diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 04:45:25 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 04:45:25 -0700 |
| commit | e74de31c6b041739b0d7d9f8a0c0fd03f48f901a (patch) | |
| tree | 22f0210e58846a1c517f246efe5f07bc085a9b57 /old/14811-h | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/14811-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/14811-h/14811-h.htm | 5736 |
1 files changed, 5736 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/old/14811-h/14811-h.htm b/old/14811-h/14811-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d845c88 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/14811-h/14811-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,5736 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?> +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> +<head> +<meta name="generator" content= +"HTML Tidy for Windows (vers 1st February 2004), see www.w3.org" /> +<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The New Freedom, by Woodrow +Wilson.</title> + +<style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[ XML blockout */ +<!-- + p { margin-top: .75em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; + } + hr { width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + clear: both; + } + + table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} + + body{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + + .linenum {position: absolute; top: auto; left: 4%;} /* poetry number */ + .blockquot{margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 10%;} + .pagenum {position: absolute; left: 92%; font-size: smaller; text-align: right;} /* page numbers */ + .sidenote {width: 20%; padding-bottom: .5em; padding-top: .5em; + padding-left: .5em; padding-right: .5em; margin-left: 1em; + float: right; clear: right; margin-top: 1em; + font-size: smaller; background: #eeeeee; border: dashed 1px;} + + .bb {border-bottom: solid 2px;} + .bl {border-left: solid 2px;} + .bt {border-top: solid 2px;} + .br {border-right: solid 2px;} + .bbox {border: solid 2px;} + + .center {text-align: center;} + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + + .figcenter {margin: auto; text-align: center;} + + .figleft {float: left; clear: left; margin-left: 0; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-top: + 1em; margin-right: 1em; padding: 0; text-align: center;} + + .figright {float: right; clear: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; + margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 0; padding: 0; text-align: center;} + + .footnotes {border: dashed 1px;} + .footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} + .footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} + .fnanchor {vertical-align: super; font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;} + + .poem {margin-left:10%; margin-right:10%; text-align: left;} + .poem br {display: none;} + .poem .stanza {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;} + .poem span {display: block; margin: 0; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} + .poem span.i2 {display: block; margin-left: 2em;} + .poem span.i4 {display: block; margin-left: 4em;} + // --> + /* XML end ]]>*/ +</style> +</head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of The New Freedom, by Woodrow Wilson + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: The New Freedom + A Call For the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People + +Author: Woodrow Wilson + +Release Date: January 26, 2005 [EBook #14811] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NEW FREEDOM *** + + + + +Produced by Rick Niles, Melissa Er-Raqabi and the Online Distributed +Proofreading Team. + + + + + + +</pre> + +<h1>THE NEW FREEDOM</h1> +<h2>A CALL FOR THE EMANCIPATION<br /> +OF THE GENEROUS ENERGIES<br /> +OF A PEOPLE</h2> +<h3>BY</h3> +<h2>WOODROW WILSON</h2> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center">NEW YORK AND GARDEN CITY<br /> +DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY<br /> +1913</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><b>THIS BOOK<br /> +I DEDICATE, WITH ALL MY HEART, TO EVERY MAN OR<br /> +WOMAN WHO MAY DERIVE FROM IT, IN HOWEVER<br /> +SMALL A DEGREE, THE IMPULSE OF<br /> +UNSELFISH PUBLIC SERVICE</b></p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>PREFACE</h2> +<p>I have not written a book since the campaign. I did not write +this book at all. It is the result of the editorial literary skill +of Mr. William Bayard Hale, who has put together here in their +right sequences the more suggestive portions of my campaign +speeches.</p> +<p>And yet it is not a book of campaign speeches. It is a +discussion of a number of very vital subjects in the free form of +extemporaneously spoken words. I have left the sentences in the +form in which they were stenographically reported. I have not tried +to alter the easy-going and often colloquial phraseology in which +they were uttered from the platform, in the hope that they would +seem the more fresh and spontaneous because of their very lack of +pruning and recasting. They have been suffered to run their +unpremeditated course even at the cost of such repetition and +redundancy as the extemporaneous speaker apparently inevitably +falls into.</p> +<p>The book is not a discussion of measures or of programs. It is +an attempt to express the new spirit of our politics and to set +forth, in large terms which may stick in the imagination, what it +is that must be done if we are to restore our politics to their +full spiritual vigor again, and our national life, whether in +trade, in industry, or in what concerns us only as families and +individuals, to its purity, its self-respect, and its pristine +strength and freedom. The New Freedom is only the old revived and +clothed in the unconquerable strength of modern America.</p> +<div style="margin-left: 5%;"> +<p><b>WOODROW WILSON.</b></p> +</div> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2>CONTENTS</h2> +<div style="margin-left: 40%;"> +<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary= +"Table of Contents"> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#I"><b>I</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> The Old Order +Changeth</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#II"><b>II</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> What is Progress?</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#III"><b>III</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> Freemen Need No +Guardians</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#IV"><b>IV</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> Life Comes from the +Soil</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#V"><b>V</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> The Parliament of the +People</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#VI"><b>VI</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> Let There Be Light</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#VII"><b>VII</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> The Tariff--"Protection," or +Special Privilege?</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#VIII"><b>VIII</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> Monopoly, or +Opportunity?</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#IX"><b>IX</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> Benevolence, or +Justice?</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#X"><b>X</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> The Way to Resume is to +Resume</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#XI"><b>XI</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> The Emancipation of +Business</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'><a href="#XII"><b>XII</b></a></td> +<td align='left'><b> The Liberation of a People's +Vital Energies</b></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td align='left'></td> +</tr> +</table> +</div> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h1>THE NEW FREEDOM</h1> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="I" id="I"></a><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3"></a>I</h2> +<h2>THE OLD ORDER CHANGETH</h2> +<p>There is one great basic fact which underlies all the questions +that are discussed on the political platform at the present moment. +That singular fact is that nothing is done in this country as it +was done twenty years ago.</p> +<p>We are in the presence of a new organization of society. Our +life has broken away from the past. The life of America is not the +life that it was twenty years ago; it is not the life that it was +ten years ago. We have changed our economic conditions, absolutely, +from top to bottom; and, with our economic society, the +organization of our life. The old political formulas do not fit the +present problems; they <a name="Page_4" id="Page_4"></a>read now +like documents taken out of a forgotten age. The older cries sound +as if they belonged to a past age which men have almost forgotten. +Things which used to be put into the party platforms of ten years +ago would sound antiquated if put into a platform now. We are +facing the necessity of fitting a new social organization, as we +did once fit the old organization, to the happiness and prosperity +of the great body of citizens; for we are conscious that the new +order of society has not been made to fit and provide the +convenience or prosperity of the average man. The life of the +nation has grown infinitely varied. It does not centre now upon +questions of governmental structure or of the distribution of +governmental powers. It centres upon questions of the very +structure and operation of society itself, of which government is +only the instrument. Our development has run so fast and so far +along the lines sketched in the earlier day of constitutional +definition, has so crossed and interlaced those lines, has piled +upon them such novel structures of trust and combination, has +elaborated within them <a name="Page_5" id="Page_5"></a>a life so +manifold, so full of forces which transcend the boundaries of the +country itself and fill the eyes of the world, that a new nation +seems to have been created which the old formulas do not fit or +afford a vital interpretation of.</p> +<p>We have come upon a very different age from any that preceded +us. We have come upon an age when we do not do business in the way +in which we used to do business,—when we do not carry on any +of the operations of manufacture, sale, transportation, or +communication as men used to carry them on. There is a sense in +which in our day the individual has been submerged. In most parts +of our country men work, not for themselves, not as partners in the +old way in which they used to work, but generally as +employees,—in a higher or lower grade,—of great +corporations. There was a time when corporations played a very +minor part in our business affairs, but now they play the chief +part, and most men are the servants of corporations.</p> +<p>You know what happens when you are the servant of a corporation. +You have in no instance access to the men who are really +deter<a name="Page_6" id="Page_6"></a>mining the policy of the +corporation. If the corporation is doing the things that it ought +not to do, you really have no voice in the matter and must obey the +orders, and you have oftentimes with deep mortification to +co-operate in the doing of things which you know are against the +public interest. Your individuality is swallowed up in the +individuality and purpose of a great organization.</p> +<p>It is true that, while most men are thus submerged in the +corporation, a few, a very few, are exalted to a power which as +individuals they could never have wielded. Through the great +organizations of which they are the heads, a few are enabled to +play a part unprecedented by anything in history in the control of +the business operations of the country and in the determination of +the happiness of great numbers of people.</p> +<p>Yesterday, and ever since history began, men were related to one +another as individuals. To be sure there were the family, the +Church, and the State, institutions which associated men in certain +wide circles of relationship. But in the ordinary concerns of life, +in the <a name="Page_7" id="Page_7"></a>ordinary work, in the daily +round, men dealt freely and directly with one another. To-day, the +everyday relationships of men are largely with great impersonal +concerns, with organizations, not with other individual men.</p> +<p>Now this is nothing short of a new social age, a new era of +human relationships, a new stage-setting for the drama of life.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>In this new age we find, for instance, that our laws with regard +to the relations of employer and employee are in many respects +wholly antiquated and impossible. They were framed for another age, +which nobody now living remembers, which is, indeed, so remote from +our life that it would be difficult for many of us to understand it +if it were described to us. The employer is now generally a +corporation or a huge company of some kind; the employee is one of +hundreds or of thousands brought together, not by individual +masters whom they know and with whom they have personal relations, +but by agents of one sort or another. Workingmen are marshaled in +great numbers <a name="Page_8" id="Page_8"></a>for the performance +of a multitude of particular tasks under a common discipline. They +generally use dangerous and powerful machinery, over whose repair +and renewal they have no control. New rules must be devised with +regard to their obligations and their rights, their obligations to +their employers and their responsibilities to one another. Rules +must be devised for their protection, for their compensation when +injured, for their support when disabled.</p> +<p>There is something very new and very big and very complex about +these new relations of capital and labor. A new economic society +has sprung up, and we must effect a new set of adjustments. We must +not pit power against weakness. The employer is generally, in our +day, as I have said, not an individual, but a powerful group; and +yet the workingman when dealing with his employer is still, under +our existing law, an individual.</p> +<p>Why is it that we have a labor question at all? It is for the +simple and very sufficient reason that the laboring man and the +employer are not intimate associates now as they used to <a name= +"Page_9" id="Page_9"></a>be in time past. Most of our laws were +formed in the age when employer and employees knew each other, knew +each other's characters, were associates with each other, dealt +with each other as man with man. That is no longer the case. You +not only do not come into personal contact with the men who have +the supreme command in those corporations, but it would be out of +the question for you to do it. Our modern corporations employ +thousands, and in some instances hundreds of thousands, of men. The +only persons whom you see or deal with are local superintendents or +local representatives of a vast organization, which is not like +anything that the workingmen of the time in which our laws were +framed knew anything about. A little group of workingmen, seeing +their employer every day, dealing with him in a personal way, is +one thing, and the modern body of labor engaged as employees of the +huge enterprises that spread all over the country, dealing with men +of whom they can form no personal conception, is another thing. A +very different thing. You never saw a corporation, any more than +you ever <a name="Page_10" id="Page_10"></a>saw a government. Many +a workingman to-day never saw the body of men who are conducting +the industry in which he is employed. And they never saw him. What +they know about him is written in ledgers and books and letters, in +the correspondence of the office, in the reports of the +superintendents. He is a long way off from them.