rome had acquired Egypt and Asia Minor with their populations of low consuming power and great tenacity of life, the Roman citizen found that he could not compete against them in the growing of crops or in other industrial enter prises. The Roman of those days was like the Anglo-Saxon of today— ^a man of great vitality, requiring excellent nurture, the best food and plenty of it. When he came into competition with the Asiatic races, people of low vitality arid with a great tenacity of life — human ma chines who could subsist upon the least food and per form the most work — ^the Roman farmer was destroy ed, the foundation of power was shattered and the Roman Empire passed away. When the Roman Republic was established most of its people were farmers. Their farms did not average more than twelve acres in area, indicating a dense rural population. No foreign foe could march through that stockade of individual farm owners to the walls of Rome. They were successful farmers and prosper- 362 IMPERLA.L WASHINGTON ous, and they made mighty soldiers. Cincinnatus left the plow to lead his victorious legion. This was the situation during the early days of the Roman state. During' the first century of the Christian era centrali zation of wealth power revolutionized this simple life of the small farm. The lands were absorbed by the wealthy; the mines of silver and gold in Spain and Greece had been worked out; the old republic disap peared and in its place was erected the- structure of an empire. James Bryce says of this period of Roman history : "The ostentation of humility which the subtle policy of Augustus had conceived, and the jealous hypocrisy of Tiberius maintained, was gradually dropped by their successors until despotism became at last recog nized in principle as the govemment of the Roman Em pire. With an aristocracy decayed, a populace de graded, an army no longer recruited froni Italy, the semblance of liberty that yet survived might be swept away with impunity. Republican forms had never been known in the provinces at all and the aspect which the imperial administration had originally assumed there soon reacted on its position in the capital. . . . This increased concentration of power was mainly re quired by the necessities of frontier defense, for within there was more decay than disaffection." Great Britain rules over the mightiest of modem empires, but the British people have not been enriched by her conquests. Study the facts with regard to her laboring population. Compare the English factory worker of today with the English yeoman of four or five hundred years ago — compare them in health, in vigor, in quickness of eye and hand, in love of life^ in anything you will, and the result will be to .the dis advantage of the present-day Britisher, Where are the people of Europe best off at the present time? Is it in Great Britain— ^mistress of the sea and ruler of territory scattered over six continents? Not at all! It is in little Switzerland, Holland, Nor way. Where is there the best distribution of wealth, THE U. S. AND THE COURSE OF EMPIRE 368 the best opportunity for the individual man? Where is there the least poverty, misery and distress? It is in Switzerland and Norway. It is not in England. Her conquests have bestowed no blessings upon her people. Two-thirds of them own nothing, while about a quarter of a million own all the property of the British Islands. What blessings has England conferred upon her col onies that would justify the adoption of her policy by the United States? Her course in Ireland has been one of the blackest pages in the history of the world — a record of starvation and plunder. If England will govern Ireland as she has done, what right has she to claim that she can govern any country? What is there in England's example that can justify us in undertaking the same work? England began with Ireland. She followed with In dia. How has that country fared ? In India, the Eng lish have made practically no converts to Christianity. Neither have the natives leamed the English language. A great army, paid for by the native govemments themselves, has been maintained to hold the Indian people in subjection and to prevent them from secur ing modern arms and modem implements of destruc tion. Indian raw materials cannot be manufactured at home because of the taxes imposed by the British authorities. Instead, they are shipped, in English ships, to Great Britain ; manufactured and underrated by- British manufacturers and merchants, and then transported back to India and sold to the Indian peo ple. As trader, manufacturer, merchant, insurance agent and banker. Great Britain has profited, and In dia has paid. What blessing has England conferred upon India? No blessings ! On the contrary, she has- taken away the food supply of the native population and left mil lions to die of starvation. At the time of annexing the Philippines President McKinley said that moral reasons compelled us to stay in the Philippines, and that we, under God's direction. 364 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON owed a duty to mankind, and more of- similar cant. Here is what John Morley, the English statesman ana writer and biographer of Gladstone says with regard to England's policy in this same connection . "First, you push on into territories where you have no business to be and v/here you promised not to go; secondly, your intrusion provokes resentment and, in these wild countries, resentment means resistance; thirdly, you instanly cry out that the people are rebel lious and that their act is rebellion (this in spite of your own assurance that you have no intention of setting up a permanent sovereignty over them) ; fourthly, you send a force to stamp out the rebellion; and, fifthly, having spread bloodshed, confusion and anarchy, you declare, with eyes uplifted to the heavens, that moral reasons force you to stay, for if you were to leave, this territory would be left in a condition which no civilized power could contemplate with equan imity or composure. These are the five stages in the Forward Rake's progress." There is not a word in that passage that does not accord with the excuses given by those American im perialists who are in favor of conquering and ruling nnwilling peoples. Does the United States wish to follow the British example? From it no money will come into the Treas ury for the benefit of the people of the United -States. The laborers of this land, from whom we raise our taxes in the same way that England raises hers — ^by a per capita levy on corisumption — are invited to contri bute this taxation to support an army of occupation and subsidize ships to carry the trade, in order that the people in the outlying territory may be exploited by the trusts of the United States. There is another reason behind the imperialist pro gram that is being followed by the United States. It is well when people become restless and dissatisfied Avith the conditions which exist ; when the workers of a land learn to believe that they are not receiving their just share of the products of their toil, to give them THE U. S. AND THE COURSE OF EMPIRE 865 amusement — to distract their attention by distant problems — ^to supply them with bread and circuses, as in Rome, or to do as England has done — ^begin the kill ing of men in some far-off land and then appeal to the patriotism of the folks at home. By such means are the minds of the people diverted from the pressing economic and social problems, the right solution of which is essential to the happiness of the toilers of the nation. There is no justification in history for the imperial course upon which we have entered. Rather, every page in history, is a warning to us — that we desist be fore it is too late. And Why should we not desist? What reason can be given for our imperial policy save' the desire of the ruling class to plunder and invest? The area of this countiy is great enough, if we would maintain free institutions under a republican form of govemment, for in a republic, founded upon the principles of equality and universal suffrage, it is es sential that the individual voter shall have a knowl edge of, and be familiar with, the methods of govora- ment ; and if the country is so great and the problems of government are so complicated that it is impossible for the individual voter to acquire this familiar knowl edge, how is it possible for him to vote intelligently? How is it possible for him to know that by his vote he is maintaining free institutions? In the past, repub lics have been of quite limited area — a single city per haps — with a comparatively small population. The founders of this government, recognizing the difficulty of maintaining as a unit a republic of extensive pro portions, inaugurated the Federal system, a union of sovereign states, hoping thereby to extend self-govern ment over vast areas and to maintain at the same time the purity of republican principles by making each sovereign state a free republic. For the purpose of unifying a vast area within the bounds of a republic it was enacted that the central govemment, the Govemment of the United States, should be a government of limited powers, a govern- 366 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON ment possessing only such powers as were conferred upon it by the Constitution. All other sovereign rights — all other powers common to a sovereign — were re tained by the States themselves, or by the people them selves as inhabitants of the States. If we follow our present policy of acquiring tropical countries, where republics cannot live, and where free, self-governing people have never lived since the world had a history, we overturn the theory upon which this govemment was established! The whole theory of our govemment precludes cen tralization of power; the whole theory of our govem ment sustains the idea that the United States as a gov ernment shall only do those things which cannot be done with equal effectiveness by the states or by the individual citizens. But our Federal system has not accomplished the purpose for which it was created ; it has not fulfilled the expectation of its authors. Before we acquire more territory; before we start on a policy of imperialism and of conquest, it is our duty to inquire whether our area and population are not already too great. Centralization went on rapidly after the War of the Rebellion. It was hastened by the Spanish War. It received an immense impetus during the World War. As a result, our people are looking to the Government of the United States as the source of all power and the channel through which all relief must come. The American people have ceased te rely on the States. They are forgetting how to rely upon themselves. This concentration of power in the hands of the Federal Government has been followed by encroach ments by the Federal courts upon the sovereignty of the states and upon the legislative and executive branches of the government itself, until a point has been reached in our publip life where the courts are almost supreme. Within the past fifty years the wealth of the United States, which was once fairly distributed, has been ac- THE U. S. AND THE COURSE OF EMPIRE 867 cumulated in the hands of a few, so that five per cent of the people own three-quarters of the nation's wealth, while two-thirds of the citizens — ^the workers — are practically without property. Recent events point un mistakably to the fact that the few men who own near ly all the wealth have gained control of the machinery of public life. They have usurped the functions of government and established a plutocracy. Those who favor an imperial policy for the United States, who favor a departure from those customs and practices that have created the proudest pages in our history, say it is manifest destiny. Throughput all recprded time manifest destiny has been the murderer pf men. Manifest destiny has caused the strong to rob the weak and has reduced the weak to slavery. Manifest destiny built the feudal castle and supplied the feudal lord with his serfs. Manifest destiny compelled re publics to go forth and conquer weaker races and to subject the conquered people tb slavery ; to impose tax ation against their will, and to inflict upon them forms of government which they considered odious. Mani fest destiny is the cry of the strong in justification of their plunder of the weak. This cry sent forth the nations of Europe to divide among them the weaker nations of Africa and Asia. If we pursue the course to which "manifest des tiny" is alluring us; if we annex weaker nations to which we cannot apply our system of govemment; if we acquire territory in the Tropics where men can not live who are capable of self-government, then re publican forms cannot exist in those distant posses sions. The vigorous blood, the best blood, the young men of our land, will be drawn away to mix with dis tant races and to hold them in subjection. Gradually the reflex of the conquest and of this tyrannical gov ernment will work its effect upon our own people, and free institutions will disappear from this land,' as well as from the land we conquer and undertake to hold in subjection. 868 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON Whenever England concludes to go upon an expedi tion and plunder some of the weaker nations of the world, she makes her first appeal tp patriotism. Then, step by step, she goes on until she has committed the wrong, has transgressed the rights of the natives ; has aroused their resistance, and then she declares that the .flag has been fired on, and that no Englishman must question the right or wrong of what is being done un- , til the enemy is defeated and the country annexed. Contemplate the course of every republic in the past; watch its surrender to the lust of power and the greed for wealth; then turn to our own shores, examine our present conduct and see our flag go down in misery and in shame. The glory of this republic has been that we have offered an asylum to thfe oppressed and a hope to mankind which has been followed wherever freedom has flowered throughout the world. Shall we stain that record? Shall we abandon history? Shall we become one of the robber nations of the world? The United States is on the wrong course — ^the . course that leads to national disgrace and finally to na tional destruction. The wealth lords who desire im perialism are not the American people. The jingoes and exploiters who are out for conquest and for an nexation are not the American people. They are mere ly the representatives of a ruling class that would use the American people to fill their own money bags. We have a task — clear and well defined. Our duty is to. educate ancj elevate the population we already have, and thus perpetuate our institutions. In the past every republic has sown the seeds of its final destruction by gratifying the desire for conquest and for glory. Let us profit by their example and pursue a course that will make the masses happy and pros perous rather than dazzle and allay the mutterings of misery and discontent by the march of armies and the' glory of conquest. XXVIII. THE PROFITEERS. /' The test of a man or of a social system is the way he acts in a crisis. The great war was the crisis that tested American capitalism and that showed it up for what it was — a brutal game of profit-making at the expense of the people who work and pay. When the war broke out in Europe, I knew that the American" business men would take advantage of the emergency in which Europe found herself to charge the highest possible price for the worst possible prod uct and when, three years later, the United States de cided to enter the war I was equally convinced that the American business men would rob their own coun try of every farthing on which they could lay their hands. Not for a moment was I deceived by the glib talk of "patriotism" that sounded from every Chamber of Commerce and every business office and banking in stitution. I had dealt with the armor-plate contracts in the United States Senate twenty years before ; I had investigated the sickening details of the beef contracts made by the packers with the govemment during the Spanish war. Besides these details and beyond them, I knew the whole busines.? system for what it was — a de vice for enabling the strong. to rob the weak; for per mitting the capitalist to coin every private or public rieed into profits. A reference to the situation which was unearthed in the Senate away back in 1897 will give the justifica tion of the conclusion I have reached with regard to the capitalist system, as such. In the closing days of the 54th Congress a question arose regarding the cost of armor-plate. After an ex haustive discussion, in which great quantities of evi dence were submitted, the question was put to a vote of the Senate in this form : — Shall the Senate vote for 370 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON armor-plate at $300 or $400' per ton? Only twelve Senators favored the $400 limit. They were Aldrich, Allison, Brice, Cullom, Gibson, Gorman, Hale, Haw ley, McMillan, Murphy, Squire and Wetmore. There were 36 votes cast on the other side, of which mine was one. The evidence seemed perfectly clear. We had sum moned experts and ascertained that the cost of labor and materials entering into a ton pf armor-plate was about $160. This figure included a charge for "keep ing plant ready for use," a charge for "shop expenses," a charge for "office expenses and contingencies," and a charge for "administration, superintendence and en gineering, besides the charges for "materials in in gots," "materials consumed In manufacture" and for "labor." Ten per cent was allowed for re-pipings and 10 per cent for rejected plates, making a total of about $200 per ton. The company claimed a return on the "investment," but it was proved that profit on the first armor-plate contract secured by thiese companies had been equal to the entire cost of the plant. An allow ance of 5 to 10 per cent was made, however, for repairs and maintenance, and the total cost of a ton of armor- plate was brought up to $225. At that figure, the profit to the companies on the . 