</p> +<p>So what we have to discuss is, not wrongs which individuals +intentionally do,—I do not believe there are a great many of +those,—but the wrongs of a system. I want to record my +protest against any discussion of this matter which would seem to +indicate that there are bodies of our fellow-citizens who are +trying to grind us down and do us injustice. There are some men of +that sort. I don't know how they sleep o' nights, but there are men +of that kind. Thank God, they are not numerous. The truth is, we +are all caught in a great economic system which is heartless. The +modern corporation is not engaged in business as an individual. +When we deal with it, we deal with an impersonal element, an +immaterial piece <a name="Page_11" id="Page_11"></a>of society. A +modern corporation is a means of co-operation in the conduct of an +enterprise which is so big that no one man can conduct it, and +which the resources of no one man are sufficient to finance. A +company is formed; that company puts out a prospectus; the +promoters expect to raise a certain fund as capital stock. Well, +how are they going to raise it? They are going to raise it from the +public in general, some of whom will buy their stock. The moment +that begins, there is formed—what? A joint stock corporation. +Men begin to pool their earnings, little piles, big piles. A +certain number of men are elected by the stockholders to be +directors, and these directors elect a president. This president is +the head of the undertaking, and the directors are its +managers.</p> +<p>Now, do the workingmen employed by that stock corporation deal +with that president and those directors? Not at all. Does the +public deal with that president and that board of directors? It +does not. Can anybody bring them to account? It is next to +impossible to <a name="Page_12" id="Page_12"></a>do so. If you +undertake it you will find it a game of hide and seek, with the +objects of your search taking refuge now behind the tree of their +individual personality, now behind that of their corporate +irresponsibility.</p> +<p>And do our laws take note of this curious state of things? Do +they even attempt to distinguish between a man's act as a +corporation director and as an individual? They do not. Our laws +still deal with us on the basis of the old system. The law is still +living in the dead past which we have left behind. This is evident, +for instance, with regard to the matter of employers' liability for +workingmen's injuries. Suppose that a superintendent wants a +workman to use a certain piece of machinery which it is not safe +for him to use, and that the workman is injured by that piece of +machinery. Some of our courts have held that the superintendent is +a fellow-servant, or, as the law states it, a fellow-employee, and +that, therefore, the man cannot recover damages for his injury. The +superintendent who probably engaged the man is not his employer. +Who is his employer?<a name="Page_13" id="Page_13"></a> And whose +negligence could conceivably come in there? The board of directors +did not tell the employee to use that piece of machinery; and the +president of the corporation did not tell him to use that piece of +machinery. And so forth. Don't you see by that theory that a man +never can get redress for negligence on the part of the employer? +When I hear judges reason upon the analogy of the relationships +that used to exist between workmen and their employers a generation +ago, I wonder if they have not opened their eyes to the modern +world. You know, we have a right to expect that judges will have +their eyes open, even though the law which they administer hasn't +awakened.</p> +<p>Yet that is but a single small detail illustrative of the +difficulties we are in because we have not adjusted the law to the +facts of the new order.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views +confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United +States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of +somebody, are afraid of something. They <a name="Page_14" id= +"Page_14"></a>know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so +subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, +that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak +in condemnation of it.</p> +<p>They know that America is not a place of which it can be said, +as it used to be, that a man may choose his own calling and pursue +it just as far as his abilities enable him to pursue it; because +to-day, if he enters certain fields, there are organizations which +will use means against him that will prevent his building up a +business which they do not want to have built up; organizations +that will see to it that the ground is cut from under him and the +markets shut against him. For if he begins to sell to certain +retail dealers, to any retail dealers, the monopoly will refuse to +sell to those dealers, and those dealers, afraid, will not buy the +new man's wares.</p> +<p>And this is the country which has lifted to the admiration of +the world its ideals of absolutely free opportunity, where no man +is supposed to be under any limitation except the limitations of +his character and of his mind; where there is <a name="Page_15" id= +"Page_15"></a>supposed to be no distinction of class, no +distinction of blood, no distinction of social status, but where +men win or lose on their merits.</p> +<p>I lay it very close to my own conscience as a public man whether +we can any longer stand at our doors and welcome all newcomers upon +those terms. American industry is not free, as once it was free; +American enterprise is not free; the man with only a little capital +is finding it harder to get into the field, more and more +impossible to compete with the big fellow. Why? Because the laws of +this country do not prevent the strong from crushing the weak. That +is the reason, and because the strong have crushed the weak the +strong dominate the industry and the economic life of this country. +No man can deny that the lines of endeavor have more and more +narrowed and stiffened; no man who knows anything about the +development of industry in this country can have failed to observe +that the larger kinds of credit are more and more difficult to +obtain, unless you obtain them upon the terms of uniting your +efforts with those who already control the <a name="Page_16" id= +"Page_16"></a>industries of the country; and nobody can fail to +observe that any man who tries to set himself up in competition +with any process of manufacture which has been taken under the +control of large combinations of capital will presently find +himself either squeezed out or obliged to sell and allow himself to +be absorbed.</p> +<p>There is a great deal that needs reconstruction in the United +States. I should like to take a census of the business men,—I +mean the rank and file of the business men,—as to whether +they think that business conditions in this country, or rather +whether the organization of business in this country, is +satisfactory or not. I know what they would say if they dared. If +they could vote secretly they would vote overwhelmingly that the +present organization of business was meant for the big fellows and +was not meant for the little fellows; that it was meant for those +who are at the top and was meant to exclude those who are at the +bottom; that it was meant to shut out beginners, to prevent new +entries in the race, to prevent the building up of competitive +enterprises that would <a name="Page_17" id="Page_17"></a>interfere +with the monopolies which the great trusts have built up.</p> +<p>What this country needs above everything else is a body of laws +which will look after the men who are on the make rather than the +men who are already made. Because the men who are already made are +not going to live indefinitely, and they are not always kind enough +to leave sons as able and as honest as they are.</p> +<p>The originative part of America, the part of America that makes +new enterprises, the part into which the ambitious and gifted +workingman makes his way up, the class that saves, that plans, that +organizes, that presently spreads its enterprises until they have a +national scope and character,—that middle class is being more +and more squeezed out by the processes which we have been taught to +call processes of prosperity. Its members are sharing prosperity, +no doubt; but what alarms me is that they are not +<i>originating</i> prosperity. No country can afford to have its +prosperity originated by a small controlling class. The treasury of +America does not lie in the brains of the small body <a name= +"Page_18" id="Page_18"></a>of men now in control of the great +enterprises that have been concentrated under the direction of a +very small number of persons. The treasury of America lies in those +ambitions, those energies, that cannot be restricted to a special +favored class. It depends upon the inventions of unknown men, upon +the originations of unknown men, upon the ambitions of unknown men. +Every country is renewed out of the ranks of the unknown, not out +of the ranks of those already famous and powerful and in +control.</p> +<p>There has come over the land that un-American set of conditions +which enables a small number of men who control the government to +get favors from the government; by those favors to exclude their +fellows from equal business opportunity; by those favors to extend +a network of control that will presently dominate every industry in +the country, and so make men forget the ancient time when America +lay in every hamlet, when America was to be seen in every fair +valley, when America displayed her great forces on the broad +prairies, ran her <a name="Page_19" id="Page_19"></a>fine fires of +enterprise up over the mountain-sides and down into the bowels of +the earth, and eager men were everywhere captains of industry, not +employees; not looking to a distant city to find out what they +might do, but looking about among their neighbors, finding credit +according to their character, not according to their connections, +finding credit in proportion to what was known to be in them and +behind them, not in proportion to the securities they held that +were approved where they were not known. In order to start an +enterprise now, you have to be authenticated, in a perfectly +impersonal way, not according to yourself, but according to what +you own that somebody else approves of your owning. You cannot +begin such an enterprise as those that have made America until you +are so authenticated, until you have succeeded in obtaining the +good-will of large allied capitalists. Is that freedom? That is +dependence, not freedom.</p> +<p>We used to think in the old-fashioned days when life was very +simple that all that govern<a name="Page_20" id="Page_20"></a>ment +had to do was to put on a policeman's uniform, and say, "Now don't +anybody hurt anybody else." We used to say that the ideal of +government was for every man to be left alone and not interfered +with, except when he interfered with somebody else; and that the +best government was the government that did as little governing as +possible. That was the idea that obtained in Jefferson's time. But +we are coming now to realize that life is so complicated that we +are not dealing with the old conditions, and that the law has to +step in and create new conditions under which we may live, the +conditions which will make it tolerable for us to live.</p> +<p>Let me illustrate what I mean: It used to be true in our cities +that every family occupied a separate house of its own, that every +family had its own little premises, that every family was separated +in its life from every other family. That is no longer the case in +our great cities. Families live in tenements, they live in flats, +they live on floors; they are piled layer upon layer in the great +tenement houses of our <a name="Page_21" id="Page_21"></a>crowded +districts, and not only are they piled layer upon layer, but they +are associated room by room, so that there is in every room, +sometimes, in our congested districts, a separate family. In some +foreign countries they have made much more progress than we in +handling these things. In the city of Glasgow, for example (Glasgow +is one of the model cities of the world), they have made up their +minds that the entries and the hallways of great tenements are +public streets. Therefore, the policeman goes up the stairway, and +patrols the corridors; the lighting department of the city sees to +it that the halls are abundantly lighted. The city does not deceive +itself into supposing that that great building is a unit from which +the police are to keep out and the civic authority to be excluded, +but it says: "These are public highways, and light is needed in +them, and control by the authority of the city."</p> +<p>I liken that to our great modern industrial enterprises. A +corporation is very like a large tenement house; it isn't the +premises of a single <a name="Page_22" id="Page_22"></a>commercial +family; it is just as much a public affair as a tenement house is a +network of public highways.</p> +<p>When you offer the securities of a great corporation to anybody +who wishes to purchase them, you must open that corporation to the +inspection of everybody who wants to purchase. There must, to +follow out the figure of the tenement house, be lights along the +corridors, there must be police patrolling the openings, there must +be inspection wherever it is known that men may be deceived with +regard to the contents of the premises. If we believe that fraud +lies in wait for us, we must have the means of determining whether +our suspicions are well founded or not. Similarly, the treatment of +labor by the great corporations is not what it was in Jefferson's +time. Whenever bodies of men employ bodies of men, it ceases to be +a private relationship. So that when courts hold that workingmen +cannot peaceably dissuade other workingmen from taking employment, +as was held in a notable case in New Jersey, they simply show that +their <a name="Page_23" id="Page_23"></a>minds and understandings +are lingering in an age which has passed away. This dealing of +great bodies of men with other bodies of men is a matter of public +scrutiny, and should be a matter of public regulation.</p> +<p>Similarly, it was no business of the law in the time of +Jefferson to come into my house and see how I kept house. But when +my house, when my so-called private property, became a great mine, +and men went along dark corridors amidst every kind of danger in +order to dig out of the bowels of the earth things necessary for +the industries of a whole nation, and when it came about that no +individual owned these mines, that they were owned by great stock +companies, then all the old analogies absolutely collapsed and it +became the right of the government to go down into these mines to +see whether human beings were properly treated in them or not; to +see whether accidents were properly safeguarded against; to see +whether modern economical methods of using these inestimable riches +of the earth were followed or were not followed. If somebody puts a +derrick im<a name="Page_24" id="Page_24"></a>properly secured on +top of a building or overtopping the street, then the government of +the city has the right to see that that derrick is so secured that +you and I can walk under it and not be afraid that the heavens are +going to fall on us. Likewise, in these great beehives where in +every corridor swarm men of flesh and blood, it is the privilege of +the government, whether of the State or of the United States, as +the case may be, to see that human life is protected, that human +lungs have something to breathe.</p> +<p>These, again, are merely illustrations of conditions. We are in +a new world, struggling under old laws. As we go inspecting our +lives to-day, surveying this new scene of centralized and complex +society, we shall find many more things out of joint.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>One of the most alarming phenomena of the time,—or rather +it would be alarming if the nation had not awakened to it and shown +its determination to control it,—one of the most significant +signs of the new social era is the degree to which government has +become as<a name="Page_25" id="Page_25"></a>sociated with business. +I speak, for the moment, of the control over the government +exercised by Big Business. Behind the whole subject, of course, is +the truth that, in the new order, government and business must be +associated closely. But that association is at present of a nature +absolutely intolerable; the precedence is wrong, the association is +upside down. Our government has been for the past few years under +the control of heads of great allied corporations with special +interests. It has not controlled these interests and assigned them +a proper place in the whole system of business; it has submitted +itself to their control. As a result, there have grown up vicious +systems and schemes of governmental favoritism (the most obvious +being the extravagant tariff), far-reaching in effect upon the +whole fabric of life, touching to his injury every inhabitant of +the land, laying unfair and impossible handicaps upon competitors, +imposing taxes in every direction, stifling everywhere the free +spirit of American enterprise.</p> +<p>Now this has come about naturally; as we <a name="Page_26" id= +"Page_26"></a>go on we shall see how very naturally. It is no use +denouncing anybody, or anything, except human nature. Nevertheless, +it is an intolerable thing that the government of the republic +should have got so far out of the hands of the people; should have +been captured by interests which are special and not general. In +the train of this capture follow the troops of scandals, wrongs, +indecencies, with which our politics swarm.</p> +<p>There are cities in America of whose government we are ashamed. +There are cities everywhere, in every part of the land, in which we +feel that, not the interests of the public, but the interests of +special privileges, of selfish men, are served; where contracts +take precedence over public interest. Not only in big cities is +this the case. Have you not noticed the growth of socialistic +sentiment in the smaller towns? Not many months ago I stopped at a +little town in Nebraska, and while my train lingered I met on the +platform a very engaging young fellow dressed in overalls who +introduced himself to me as the mayor of the town, and added +<a name="Page_27" id="Page_27"></a>that he was a Socialist. I said, +"What does that mean? Does that mean that this town is +socialistic?" "No, sir," he said; "I have not deceived myself; the +vote by which I was elected was about 20 per cent. socialistic and +80 per cent. protest." It was protest against the treachery to the +people of those who led both the other parties of that town.</p> +<p>All over the Union people are coming to feel that they have no +control over the course of affairs. I live in one of the greatest +States in the union, which was at one time in slavery. Until two +years ago we had witnessed with increasing concern the growth in +New Jersey of a spirit of almost cynical despair. Men said: "We +vote; we are offered the platform we want; we elect the men who +stand on that platform, and we get absolutely nothing." So they +began to ask: "What is the use of voting? We know that the machines +of both parties are subsidized by the same persons, and therefore +it is useless to turn in either direction."</p> +<p>This is not confined to some of the state governments and those +of some of the towns and cities.<a name="Page_28" id="Page_28"></a> +We know that something intervenes between the people of the United +States and the control of their own affairs at Washington. It is +not the people who have been ruling there of late.</p> +<p>Why are we in the presence, why are we at the threshold, of a +revolution? Because we are profoundly disturbed by the influences +which we see reigning in the determination of our public life and +our public policy. There was a time when America was blithe with +self-confidence. She boasted that she, and she alone, knew the +processes of popular government; but now she sees her sky overcast; +she sees that there are at work forces which she did not dream of +in her hopeful youth.</p> +<p>Don't you know that some man with eloquent tongue, without +conscience, who did not care for the nation, could put this whole +country into a flame? Don't you know that this country from one end +to the other believes that something is wrong? What an opportunity +it would be for some man without conscience to spring up and say: +"This is the way. Follow me!"—and lead in paths of +destruction!</p> +<p><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29"></a>The old order +changeth—changeth under our very eyes, not quietly and +equably, but swiftly and with the noise and heat and tumult of +reconstruction.</p> +<p>I suppose that all struggle for law has been conscious, that +very little of it has been blind or merely instinctive. It is the +fashion to say, as if with superior knowledge of affairs and of +human weakness, that every age has been an age of transition, and +that no age is more full of change than another; yet in very few +ages of the world can the struggle for change have been so +widespread, so deliberate, or upon so great a scale as in this in +which we are taking part.</p> +<p>The transition we are witnessing is no equable transition of +growth and normal alteration; no silent, unconscious unfolding of +one age into another, its natural heir and successor. Society is +looking itself over, in our day, from top to bottom; is making +fresh and critical analysis of its very elements; is questioning +its oldest practices as freely as its newest, scrutinizing every +arrangement and motive of its life; and <a name="Page_30" id= +"Page_30"></a>it stands ready to attempt nothing less than a +radical reconstruction, which only frank and honest counsels and +the forces of generous co-operation can hold back from becoming a +revolution. We are in a temper to reconstruct economic society, as +we were once in a temper to reconstruct political society, and +political society may itself undergo a radical modification in the +process. I doubt if any age was ever more conscious of its task or +more unanimously desirous of radical and extended changes in its +economic and political practice.</p> +<p>We stand in the presence of a revolution,—not a bloody +revolution; America is not given to the spilling of +blood,—but a silent revolution, whereby America will insist +upon recovering in practice those ideals which she has always +professed, upon securing a government devoted to the general +interest and not to special interests.</p> +<p>We are upon the eve of a great reconstruction. It calls for +creative statesmanship as no age has done since that great age in +which we set up the government under which we live, that government +which was the admiration of the <a name="Page_31" id= +"Page_31"></a>world until it suffered wrongs to grow up under it +which have made many of our own compatriots question the freedom of +our institutions and preach revolution against them. I do not fear +revolution. I have unshaken faith in the power of America to keep +its self-possession. Revolution will come in peaceful guise, as it +came when we put aside the crude government of the Confederation +and created the great Federal Union which governs individuals, not +States, and which has been these hundred and thirty years our +vehicle of progress. Some radical changes we must make in our law +and practice. Some reconstructions we must push forward, which a +new age and new circumstances impose upon us. But we can do it all +in calm and sober fashion, like statesmen and patriots.</p> +<p>I do not speak of these things in apprehension, because all is +open and above-board. This is not a day in which great forces rally +in secret. The whole stupendous program must be publicly planned +and canvassed. Good temper, the wisdom that comes of sober counsel, +the energy of thoughtful and unselfish men, the <a name="Page_32" +id="Page_32"></a>habit of co-operation and of compromise which has +been bred in us by long years of free government, in which reason +rather than passion has been made to prevail by the sheer virtue of +candid and universal debate, will enable us to win through to still +another great age without violence.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="II" id="II"></a><a name="Page_33" id= +"Page_33"></a>II</h2> +<h2>WHAT IS PROGRESS?</h2> +<p>In that sage and veracious chronicle, "Alice Through the +Looking-Glass," it is recounted how, on a noteworthy occasion, the +little heroine is seized by the Red Chess Queen, who races her off +at a terrific pace. They run until both of them are out of breath; +then they stop, and Alice looks around her and says, "Why, we are +just where we were when we started!" "Oh, yes," says the Red Queen; +"you have to run twice as fast as that to get anywhere else."</p> +<p>That is a parable of progress. The laws of this country have not +kept up with the change of economic circumstances in this country; +they have not kept up with the change of political circumstances; +and therefore we are not even where we were when we started. We +shall have to run, not until we are out of breath, but <a name= +"Page_34" id="Page_34"></a>until we have caught up with our own +conditions, before we shall be where we were when we started; when +we started this great experiment which has been the hope and the +beacon of the world. And we should have to run twice as fast as any +rational program I have seen in order to get anywhere else.</p> +<p>I am, therefore, forced to be a progressive, if for no other +reason, because we have not kept up with our changes of conditions, +either in the economic field or in the political field. We have not +kept up as well as other nations have. We have not kept our +practices adjusted to the facts of the case, and until we do, and +unless we do, the facts of the case will always have the better of +the argument; because if you do not adjust your laws to the facts, +so much the worse for the laws, not for the facts, because law +trails along after the facts. Only that law is unsafe which runs +ahead of the facts and beckons to it and makes it follow the +will-o'-the-wisps of imaginative projects.</p> +<p>Business is in a situation in America which it was never in +before; it is in a situation to which <a name="Page_35" id= +"Page_35"></a>we have not adjusted our laws. Our laws are still +meant for business done by individuals; they have not been +satisfactorily adjusted to business done by great combinations, and +we have got to adjust them. I do not say we may or may not; I say +we must; there is no choice. If your laws do not fit your facts, +the facts are not injured, the law is damaged; because the law, +unless I have studied it amiss, is the expression of the facts in +legal relationships. Laws have never altered the facts; laws have +always necessarily expressed the facts; adjusted interests as they +have arisen and have changed toward one another.</p> +<p>Politics in America is in a case which sadly requires attention. +The system set up by our law and our usage doesn't work,—or +at least it can't be depended on; it is made to work only by a most +unreasonable expenditure of labor and pains. The government, which +was designed for the people, has got into the hands of bosses and +their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has +been set up above the forms of democracy.</p> +<p><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36"></a>There are serious things to +do. Does any man doubt the great discontent in this country? Does +any man doubt that there are grounds and justifications for +discontent? Do we dare stand still? Within the past few months we +have witnessed (along with other strange political phenomena, +eloquently significant of popular uneasiness) on one side a +doubling of the Socialist vote and on the other the posting on dead +walls and hoardings all over the country of certain very attractive +and diverting bills warning citizens that it was "better to be safe +than sorry" and advising them to "let well enough alone." +Apparently a good many citizens doubted whether the situation they +were advised to let alone was really well enough, and concluded +that they would take a chance of being sorry. To me, these counsels +of do-nothingism, these counsels of sitting still for fear +something would happen, these counsels addressed to the hopeful, +energetic people of the United States, telling them that they are +not wise enough to touch their own affairs without marring them, +constitute the most extraordi<a name="Page_37" id= +"Page_37"></a>nary argument of fatuous ignorance I ever heard. +Americans are not yet cowards. True, their self-reliance has been +sapped by years of submission to the doctrine that prosperity is +something that benevolent magnates provide for them with the aid of +the government; their self-reliance has been weakened, but not so +utterly destroyed that you can twit them about it. The American +people are not naturally stand-patters. Progress is the word that +charms their ears and stirs their hearts.</p> +<p>There are, of course, Americans who have not yet heard that +anything is going on. The circus might come to town, have the big +parade and go, without their catching a sight of the camels or a +note of the calliope. There are people, even Americans, who never +move themselves or know that anything else is moving.</p> +<p>A friend of mine who had heard of the Florida "cracker," as they +call a certain ne'er-do-weel portion of the population down there, +when passing through the State in a train, asked some one to point +out a "cracker" to him. The man asked replied, "Well, if you see +something off in the <a name="Page_38" id="Page_38"></a>woods that +looks brown, like a stump, you will know it is either a stump or a +cracker; if it moves, it is a stump."