8,000 tons of armor would be about $600,000 on a $300 figure. Under the circumstances the Senate voted 36 to 12 for the $300 figure. After Congress had adjourned the Secretary of the Navy endeavored to get bids at $300. None was forth coming. Instead, representatives of the companies waited on him and advised that they could not make the plate for less than $425 — a figure which allowed for a profit of about $1,600,000 on the contract. An amendment was therefore made to the deficiency appropriation bill (July 13, 1897, p. 2,553) allowing fpr armor-plate at that price. "Last winter we appropriated money for the purpose of buying armor-plate and limited the price to $800 a ton. The evidence taken before the Committee on THE PROFITEERS 371 Naval Affairs showed conclusively that the plate could be made for $250 a ton. The two armor-plate factor ies, being in collusion and having been in collusion as to every bid they have had heretofore, as was shown by the evidence before the Committee on Naval Af fairs, refused to make the plate for $300, but insisted that they should have $425. "Instead of bringing In a proposition to build a fac tory and make the plate ourselves and thus protect the interests of the govemment, the Committee on Appro priations propose to accede to the demands of these men, who are in a trust to plunder the Treasury, and they bring in an amendment to pay them $425, thus cowardly surrendering to this admitted combination. It seems to me too disgraceful to be tolerated." (It was shown that the two plants could be dupli cated at one or one and a half millions each.) These facts and many others that had come to my attention during the years of my public life led me to look behind the patriotic professions of the business leaders — ^their talk about Belgium and the Lusitania, and "Humariity" and "Democracy" — to see what were the real reasons that were leading the United States into the war. I did not have to look far before discov ering the answer, American banks, like the Morgans, and American manufacturers, like the Bethlehem Steel Company, had granted large extensions of credit to the Allies and, if the Allies lost, they were bankrupt.' Fur thermore, they saw an unequaled opportunity to strengthen their hold in the United States and to mn a pipeline into the public treasury. The entrance of the United States into the war would validate their European speculations at the^ same time that it gave them tens of billions in- American war contracts. By the time these facts were clear in my mind, the United States had entered the war. I opposed the step with all of the energy that I had, and, after it was taken, I said very frankly what I thought about it in the following newspaper interview that appeared in the Sioux Falls "Argus Leader" of October 6, 1917: 872 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON "There is no excuse for this war." "We should back right out of it." "We never should have gone into a war to help the Schwabs make $40,000,000 per year." "This man McAdoo said here that we are in the war from principle to protect our right to trade on the open sea. Not an American was killed except on ammunition boats, and they had no right to be there." "Sympathy is being extended to Belgium. She deserves none. For fifty years Belgium robbed the Congo. This made Belgium wealthy, but three-fourths of her people did not share in this wealth. If she is now indem nified it will go to the men who robbed the negroes of the Congo." "One hundred years ago we fought out the alien and sedition law. The party back of it failed at the next election. The same struggle is on again." "People desire to know if they are living in the United States or in Russia." Since the day that I refused to take sides with Mr. Wilson in his 1912 campaign he had disliked me. This statement gave him his chance and within ten days of the date on which it appeared I was indicted by the Federal Grand Jury at Sioux Falls, S, D, s^ The indictment is a curious document. One day, with the many others that were issued during the same period, it will be historic: "The District Court of the United States of America for the Southern Division of the District of South Da kota in the Eighth Judicial Circuit, "At a stated term of the District Court of the United States of America for the Southern Division of the District of South Dakota begun and held at the City of Sioux Falls, within and for the district and circuit aforesaid, on the third Tuesday of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seventeen : THE PROFITEERS 873 "The Grand jurors of the United States of America, good and lawful men, summoned from the body of the district aforesaid, then and there being duly em paneled, sworn and charged by the court aforesaid, to diligently inquire and true presentment make for said district of South Dakota, in the name and by the au thority of the United States of America, upon their oaths, do present : "That Richard Franklin Pettigrew, late of Minne haha County, State of South Dakota, in said district heretofore, to wit : on or about the sixth day of Octo ber, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seventeen, at and in the County of Minnehaha, State of South Dakota, and in the division and district aforesaid, and within the exclusive jurisdiction of this court, and while and when the United States was at war with the Imperial German Government, pursuant to a joint resolution of the Congress of the United States, approved by the President of the United States on April 6, A. D. 1917, did then and there knowingly, feloniously and wilfully make, say and utter certain false statements, with intent to promote the success of the enemy of the United States, that is to say, the Im perial German Govemment, to wit: that he, the said Pettigrew, did then and there wilfully and feloniously publicly state and say to one P. F. Leavins, and to other persona to the Grand Jurors unknown, and did then and there direct and cause to be published, printed and circulated through and by means of the 'Daily Argus Leader,' a daily newspaper, published in the City of Sioux Falls, State of South Dakota, in words and sub stance, as follows, that is to say : " 'There is no excuse for this war,' " 'We should back right out of it.' " 'We never should have gone into a war to help the Schwabs make $40,000,000 per year.' " 'This man McAdoo said here that we are in the war from principle to protect our right fo trade on the open sea. Not an American 874 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON was killed except on ammunition boats, and they had no right to be there.' " 'Sympathy is being extended to Belgium. She deserves none. Fifty years ago Belgium robbed the Congo. This made Belgium wealthy, but three-fourths of her people did not share in this wealth. If she is now indem nified it will go to the men who robbed the negroes of the Congo.' " 'One hundred years ago we fought out the alien and sedition law. The party back of it failed at the next election. The same struggle is on again.' " 'People desire to know if they are living in the United States or in Russia.' against the peace and dignity of the United States of America and contrary to the form, force and effect of the statute of the United States in such case made and provided. "Count Two. - "And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do further present and say: "That Richard Franklin Petttigrew, late of Minne haha County, State of South Dakota, in the said dis trict heretofore, to wit: On the sixth day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seventeen, with force and arms, at and in the County of Minnehaha, State of South Dakota, and in the divi sion and district aforesaid, and within the exclusive jurisdiction of this court, and while and when the United States was at war with the Imperial German Govemment, pursuant to a joint resolution of the Con gress of the United States, approved by the President of the United States ori April 6, A. D. 1917, did then and there, knowingly, feloniously and wilfully obstruct the recruiting and enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the United States, In that he, the said Richard Franklin Pettigrew, did then and THE PROFITEERS 875 there feloniously publicly state, say and utter to one P. F. Leavins, and to other persons to the Grand Jurors jnknown, and did then and there direct and cause to be published, printed and circulated through and by means of the 'Daily Argtis Leader,' a daily newspaper, published and circulated in the City of Sioux Falls, State of South Dakota, in words and substance, as fol lows, that is to say : " 'There is no excuse for this war.' " 'We should back right out of it.' " 'We never should have gone into a war to help the Schwabs make $40,000,000 per year.' " 'This man McAdoo said here that we are in the war from principle to protect our right to trade on the open sea. Not an American was killed except on ammunition boats, and they had no right to be there.' " 'Sympathy is being extended to Belgium. She deserves none. Fifty years ago Belgium robbed the Congo. This made Belgium wealthy, but three-fourths of her people did not share in this wealth. If she is now indem nified it will go to the men who robbed the negroes of the Congo.' " 'One hundred years ago we fought out the alien and sedition law. The party back of it failed at the next election. The same struggle is on again.' " 'People desire to know if they are living in the United States or in Russia.' against the peace and dignity of the United States of America and contrary to the form, force and effect of the statute of the United- States in such case made and provided. "Count Three. "And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do further present and say: 876 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON "That Richard Franklin Pettigrew, late of Minne haha County, State of South Dakota, in said district heretofore, to wit : on the sixth day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seven teen, at and in the County of Minnehaha, State of South Dakota, and in the division and district afore said, and within the exclusive jurisdiction of this court, , and while and when t-^j United States was at war with ' the Imperial German Government, pursuant to a joint resolution of the Congress of the United States, ap-^ proved by the President of the United States on April 0, A. D. 1917, did then and there feloniously and wil fully cause and attempt to cause disloyalty, insubordi nation, mutiny and refusal of duty in the military forces of the United States, to the injury of the United States, in that he, the said Richard Franklin Pettigrew, did then and there feloniously publicly state, say and utter to one P. F. Leavins, and to other persons to the Grand Jurors unknown, and did then and there direct and cause to be published, printed and circulated through and by means of the 'Daily Argus Leader,' a daily newspaper, published and circulated in the City of Sioux Falls, State of South Dakota, in Words and substance, as follows, that is to say : " 'There is no excuse for this war.' " 'We should back right out of it.' " 'We never should have gone into a war to help the Schwabs make $40,000,000 per year.' " 'This man McAdoo said here that we are in the war from principle to protect our right to trade on the open sea. Not an American was killed except on ammunition boats, and they had no right to be there.' " 'Sympathy is being extended \to Belgium. She deserves none. Fifty years ago Belgium robbed the Congo. This made Belgium wealthy, but three-fourths of her people did not share in this wealth. If she is now indem- THE PROFITEERS 377 nified it will go to the men who robbed the negroes of the Congo.' " 'One hundred years ago we fought out the alien and sedition law. The party back of it failed at the next election. The same struggle is on again.' " 'People desire to know if they are living in the United States or in Russia.' against the peace and dignity of the United States of America and contrary to the form, force and effect of the statute of the United States in such case made and provided. "R. P. STEWART, United States Attorney in and for the State and District of South Dakota. "JAMES EDDIOTT, Judge. "Names of witnesses sworn and examined before the Grand Jurors: P. F. Leavins." /^''Was I indicted because I had told a lie or because I had told the truth? Was I right in my charges or was I wrong? Was it a war for democracy or was it a profiteers' war? I did not have to w^it long for the answer to these questions. In fact, the answer came with a arpidity and with a completeness that was overwhelming. First there was the statement from the Chairman of the Federal Reserve (Bank) Board, Mr. Harding; then came the revelations with regard to Hog Island and to the airplane contracts ; later Mr, Wilson, in his St, Louis speech, blurted out the frank admission — "Of course this was a commercial war," and finally there appeared the figures showing the profits made by the leading industries during the war years. For example, there was Bethlehem Steel, Schwab's own plant. The profits of this company for 1911, 1912 and 1913 averaged $3,075,108 per year. In 1915, the profits had jumped to $17,762,813; in 1916 to $43,- 503,968. For 1918, the corporation made a profit of 378 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON $57,188,769. Improvements and extensions of the plant ate up $24,829,245, while depreciation took $31,- 510,366. See my indictment. Schwab exceeded forty million a year. Again, there was du Pont Powder which reports its war profits in the following words, which are taken from its financial report for 1918. "The stock of the E. I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Company, the pre decessor of the E. I. du Pont de Nemours Company, sold during the early months of the war at $125 per share. The share of debenture stock and two shares of common stock of E. I. du Pont de Nemours Com pany, which were exchanged for the former security, are worth in today's market (Dec. 31, 1918) $598, or an increase in value of 874 per cent. In the meantime (1915-18) the total dividends on the common stock of the E. I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Company and on the exchanged securities of E. I. du Pont de Ne mours Company have amounted to 458 per cent on the par value of the original stock. It is difficult to im agine a more satisfactory financial result." It is difficult. But it is very easy to picture the misery and suffering of war and the great price in ex cessive taxation that the purchasers of the du Pont product have saddled ori the working people in their respective countries. Then there were the producers of copper. The Ana conda Copper Mining Company paid $65,275,000 in cash dividends during the years 1915 to 19l8. It also paid off a funded debt of $15,000,000 in the same period, and invested, besides, $54,466,703 in better ments. After this outlay, it had, on