</p> +<p>Now, movement has no virtue in itself. Change is not worth while +for its own sake. I am not one of those who love variety for its +own sake. If a thing is good to-day, I should like to have it stay +that way to-morrow. Most of our calculations in life are dependent +upon things staying the way they are. For example, if, when you got +up this morning, you had forgotten how to dress, if you had +forgotten all about those ordinary things which you do almost +automatically, which you can almost do half awake, you would have +to find out what you did yesterday. I am told by the psychologists +that if I did not remember who I was yesterday, I should not know +who I am to-day, and that, therefore, my very identity depends upon +my being able to tally to-day with yesterday. If they do not tally, +then I am confused; I do not know who I am, and I have to go around +and ask somebody to tell me my name and where I came from.</p> +<p><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39"></a>I am not one of those who +wish to break connection with the past; I am not one of those who +wish to change for the mere sake of variety. The only men who do +that are the men who want to forget something, the men who filled +yesterday with something they would rather not recollect to-day, +and so go about seeking diversion, seeking abstraction in something +that will blot out recollection, or seeking to put something into +them which will blot out all recollection. Change is not worth +while unless it is improvement. If I move out of my present house +because I do not like it, then I have got to choose a better house, +or build a better house, to justify the change.</p> +<p>It would seem a waste of time to point out that ancient +distinction,—between mere change and improvement. Yet there +is a class of mind that is prone to confuse them. We have had +political leaders whose conception of greatness was to be forever +frantically doing something,—it mattered little what; +restless, vociferous men, without sense of the energy of +concentration, knowing only the energy of succession. Now, <a name= +"Page_40" id="Page_40"></a>life does not consist of eternally +running to a fire. There is no virtue in going anywhere unless you +will gain something by being there. The direction is just as +important as the impetus of motion.</p> +<p>All progress depends on how fast you are going, and where you +are going, and I fear there has been too much of this thing of +knowing neither how fast we were going or where we were going. I +have my private belief that we have been doing most of our +progressiveness after the fashion of those things that in my +boyhood days we called "treadmills,"—a treadmill being a +moving platform, with cleats on it, on which some poor devil of a +mule was forced to walk forever without getting anywhere. Elephants +and even other animals have been known to turn treadmills, making a +good deal of noise, and causing certain wheels to go round, and I +daresay grinding out some sort of product for somebody, but without +achieving much progress. Lately, in an effort to persuade the +elephant to move, really, his friends tried dynamite. It +moved,—in separate and scattered parts, but it moved.</p> +<p><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41"></a>A cynical but witty +Englishman said, in a book, not long ago, that it was a mistake to +say of a conspicuously successful man, eminent in his line of +business, that you could not bribe a man like that, because, he +said, the point about such men is that they have been +bribed—not in the ordinary meaning of that word, not in any +gross, corrupt sense, but they have achieved their great success by +means of the existing order of things and therefore they have been +put under bonds to see that that existing order of things is not +changed; they are bribed to maintain the <i>status quo</i>.</p> +<p>It was for that reason that I used to say, when I had to do with +the administration of an educational institution, that I should +like to make the young gentlemen of the rising generation as unlike +their fathers as possible. Not because their fathers lacked +character or intelligence or knowledge or patriotism, but because +their fathers, by reason of their advancing years and their +established position in society, had lost touch with the processes +of life; they had forgotten what it was to begin; they had +for<a name="Page_42" id="Page_42"></a>gotten what it was to rise; +they had forgotten what it was to be dominated by the circumstances +of their life on their way up from the bottom to the top, and, +therefore, they were out of sympathy with the creative, formative +and progressive forces of society.</p> +<p>Progress! Did you ever reflect that that word is almost a new +one? No word comes more often or more naturally to the lips of +modern man, as if the thing it stands for were almost synonymous +with life itself, and yet men through many thousand years never +talked or thought of progress. They thought in the other direction. +Their stories of heroisms and glory were tales of the past. The +ancestor wore the heavier armor and carried the larger spear. +"There were giants in those days." Now all that has altered. We +think of the future, not the past, as the more glorious time in +comparison with which the present is nothing. Progress, +development,—those are modern words. The modern idea is to +leave the past and press onward to something new.</p> +<p><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43"></a>But what is progress going to +do with the past, and with the present? How is it going to treat +them? With ignominy, or respect? Should it break with them +altogether, or rise out of them, with its roots still deep in the +older time? What attitude shall progressives take toward the +existing order, toward those institutions of conservatism, the +Constitution, the laws, and the courts?</p> +<p>Are those thoughtful men who fear that we are now about to +disturb the ancient foundations of our institutions justified in +their fear? If they are, we ought to go very slowly about the +processes of change. If it is indeed true that we have grown tired +of the institutions which we have so carefully and sedulously built +up, then we ought to go very slowly and very carefully about the +very dangerous task of altering them. We ought, therefore, to ask +ourselves, first of all, whether thought in this country is tending +to do anything by which we shall retrace our steps, or by which we +shall change the whole direction of our development?</p> +<p><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44"></a>I believe, for one, that you +cannot tear up ancient rootages and safely plant the tree of +liberty in soil which is not native to it. I believe that the +ancient traditions of a people are its ballast; you cannot make a +<i>tabula rasa</i> upon which to write a political program. You +cannot take a new sheet of paper and determine what your life shall +be to-morrow. You must knit the new into the old. You cannot put a +new patch on an old garment without ruining it; it must be not a +patch, but something woven into the old fabric, of practically the +same pattern, of the same texture and intention. If I did not +believe that to be progressive was to preserve the essentials of +our institutions, I for one could not be a progressive.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>One of the chief benefits I used to derive from being president +of a university was that I had the pleasure of entertaining +thoughtful men from all over the world. I cannot tell you how much +has dropped into my granary by their presence. I had been casting +around in my mind for something by which to draw several parts of +my <a name="Page_45" id="Page_45"></a>political thought together +when it was my good fortune to entertain a very interesting +Scotsman who had been devoting himself to the philosophical thought +of the seventeenth century. His talk was so engaging that it was +delightful to hear him speak of anything, and presently there came +out of the unexpected region of his thought the thing I had been +waiting for. He called my attention to the fact that in every +generation all sorts of speculation and thinking tend to fall under +the formula of the dominant thought of the age. For example, after +the Newtonian Theory of the universe had been developed, almost all +thinking tended to express itself in the analogies of the Newtonian +Theory, and since the Darwinian Theory has reigned amongst us, +everybody is likely to express whatever he wishes to expound in +terms of development and accommodation to environment.</p> +<p>Now, it came to me, as this interesting man talked, that the +Constitution of the United States had been made under the dominion +of the Newtonian Theory. You have only to read the papers of <i>The +Federalist</i> to see that fact <a name="Page_46" id= +"Page_46"></a>written on every page. They speak of the "checks and +balances" of the Constitution, and use to express their idea the +simile of the organization of the universe, and particularly of the +solar system,—how by the attraction of gravitation the +various parts are held in their orbits; and then they proceed to +represent Congress, the Judiciary, and the President as a sort of +imitation of the solar system.</p> +<p>They were only following the English Whigs, who gave Great +Britain its modern constitution. Not that those Englishmen analyzed +the matter, or had any theory about it; Englishmen care little for +theories. It was a Frenchman, Montesquieu, who pointed out to them +how faithfully they had copied Newton's description of the +mechanism of the heavens.</p> +<p>The makers of our Federal Constitution read Montesquieu with +true scientific enthusiasm. They were scientists in their +way,—the best way of their age,—those fathers of the +nation. Jefferson wrote of "the laws of Nature,"—and then by +way of afterthought,—"and of Nature's God." And they +constructed a gov<a name="Page_47" id="Page_47"></a>ernment as they +would have constructed an orrery,—to display the laws of +nature. Politics in their thought was a variety of mechanics. The +Constitution was founded on the law of gravitation. The government +was to exist and move by virtue of the efficacy of "checks and +balances."</p> +<p>The trouble with the theory is that government is not a machine, +but a living thing. It falls, not under the theory of the universe, +but under the theory of organic life. It is accountable to Darwin, +not to Newton. It is modified by its environment, necessitated by +its tasks, shaped to its functions by the sheer pressure of life. +No living thing can have its organs offset against each other, as +checks, and live. On the contrary, its life is dependent upon their +quick co-operation, their ready response to the commands of +instinct or intelligence, their amicable community of purpose. +Government is not a body of blind forces; it is a body of men, with +highly differentiated functions, no doubt, in our modern day, of +specialization, with a common task and purpose. Their co-operation +is indis<a name="Page_48" id="Page_48"></a>pensable, their warfare +fatal. There can be no successful government without the intimate, +instinctive co-ordination of the organs of life and action. This is +not theory, but fact, and displays its force as fact, whatever +theories may be thrown across its track. Living political +constitutions must be Darwinian in structure and in practice. +Society is a living organism and must obey the laws of life, not of +mechanics; it must develop.</p> +<p>All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an +era when "development," "evolution," is the scientific +word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian +principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is +a living thing and not a machine.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Some citizens of this country have never got beyond the +Declaration of Independence, signed in Philadelphia, July 4th, +1776. Their bosoms swell against George III, but they have no +consciousness of the war for freedom that is going on to-day.</p> +<p>The Declaration of Independence did not <a name="Page_49" id= +"Page_49"></a>mention the questions of our day. It is of no +consequence to us unless we can translate its general terms into +examples of the present day and substitute them in some vital way +for the examples it itself gives, so concrete, so intimately +involved in the circumstances of the day in which it was conceived +and written. It is an eminently practical document, meant for the +use of practical men; not a thesis for philosophers, but a whip for +tyrants; not a theory of government, but a program of action. +Unless we can translate it into the questions of our own day, we +are not worthy of it, we are not the sons of the sires who acted in +response to its challenge.</p> +<p>What form does the contest between tyranny and freedom take +to-day? What is the special form of tyranny we now fight? How does +it endanger the rights of the people, and what do we mean to do in +order to make our contest against it effectual? What are to be the +items of our new declaration of independence?</p> +<p>By tyranny, as we now fight it, we mean control of the law, of +legislation and adjudication, <a name="Page_50" id="Page_50"></a>by +organizations which do not represent the people, by means which are +private and selfish. We mean, specifically, the conduct of our +affairs and the shaping of our legislation in the interest of +special bodies of capital and those who organize their use. We mean +the alliance, for this purpose, of political machines with selfish +business. We mean the exploitation of the people by legal and +political means. We have seen many of our governments under these +influences cease to be representative governments, cease to be +governments representative of the people, and become governments +representative of special interests, controlled by machines, which +in their turn are not controlled by the people.</p> +<p>Sometimes, when I think of the growth of our economic system, it +seems to me as if, leaving our law just about where it was before +any of the modern inventions or developments took place, we had +simply at haphazard extended the family residence, added an office +here and a workroom there, and a new set of sleeping rooms there, +built up higher on our foundations, and put out little lean-tos on +the side, until we have <a name="Page_51" id="Page_51"></a>a +structure that has no character whatever. Now, the problem is to +continue to live in the house and yet change it.</p> +<p>Well, we are architects in our time, and our architects are also +engineers. We don't have to stop using a railroad terminal because +a new station is being built. We don't have to stop any of the +processes of our lives because we are rearranging the structures in +which we conduct those processes. What we have to undertake is to +systematize the foundations of the house, then to thread all the +old parts of the structure with the steel which will be laced +together in modern fashion, accommodated to all the modern +knowledge of structural strength and elasticity, and then slowly +change the partitions, relay the walls, let in the light through +new apertures, improve the ventilation; until finally, a generation +or two from now, the scaffolding will be taken away, and there will +be the family in a great building whose noble architecture will at +last be disclosed, where men can live as a single community, +co-operative as in a perfected, co-ordinated beehive, not afraid of +any storm of <a name="Page_52" id="Page_52"></a>nature, not afraid +of any artificial storm, any imitation of thunder and lightning, +knowing that the foundations go down to the bedrock of principle, +and knowing that whenever they please they can change that plan +again and accommodate it as they please to the altering necessities +of their lives.</p> +<p>But there are a great many men who don't like the idea. Some wit +recently said, in view of the fact that most of our American +architects are trained in a certain <i>École</i> in Paris, +that all American architecture in recent years was either bizarre +or "Beaux Arts." I think that our economic architecture is +decidedly bizarre; and I am afraid that there is a good deal to +learn about matters other than architecture from the same source +from which our architects have learned a great many things. I don't +mean the School of Fine Arts at Paris, but the experience of +France; for from the other side of the water men can now hold up +against us the reproach that we have not adjusted our lives to +modern conditions to the same extent that they have adjusted +theirs. I was very much interested in <a name="Page_53" id= +"Page_53"></a>some of the reasons given by our friends across the +Canadian border for being very shy about the reciprocity +arrangements. They said: "We are not sure whither these +arrangements will lead, and we don't care to associate too closely +with the economic conditions of the United States until those +conditions are as modern as ours." And when I resented it, and +asked for particulars, I had, in regard to many matters, to retire +from the debate. Because I found that they had adjusted their +regulations of economic development to conditions we had not yet +found a way to meet in the United States.</p> +<p>Well, we have started now at all events. The procession is under +way. The stand-patter doesn't know there is a procession. He is +asleep in the back part of his house. He doesn't know that the road +is resounding with the tramp of men going to the front. And when he +wakes up, the country will be empty. He will be deserted, and he +will wonder what has happened. Nothing has happened. The world has +been going on. The world has a habit of going on. The world has a +habit of leaving those behind <a name="Page_54" id= +"Page_54"></a>who won't go with it. The world has always neglected +stand-patters. And, therefore, the stand-patter does not excite my +indignation; he excites my sympathy. He is going to be so lonely +before it is all over. And we are good fellows, we are good +company; why doesn't he come along? We are not going to do him any +harm. We are going to show him a good time. We are going to climb +the slow road until it reaches some upland where the air is +fresher, where the whole talk of mere politicians is stilled, where +men can look in each other's faces and see that there is nothing to +conceal, that all they have to talk about they are willing to talk +about in the open and talk about with each other; and whence, +looking back over the road, we shall see at last that we have +fulfilled our promise to mankind. We had said to all the world, +"America was created to break every kind of monopoly, and to set +men free, upon a footing of equality, upon a footing of +opportunity, to match their brains and their energies." and now we +have proved that we meant it.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="III" id="III"></a><a name="Page_55" id= +"Page_55"></a>III</h2> +<h2>FREEMEN NEED NO GUARDIANS</h2> +<p>There are two theories of government that have been contending +with each other ever since government began. One of them is the +theory which in America is associated with the name of a very great +man, Alexander Hamilton. A great man, but, in my judgment, not a +great American. He did not think in terms of American life. +Hamilton believed that the only people who could understand +government, and therefore the only people who were qualified to +conduct it, were the men who had the biggest financial stake in the +commercial and industrial enterprises of the country.</p> +<p>That theory, though few have now the hardihood to profess it +openly, has been the working theory upon which our government has +lately been conducted. It is astonishing how persistent it is. It +is amazing how quickly the politi<a name="Page_56" id= +"Page_56"></a>cal party which had Lincoln for its first +leader,—Lincoln, who not only denied, but in his own person +so completely disproved the aristocratic theory,—it is +amazing how quickly that party, founded on faith in the people, +forgot the precepts of Lincoln and fell under the delusion that the +"masses" needed the guardianship of "men of affairs."</p> +<p>For indeed, if you stop to think about it, nothing could be a +greater departure from original Americanism, from faith in the +ability of a confident, resourceful, and independent people, than +the discouraging doctrine that somebody has got to provide +prosperity for the rest of us. And yet that is exactly the doctrine +on which the government of the United States has been conducted +lately. Who have been consulted when important measures of +government, like tariff acts, and currency acts, and railroad acts, +were under consideration? The people whom the tariff chiefly +affects, the people for whom the currency is supposed to exist, the +people who pay the duties and ride on the railroads? Oh, no! What +do they know about such matters!<a name="Page_57" id="Page_57"></a> +The gentlemen whose ideas have been sought are the big +manufacturers, the bankers, and the heads of the great railroad +combinations. The masters of the government of the United States +are the combined capitalists and manufacturers of the United +States. It is written over every intimate page of the records of +Congress, it is written all through the history of conferences at +the White House, that the suggestions of economic policy in this +country have come from one source, not from many sources. The +benevolent guardians, the kind-hearted trustees who have taken the +troubles of government off our hands, have become so conspicuous +that almost anybody can write out a list of them. They have become +so conspicuous that their names are mentioned upon almost every +political platform. The men who have undertaken the interesting job +of taking care of us do not force us to requite them with +anonymously directed gratitude. We know them by name.</p> +<p>Suppose you go to Washington and try to get at your government. +You will always find that while you are politely listened to, the +men <a name="Page_58" id="Page_58"></a>really consulted are the men +who have the biggest stake,—the big bankers, the big +manufacturers, the big masters of commerce, the heads of railroad +corporations and of steamship corporations. I have no objection to +these men being consulted, because they also, though they do not +themselves seem to admit it, are part of the people of the United +States. But I do very seriously object to these gentlemen being +<i>chiefly</i> consulted, and particularly to their being +exclusively consulted, for, if the government of the United States +is to do the right thing by the people of the United States, it has +got to do it directly and not through the intermediation of these +gentlemen. Every time it has come to a critical question these +gentlemen have been yielded to, and their demands have been treated +as the demands that should be followed as a matter of course.</p> +<p>The government of the United States at present is a foster-child +of the special interests. It is not allowed to have a will of its +own. It is told at every move: "Don't do that; you will interfere +with our prosperity." And when we <a name="Page_59" id= +"Page_59"></a>ask, "Where is our prosperity lodged?" a certain +group of gentlemen say, "With us." The government of the United +States in recent years has not been administered by the common +people of the United States. You know just as well as I +do,—it is not an indictment against anybody, it is a mere +statement of the facts,—that the people have stood outside +and looked on at their own government and that all they have had to +determine in past years has been which crowd they would look on at; +whether they would look on at this little group or that little +group who had managed to get the control of affairs in its hands. +Have you ever heard, for example, of any hearing before any great +committee of the Congress in which the people of the country as a +whole were represented, except it may be by the Congressmen +themselves? The men who appear at those meetings in order to argue +for or against a schedule in the tariff, for this measure or +against that measure, are men who represent special interests. They +may represent them very honestly, they may intend no wrong to their +fellow-citizens, but they are <a name="Page_60" id= +"Page_60"></a>speaking from the point of view always of a small +portion of the population. I have sometimes wondered why men, +particularly men of means, men who didn't have to work for their +living, shouldn't constitute themselves attorneys for the people, +and every time a hearing is held before a committee of Congress +should not go and ask: "Gentlemen, in considering these things +suppose you consider the whole country? Suppose you consider the +citizens of the United States?"</p> +<p>I don't want a smug lot of experts to sit down behind closed +doors in Washington and play Providence to me. There is a +Providence to which I am perfectly willing to submit. But as for +other men setting up as Providence over myself, I seriously object. +I have never met a political savior in the flesh, and I never +expect to meet one. I am reminded of Gillet Burgess' verses:</p> +<div class="poem"> +<div class="stanza"><span>I never saw a purple cow,<br /></span> +<span>I never hope to see one,<br /></span> <span>But this I'll +tell you anyhow,<br /></span> <span>I'd rather see than be +one.<br /></span></div> +</div> +<p><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61"></a>That is the way I feel about +this saving of my fellow-countrymen. I'd rather see a savior of the +United States than set up to be one; because I have found out, I +have actually found out, that men I consult with know more than I +do,—especially if I consult with enough of them. I never came +out of a committee meeting or a conference without seeing more of +the question that was under discussion than I had seen when I went +in. And that to my mind is an image of government. I am not willing +to be under the patronage of the trusts, no matter how providential +a government presides over the process of their control of my +life.</p> +<p>I am one of those who absolutely reject the trustee theory, the +guardianship theory. I have never found a man who knew how to take +care of me, and, reasoning from that point out, I conjecture that +there isn't any man who knows how to take care of all the people of +the United States. I suspect that the people of the United States +understand their own interests better than any group of men in the +confines of the country understand them. The men who are <a name= +"Page_62" id="Page_62"></a>sweating blood to get their foothold in +the world of endeavor understand the conditions of business in the +United States very much better than the men who have arrived and +are at the top. They know what the thing is that they are +struggling against. They know how difficult it is to start a new +enterprise. They know how far they have to search for credit that +will put them upon an even footing with the men who have already +built up industry in this country. They know that somewhere, by +somebody, the development of industry is being controlled.</p> +<p>I do not say this with the slightest desire to create any +prejudice against wealth; on the contrary, I should be ashamed of +myself if I excited class feeling of any kind. But I do mean to +suggest this: That the wealth of the country has, in recent years, +come from particular sources; it has come from those sources which +have built up monopoly. Its point of view is a special point of +view. It is the point of view of those men who do not wish that the +people should determine their own affairs, because they <a name= +"Page_63" id="Page_63"></a>do not believe that the people's +judgment is sound. They want to be commissioned to take care of the +United States and of the people of the United States, because they +believe that they, better than anybody else, understand the +interests of the United States. I do not challenge their character; +I challenge their point of view. We cannot afford to be governed as +we have been governed in the last generation, by men who occupy so +narrow, so prejudiced, so limited a point of view.</p> +<p>The government of our country cannot be lodged in any special +class. The policy of a great nation cannot be tied up with any +particular set of interests. I want to say, again and again, that +my arguments do not touch the character of the men to whom I am +opposed. I believe that the very wealthy men who have got their +money by certain kinds of corporate enterprise have closed in their +horizon, and that they do not see and do not understand the rank +and file of the people. It is for that reason that I want to break +up the little coterie that has determined what the government of +the nation should <a name="Page_64" id="Page_64"></a>do. The list +of the men who used to determine what New Jersey should and should +not do did not exceed half a dozen, and they were always the same +men. These very men now are, some of them, frank enough to admit +that New Jersey has finer energy in her because more men are +consulted and the whole field of action is widened and liberalized. +We have got to relieve our government from the domination of +special classes, not because these special classes are bad, +necessarily, but because no special class can understand the +interests of a great community.</p> +<p>I believe, as I believe in nothing else, in the average +integrity and the average intelligence of the American people, and +I do not believe that the intelligence of America can be put into +commission anywhere. I do not believe that there is any group of +men of any kind to whom we can afford to give that kind of +trusteeship.</p> +<p>I will not live under trustees if I can help it. No group of men +less than the majority has a right to tell me how I have got to +live in America. I will submit to the majority, because I <a name= +"Page_65" id="Page_65"></a>have been trained to do it,—though +I may sometimes have my private opinion even of the majority. I do +not care how wise, how patriotic, the trustees may be, I have never +heard of any group of men in whose hands I am willing to lodge the +liberties of America in trust.