January 1, 1919, a net quick surplus of $39,926,000 as compared with $4,688,204 in 1914. The twenty-nine leading copper producing companies paid $540,846,855 in cash divi dends during 1915, 1916, 1917 and 1918; expended $354,704,290 in betterments and improvements during 1915, 1916 and 1917, and in 1918 their surplus was $830,798,593 as compared with a surplus of $96,711;- 392 on the same day of 1914. THE PROFITEERS 379 The United States Steel Corporation, with a capital stock of about $750,000,000, made a profit, in 1916 and 1917, of $888,931,511. These are figures published by the company itself. When the steel Trust was formed this capital stock represented little besides water, but during two war years the corporation made over 100 per cent on it. These are individual cases. In Senate Document 259, 65th Congress, Second Session, are published the figures showing the profits made by American business men during the year 1917. This document contains 388 pages, and in it are listed, by number, the amount and per cent of profits made in 1917 by American busi ness men. The results are almost unbelievable. Among the Industries engaged in manufacturing and selling the principal necessaries of life there is not a single trade in which at least one concern did not make 100 per cent or more on the capital stock. The profits for 122 meat-packing concerns are re ported as follows: 31 concerns made profits for the year of less than 25 per cent ; 45 made profits of from 25 per cent to 50 per cent ; 46 made profits of over 50 per cent; and 22 of over 100 per cent. In this indus try, half of the concerns made a profit of more than 50 per cent and a sixth of over 100 per cent. , These sound like large returns, but they' are out distanced by the figure for the 840 bituminous coal pro ducers in the Appalachian field. Among these con cerns there were only 28 that reported profits of less than 25 per cent; 68 reported profits of 25 but less than 50 per cent; 79 reported profits of from 50 to 100 per cent; 135 reported profits of 100 to 500 per cent; 21 reported profits of from 500 to 1000 per cent, and 14 reported profits of over 1000 per cent. Half of the concems in this industry showed profits of more than 100 per cent, and one in each ten reported profits of more than 500 per cent. The whole report is filled with just such figures. Profits of under 25 per cent are unusual. Profits of 50 880 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON per cent, 100 per cent, and 500 per cent in a single year are quite common. How moderate I had been ! I had talked about our entrance into the war enabling Schwab and his asso ciates to make forty millions a year. What they had actually done was to make billions. I had only half stated the case for the profiteers. True to the prin ciples of their ferocious system, they had taken advan tage of a national emergency to become fabulously rich. In July, 1920, I wrote the Pittsburgh Dispatch the following letter which they published at once : , "Sioux Falls, S. Dak., July 24, 1920. "The Pittsburgh Dispatch, Pittsburgh, Pa. "You asked me to answer this question: 'Was the object of the war gained?' "I suppose my answer must be confined to the United States' participation in that con test. So far as the United States is con cerned, the very object and only object for which we entered the war has been fully gained. We went into the war because the great financial and industrial interests cen tered in New York, who are the real govern ment of the United States, conceived it to be for their gain or profit to put the United States into the European conflict. They had sold billions of dollars' worth of material to England, Russia, France and Italy, at enor mous prices, reaping a marvelous profit. But as the war progressed and the demands on the part of those nations for credit increased, the financiers and controllers of American indus try who were furnishing war material, be came alarmed, and feared they would not be aible to collect their claims against these European nations who were approaching bankduptcy, and they therefore determined to ' put the United States into that controversy, THE PROFITEERS and have the United States loan money to the European nations, to pay off the obligations which they held against them. "They, therefore, started an agitation in the United States to work up the people of this country in favor of going into the war. They bought up, or already owned, all the great daily newspapers. They ordered and paid for preparedness parades in every town of consequence in the United States. They lied to and deceived the American people with exaggerated stories of the German atrocities, until they created a war frenzy In this country. "They had been at work on the President for months. They had a committee, a secret committee, paid by them, planning every phase of the war before we went into it. "E. P. C. Harding, of the Federal Reserve, President of the Bank Board of the United States, on March 22, 1917, published the fPl- Ipwing statement: " 'As banker and creditor, the United States would have a place Q,t the peace conference table, and be in a much better position to re sist a/ny proposed repudiation of debts, FOR IT MIGHT AS WELL BE REMEMBERED THAT WE WILL BE FORCED TO TAKE UP THE CUDGELS FOR ANY OF OUR CITIZENS OWNING BONDS THAT MIGHT BE REPUDIATED.'" "The above was issued before we entered the war, and immediately on our entering the war, these corporations rushed through a loan to the European countries, not one dollar of which ever went to Europe except in the form of war material. "As a result of the war the United States is a debtor and these corporations and their rep- 382 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON resentatives, are creditors of the United , States instead of the European nations. Their profits run into the tens bf billions. The very object for which we went to war has, there fore, been fully gained. "Conclusive proof is in the fact we have 16,500 more millionaires than we had before we went into the war. — R. F. Pettigrew. This letter states the whole issue. The country was in peril. Men were dying. The energies of the nation were being directed to the win ning of a victory. The ignorant, unthinking millions were being mobilized to make the world safe for de mocracy, and the profiteers were piling up their wealth. There was no misunderstanding about this matter. It was not an accident The profiteers did not and could not stop profiteer ing because the system to which they belong is a profi teering system. The profiteer is a product of a system of society that provides the largest rewards for the man who is most successful in robbing his fellows of the results of their labor. There was profiteering before the war— on a small scale. But during the war — in a critical period — ^the system was tested and it proved to be what many of us had thought it— a legal ized system of robbery ; a method of enabling the rich to live off the toil of the poor, and to fatteii out of their privations. The World War showed capitalism at its best and at its worst. In every one of the great capitalist coun tries engaged in the war, the same kind of profi teering went on. The American profiteers made more than their European competitors because there was more to make. Everywhere they got what they could. Capitalism produced the war. Capitalism profited by the war. The utter incompetence; the crass bru tality of the system caused it to break in Russia, in THE PROFITEERS 883 Germany and Austria. Today It Is in full swing, stronger than ever in England, France and the United States. Will the people who do the . work and pro duce the wealth ever realize that capital is stolen labor and its only function Is to steal more labor? XXIX. THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION. The war was an affirmation of capitalism. The Russian Revolution was the answer of the workers. The war wrecked most of the capitalist nations of Europe — wrecked them financially and economically — and those that survived the pei-iod of hostilities were caught in the maelstrom of high prices that followed the signing of the Armistice. During more than four years the producers of Europe turned from making useful things and devoted themselves to making the means of destruction. The result was fatal. Euro pean capitalism had written its own death sentence. The old system broke down first in Russia. The revolution began there, and no sooner did it show itself than the other capitalist nations — ^the former Allies of Russia, — ^turned against her and fought her with armies, with a blockade, and with every other device that military and diplomatic experts could devise. The demands of the Russian people were very pim ple. They asked for work, bread and peace — ^three things that the capitalist system in Russia was unable to provide. Hence the revolution. There have been scores of revolutions during the past two centuries, and after each one of them that proved successful, the people have written a Constitution mod eled on the Constitution of the Uriited States — a Con stitution that permitted the economic masters to carry on their work of exploitation with impunity. The Rus sians abandoned this precedent. Instead of writing a political constitution, they did a very new and a very wonderful thing — ^they wrote an economic constitution, based on the proposition that the exploitation of one man by another must cease. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution of the United States as an afterthought. It is not in the body of the Constitution at all, but takes the form THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION 385 of "amendments." The Russian Constitution begins with a Bill of Rights. The rights enumerated in our Constitution are civil rights, free speech, free press, religious freedom, rights of accused persons, rights in the case of civil trials. The right to be admitted to bail, etc The Russian Bill of Rights begins with a statement of economic prin ciples. Chapter 1 of the Bill of Rights declares the existence of a Soviet Republic in Russia. Chapter 2 begins with these words,— "Bearing in mind, as its fundamental problem, the abolition of exploitation of men by men, the entire abolition of the division of the people in classes, the suppression of exploiters; the establishment of a Socialist society, and the victory of Socialism in all lands, the Third AU-Russian Con gress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies further resolves : "a. for the purpose of realizing the socialization of land, all private property in land is abolished, and the entire land is declared to be national property and is to be apportioned among husbandmen without any com- perisation to the former owners, in the measures of each one's ability to till it. "b, all forests, treasures of the earth, and waters of general public utility, all implements, whether animate or inanimate, model farms and agricultural enter prises, are declared to be national property. "c as a first step towards the complete transfer of ownership to the Soviet Republic of all factories, mills, mines, railways, and other means of production and transportation, the Soviet law for the control by work men and the establishment of the Supreme Soviet of National Economy is hereby confirmed, so as to assure the power of the workers over the exploiters. "d. with reference to international banking and finance, the third Congress of Soviets is discussing the Soviet decree regarding the annulment of loans made by the Govemment of the Czar, by landowners and the bourgeoise, and it trusts that the Soviet Govemment will firmly follow this course until the final victory of 886 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the international workers' revolt against the oppres sion of capital. "e. the transfer of all banks into the ownership of the Workers' and Peasants' Government, as one of the conditions of the liberation of/ the tolling masses from the yoke of capital, is confirmed. "f . universal obligation to work is introduced for the purpose of eliminating the parasitic strata of society and organizing the economic life of the country." All wealth and all the comforts of civilization are the products of labor applied to the earth. Man is a land animal and his right to the soil is inherent and funda mental. , The chance to reach the land and the right to reach it are as great as the right to use the air and the water of the earth. The Soviet Constitution allows every person over eighteen years of age to vote if they are engaged in some useful employment. Thus disfranchising the lawyers and the preachers. A lawyer spends the first half of his life over the past and the last half trying to apply the past to the present and lets the future go to hell. A preacher spends the first half of his life over the past and the last half over the future and lets the pres ent go to hell. I am sure neither are engaged in a useful occupation. Then follows a provision regarding the right to bear arms. After it there comes the forceful and splendid declaratiori against capitalist imperialism and in favor of a self-governing and self-determining world. Sec tions 4 and 5 of Chapter 3 provide : "Expressing its absolute resolve to liberate mankind from the grip of capital and im perialism, which fiooded the earth with blood in this present most criminal of all wars, the Third Congress of, Soviets fully agrees with the Soviet Government in its policy of break ing secret treaties, of organizing on a wide THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION 887 scale the fraternization of the workers and peasants of the belligerent armies, and of making all efforts to conclude a general demo cratic peace without annexations or indem nities, upon the basis of the free determina tion of the peoples. "It is also to this end that the Third Con gress of Soviets insists upon putting an end to the barbarous policy of the bourgeois civ ilization which enables the exploiters of a few chosen nations to enslave hundreds of millions of the toiling population of Asia, of the col onies, and of small countries generally." Following this protest there is a section (8) setting forth the attitude of the Soviet Government toward those portions of the former Russian Empire which were not yet incorporated into the Soviet Republic : "In its effort to create a league — ^free and voluntary, and for that reason all the more complete and secure — of the working classes of all the peoples of Russia, the Third Con gress of Soviets merely establishes the funda mental principles of the federation of Russian Soviet Republics, leaving to the workers and peasants of every people to decide the follow ing question at their plenary sessions of their Soviets: whether or not they desire to par ticipate, and on what basis, in the federal gov ernment and other federal Soviet insiitu^ tions." Conservative thinkers and publicists deride these provisions on the ground that the Soviet Govemment has not yet been able to put them fully into practice. They jest. Have we been able to enforce the Prohibi tion Amendment?, to enfranchise the Negroes in ac cordance with the provisions of amendment 14?, to guarantee the right of free speech in accordance with amendment 1?, or to protect American citizens against 388 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON unreasonable search and seizure in accordance with amendment 4? To ask these questions, is to answer them. A Bill of Rights presents the aspirations and the political ideals of a people — nothing more. The ideals of our forefathers were of a political nature, as is clearly indicated in the Bill of Rights which they drew up. In the same way, the ideals of the Russian work ers are of an economic nature, as is clearly indicated by the Bill of Rights which they have drawn up. The times have changed since the Constitutional Convention met in 1787. Then men were striving for political freedom. Now they are seeking economic emancipation. It is all part of the same struggle — for liberty, but the new times have called forth new ideals. The Russian Bill of Rights is a new step and a long step in the direction of freedom. There were nearly 170 millions of people in Russia when the war began in 1914. After three years of bloody struggle they dem.anded work, bread and peace, and they proceeded to get these things in the only way that the workers will ever get them from the masters — by taking them. The beneficiaries of privilege will not yield unless they are compelled to by force of cir