</p> +<p>If any part of our people want to be wards, if they want to have +guardians put over them, if they want to be taken care of, if they +want to be children, patronized by the government, why, I am sorry, +because it will sap the manhood of America. But I don't believe +they do. I believe they want to stand on the firm foundation of law +and right and take care of themselves. I, for my part, don't want +to belong to a nation, I believe that I do not belong to a nation, +that needs to be taken care of by guardians. I want to belong to a +nation, and I am proud that I do belong to a nation, that knows how +to take care of itself. If I thought that the American people were +reckless, were ignorant, were vindictive, I might shrink from +putting the government into their hands. But the beauty of +democracy is that when you are reck<a name="Page_66" id= +"Page_66"></a>less you destroy your own established conditions of +life; when you are vindictive, you wreak vengeance upon yourself; +the whole stability of a democratic polity rests upon the fact that +every interest is every man's interest.</p> +<p>The theory that the men of biggest affairs, whose field of +operation is the widest, are the proper men to advise the +government is, I am willing to admit, rather a plausible theory. If +my business covers the United States not only, but covers the +world, it is to be presumed that I have a pretty wide scope in my +vision of business. But the flaw is that it is my own business that +I have a vision of, and not the business of the men who lie outside +of the scope of the plans I have made for a profit out of the +particular transactions I am connected with. And you can't, by +putting together a large number of men who understand their own +business, no matter how large it is, make up a body of men who will +understand the business of the nation as contrasted with their own +interest.</p> +<p>In a former generation, half a century ago, there were a great +many men associated with <a name="Page_67" id="Page_67"></a>the +government whose patriotism we are not privileged to deny nor to +question, who intended to serve the people, but had become so +saturated with the point of view of a governing class that it was +impossible for them to see America as the people of America +themselves saw it. Then there arose that interesting figure, the +immortal figure of the great Lincoln, who stood up declaring that +the politicians, the men who had governed this country, did not see +from the point of view of the people. When I think of that tall, +gaunt figure rising in Illinois, I have a picture of a man free, +unentangled, unassociated with the governing influences of the +country, ready to see things with an open eye, to see them +steadily, to see them whole, to see them as the men he rubbed +shoulders with and associated with saw them. What the country +needed in 1860 was a leader who understood and represented the +thought of the whole people, as contrasted with that of a class +which imagined itself the guardian of the country's welfare.</p> +<p>Now, likewise, the trouble with our present political condition +is that we need some man <a name="Page_68" id="Page_68"></a>who has +not been associated with the governing classes and the governing +influences of this country to stand up and speak for us; we need to +hear a voice from the outside calling upon the American people to +assert again their rights and prerogatives in the possession of +their own government.</p> +<p>My thought about both Mr. Taft and Mr. Roosevelt is that of +entire respect, but these gentlemen have been so intimately +associated with the powers that have been determining the policy of +this government for almost a generation, that they cannot look at +the affairs of the country with the view of a new age and of a +changed set of circumstances. They sympathize with the people; +their hearts no doubt go out to the great masses of unknown men in +this country; but their thought is in close, habitual association +with those who have framed the policies of the country during all +our lifetime. Those men have framed the protective tariff, have +developed the trusts, have co-ordinated and ordered all the great +economic forces of this country in such fashion that nothing but an +<a name="Page_69" id="Page_69"></a>outside force breaking in can +disturb their domination and control. It is with this in mind, I +believe, that the country can say to these gentlemen: "We do not +deny your integrity; we do not deny your purity of purpose; but the +thought of the people of the United States has not yet penetrated +to your consciousness. You are willing to act for the people, but +you are not willing to act <i>through</i> the people. Now we +propose to act for ourselves."</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>I sometimes think that the men who are now governing us are +unconscious of the chains in which they are held. I do not believe +that men such as we know, among our public men at least—most +of them—have deliberately put us into leading strings to the +special interests. The special interests have grown up. They have +grown up by processes which at last, happily, we are beginning to +understand. And, having grown up, having occupied the seats of +greatest advantage nearest the ear of those who are conducting +government, having contributed the money which was necessary to the +<a name="Page_70" id="Page_70"></a>elections, and therefore having +been kindly thought of after elections, there has closed around the +government of the United States a very interesting, a very able, a +very aggressive coterie of gentlemen who are most definite and +explicit in their ideas as to what they want.</p> +<p>They don't have to consult us as to what they want. They don't +have to resort to anybody. They know their plans, and therefore +they know what will be convenient for them. It may be that they +have really thought what they have said they thought; it may be +that they know so little of the history of economic development and +of the interests of the United States as to believe that their +leadership is indispensable for our prosperity and development. I +don't have to prove that they believe that, because they themselves +admit it. I have heard them admit it on many occasions.</p> +<p>I want to say to you very frankly that I do not feel vindictive +about it. Some of the men who have exercised this control are +excellent fellows; they really believe that the prosperity of the +country depends upon them. They <a name="Page_71" id= +"Page_71"></a>really believe that if the leadership of economic +development in this country dropped from their hands, the rest of +us are too muddle-headed to undertake the task. They not only +comprehend the power of the United States within their grasp, but +they comprehend it within their imagination. They are honest men, +they have just as much right to express their views as I have to +express mine or you to express yours, but it is just about time +that we examined their views for ourselves and determined their +validity.</p> +<p>As a matter of fact, their thought does not cover the processes +of their own undertakings. As a university president, I learned +that the men who dominate our manufacturing processes could not +conduct their business for twenty-four hours without the assistance +of the experts with whom the universities were supplying them. +Modern industry depends upon technical knowledge; and all that +these gentlemen did was to manage the external features of great +combinations and their financial operation, which had very little +to do with the intimate skill with <a name="Page_72" id= +"Page_72"></a>which the enterprises were conducted. I know men not +catalogued in the public prints, men not spoken of in public +discussion, who are the very bone and sinew of the industry of the +United States.</p> +<p>Do our masters of industry speak in the spirit and interest even +of those whom they employ? When men ask me what I think about the +labor question and laboring men, I feel that I am being asked what +I know about the vast majority of the people, and I feel as if I +were being asked to separate myself, as belonging to a particular +class, from that great body of my fellow-citizens who sustain and +conduct the enterprises of the country. Until we get away from that +point of view it will be impossible to have a free government.</p> +<p>I have listened to some very honest and eloquent orators whose +sentiments were noteworthy for this: that when they spoke of the +people, they were not thinking of themselves; they were thinking of +somebody whom they were commissioned to take care of. They were +always planning to do things <i>for</i> the American <a name= +"Page_73" id="Page_73"></a>people, and I have seen them visibly +shiver when it was suggested that they arrange to have something +done by the people for themselves. They said, "What do they know +about it?" I always feel like replying, "What do <i>you</i> know +about it? You know your own interest, but who has told you our +interests, and what do you know about them?" For the business of +every leader of government is to hear what the nation is saying and +to know what the nation is enduring. It is not his business to +judge <i>for</i> the nation, but to judge <i>through</i> the nation +as its spokesman and voice. I do not believe that this country +could have safely allowed a continuation of the policy of the men +who have viewed affairs in any other light.</p> +<p>The hypothesis under which we have been ruled is that of +government through a board of trustees, through a selected number +of the big business men of the country who know a lot that the rest +of us do not know, and who take it for granted that our ignorance +would wreck the prosperity of the country. The idea of the +Presidents we have recently had has been that they <a name= +"Page_74" id="Page_74"></a>were Presidents of a National Board of +Trustees. That is not my idea. I have been president of one board +of trustees, and I do not care to have another on my hands. I want +to be President of the people of the United States. There was many +a time when I was president of the board of trustees of a +university when the undergraduates knew more than the trustees did; +and it has been in my thought ever since that if I could have dealt +directly with the people who constituted Princeton University I +could have carried it forward much faster than I could dealing with +a board of trustees.</p> +<p>Mark you, I am not saying that these leaders knew that they were +doing us an evil, or that they intended to do us an evil. For my +part, I am very much more afraid of the man who does a bad thing +and does not know it is bad than of the man who does a bad thing +and knows it is bad; because I think that in public affairs +stupidity is more dangerous than knavery, because harder to fight +and dislodge. If a man does not know enough to know what the +consequences are going to be to the country, <a name="Page_75" id= +"Page_75"></a>then he cannot govern the country in a way that is +for its benefit. These gentlemen, whatever may have been their +intentions, linked the government up with the men who control the +finances. They may have done it innocently, or they may have done +it corruptly, without affecting my argument at all. And they +themselves cannot escape from that alliance.</p> +<p>Here, for example, is the old question of campaign funds: If I +take a hundred thousand dollars from a group of men representing a +particular interest that has a big stake in a certain schedule of +the tariff, I take it with the knowledge that those gentlemen will +expect me not to forget their interest in that schedule, and that +they will take it as a point of implicit honor that I should see to +it that they are not damaged by too great a change in that +schedule. Therefore, if I take their money, I am bound to them by a +tacit implication of honor. Perhaps there is no ground for +objection to this situation so long as the function of government +is conceived to be to look after the trustees of prosperity, who in +turn will look after the people; but on any <a name="Page_76" id= +"Page_76"></a>other theory than that of trusteeship no interested +campaign contributions can be tolerated for a moment,—save +those of the millions of citizens who thus support the doctrines +they believe and the men whom they recognized as their +spokesmen.</p> +<p>I tell you the men I am interested in are the men who, under the +conditions we have had, never had their voices heard, who never got +a line in the newspapers, who never got a moment on the platform, +who never had access to the ears of Governors or Presidents or of +anybody who was responsible for the conduct of public affairs, but +who went silently and patiently to their work every day carrying +the burden of the world. How are they to be understood by the +masters of finance, if only the masters of finance are +consulted?</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>That is what I mean when I say, "Bring the government back to +the people." I do not mean anything demagogic; I do not mean to +talk as if we wanted a great mass of men to rush in and destroy +something. That is not the <a name="Page_77" id="Page_77"></a>idea. +I want the people to come in and take possession of their own +premises; for I hold that the government belongs to the people, and +that they have a right to that intimate access to it which will +determine every turn of its policy.</p> +<p>America is never going to submit to guardianship. America is +never going to choose thralldom instead of freedom. Look what there +is to decide! There is the tariff question. Can the tariff question +be decided in favor of the people, so long as the monopolies are +the chief counselors at Washington? There is the currency question. +Are we going to settle the currency question so long as the +government listens only to the counsel of those who command the +banking situation?</p> +<p>Then there is the question of conservation. What is our fear +about conservation? The hands that are being stretched out to +monopolize our forests, to prevent or pre-empt the use of our great +power-producing streams, the hands that are being stretched into +the bowels of the earth to take possession of the great riches that +lie hidden in Alaska and elsewhere in the incom<a name="Page_78" +id="Page_78"></a>parable domain of the United States, are the hands +of monopoly. Are these men to continue to stand at the elbow of +government and tell us how we are to save ourselves,—from +themselves? You can not settle the question of conservation while +monopoly is close to the ears of those who govern. And the question +of conservation is a great deal bigger than the question of saving +our forests and our mineral resources and our waters; it is as big +as the life and happiness and strength and elasticity and hope of +our people.</p> +<p>There are tasks awaiting the government of the United States +which it cannot perform until every pulse of that government beats +in unison with the needs and the desires of the whole body of the +American people. Shall we not give the people access of sympathy, +access of authority, to the instrumentalities which are to be +indispensable to their lives?