cumstances that are too strong for them to control. The embodiment of that force is the organized will of the people who do the worlds' work. The Russian Revolution is the greatest event of our times. It marks the beginning of the epoch when the working people will assume the task of directirig and controlling industry. It blazes a path into this un known countr5% where the workers of the world are destined to take from their exploiters the right to con trol and direct the economic affairs of the community. XXX. THE LEAGUE TO PERPETUATE WAR. The war has just begun. I said that when the Arm istice terms were published and when I read the Treaty and the League Covenant I felt more than ever con vinced of the justice of my conclusion. The Treaty of Versailles is merely an armistice — a suspension of hos tilities, while the combatants get their wind. There is a war in every chapter of the Treaty and in every section of the League Covenant; war all over the world; war without end so long as the conditions en dure which produce these documents. The League of Nations is a League to perpetuate war. I do not charge that its sponsors intended this, though I have sufficient respect for the intellectual ability of men like Balfour and Lloyd George, Makino and Orlando to believe that they knew quite well what they were about. But whether by intention or accident, the "Big Five" pre sented the world with two documents, the attempted enforcement of which is destined to bathe the earth in blood and wipe out what remains of "western civili zation." The advocates of the League of Nations claim for it that it will end war. "If we do not adopt it," says Mr. Wilson, "we will break the heart of the world." If we do adopt it, we shall help to bleed the western world white in the series of frightful international struggles that will follow upon any attempt to enforce the Treaty and the League Covenant as they are writteri. Let me state, briefly, my reasons for believing that the League of Nations is a War League rather than a Pe&ce Lesffue, 1. The League of Nations is not a league of all na tions. On the contrary, three kinds of nations are deliberately excluded from it,— the Socialist nations like Russia; the enemy nations, like Germany; and the "undeveloped nations," like Mexico. The "Big Five" 890 IMPERLVL WASHINGTON v/ho wrote the Armistice Terms, the Peace Treaty and the League Covenant were Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan and the United Slates. These are the five great capitalist empires of the world. They are also the five leaders among the allied nations. The League is therefore a Holy Alliance of capitalist empires against socialist states ; a League of the Allies against the Cen tral Powers ; a League of the five great exploiting na tions of the world against those whom they propose to rob. This situation creates a series of alignments any One of which may lead to an outbreak at almost ariy moment. 2. On the one hand, there is the alignment against Russih. Ever since the Revolution of 1917, the Allies have done everything in their powier to destroy the govemment of Russia. They have sent their armies against her at Vladivostock and at Archangel; they have attacked her with their fleets on the Black Sea and in the Baltic; they have financed and equipped those like Yudenich, Kolchak, Denikine and Wrangel who were in rebellion against the established government of Russia ; they have financed and equipped the Ukra- nians, the Finns and the Poles, on condition that they should make war on Russia; they have established a "sanitary cordon" of border states in an effort to cut Russia off from the rest of Europe; they have main tained a blockade which has resulted in the death, by starvation and by disease, of Russian men, women and children. During three long years, the Allies have car ried on these activities without succeeding in forcing a declaration of war from Russia. The Russian people are very patient. They had need of patience under the Czars, but there, is a limit to everything. There are a hundred and fifty million of Russians. These people feel bitter against the cap italist govemments that have attacked and blockaded them. They have an army — ^the largest now In Europe, if report speaks true. Some day that army will come into action against the armies of the Allies— come with the fervor and ardor of revolution, and when it, comes, THE LEAGUE TO PERPETUATE WAR 891 Europe will witness another terrible massacre and an other fearful destruction of wealth. 8. Then, there are the enemy countries — defeated in the great war, stripped of their navies and of their merchant ships ; of their colonies ; of their investments in foreign countries; of their coal and iron; dismem bered, saddled with heavy indemnities in addition to their onerous taxes. These enemy countries are suf fering under the smart of a terrible military defeat. But more than that, after revolting and driving out their despotic -rulers they have been subjected to an economic punishment more frightful than any that has ever been administered in modern times. The gov erning classes feel this ; the people feel it, and they are all ready, at the first opportunity, to rush to arms in vindication of their international position and of their national rights, which they believe were grossly vio lated by the Treaty of Versailles. No opportunity was lost; no effort was spared to humiliate the defeated and to visit upon them a drastic economic punishment. The vanquished and humiliated are preparing to come back, and the Allied Nations know it. 4. There are the exploited countries; the "unde veloped" portions of the earth; the promising invest ment field; the good markets — Mexico, India, Korea, Egypt, Persia, China and the others. Africa has been under the heel of Western business men for genera tions. The same thing is true of India and other por tions of Western and Southern Asia. These peoples, numbering hundreds of millions, have been kept in ignorance and held in bondage, while the British, Ger man, French, Belgian and other traders and investors made free with their property and their lives. In the Belgian Congo, the black men were treated with in describable cruelty; the people of India, after a cen tury and a half of British rule, are almost deliberately curtailed In order that the Indian market might be open for British manufacturers. Mexico has been vic timized again and again by the United States. Hayti, Santo Domingo and Nicaragua have felt the weight 892 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON of America's imperial fist. Under the Treaty, with Its "Mandates" and its guarantees of territorial integrity, these peoples, comprising the bulk of the world's pop ulations, are to be continued in "tutelage" while Allied Capitalists plunder and allied governments tax and kill. The Baku Conference of the Eastern People (Sep tember, 1920) is the beginning of an organized protest that challenges the right of the west to continue its exploitation of the East. India is aflame with revolt, and the smaller eastem countries are awaiting the sig nal to begin a holy war, a religious crusade, against the domination of Western Civilization, Whether the pro posed expulsion of the Sultan from Europe will start the conflagration, or whether some other spark will set it off remains to be seen. But the spirit of liberation is abroad in the earth, and any group of nations that seeks, with or without a covenant, to continue a system of virtual slavery, is heading for bitter and terrible conflicts. 5. Finally, there is an item of immense significance. The "Big Five" are five capitalist empires, each one of which is struggling for markets and for investment opportunities. Britain and Germany fought the recent war because Germany challenged Britain's economic supremacy. Today each of the Big Five is busy with just such an economic battle as that which preceded the war of 1914. British and American oil interests are in open conflict; Japan is seeking to exclude western bankers from the Chinese field; France and Italy are bitter rivals for the control of the Mediterranean; Britain and France are contending for the resources of Central feurope and of the near East. Besides that, it must not be forgotten that naval and military ap propriations are larger among the Big Five than they were before the world war. "Any one of these issues may lead to war — ^between the Allies and Russia ; between the Allies and the Cen tral Powers; between the Allies and the victims of their exploitation ; between the Allies themselves. One or more of them is sure to result in war within a dec- THE LEAGUE TO PERPETUATE WAR 893 ade, if the Treaty and the League Covenant are en forced. The League of Nations is a League of War ; Its present form. Its very existence spells war. I have another reason for insisting that the League will make for war rather than for peace — a reason growing out of the League's own record. During its brief existence, the League has witnessed more than a score of wars in Europe, Africa and in Asia. These wars have been participated in by Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan — ^the leading exponents of the League. France has sent men and money to back Po land and to uphold General Wrangel's insurrection against the Russian Government, while her armies are busy conquering and subjugating Syria. Great Brit ain is fighting in Ireland and in Mesopotamia Spain, France and Italy all are fighting in North Africa, and Thrace is being ravaged by contending armies. Since the League came into being, Europe has blazed with war. The League is not a war preventer, but a war maker. So much for the character and history of the League. Now as to its purposes. These are three in number: 1. To crush out Socialism. 2. To safeguard the British Empire, 8. To unite the exploiters against the exploited. The relation of the League and of its principal mem bers toward Soviet Russia is a sufficient guarantee of the first point. The position of the British Empire, combined with the working of Article X of the League Covenant establishes the second. British statesmen insisted that they desired nothing as a result of the war. As things tumed out, however, they received over two million square miles, including important possessions in East Africa, Mesopotamia, the lands bordering the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, Persia, Thibet, and the German possessions in the South Pacific. This gives the British Empire control over something like a third of the earth, including a continuous stretch of territory from the Cane of Good Hope to Cairo and from Cairo to Bengal. These things 894 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON are guaranteed under the Treaty, and Article X of the Covenant provides that : "The members of the League undertake to respect and preserve against external aggression, the territorial integrity and existing politi cal independence of all members of the League." This clause commits all members of the League to back the British Empire in its efforts to hold hundreds of mill ions of human beings in subjection. The original Holy Alliance organized in 1815 be tween Austria, Russia, Prussia and France, carried a mutual guarantee to protect from intemal disturbances like the French Revolution, the members of the Alli ance. This new Alliance guarantees its members against the possible loss of their colonies and posses sions by any form of external oppression. They bind each other to help hold what they ,have stolen in this and previous wars. According to the original plan, the United States was to furnish the men and the money necessary to carry this Covenant into effect. The League is intended to organize and unite the exploiter nations. Under Covenant provisions, the ex ploited nations have no rights that the exploiters are bound to respect. Japanese troops will remain in Korea ; British rule stays in India and American Ma rines hold their ground in Hayti. The robbers will unite and plunder their victims in severalty. Thus, the League Is intended, not to secure freedom and self-determination, but to perpetuate autocracy and the rule of force of which the leading members of the League are the chief exponents. The Treaty and the League Covenant intensify every cause that led up to the world war. International Capitalism, with its economic rivalries and commercial struggles is perpetuated and consecrated; the exploi tation of the weak by the rich and the strong is pro vided for ; out of such a situation there can come noth ing less than revolution and a struggle for independ ence on the one hand and the bitterest conflicts be tween the members of the League on the other. The THE LEAGUE TO PERPETUATE WAR 895 Leagrue will perpetuate, will compel war. It makes peace unthinkable ; impossible. It condemns the world to generations of blood-letting and destruction. The League is a logical product of the forces that made the last war and will prove an instrument of immense vaJue in bringing about the next one. XXXL THE 1920 ELECTION. The World War gave the business interests the op portunity for which they had been waiting. At the same time that they made millions they were able to come out in the open as the controlling force in Ameri can public life. Their answer to the Russian Revolu tion revealed their international stand. The events surrounding the election of 1920 showed how far they were ready to go in dominating the lives of the Ameri can people. I spent the winter of 1919-1920 in Washington and New York, where I paid close attention to the business situation. I was particularly interested in the question as to whether a panic was going" to be ordered by the New York bankers. The masters of business life discussed the high cost of living, in other words; the cost of food and raw ma terial, and how to reduce prices. They knew that the inflation of the currency was what had increased the price of all articles not controlled by the trusts, and they discussed the question of contracting the volume of money, for we have in circulation in the United States today nearly fifty-nine dollars per capita as against seventeen dollars in 1880. \^ut the issue of money under the present system is very; profitable to the bankers'. They had made more than a billion out of the issue of money since the United States went into the war, and had inflated the currency, since the pres ent bank act went into effect, by several billions of dol lars. The bankers disliked to contract the currency because the issue of money is so profitable, and they finally hit upon another method and said, "We will con tract the credit" There were two fields iri which It was possible to contract credit. One was the field of big business. The other was the field of agriculture. A contraction ol THE 1920 ELECTION 397 credit to big business would have hit manufacturers and merchants (themselves). A contraction of agri cultural credits, on the other hand, would hit only the farmers who are unorganized and in no position to strike back. A decision was therefore inade to curtail credit by compelling all the banks, to restrict their loans in the farm-producing area of the United Statejs^ After the whole matter had been argued through, an order was sent out from New York to all of the reserve banks throughout the United States to restrict their loans and to refuse credit on all the products of human toil not controlled by the combinations. The result has been, of course, the reduction in.the price of everything that is produced on the farm. Meat, com, cotton, oats and hay are all far below their spring selling prices, not becaufee crops were unusually large, but because the farmers were compelled to sell all of their crops in the market at the same time. They were compelled to sell because they could not borrow. They could not bor row, not because money, was scarce — ^there was more money in the country than at any time in its history — but because the banks refused it to the farmers. Dur ing this same time loans were made to Norway, Bel gium, France. There was plenty of money for that, but food prices must come down, and the way to bring them down was to compel the farmers to sell by with drawing all credits and calling all existing loans. While American farmers were being refused credit, the Bankers' Club, which is the government of the United States, entered into a "consortium" with the bankers of England, France and J^pan to loan money to China for railroad concessions and concessions of minerals and coal. Vanderlip and Lamont were in china all through April getting these conceasions. This contract between the United States, England, France and Japan is a written contract and the Secretary of State is a party to it ; and yet the people of the United States are refused access to it. This same club in New York, composed of the bank ers and the great industries, discussed the question of 398 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the cost of labor. They said, "Labor is clamoring for more pay because of the high cost of living. We can reduce the cost of living by withdrawing credit and robbing the farmers, out we must also reduce wages," and they discussed for weeks the question of importing Chinese and Japanese laborers from the Orient. Their newspapers began to agitate the question, feeling out the public, but the opposition was so strong against taking down the bars and Importing coolie labor that they turned their attention to Europe and made ar rangements for the importation of laborers from the starving centers of Europe at wages that would send an American laborer to the poorhouse. It is contract labor, in violation of the laws of the United States, Unless American wages were reduced, it would be impossible for American manufacturers to compete in foreign markets, and unless food prices came down, wages could not be reduced without lowering efficiency. Therefore, the food prices came down and the farmers stood the loss, and this was done on the eve of an elec tion. In years gope by the business interests would not have dared to operate so openly. That they do it now is the proof of their power, and of the contempt in which they hold the American people. So much for the events which preceded the election. It was a period of open-handed assumption of power by the business interests. Now for the campaign itself. My interests were centered on the Republican cam paign because it was evident from the start tiiat the Republicans were destined to win. The Republican Convention was a very grand affair. I arrived in Chicago on the second arid stayed until the twelfth of June, and saw the whole operation. I had a friend who has been a member of the Republican Na tional Convention for forty years, and has been one of the leaders in every Convention, and he reported each morning — between one and two o'clock — ^the result of every conference, so that I knew in advance just what the convention was going to do the next day; and it always functioned according to program. THE 1920 ELECTION 899 The representatives of the great interests arrived m a body and took charge of the convention from the start. It is the first time they have ever done this. There was Gary, head of the Steel Corporation; Davi son arid Lamont of Morgan & Co. ; F. H. Allen of Lee Higginson & Co.; Atterbury, vice-president of the Pennsylvania Railroad, and Dick Mellen, of Pittsburgh, whose family is, I suppose — ^next to Rockefeller — ^the richest in America. Then there were George Baker and Frank Vanderlip and Daniel G Reid. These men took no chances. They went to Chicago, wrote the platform, and nominated the candidate. They were willing to take Lowden or Wood, but Borah said that he would bolt the convention if they named either one of them. They were holding Knox and Hoover, Har ding and Senator Watson of Indiana in reserve, and were willing to take any one of them, but they did not want a bolt in the party. Thesis financiers are the men whp put the United States into the European war. They fumished the money to pay for preparedness parades all over the country ; they are out for empire. They wanted to put a plank into the platform providing for a league of nations, or, rather, the Versailles Treaty with mild reservations, and they had prepared such a plank and they would have adopted it, but Borah and Johnson went before the committee and told them they would bolt if they put that plank intd the platform. That, of course destroyed Knox's chances, for he had agreed in advance that he would stand by and carry out such a plank if he were nominated; but without the plank these men would not trust Knox, and that ended his chance for the nomination. Then they canvassed Sproul of Pennsylvania, but Penrose wired that he would not stand for Sproul, who was trying to administer his political estate before he was dead. 'They finally concluded that Harding was the man least objectionable and most certain to stand right on their plans to exploit the rest of the world. In other words, Harding was from Ohio — ^which they 400 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON must carry in order to win — and he was sound on the question of the commercial conquest of the earth by the United States. The business interests named Harding. They would have preferred a stronger man — Knox of Pennsylvania was the favorite— but Harding was more available, so Harding was chosen. Just a word as to the record of this latest President of "the greatest community on earth," as published in the "Searchlight," after a careful study of his six years in the Senate : "Harding probably ranks below every other Senator in initiative, activity and accomplishment. "Neither his friends nor his eriemies can connect his name with a single outstanding issue, good or bad. "He neither introduced nor championed even one big constructive measure. "He was absent or dodged 1,170 roll calls and quo rum calls. "All the bills and resolutions he introduced were local or private in character, except eight None of these eight was of big importance. "In all matters of politics, economics and spoils he was a follower of the Old Guard bosses— Penrose, Smoot and Lodge. "On issues at all important he voted with the pro gressive group only nlnt times in six years. "He has voted for the liquor interests thirty times, and against them only twice. "He favored woman suffrage after much reluctance and indecision. "He voted for the Cummins Railroad Bill, with its anti-strike provision. "He stood consistently against conservation, voted for the vicious Shields water power bill several times. "On eveiy important test between capital and labor, he voted with capital. "He opposed public ownership in every form. "On revenue measures, he voted against every THE 1920 ELECTION 401 amendment to increase the tax upon profiteering and large incomes. "He voted and spoke for conscription as a permanent policy. "He opposed disarmament for all nations." Harding never read the Declaration of Independ ence and never heard of Thomas Jefferson. Discuss ing Philippirie independence January 28, 1916, Hard ing said : "Independence was not the inspiration of the War of the Revolution. . . . The American Republic never gave a thought to the 'consent of the governed' ; never gave a thought to the violation of 'inalienable rights" ... I know What is in our hearts. . . . And if we are to go into the Orient for an expansion of com merce and trade, I fancy that the possession of these rich islands will be very much to our advantage." The big bankers, who dominate our foreign, as they dominate our domestic policy, have registered their full determination to take the billions they made out of the war as profiteers and reach out for the oil and iron and coal of the world and, by concessions and the grant of privileges, exploit the great natural resources not only of North and South America, but of Asia and Africa. Vanderlip and Lamont spent all of April and half of May in China and Japan, securing concessions for building railroads and the right to develop the great coal, oil and iron deposits of that country. They had their agents also in Siberia. Their program is to make a contract with Mexico— they are going to call it a treaty — ^by which they can exploit all the resources of Mexico. If Mexico will not make the treaty, after Harding is inaugurated, our army will march into that country. They will proceed at once to build a bigger navy than England has, and they are fully determined to use the resources of the navy of the United States to carry out their imperial policy. They propose to continue to exploit the laborers of this country and force what they plunder from labor on to the other na tions of the world by commercial regulations and con- 402 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON cessions, which are to be backed up by the full force bf the army and the navy of the United States. We are no longer a republic or democracy or any semblance of either one. The entrance of the United States into the great war extinguished all possibilities in that direction. We are a feudal aristocracy with artificial persons for our feudal lords, the most cruel form of society it is possible to imagine. The old feudal aristocracy was composed of natural persons with some human sympathy; but cur feudal lords have none of these attributes, . The situation leads me to repeat what I cannot say too often — that capital is stolen labor and its only func tion is to steal more lahor. This has been true since Lincoln pointed it out more than seventy years ago, and and it is equally true today, when the power in the hands of the capitalists is greater than it has been at any time in history. Back of all this program are the voters of the United States. Thrilled by the World War; terrified by the "Bolshevist Menace," as it has been described by the press ; lukewarm on the question of mixing up in the chaos of European politics and finance ; stimulated and, at the same time, reassured by four years of extraordi nary "prosperity," sixteen millions pf voters went to the polls on November 2, 1920, and cast their votes for Harding, the nominee of Big Business — ^the acceptable jand accepted representative of the most sinister forces in American public life, Harding's plurality of seven millions — unprecedented in presidential elections, gives the Republican party an assurance of at least eight years of unquestioned power. The Great War is over. Peace has been restored. Sanity is supposed to have replaced the hysteria of war frenzy. Yet Harding, spokesman of plutocratic impe rialism, is in the White House, while Debs, the cham pion of economic emancipation, is In the Atlanta peni tentiary. XXXII. CAPITALISM. The people of the United States are playing with fire. They are experimenting with an unworkable system of social organization — ^a system that has been tried re peatedly during the past three or four thousand years, and that has destroyed civilization as often as it has been tried. The form of the experiments has been dif ferent, but their essential features remain the same. Let me review these features briefly, bcause they lie at the foundation of our whole public life. First, there is the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few men — "self-made," "irresponsible" — owing no allegiance to anything save our own des tinies and their own ambitions. These wealth-lords, or plutocrats, ruling by virtue of their wealth, have been the bane of every great civilization from Assyria and Egypt to Rome, Spain and Great Britain. "Two per cent of the people of the United States own sixty per cent Of the property of the United States. Yet they produced none of it. By legislation, by craft and cunning, by control of Congress and the courts, they took to themselves what others produced. Sixty- six per cent ofi the people of the United States own five per cent of the property of the United States. Yet they produced all of the wealth and have none of it. Why do not the producers of this wealth have what they pro duce? Because the making of the laws and the control of the courts is in the hands of those who do not work, and this has been true from the beginning of the Gov ernment. The convention which framed the Constitu tion of the United States was composed of fifty-five members. A majority were lawyers — not one farmer, mechanic or laborer. Forty owned Revolutionary Scrip. Fourteen were land speculators. Twenty-four were money-lenders. Eleven were merchants. Fifteen were slave-holders. They made a Constitution io pro- 404 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON tect the rights of property and not the rights of man, and, ever since. Congress has been controlled by the property owner, and has framed laws In their interests and their interests only, and always refused to frame any laws in the interest of those who produce all the wealth and have none of it. In the second place, the wealth-owning class, because of its wealth-power and its hold on the machinery of society, takes a tribute from the mass of the workers. The character of this tribute varies from age to age. At bottom it is the same. The owner of wealth, be cause he possesses the things without which the masses would starve, compels them to pay him a return for their use. In Egypt and in feudal Europe, the masters owned land and exacted rent. Here, in /the United States, the masters own the forests, mines, factories, railroads, banks and insurance companies. These things they own through the instrumentality of corpo rations and therefore their income takes the form of dividends on stocks and of interest on bonds. The form is immaterial. The fact remains that the few — whether as landlords or capitalists — hold the choice spots of the earth, and the many, for the privilege of enjoying these choice spots, pay tribute to the few who own them. These masses — ^the workers — ^the producers — are re warded with the least possible amount upon which they are willing to go on working and reproducing their kind. In old times they were chattel slaves ; today they are wage slaves. Formerly, their masters took all of their product and guaranteed them a living. Now, a part of the product goes to the workers, but they must keep themselves. In the past the work done by the slave for his mas ter kept the master in luxury and enabled him to live a life of ease, and, if he desired, ~of dissipation and v/aste. Today the rent, interest and dividends paid by the workers "to the owners of lands, bonds and stocks enables these owners to live in luxury, in fdleness and, if 'they desire, in wasteful dissipation. The owners of CAPITALISM 405 American wealth, according to the returns published by the Internal Revenue office, state on their income tax blanks that their incomes amount to tens and hun dreds of thousands, to millions and tens of millions of •dollars each year. The most skilled of the workers seldom make over $100 a week with steady work, and seven-eighths of them make less than $50 a week. Furthermore, when hard times come, it is the worker who goes on the street and starves. The bondholder continues to draw his interest and the stockholder con tinues to receive his dividend. The bondholder, under the law, can insist upon his interest. The corporations take care of the stockholder long after the workers have begun to walk the streets looking for a chance to work. These owners, freed from the necessity for labor, develop rapidly into d leisure class, while the workers, struggling for existence, constitute a labor class. The leisure class controls the surplus wealth of the com munity. Out of this surplus it feeds, dresses and houses itself; buys privileges, corrupts the machinery of the state ; invests in foreign exploiting opportuni ties; struggles with the leisure classes of other coun tries for the chance to exploit and rob. Among the masses, who are laboring and producing without getting the value of their product, there is poverty and want. Diseases waste and ravage ; vitality is sapped; energy deteriorates. Perhaps nowhere in the modern world is the picture more clearly presented than among the exploited British factory workers.