</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="IV" id="IV"></a><a name="Page_79" id= +"Page_79"></a>IV</h2> +<h2>LIFE COMES FROM THE SOIL</h2> +<p>When I look back on the processes of history, when I survey the +genesis of America, I see this written over every page: that the +nations are renewed from the bottom, not from the top; that the +genius which springs up from the ranks of unknown men is the genius +which renews the youth and energy of the people. Everything I know +about history, every bit of experience and observation that has +contributed to my thought, has confirmed me in the conviction that +the real wisdom of human life is compounded out of the experiences +of ordinary men. The utility, the vitality, the fruitage of life +does not come from the top to the bottom; it comes, like the +natural growth of a great tree, from the soil, up through the trunk +into the branches to the foliage and the fruit. The great +struggling unknown masses <a name="Page_80" id="Page_80"></a>of the +men who are at the base of everything are the dynamic force that is +lifting the levels of society. A nation is as great, and only as +great, as her rank and file.</p> +<p>So the first and chief need of this nation of ours to-day is to +include in the partnership of government all those great bodies of +unnamed men who are going to produce our future leaders and renew +the future energies of America. And as I confess that, as I confess +my belief in the common man, I know what I am saying. The man who +is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it. The man +who is in the mêlée knows what blows are being struck +and what blood is being drawn. The man who is on the make is the +judge of what is happening in America, not the man who has made +good; not the man who has emerged from the flood; not the man who +is standing on the bank looking on, but the man who is struggling +for his life and for the lives of those who are dearer to him than +himself. That is the man whose judgment will tell you what is going +on in America; that is the man by whose judgment I, for one, wish +to be guided.</p> +<p><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81"></a>We have had the wrong jury; +we have had the wrong group,—no, I will not say the wrong +group, but too small a group,—in control of the policies of +the United States. The average man has not been consulted, and his +heart had begun to sink for fear he never would be consulted again. +Therefore, we have got to organize a government whose sympathies +will be open to the whole body of the people of the United States, +a government which will consult as large a proportion of the people +of the United States as possible before it acts. Because the great +problem of government is to know what the average man is +experiencing and is thinking about. Most of us are average men; +very few of us rise, except by fortunate accident, above the +general level of the community about us; and therefore the man who +thinks common thoughts, the man who has had common experiences, is +almost always the man who interprets America aright. Isn't that the +reason that we are proud of such stories as the story of Abraham +Lincoln,—a man who rose out of the ranks and interpreted +America better than any <a name="Page_82" id="Page_82"></a>man had +interpreted it who had risen out of the privileged classes or the +educated classes of America?</p> +<p>The hope of the United States in the present and in the future +is the same that it has always been: it is the hope and confidence +that out of unknown homes will come men who will constitute +themselves the masters of industry and of politics. The average +hopefulness, the average welfare, the average enterprise, the +average initiative, of the United States are the only things that +make it rich. We are not rich because a few gentlemen direct our +industry; we are rich because of our own intelligence and our own +industry. America does not consist of men who get their names into +the newspapers; America does not consist politically of the men who +set themselves up to be political leaders; she does not consist of +the men who do most of her talking,—they are important only +so far as they speak for that great voiceless multitude of men who +constitute the great body and the saving force of the nation. +Nobody who cannot speak the common thought, who does not move +<a name="Page_83" id="Page_83"></a>by the common impulse, is the +man to speak for America, or for any of her future purposes. Only +he is fit to speak who knows the thoughts of the great body of +citizens, the men who go about their business every day, the men +who toil from morning till night, the men who go home tired in the +evenings, the men who are carrying on the things we are so proud +of.</p> +<p>You know how it thrills our blood sometimes to think how all the +nations of the earth wait to see what America is going to do with +her power, her physical power, her enormous resources, her enormous +wealth. The nations hold their breath to see what this young +country will do with her young unspoiled strength; we cannot help +but be proud that we are strong. But what has made us strong? The +toil of millions of men, the toil of men who do not boast, who are +inconspicuous, but who live their lives humbly from day to day; it +is the great body of toilers that constitutes the might of America. +It is one of the glories of our land that nobody is able to predict +from what family, from what region, from what race, even, the +<a name="Page_84" id="Page_84"></a>leaders of the country are going +to come. The great leaders of this country have not come very often +from the established, "successful" families.</p> +<p>I remember speaking at a school not long ago where I understood +that almost all the young men were the sons of very rich people, +and I told them I looked upon them with a great deal of pity, +because, I said: "Most of you fellows are doomed to obscurity. You +will not do anything. You will never try to do anything, and with +all the great tasks of the country waiting to be done, probably you +are the very men who will decline to do them. Some man who has been +'up against it,' some man who has come out of the crowd, somebody +who has had the whip of necessity laid on his back, will emerge out +of the crowd, will show that he understands the crowd, understands +the interests of the nation, united and not separated, and will +stand up and lead us."</p> +<p>If I may speak of my own experience, I have found audiences made +up of the "common people" quicker to take a point, quicker to +<a name="Page_85" id="Page_85"></a>understand an argument, quicker +to discern a tendency and to comprehend a principle, than many a +college class that I have lectured to,—not because the +college class lacked the intelligence, but because college boys are +not in contact with the realities of life, while "common" citizens +are in contact with the actual life of day by day; you do not have +to explain to them what touches them to the quick.</p> +<p>There is one illustration of the value of the constant renewal +of society from the bottom that has always interested me +profoundly. The only reason why government did not suffer dry rot +in the Middle Ages under the aristocratic system which then +prevailed was that so many of the men who were efficient +instruments of government were drawn from the church,—from +that great religious body which was then the only church, that body +which we now distinguish from other religious bodies as the Roman +Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church was then, as it is now, +a great democracy. There was no peasant so humble that he might not +become a priest, and no priest so obscure <a name="Page_86" id= +"Page_86"></a>that he might not become Pope of Christendom; and +every chancellery in Europe, every court in Europe, was ruled by +these learned, trained and accomplished men,—the priesthood +of that great and dominant body. What kept government alive in the +Middle Ages was this constant rise of the sap from the bottom, from +the rank and file of the great body of the people through the open +channels of the priesthood. That, it seems to me, is one of the +most interesting and convincing illustrations that could possibly +be adduced of the thing that I am talking about.</p> +<p>The only way that government is kept pure is by keeping these +channels open, so that nobody may deem himself so humble as not to +constitute a part of the body politic, so that there will +constantly be coming new blood into the veins of the body politic; +so that no man is so obscure that he may not break the crust of any +class he may belong to, may not spring up to higher levels and be +counted among the leaders of the state. Anything that depresses, +anything that makes the organization greater than the man, anything +that blocks, discourages, <a name="Page_87" id= +"Page_87"></a>dismays the humble man, is against all the principles +of progress. When I see alliances formed, as they are now being +formed, by successful men of business with successful organizers of +politics, I know that something has been done that checks the +vitality and progress of society. Such an alliance, made at the +top, is an alliance made to depress the levels, to hold them where +they are, if not to sink them; and, therefore, it is the constant +business of good politics to break up such partnerships, to +re-establish and reopen the connections between the great body of +the people and the offices of government.</p> +<p>To-day, when our government has so far passed into the hands of +special interests; to-day, when the doctrine is implicitly avowed +that only select classes have the equipment necessary for carrying +on government; to-day, when so many conscientious citizens, smitten +with the scene of social wrong and suffering, have fallen victims +to the fallacy that benevolent government can be meted out to the +people by kind-hearted trustees of prosperity and <a name="Page_88" +id="Page_88"></a>guardians of the welfare of dutiful +employees,—to-day, supremely, does it behoove this nation to +remember that a people shall be saved by the power that sleeps in +its own deep bosom, or by none; shall be renewed in hope, in +conscience, in strength, by waters welling up from its own sweet, +perennial springs. Not from above; not by patronage of its +aristocrats. The flower does not bear the root, but the root the +flower. Everything that blooms in beauty in the air of heaven draws +its fairness, its vigor, from its roots. Nothing living can blossom +into fruitage unless through nourishing stalks deep-planted in the +common soil. The rose is merely the evidence of the vitality of the +root; and the real source of its beauty, the very blush that it +wears upon its tender cheek, comes from those silent sources of +life that lie hidden in the chemistry of the soil. Up from that +soil, up from the silent bosom of the earth, rise the currents of +life and energy. Up from the common soil, up from the quiet heart +of the people, rise joyously to-day streams of hope and +determination bound to renew the face of the earth in glory.</p> +<p><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89"></a>I tell you, the so-called +radicalism of our times is simply the effort of nature to release +the generous energies of our people. This great American people is +at bottom just, virtuous, and hopeful; the roots of its being are +in the soil of what is lovely, pure, and of good report, and the +need of the hour is just that radicalism that will clear a way for +the realization of the aspirations of a sturdy race.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="V" id="V"></a><a name="Page_90" id= +"Page_90"></a>V</h2> +<h2>THE PARLIAMENT OF THE PEOPLE</h2> +<p>For a long time this country of ours has lacked one of the +institutions which freemen have always and everywhere held +fundamental. For a long time there has been no sufficient +opportunity of counsel among the people; no place and method of +talk, of exchange of opinion, of parley. Communities have outgrown +the folk-moot and the town-meeting. Congress, in accordance with +the genius of the land, which asks for action and is impatient of +words,—Congress has become an institution which does its work +in the privacy of committee rooms and not on the floor of the +Chamber; a body that makes laws,—a legislature; not a body +that debates,—not a parliament. Party conventions afford +little or no opportunity for discussion; platforms are privately +manufactured and adopted with a whoop. It <a name="Page_91" id= +"Page_91"></a>is partly because citizens have foregone the taking +of counsel together that the unholy alliances of bosses and Big +Business have been able to assume to govern for us.</p> +<p>I conceive it to be one of the needs of the hour to restore the +processes of common counsel, and to substitute them for the +processes of private arrangement which now determine the policies +of cities, states, and nation. We must learn, we freemen, to meet, +as our fathers did, somehow, somewhere, for consultation. There +must be discussion and debate, in which all freely participate.</p> +<p>It must be candid debate, and it must have for its honest +purpose the clearing up of questions and the establishing of the +truth. Too much political discussion is not to honest purpose, but +only for the confounding of an opponent. I am often reminded, when +political debate gets warm and we begin to hope that the truth is +making inroads on the reason of those who have denied it, of the +way a debate in Virginia once seemed likely to end:</p> +<p>When I was a young man studying at Char<a name="Page_92" id= +"Page_92"></a>lottesville, there were two factions in the +Democratic party in the State of Virginia which were having a +pretty hot contest with each other. In one of the counties one of +these factions had practically no following at all. A man named +Massey, one of its redoubtable debaters, though a little, slim, +insignificant-looking person, sent a messenger up into this county +and challenged the opposition to debate with him. They didn't quite +like the idea, but they were too proud to decline, so they put up +their best debater, a big, good-natured man whom everybody was +familiar with as "Tom," and it was arranged that Massey should have +the first hour and that Tom Whatever-his-name-was should succeed +him the next hour. When the occasion came, Massey, with his +characteristic shrewdness, began to get underneath the skins of the +audience, and he hadn't made more than half his speech before it +was evident that he was getting that hostile crowd with him; +whereupon one of Tom's partisans in the back of the room, seeing +how things were going, cried out: "Tom, call him a liar and make it +a fight!"</p> +<p><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93"></a>Now, that kind of debate, +that spirit in discussion, gets us nowhere. Our national affairs +are too serious, they lie too close to the well-being of each one +of us, to excuse our talking about them except in earnestness and +candor and a willingness to speak and listen with open minds. It is +a misfortune that attends the party system that in the heat of a +campaign partisan passions are so aroused that we cannot have frank +discussion. Yet I am sure that I observe, and that all citizens +must observe, an almost startling change in the temper of the +people in this respect. The campaign just closed was markedly +different from others that had preceded it in the degree to which +party considerations were forgotten in the seriousness of the +things we had to discuss as common citizens of an endangered +country.