-dnr- ing the forty or fifty years preceding the- World War. It the soldiers on the field were cannon fodder, the men and women of Lancashire and Birmingham. were factory fodder. While the leisure class of Britain was shooting grouse and chasing foxes across the ploughed land, the men and women and children belonging to the working masses were huddled In garrets and cellars— the prey of tuberculosis, rickets, anaemia and want- The leisure class, having nothing better to do, plays 11 at ducks and drakes with international affairs, plunges 406 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON the country into economic and military conflicts, heaps up great debts, and wastes its own and the country's resources, while the workers do the mass-fighting, pay the taxes and suffer from starvation and disease. Be tween the two classes there springs up hate, class conflict and perpetual dissension. It was not for noth ing that Alexander Hamilton wrote, "The various' and unequal distribution of wealth." When I entered the public life of the United States, the economic ruling class was just stepping Into power. There was no leisure olass to speak of. There was still an abundance of free land for the workers. The Amer ica that I knew in my young manhood was still talking, in all sincerity, about "government of, by and f Or the people." In the brief period of my own public experi ence we have adopted a species of feudalism more unhuman and more vicious than any of which history bears a record — a feudalism of artificial persons (cor porations) using their power to exploit the workers in the interest of the parasites. Within my lifetime we have become a govemment of corporations whose at torneys are in the House and Senate and throughout the bureaus and departments of the Govemment, look ing out for the interests of those who pay them their retaining fees. This is capitalism — the control of tiie machinery of society in the Interests of those Who own Its wealli. This was feudalism in France and slavery in Rome and in Assyria. This is the system of dividing the commu nity into two classes — owners and producers— ^nd of rewarding the owners at the expense of the producers. As I read history, this method of social organization has had and can have only one result. The leisure class rots out and drops to pieces ; the workers starve and suffer and die. Sometimes they revolt — ^particu larly in the later years. Generally, they are too weak and too ignorant to do anything more than labor arid r^rodnce. in the preceding pages I have tried to show how this eyetem was getting its grip on the United States. Out CAPITALISM 407 of my own experience in public life I have indicated the activity of the land-grabbers, the bankers, the money- ring, the beneficiaries of the tariff, the trust magnates, the railroad operators and the other masters of the economic world. In Congress and out, year by year, they have taken possession of the country's best re sources, robbed the people through monopoly, ex ploited and plundered the workers by means of low wages and high prices. Then, with their ill-gotten gains, they have invaded other lands — Cuba, Porto Rico, the Philippines, Mexico, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Haiti — and there they have repeated the same process, by fair means or foul, gaining posses sion of the timber, oil, copper and iron, and then forc ing the natives to produce these commodities for a pit tance wage. Behind them, in these ventures, the pluto crats had the army an^ navy of the United States to be used when necessary, as they were used against Spain, the Philippines, the Mexicans, the Haitians and the rest Meanwhile, at home, through the subsidy of po litical parties — ^through the passage of legislation — through the courts — through the private control or, where necessary, through the open purchase or coer cion of public men, the interests have taken possession of the government of the United States, shaping its institutions, and directing its policies along lines cal culated to yield the largest net returns to the plutoc racy. "The last move in this direction involved the entrance of the United States into the World War; the conscrip tion of men ; the dispatch of an army to the battlefields of Europe; the suppression of free speech and a free press; search, seizure, indictment, trial, imprisonment and the deportation of men and women in open and flagrant violation of constitutional guarantees and long-established precedent. The Wilson administration and the Supreme Court have demonstrated and established that in time of war the Constitution, with all its amendments, is but a scrap of paper and of no force and effect. Hereafter, 408 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON all that the people who do not work and produce the wealth have to do is to unite and get control of the Congress and other branches of the government and declare war on some country — any country — and at once proceed to enact laws in total disregard of the Constitution, and all its guarantees, and arrest and imprison all who disagree or protest. It is well for the people who toil to make a note of this fact. No man who has regard for the welfare of this- country, or who is concerned for its future, can fail to be alarmed at the course that it has followed, and is still following, along the road that leads to empire and imperial institutions. There may yet be time, but un less we turn back soon, it will be too late. It behooves the sixty-six per cent of our people to take possession of their Govemment and enact laws so that every man shall have all he produces. Capital is stolen labor, and its only function is to steal more labor. ^ XXXIII. THE TRIUMPH OF CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION. Perhaps I can say more effectively what I tried to write in the last chapter by means of an allegory which tells, in simple form, the story of our blunders. One hundred years ago a colony of English farm laborers, one hundred in number, composed of men, women and children — old and young — chartered a ship and started for Australia. They were inspired to go by the promise of free land — ^they and their ancestors having been tenants upon an English estate. The ship was a sailing ship and the colonists loaded it with their second-hand furniture, second-hand bed ding and second-hand farm implements. They also obtained some seeds from a charitable person who was willing to await the success of the colony for the return of his investment ; and, with the seeds and agri cultural implements, they started from England for Australia by way of Cape Horn. The voyage across the Atlantic was successfully made; the cape was rounded and the ship stretched her sails as she moved away into the broad Pacific The colonists, who knew little of sailing routes soon got off from the ordinary track of vessels and, when well out in the Pacific Ocean, ran their ship aground upon a sunken reef which stove a hole in the bottom and placed it beyond repair. Consternation prevailed airiong the passengers. Some fainted. Others ran up and down the decks, nearly insane with fear. The cooler heads soon re stored order however, and all hands were organized to save what they could out of the wreck. Wheri it became evident that the ship was in no immediate dan ger of sinking, the faint-hearted regained courage and all went to work with a will. There were two young men — healthy and strong — who seemed to take no interest in the salvage plans. 410 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON but busied themselves with trying to release from its lashings the only life-boat upon the ship — a very small boat, which was all that the colonists, out of their meagre funds, could afford. A study of the situation showed the leaders of the party that their condition was by no means hopeless. The ship did not fill rapidly and about ten miles south of the wreck, land could be made out. There was no wind, the sea was calm. Their one boat was too small to be of any great use, so the voyagers decided to build a raft out of the ship and try to reach the land south of them. So they all started to work — with the excep tion of the two young men — constructed their raft on the leeward side of the ship and began loading it with their belongings. Before they had gone far with the loading, they found that the raft would not carry over one-half of the colony. So they took the old and the helpless and the children, and half of the most able- bodied, and proceeded to propel the raft to the land, while the others were picking up and putting in shape t|ie remainder of the cargo and the stores. The occupants of the raft landed upon the island without difficulty. Apparently, so far as they could see, it was a complete and absolute desert. They had no ticed, before they left the ship, that the two young men, who had been hanging around the life-boat had dis appeared, and that the life-boat, as well a^ all the arins and munitions on the ship had disappeared with them. These men had rendered no assistance whatever In res cuing their fellow-beings from the wreck, and they had deserted the ship at the critical moment, with the only seaworthy craft that the colonists possessed. After the first raft cargo had been landed, a few of the men returned with the raft to the ship, loaded their implements and the remainder of the food and taking aboard the rest of the colony, returned to the island. For the next day or two, the shipwrecked colonists gave their attention to stripping the ship taking such parts as they could detach, to the island, and construct- TRIUMPH OF CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION 411 Ing temporary shelter. After all that could be moved was taken to the camping place they had selected, three of the company were chosen to explore the island, while others were detailed to manufacture a temporary boat in order to see if there were eatable fish in the waters surrounding the Island. Those who had been sent to explore the island soon returned with the report that they had found a body of very fertile land several miles in the interior of the island, that this land was about three thousand acres in extent; that there was a large spring of water in the center of it, and that it appeared to be the only cultivatable land upon the whole island. They reported further that the two young men, who had abandoned their fellows were there in possession of the fertile land, and that when the committee proposed to bring all the other people up to the spring of fresh water and the fertile land, the two young men replied that they, having discovered the oasis, were the lawful own ers and they proposed to stand upon their right to retain it. When the committee insisted that the land should not be privately owned but should be the com mon property of all — ^as man was a land animal and fertile soil was absolytely essential to his existence — the two young men who had in their possession all of the arms on the ship, first argued that the committee must not undertake to discourage individual initiative — ^that it would be ruinous to civilization not to en courage individual enterprise and that the land be longed to them by right of discovery. But, when the committee pressed the point and urged the rights of man, the two young men said : "We have all the arms and ammunition that are on this island, and if you undertake to force possession of this land, we shall fire upon you," After hearing the report of their Committee, the colonists held a meeting and decided that it would be a great mistake to discourage individual enterprise or in any way throttle individual ambition. -They and their ancestors had always paid rent to a landlord ; tiiey 412 IMPERLAL WASHINGTON had been taught to believe that it was the rights of property that were sacred and not the rights of man, and so they resolved to move on to the three thousand fertile acres and pay rent for the use of them. So they gathered together the old and the helpless and the little children and moved them first, and then they moved air of their belongings, including their supply of food arid seed and implements, without any help whatever from the two young men who were busily guarding the results of their enterprise. The Colonists set to work at once to cultivate the land and put in a crop. The two young men married the two most likely young women on the island, and the two young women and their relatives esteemed it a great catch. After the first crop was harvested, the young men, by promising a little reduction in rent, put the whole laboring population at work building them a house that corresponded with the importance of their position. The workers hewed, with the rough tools, the coral rock out of the barren portions of the island and con structed a very splendid residence for the ruling classes. After the house was finished and the workers had manufactured as best they could, out of the wood obtained fr'om the ship, furniture with which to stock it, they began to construct hovels of stone and earth for themselves and their children, and their aged and their sick. So matters went on for several years, during which about two thousand acres of the fertile land were brought under cultivation. Meanwile the population had increased and their labor had made a beautiful park out of the remaining thousand acres which sur rounded the residence of their lords. They had also built a heavy wall around the thousand acres so as to protect the park from encroachment. The leaders of the colony still dreamed of resuming their journey to Australia, and in the little spare time they had between planting, harvesting and building, they explored the island. On the end farthest removed TRIUMPH OF CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION 413 from the oasis, they found a deep and rugged ravine, containing some scrubby vegetation and coming down from a considerable elevation that suggested volcanic origin. In the ravine they discovered gold in great quantities and immediately began to extract it from the soil. It was placer gold and came out in big and small nuggets. After gold was discovered, the oldest of the two colonists, who had appropriated all of the fertile land upon the island, took the title of Lord Goldfield, and the whole population tumed out for a holiday to cele brate the event. They attended services in their churches and were told by their spiritual advisers that it was a great providence of God's which had bestowed upon them so kind and beneficent a ruler as the lord of the province; that, in fact, their lord had received his title direct from God ; that it was of divine origin and was sent especially to them by the great Ruler of the universe because of his loving care. In addition to the gold, some of the colonists dis covered at the headwaters of the stream upon the banks of which the gold was found, a small band of wild goats. The goats were very thin and their hair was not of the finest quality; but immediately upon the discovery of the goats the lords of the palace had them removed to the one thousand acres which they had walled in as a park around their mansion, and great care was exercised in their breeding so that only the best qualities were reproduced. These efforts met with great success. The inferior goats were sterilized and only those allowed to reproduce who were of the very best quality. The animals became strong and large and covered with a wooly coat, and were thus suitable for beasts of burden, and to furnish wool for cloth, and milk for the children of the rich. As a result of this achievement the other young man took a titie— the titie of Lord Angora, in honor of the discovery of the goats. And again ceremonies were held and a holiday proclaimed and the population in structed in the divine origin of this titie. 414 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON But while birth control was exercised with regard to the goats, and great care taken to see that they were properly fed, the common people of the colony were taught that it was wicked to interfere with the proc esses of nature, and as the population had brought with them the usual diseases common to the sexes in Great Britain, there were increasing numbers constantly among the inhabitants of those who were diseased and of those who were mentally defective ; in fact, a very large number of dependents had grown up and the slums had appeared, and as they took no care with regard to sanitary affairs, epidemic diseases — ^the re sult of the poisoning of the population by their own filth — spread among them and reduced the population from time to time. And the people were tanght that this was a visitation by Providence to punish them for their failure to appreciate the glory and goodness of God; that they should read the Bible every day and observe Sunday and attend Church and above all, con tribute to the support of the Church and- God's repre sentative — ^the preacher, who had ordered a day of fasting and prayer to appease the anger of the Deity; And the preacher chanted — "God is great and God is good; He provideth our daily food; by His hand we are aJl fed; give us now our daily bread." And the people cried "Halleluiah, Glory to God." But God's wrath was so great that He would not hear, and the epidemic ran its full course. The preacher then told the people that the only way to prevent future epi demics was to be more devout and that God, above all things, loved a cheerful giver. The rulers of the island had planned and directed the construction of large warehouses which were used to store the products of the land. Many colonists were improvident. They would sell off what tiiey produced and use up the returns so that they would not have enough to last them uijtil the next crop. As the popu lation grew and life became less bearable the number of the,, improvident increased. The two thousand acres under cultivation yielded three crops a year; was TRIUMPH OF CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION 415 intensely cultivated and produced an abundance of supplies. The ruling classes, who owned the gold mines as well as the fertile land, knowing that the value of money depended upon its quantity, decided that the nuggets of gold should have a value in propor tion to their weight or size, and, of course, they decreed that the unit should be pounds, shillings and pence. They also manipulated the money so that, when the crop was harvested, the money was very scarce and therefore, the prices were very low. They would buy the products of the land and store them in their ware houses and, when the next crop was fairly in the ground and improvident members of the community were entirely out of food, they would make the volume of money exceedingly abundant, prices would rise and they could thus charge several times what they paid for the products of the land. They soon found that this was unnecessary for, as they were the only owners of money and had the only warehouses, they could arbitrarily fix the price and thus exploit the population to the full extent of their desire, through their trust control. But a new problem had arisen. Malthus' theory that population would outrun subsistence had come true. The two thousand acres would no longer produce food enough to supply the population and the serfs began to wonder how they would overcome the difficulty. They never thought of encroaching upon the park because that was private property belonging to God and the descendants of the two young men who had, by their private enterprise, discovered and taken possession of it; and the descendants bf these young men never, for a moment, thought of plowing up the park, and they insisted that the miserable population wpuld have enough if they would exercise frugality and industry and would educate themselves ; but they were ignorant and many of them were idle and of but little conse quence. So a committee was appointed to explore the neigh boring seas with the hope of finding land. The ex- 416 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON pedition discovered some small islands, almost entirely barren. On one of them, however, they found a human being, clothed in palm leaves, who fled upon their ap proach; but they called to him and to their astonish ment and joy he responded in the English tongue. He had been upon the island for ten years, the only sur vivor of a shipwreck, and had subsisted upon roots, scant vegetation, and the products of the sea, clothing himself with palm leaves. Of course he went home with the colonists and after he had fully recovered, began to preach the doctrine of Socialism. He said the rights of man were sacred and not the rights of property. He said that every man should have all that his labor produces — ^that man was a land animal and that the land was essential to his very existence, and that no person should own more land than he could use and that, for the idle to demand rent for the use of the land — ^the common inheritance of all — was immoral and dishonest, and that they should immediately take possession of the thousand acres in the park and put those acres into crops. And many of the people endorsed his views. But the ruling classes were not idle. They had watched his movements ; they sent their paid retainers their lawyers, among the people and argued that tO take the park and not pay for it would be confiscation and robbery; that the present owner had inherited it from ancestors who had acquired it by thrift and in dustry and enterprise. That if the public appropriated it to the good of all it would destroy all incentive to individual enterprise and stop the wheels of progress and discourage ambition and return the world to bar barism ; and they also wanted to know if they proposed to rob widows and orphans. The ruler had also organized a standing army of trained men under the plea that the colony might be invaded by savages from some unknown island in the sea, and that an army was needed for protection. The army was officered by men who had been brought up from childhood as trained soldiers and taught that they> TRIUMPH OF CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION 417 must obey their superior officers. even unto shooting their own brothers and sisters, iif commanded to do so by the officer over them. And, as the commander- in-chief of their standing army was by law the oldest son of the oldest of the two men who had discovered the fertile land, the army was ordered out, and they captured the socialist in the interest of law and order, and stood him up against the wall which surrounded the one thousand acres, and fired a volley into him and threw his body into the moat. Civil war at once commenced ; the population divided almost equally on the great question of the sacred rights of property, and they began killing each other until half of the people were disposed of. But as the trained men with their guns were on the side of the owner of the property, the people that remained alive stopped the unequal contest, and right and might pre vailed ; law and order triumphed ; the congestion was relieved ; the park was saved ; the people agreed to con tinue to pay rent, and Christian civilization pursued Its peaceful and solemn course. XXXIV. LOOKING AHEAD. I have had a long experience with the public life of the United States; I have been repeatedly to Europe; I have studied the life of the East at first hand; I have read economics, history, sociology; I have been busily engaged in the life of the world for more than half of a century. If long experience and investigation, coupled with study and discussion, fit a man to under stand what is going on about him, then I believe that I have the necessary qualifications for passing on the events that are now transpiring, and for predicting the trend of our economic and political life. There are certain things that I see very clearly ; and certain tendencies that are working toward their logi cal goals just as inexorably as the sun passes across the heavens. These tendencies in our public life are siniilar to, though not identical with, similar forces that have operated in other societies during historic times; and they bear a very close resemblance to the forces that are now at work in all of the great capi talist countries of the world. In the fight over the annexation of Hawaii, I pre dicted that the road 'which was then being followed by the United States would lead speedily to empire. Well, the empire is already here — having arrived more speed ily than I, in my wildest imaginings, ever dreamed that It would arrive. / At the time of the struggle over the Hawaiian Treaty, few people believed that the United States could ever be an imperial nation. They were skeptical, or else they scoffed openly. Even the representatives of the great interests had little idea of what was hap pening. They knew that they were serving the men who had retained them, but with the exception of a very few among them they saw no farther than the LOOKING AHEAD 419 immediate present. They were lawyers — not states men. As for the masses of the people, they were as igno rant then as they are now. They were swayed by their emotions. They responded to the "full dinner pail" appeal. They were the victims of an education that taught them to remember — not to think ; and they were so busy remembering the glories of seventeenth century Revolutionary America that they had no en ergy or ambition to devote to the problems of nine teenth century plutocratic and imperial America. Dur ing the campaign of 1900 I went before the farmers of South Dakota as a man who had served them for a decade in their fight against the exploiters. Mark Hanna, the direct representative of those exploiters, came put to Dakota with a half a million dollars, and the half million carried more weight than my eleven, years of service in the Senate. Such experience taught me that, all other things being equal, people will do what their immediate eco nomic advantage prompts them to do. Against the weight of this economic advantage, ideals and abstract ideas will not win with the average man or woman. Therefore, I reached a conclusion that I have since seen verified again and agairi — ^that where the carcass is the vultures will be gathered together. So long as the privileged few hold the reins of economic power, and so long as they are willing to share up with the workers a portion — even a small portion of the plunder — they can hope to maintain their authority. So I realized that progress was to be made from the tyranny of the masters as well as from the spirit of revolt among the workers, and where the workers had been crushed and exploited for generations, as in Eng land, I realized that it would take a great deal of tyranny before the masses could be expected to revolt. Thus the danger of the American farmers and wage- earners lay in their very prosperity and in the leniency of their masters. So long as the bread was aburidant 420 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON I did not see how it was possible for forward-looking people to expect any effective progress. Nevertheless, I expected the present century to yield a crop of revolutions, based on tyranny and starvation, and I predicted such a result in 1900. I made this prediction in reply to a letter from the Red Cross, in which the Director of the 20th Century Department asked me to tell what the world might expect in the new century. The Red Cross request was as follows: "THE AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS 20th Century Department Walter L. Phillips General Secretary, Bridgeport, Conn. "Miss Clara Barton, President, Miss Ellen Spencer Mussey, Counsel and 8rd Vice-President, Washington, D. C. Frank D. Higbee, Director 20th Century Dept., New York New York Nov. 21, 1900. "Hon. Richard F. Pettigrew, Sious Falls, South Dakota. "Sir: "The Red Cross regards your position and standing to be such as to make your views on the progress and value of the 19th Century, in comparison with other centuries and your prophecies regarding the 20th Century of great value, and we respectfully request you to forward to us at your earliest convenience from 40 to 70 words in your own handwriting giving your thoughts in that connection. We shall read them at all of our meetings through out the United States, and afterwards allow the United States Government to take them LOOKING AHEAD and forever exhibit and preserve them in the Congressional Library at Washington. "An engraved invitation «is being prepared, one of which will be mailed to you, but the time is short, and we take this method to ex- ^ pedite matters, and hope you will send in your 'Greeting' before December 1st, if you can do so. "We prefer to have the 'Greeting' in your own handwriting rather than typewritten be cause we wish to have each 'Greeting' in auto graph form when turned over to the govern ment for preservation for all time. "Thanking you in advance, I am, Verty tmly yours, "FRANK D. HIGBEE, Director 20th Century Watch Meetings. "Approved : "CLARA BARTON, President." To this letter I sent the following reply: "To the American Nationad Red Cross : "During the century just closed, mankind has made marvelous progress in his control over the forces of Nature, and in the produc tion of things which contribute to his physical comfort. "The early years of the century marked the progress of the race towards individual freedom and permanent victory over the tyr anny of hereditary artistocracy, but the clos ing decades of the century have witnessed the surrender of all that was gained to the more heartless tyranny of accumulated wealth. Man's progress has therefore been material and not spiritual or ideal and the future alone can demonstrate whether any real progress has been made. "I believe the new century will open with 422 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON many bloody revolutions as a result of the pro test of the masses against the tyranriy and op pression of the wealth of the world in the hands of a few, resulting in great progress to wards socialism and the more equal distribu tion of the products of human toil and, as a result, the moral and spiritual uplifting of the race. "R. F. PETTIGREW. "Washington, D. C, Nov. 22, 1900." It was twenty years ago that I predicted "many bloody revolutions as a result of the protest of the masses against the tyranny and pppression of the wealth of the world in the hands of the few." These revolutions have occurred — ^the first in Russia (1905), and subsequently the revolutions in Russia, Hungary, Germany and other portions of Central Europe. Then, too, there has occurred the "great progress towards socialism and the more equal distribution of the products of human toil" that I predicted at the same time. The progress has been unequal. In the United States and in Japan, it has only just begun. All over Europe it has reached advanced stages, and the same forces of tyrannous capitalism and imperial ism that have been at work in Europe, making for these revolutions, and for this revision of the ways of handling economic life are now busy In the United States, where the ruling class is following the old course of empire, and where the workers are beginning to wake up to the fact that they must take charge of their own economic affairs or perish, as have their European comrades, in the inevitable struggle between contending empires. We have not yet witnessed "the moral and spiritual uplifting of the race," about which I wrote in 1900, but already there are intimations that progress is be mg made in that direction. A spirit has come out of Russia that has transformed the thinking of the world LOOKING AHEAD • 428 in three short years, and the end is not yet. This spirit is permeating the mases everywhere, and inspiring the most thotightful among them with the ideas and ideals of a free economic sociey. The closing years of the Nineteenth Century saw the Imperialists of the world at the zenith of their power. The World War marked the beginning of their downfall. Today I see the workers of the world coming into' their own. Before this present generation passes, the workers in all of the important industrial countries of Europe' will be the masters of the jobs on which they are dependent for a livelihood. The workers will gain this control only through the course Of a struggle during which western civilization will either pass to a new level of industrial and social organization, or else it will destroy itself in the conflict. This is the supreme test of the effectiveness of the pres ent level of working-class intelligence. If the work ers have leamed enough and can maintain sufficient solidarity to hold the machinery of economic life to gether, while the transition is being made, the next steps in material and in spiritual progress must come in quick succession. If, on the other hand, the workers fail to make the transition, there must ensue years or perhaps centuries of stagnation, like those which fol lowed the dissolution of the Roman Empire. Whatever the success of the workers, one thing is certain— ^if those who do the world's work do not make this fight for the control of their jobs, the madcaps who are now directing the affairs of the great capitalist states will continue with their wars — each more ter rible than the last one — until there remain only the fragments of the present civilization, and then the dark ages that will follow, across the war-devastated earth, will be dark indeed. ' If through either struggle^that of the workers to get and to hold control of their jobs, or that of the plutocracies for the right to exploit the garden spots of the earth — ^the present civilization of the West is 424 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON destroyed, then the ancient civilization of the East, based on the agricultural village, will again dominate The beginnings of these changes already are seen in Central Europe, where finances, transportation and manufacturing have been seriously deranged, or where their operation has been completely suspended, and where starvation and disease are consuming a popu lation for which the old order of society cari afford no remedy. The war has been officially over for some time, yet, .during the many months since there were open hos tilities on the main battie-fronts, the economic life of Central Europe has not recovered its normal tone. There were many who felt that no sooner was the armistice agreed to than there would be a resumption of the ordinary economic activities of the peoples of the warring countries. At least "by the first of the year," insisted the optimists, things would "pick up." The first of the year has 'come and has gone — for the year of 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1922, and unless all accounts are at fault the starvation, disease, suffering and misery are more acute now than they were at the end of the war. Certainly the financial reports show that the economic portion of Austria, Poland, Hungary, Esthonia and probably of Germany is growing pro- .!^ressively worse. It is impossible to turn the ener-, gies of hundreds of millions from useful labor to de struction for five years without breaking down or wip ing out the old impulses and habits that lead to useful labor. War is more than hell. It is chaos,, negation and denial of human civilization and progress. The worst that can be said about the present system is that it makes war inevitable. There is a crisis in the life of nearly four hundred millions who make up Europe. Many of the people are facing a situation that is desperate to a degree that cannot be appreciated by those who have not seen it. The people of the United States have a unique op- LOOKING AHEAD 425 portunity In this crisis. I do not speak of their op portunity to give food and clothing. By that means they may push off the anguish of Europe for a few months. I mean an opportunity to show how things should be arranged to guarantee the life, liberty and happiness of a people. ^ The United States is isolated geograpically. Hence it Is in a better position to experiment and to work out its new ideas than is any other nation of the world. Again, nature has supplied the United States with an unexcelled store of all the resources necessary to the building and maintenance of a great civilization. Hence it follows that, unlike the peoples of overcrowded Europe, none of those who live in the United States need lack for food or clothing or shelter. The coal and iron, the cotton and the wheat, the com and the cattle, the beneficial climate and the generous soil all are present in extraordinary abundance. Besides that, there are no near neighbors that are in a position to interfere v/ith the internal affairs of the country. Once the American people have decided to reorganize their economic life on a basis of intelligence, there can be no effective check placed upon them from the outside. Finally, the past few years have given this country an immense surplus in machinery, in commodities, in goods of various kinds that represent a great lead over any would-be rival. Such are the advantages which the people of the United States now enjoy. There is one way and only one way in which they can make good and utilize them to the full. That is for the workers to take possession of their jobs, assume the direction of economic policy, and take the full product that they create. Under our form of govemment this can and should be accomplished, not by force, but by political action. Those who do the work and prodqce all the wealth should combine and form a political party with a plat form of eight words: "Every man Is entitled to all he produces," with a slogan, "All power to the people 426 IMPERIAL WASHINGTON who do the work and produce the wealth," and take possession of the government in all its branches, drive the lawyers out of offics and repeal all laws granting privileges, and enact laws for the public ownership of all utilities of every kind that are now owned by corporations. By this means, and by this means only, can imperial ism be checked, the class struggle eliminated, and the life of the people be placed on a sound and rational basis. In this direction and in this direction only can they hope to attain the life, liberty and happiness of which our forefathers dreamed. INDEX. Agriculture as a Basis for National Greatness 362 America, Changes in 10 Decay of Liberty in 11 Distribution of Wealth in 121 American Conquest of the Philippines 328 Control, Result of, in Porto Rico 355 Federation of Labor, Character of Ill Federation of Labor, Relations with 109 Government, Criticism of 173 Government, Original Purpose of 366 History, Economic Forces in 10 History, Imperialism in 335 Imperialism, Development of 342 Imperialism in Central America 341 Imperialism, Record of ,335 Labor, Position of 115 People and the Senate 196 People and the Trusts 69 People, Ignorance of , , 7 Politics, Characterization of .....,, .269 Politics, Standards of .273 Public Life 7 Public Life, Changes in 10 Sovereignty in the Philippines 331 Statesmen, Characterization of ~ 269 Americanization Campaig:n, Backers of 7 Campaign for ,••••• 8 Anti-Imperialism League, Organization of. 272, 322 Anti-Imperialist Movement, Sources of Support 325 Anti-Trust Law, Non-enforcement 77 Legislation, Fate of , 248 Arid Land, Irrigation of 27 Armor Plate, Cost of Manufacture 369 Profiteering on 370 Trust • 371 Army Ordnance Association 8 Banker, Evolution of 82 Bankers and Money Issue — 39 Relation of, to Hard Times 397 428 , INDEX. Banking and Government Function 35 Parasitic Nature of 34 Power, Dangers of 36 Profits of 33 Public Control Desirable 34 Supremacy and Imperialism 41 True Nature of 32 Benevolent Assimilation, Excuse for 346 Bethlehem Steel, Profits of 377 Big Business, Political Body Servants of 277 Bill of Rights, Origin of 139 Black Hills Reservation 16 Bribery as a Business 162 British Empire and the Opium Monopoly .206 Effects on the People 364 Imperialism in China 350 Investments, Volume of 41 Record in India 363 Record in Ireland 363 Business and Imperialism 308 And Politics, an Instance 284 Cycles, Form of 46 Cycles, Uses of 47 Empire, Development of 10 Groups, Struggle to Control the Constitution 137 Interests and the Hawaiian Revolution 311 Interests and Lawyers 144 Interests and Organized Labor 114 Interests, Presidential Nomination by 400 Men, Needs of and the Constitution 134 Moralil^, Instance ci 274 CampaigB CSontribotions, Instaxiai of 292 Oantributiona, Sources of 218 Funds in Presidential Elections. .255 Funds, Metiiods of Raising 218 Funds, Source of 254 Capitalism and a Leisure Class 405 Character of 404 Control of Society by 406 Exploitation Under 406 Failure of^ in Russia 884 In the United States 45 Typified by Profiteering ]369 Capitalist and Worker 243 Carpet-bag Officials » . , , ^ , ,150 Central America and American Imperialism. ........,!,. !341 Central America, League of Nations in .841 Central Bank in Japan , . , . . * 36 INDEX. 429 Chaos, Threat of 424 Chattel Slavery and Wage Slavery 405 Cheap Money and Rising Prices 40 Checks and Balances, and Democracy 138 Checks and Balances, Purpose bf 169 Civil Liberty and the Constitution 138 Class Rule in the United States 12 Coal Mining Profits for 1917 379 Colonial Treasury Notes, Effect of 51 Combinations of Railroads 91 Compensated Dollar Necessary 36 Competition Abandoned by America 71 Accepted ¦ 71 And Tariff 67 And Trusts 71 Effects of 73 In America 71 In Sugar 74 Concessions, Sale of in Congress 277 Congress — Attitude Toward Wealth Distribution 129 Back of Land Frauds 279 Dominated by Lawyers 141 Protection of Trusts by 78 Conquest of the Philippines 330 Conservation and Prosperity 28 Policy for 29 Proposed Methods 26 Constabulary, Work of, in Porto Rico 356 Constitution, Adoption of, and Bill of Rights 166 Amendments to 139 And Human Liberty i 134 And the Business Man 133 And the Declaration of Independence 139 And the Rights of Man 137 As a Bulwark to Exploitation 140 As Substitute for Revolution 170 At the Mercy of the Courts 169 First Amendment •, 165 Opposition in, to Democracy • • • J38 Origrjnal Form of 138 Origins 133 Overturned by the Courts 1°^ Constitutional Convention, Work of 163 Contract Labor, Advantage of 52 Co-operation, Necessity for 116 Copper Profits, Amounts of 378 Corporation,'?, Exploitation Through 30 Power of «1 Corrupt Politics, Instances of loo 480 INDEX, Corruption in the Senate 205 Course of Empire and the United States 359 Course of Empire, Beginnings in the United States 326 Courts and Politics 170 And the Railroads 91 As Protectors of Profiteering 180 Domination of, by Lawyers 143 Place in Our Government 194 Credit Mobilier 86 Methods of 1 88 Currency Issues, Profits Through 35 Democracy and the Constitution 138 Feai: of, by Constitution Makers 163 Demonetized Silver and Trusts 72 Discriminations by Railroads 82 Distribution of Wealth, Facts of Concealed 124 Distribution of Wealth in America 121 Du Pont Powder Company, Profits of 378 Economic Breakdown in Capitalist Society 47 Power in America 118 System of Porto Rico 362 Education of Lawyers , . . , 144 El Caney, Battle of. 238 Election of 1920 and the Vested Interests 399 Significance of 396 Empire, Course of, and the United States 359 Enemy Countries, Position of 391 Enlightened Self-interest, Instance of 273 Espionage Act, Decisions Under 182 Indictment Under 372 Evolution of a Banker 32 Exploitation and Banking 39 And Imperialism 348 As a Means to Wealth. ; 119 Form of, in Porto Rico 352 Through Banking 41 Exploited Countries, Position of 391 Express Companies, Regulation of 94 Farm Tenancy, Development of 4L And Industrial Depressions 49 Federal Government and Property 78 Federal Judges, Disqualifications of !..!.. 187 Training of '\ Igg Federal Legislation, Character of ....!!!!.!!! 109 Federal Reserve Acts, Results of ,,[' 54 Federal Reserve System, Earnings of 54 INDEX. 481 ^Fees, Effect of, on La-wyers. '. 145 Example of, in the Senate 146 Financial Concentration 37 Financial Imperialism and -Hawaii 308 Financial Power, Influence on Congress 54 Financing of Railroads 85 First Opium War, Cause of 348 Floods, Control of 28 Prevention of 27 Forcible Annexation of the Philippines 328 Foreign Capital in Hawaii 308 Poreig:n Ownership of Railroads 96 Forest Frauds 17 Forest Policy, Results 16 . Forest Reservations 14 Preservation 16 Purpose 19 Formosa, Control of, by Japan 357 Frauds in Forest Legislation 18 Free Speech Cases and the Supreme Court 181 Convictions in 181 Free Trade, Result of, in England. 60 Theory of 60 Freight Rates, Discriminations in 82 Gold Basis, Necessity for 41 And English Policy 42 And Exploitation 42 And Imperialism 40 Gold Production, Effect on Prices 50 Gold Standard and Imperial Policy 47 Rejection of 50 Success of, in Great Britain 44 Government and Organized Labor 112 By Lawyers 143 By Landlord and Manufacturers 134 Decay of Republican 10 Desirable Forms of 172 Dominated by Lawyerst 141 Ownership, Plans for 89 Ownership, Proposal for 87 Ownership of Railroads 93 Government Bonds, Jobbing in 284 Bond Sales, Scandal of 28-.; Governmental Inefficiency, Remedies of 17. Governments Represent the Standard of Peoples 331 Greenbackism and Peter Cooper 40 Harbor Development . , , 28 482 INDEX. Hard Times, Beginnings of 397 Hawaii and Business Interests .*. 819 Fight on Annexation of 319 Foreig^i Capital in 308 Franchise in 318 New Govemment of 317 Ownership of, by Americans 308 Seizure of 314 Hawaiian Revolution, Facts of 309 Hawaiian Treaty, Ratification Opposed 309 Hayti, United States Domination of 342 Hepburn Bill 233 High Finance of Railroads 87 Homestead Law and the Republican Party 250 Debate on 251 Imperial Policy, Meaning of, to Human Rights 326 Imperialism and Big Business 307-319 And Exploitation 348 And World Peace 393 As Manifest Destiny 367 Beginning of, and Hawaii 319 Development of, in the United States 344 Effects of, in Ireland and India 363 Essentials of .' 343 Functions of , ,326 Instances of, in American History 335 Menace of, in the United States 321 Practices of 346 Price Paid for 366 Struggle Against 132 The End of Liberty , 360 Income Tax Decision as an Usurpation .176 Independence Depends on the People 170 Indian Lands, Exploitation of 285 Indictment Under the Espionage Act 373 Industrial Depressions and Farm Tenancy 48 Internal Improvements, Indifference to 29 International Competition and World Peace 394 Invisible Government 131 Ireland as Example of Imperial Wrong-Doing 363 Irrigation, Proposals for 27 Japan, Banking Experiments in 36 Japanese Imperialism, Instance of 357 Judges, Character of 169-184 Constitutional Removal of 190 Training of 188 Judicial Legislation, Resort to 178 ' ¦ i INDEX. 488 Judicial Power, Dangers of 174-185 Limitations on 172 Judicial Usurpation, Income Tax Cases , . . . , 176 Instances of .„ 175 Remedies for 190 Kettle Hill, Battle of 238 Labor and the Government 112 And Politics 112 In America , 101 Cost of, and Hard Times 398 Labor Legislation, Fate of 101 Labor, Movement and the Interests 114 Rights of , .115 Standing in Congn^ess 115 Labor Unions and Socialism 110 Standards of 243 Land, Basic Nature of 31 Land Frauds Backed in Congress 279 Instance of 279 How Perpetrated 24 Land Grabbing IS Land Grant Railroads 86 Financing of 269 Graft of 16 Reorganization of ^ 259 Proiierty of ., 18 Land Laws, Enactment 13 Land Ownership, Exploitation Through 30 Law, Deification of by Lawyers 143 Lawyer-Government in the United States 143 Lawyers and the Courts 143 And the Public Policy 143 As a Ruling Class 149 / As Guardians of Property 145 As the Spokesmen of Plutocracy . , 141 Control of Congress by 141 Education of 144 Functions of 141 Proportion of, in Washington 141 Qualification of 144 League of Nations and International Capitalism .394 A Holy Alliance 394 An,d Russia 390 Authors of 389 A War League 389 Character of 389 Defects in . . : 393 Of Central America 339 Purposes of . . . ¦ • « •93 484 INDEX. Liberty and the People^ 169 Decay of, in the United States 11 Sacrificed to Imperialism 360 Limitation of Powers by the Constitution 167 Lobbying and the Vested Interests 277 Lost Bill, Discovery of 108 Machinery, Displacement of Labor by 126 Mail Weighing and Fraud 81 Manifest Destiny and Imperialism 367 Masses as Guardians of Liberty 170 Mexican War, Imperial Purpose of 334 Militarism, Growth of, in the United States 360 , Money, Danger of Private Control 37 Functions of 56 Money Congresses, Proceedings of 43 Money Contraction in 1893 ,. 48 Money Issue by Private Agencies 47 Money Monopoly, Advocacy of 52 Results of 36 Money Power, Control by 35 Danger of 119 Irresponsibility of 36 National Bank Act, Defects of 36 National Bank Charters, Renewal Opposed 37 New York Bankers and Government Bond Sales 288 Next War, Basis for 390 Preparations for 9 Nicaragua, American Imperialism in 341 Nicjkel Industry, Failure of , 63 History of 62 Oil/Rates, Discriminations in 84 Old Parties, Identity of Interest 248 Oligarchy, Established by Courts 169 Set Up in Hawaii 31 8 Opium Monopoly, Position of !.!!.!! !206 Opium Traffic, Character of 349 Organized Labor and 'the Government ......!.. !ll2 Owners and Workers ,113 Ownership of Railroad Securities ".............. 94 Panama, Revolution in 333 Seizure of '.'.'.'.'. 337 Panic of 1920, Causes of 55 Panics and Private Banking 37 Panics in the U. S i 46 Paper Money, Privately Issued...' ...'..'.".". 54 INDEX. 435 Party Machines, Character of 248 Party Politics, Deceptions of 252 Party Spoils and the Presidents 215 Patriotism and Preparedness 8 Peace and the League of Nations 389 People as the Final Authority. 170 • People, Rights Vested in 166 Philippine Islands Torn from the Natives 328 f'hiUppines, Aggn:ession in 326 .Results of American Occupation in 264 Revolution in 327 Plutocracy and the Constitution 140 And Lawyers 141 Defended in the Senate 206 Growth of ; . . .307 In the United States 118 Meaning of 118 Menace of 404 Power of, in America 120 Public Lackeys of .277 Rise of, to Power 132 Supremacy of 131 I Politicians As the Servants of Business 283 Political Conventions, Character of 249 Machinery of .' 217 Political Developments of the Future 425 Political Intrigue, Story of 158 Political Log Rolling 257 Political Machines 215 Political Manipulation, Instances of 256 Political Parties, Historic Purpose 248 Similarify of • • 234 Political Servants of Big Business 277 Political Standards in the United States 273 Politics and the Courts 170 Characterization of 269 Corruption in 155 Dependence of, on Contributions 325 In the Territories 151 Politics and the Courts in the United States 148 Pools of Railroads 91 Porto Rico, Economic Conditions in