</p> +<p>There is astir in the air of America something that I for one +never saw before, never felt before. I have been going to political +meetings all my life, though not all my life playing an immodestly +conspicuous part in them; and there is a spirit in our political +meetings now <a name="Page_94" id="Page_94"></a>that I never saw +before. It hasn't been very many years, let me say for example, +that women attended political meetings. And women are attending +political meetings now not simply because there is a woman question +in politics; they are attending them because the modern political +meeting is not like the political meeting of five or ten years ago. +That was a mere ratification rally. That was a mere occasion for +"whooping it up" for somebody. That was merely an occasion upon +which one party was denounced unreasonably and the other was lauded +unreasonably. No party has ever deserved quite the abuse that each +party has got in turn, and nobody has ever deserved the praise that +both parties have got in turn. The old political meeting was a +wholly irrational performance; it was got together for the purpose +of saying things that were chiefly not so and that were known by +those who heard them not to be so, and were simply to be taken as a +tonic in order to produce cheers.</p> +<p>But I am very much mistaken in the temper <a name="Page_95" id= +"Page_95"></a>of my fellow-countrymen if the meetings I have seen +in the last two years bear any resemblance to those older meetings. +Men now get together in a political meeting in order to hear things +of the deepest consequence discussed. And you will find almost as +many Republicans in a Democratic meeting as you will find Democrats +in a Republican meeting; the spirit of frank discussion, of common +counsel, is abroad.</p> +<p>Good will it be for the country if the interest in public +concerns manifested so widely and so sincerely be not suffered to +expire with the election! Why should political debate go on only +when somebody is to be elected? Why should it be confined to +campaign time?</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>There is a movement on foot in which, in common with many men +and women who love their country, I am greatly +interested,—the movement to open the schoolhouse to the +grown-up people in order that they may gather and talk over the +affairs of the neighborhood and the state. There are schoolhouses +all over <a name="Page_96" id="Page_96"></a>the land which are not +used by the teachers and children in the summer months, which are +not used in the winter time in the evening for school purposes. +These buildings belong to the public. Why not insist everywhere +that they be used as places of discussion, such as of old took +place in the town-meetings to which everybody went and where every +public officer was freely called to account? The schoolhouse, which +belongs to all of us, is a natural place in which to gather to +consult over our common affairs.</p> +<p>I was very much interested in the remark of a fellow-citizen of +ours who had been born on the other side of the water. He said that +not long ago he wandered into one of those neighborhood schoolhouse +meetings, and there found himself among people who were discussing +matters in which they were all interested; and when he came out he +said to me: "I have been living in America now ten years, and +to-night for the first time I saw America as I had imagined it to +be. This gathering together of men of all sorts upon a perfect +footing of equality to discuss frankly with one another what +con<a name="Page_97" id="Page_97"></a>cerned them all,—that +is what I dreamed America was."</p> +<p>That set me to thinking. He hadn't seen the America he had come +to find until that night. Had he not felt like a neighbor? Had men +not consulted him? He had felt like an outsider. Had there been no +little circles in which public affairs were discussed?</p> +<p>You know that the great melting-pot of America, the place where +we are all made Americans of, is the public school, where men of +every race and of every origin and of every station in life send +their children, or ought to send their children, and where, being +mixed together, the youngsters are all infused with the American +spirit and developed into American men and American women. When, in +addition to sending our children to school to paid teachers, we go +to school to one another in those same schoolhouses, then we shall +begin more fully to realize than we ever have realized before what +American life is. And let me tell you this, confidentially, that +wherever you find school boards that object to opening the <a name= +"Page_98" id="Page_98"></a>schoolhouses in the evening for public +meetings of every proper sort, you had better look around for some +politician who is objecting to it; because the thing that cures bad +politics is talk by the neighbors. The thing that brings to light +the concealed circumstances of our political life is the talk of +the neighborhood; and if you can get the neighbors together, get +them frankly to tell everything they know, then your politics, your +ward politics, and your city politics, and your state politics, +too, will be turned inside out,—in the way they ought to be. +Because the chief difficulty our politics has suffered is that the +inside didn't look like the outside. Nothing clears the air like +frank discussion.</p> +<p>One of the valuable lessons of my life was due to the fact that +at a comparatively early age in my experience as a public speaker I +had the privilege of speaking in Cooper Union in New York. The +audience in Cooper Union is made up of every kind of man and woman, +from the poor devil who simply comes in to keep warm up to the man +who has come in to take a serious <a name="Page_99" id= +"Page_99"></a>part in the discussion of the evening. I want to tell +you this, that in the questions that are asked there after the +speech is over, the most penetrating questions that I have ever had +addressed to me came from some of the men who were the least +well-dressed in the audience, came from the plain fellows, came +from the fellows whose muscle was daily up against the whole +struggle of life. They asked questions which went to the heart of +the business and put me to my mettle to answer them. I felt as if +those questions came as a voice out of life itself, not a voice out +of any school less severe than the severe school of experience. And +what I like about this social centre idea of the schoolhouse is +that there is the place where the ordinary fellow is going to get +his innings, going to ask his questions, going to express his +opinions, going to convince those who do not realize the vigor of +America that the vigor of America pulses in the blood of every true +American, and that the only place he can find the true American is +in this clearing-house of absolutely democratic opinion.</p> +<p><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100"></a>No one man understands the +United States. I have met some gentlemen who professed they did. I +have even met some business men who professed they held in their +own single comprehension the business of the United States; but I +am educated enough to know that they do not. Education has this +useful effect, that it narrows of necessity the circles of one's +egotism. No student knows his subject. The most he knows is where +and how to find out the things he does not know with regard to it. +That is also the position of a statesman. No statesman understands +the whole country. He should make it his business to find out where +he will get the information necessary to understand at least a part +of it at a time when dealing with complex affairs. What we need is +a universal revival of common counsel.</p> +<p>I have sometimes reflected on the lack of a body of public +opinion in our cities, and once I contrasted the habits of the city +man with those of the countryman in a way which got me into +trouble. I described what a man in a <a name="Page_101" id= +"Page_101"></a>city generally did when he got into a public vehicle +or sat in a public place. He doesn't talk to anybody, but he +plunges his head into a newspaper and presently experiences a +reaction which he calls his opinion, but which is not an opinion at +all, being merely the impression that a piece of news or an +editorial has made upon him. He cannot be said to be participating +in public opinion at all until he has laid his mind alongside the +minds of his neighbors and discussed with them the incidents of the +day and the tendencies of the time.</p> +<p>Where I got into trouble was, that I ventured on a comparison. I +said that public opinion was not typified on the streets of a busy +city, but was typified around the stove in a country store where +men sat and probably chewed tobacco and spat into a sawdust box, +and made up, before they got through, what was the neighborhood +opinion both about persons and events; and then, inadvertently, I +added this philosophical reflection, that, whatever might be said +against the chewing of tobacco, this at least could be said for it: +that <a name="Page_102" id="Page_102"></a>it gave a man time to +think between sentences. Ever since then I have been represented, +particularly in the advertisements of tobacco firms, as in favor of +the use of chewing tobacco!</p> +<p>The reason that some city men are not more catholic in their +ideas is that they do not share the opinion of the country, and the +reason that some countrymen are rustic is that they do not know the +opinion of the city; they are both hampered by their limitations. I +heard the other day of a woman who had lived all her life in a city +and in an hotel. She made a first visit to the country last summer, +and spent a week in a farmhouse. Asked afterward what had +interested her most about her experience, she replied that it was +hearing the farmer "page his cows!"</p> +<p>A very urban point of view with regard to a common rustic +occurrence, and yet that language showed the sharp, the inelastic +limits of her thought. She was provincial in the extreme; she +thought even more narrowly than in the terms of a city; she thought +in the terms of an hotel. In proportion as we are confined within +the walls of one hostelry or one city or <a name="Page_103" id= +"Page_103"></a>one state, we are provincial. We can do nothing more +to advance our country's welfare than to bring the various +communities within the counsels of the nation. The real difficulty +of our nation has been that not enough of us realized that the +matters we discussed were matters of common concern. We have talked +as if we had to serve now this part of the country and again that +part, now this interest and again that interest; as if all +interests were not linked together, provided we understood them and +knew how they were related to one another.</p> +<p>If you would know what makes the great river as it nears the +sea, you must travel up the stream. You must go up into the hills +and back into the forests and see the little rivulets, the little +streams, all gathering in hidden places to swell the great body of +water in the channel. And so with the making of public opinion: +Back in the country, on the farms, in the shops, in the hamlets, in +the homes of cities, in the schoolhouses, where men get together +and are frank and true with one another, there come trickling down +the streams which <a name="Page_104" id="Page_104"></a>are to make +the mighty force of the river, the river which is to drive all the +enterprises of human life as it sweeps on into the great common sea +of humanity.</p> +<p>I feel nothing so much as the intensity of the common man. I can +pick out in any audience the men who are at ease in their fortunes: +they are seeing a public man go through his stunts. But there are +in every crowd other men who are not doing that,—men who are +listening as if they were waiting to hear if there were somebody +who could speak the thing that is stirring in their own hearts and +minds. It makes a man's heart ache to think that he cannot be sure +that he is doing it for them; to wonder whether they are longing +for something that he does not understand. He prays God that +something will bring into his consciousness what is in theirs, so +that the whole nation may feel at last released from its dumbness, +feel at last that there is no invisible force holding it back from +its goal, feel at last that there is hope and confidence and that +the road may be trodden as if we were <a name="Page_105" id= +"Page_105"></a>brothers, shoulder to shoulder, not asking each +other anything about differences of class, not contesting for any +selfish advance, but united in the common enterprise.</p> +<p>The burden that is upon the heart of every conscientious public +man is the burden of the thought that perhaps he does not +sufficiently comprehend the national life. For, as a matter of +fact, no single man does comprehend it. The whole purpose of +democracy is that we may hold counsel with one another, so as not +to depend upon the understanding of one man, but to depend upon the +counsel of all. For only as men are brought into counsel, and state +their own needs and interests, can the general interests of a great +people be compounded into a policy that will be suitable to +all.</p> +<p>I have realized all my life, as a man connected with the tasks +of education, that the chief use of education is to open the +understanding to comprehend as many things as possible. That it is +not what a man knows,—for no man knows a great +deal,—but what a man has upon his mind to find out; it is his +ability to <a name="Page_106" id="Page_106"></a>understand things, +it is his connection with the great masses of men that makes him +fit to speak for others,—and only that. I have associated +with some of the gentlemen who are connected with the special +interests of this country (and many of them are pretty fine men, I +can tell you), but, fortunately for me, I have associated with a +good many other persons besides; I have not confined my +acquaintance to these interesting groups, and I can actually tell +those gentlemen some things that they have not had time to find +out. It has been my great good fortune not to have had my head +buried in special undertakings, and, therefore, I have had an +occasional look at the horizon. Moreover, I found out, a long time +ago, fortunately for me, when I was a boy, that the United States +did not consist of that part of it in which I lived. There was a +time when I was a very narrow provincial, but happily the +circumstances of my life made it necessary that I should go to a +very distant part of the country, and I early found out what a very +limited acquaintance I had with the United States, found out that +<a name="Page_107" id="Page_107"></a>the only thing that would give +me any sense at all in discussing the affairs of the United States +was to know as many parts of the United States as possible.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>The men who have been ruling America must consent to let the +majority into the game. We will no longer permit any system to go +uncorrected which is based upon private understandings and expert +testimony; we will not allow the few to continue to determine what +the policy of the country is to be. It is a question of access to +our own government. There are very few of us who have had any real +access to the government. It ought to be a matter of common +counsel; a matter of united counsel; a matter of mutual +comprehension.</p> +<p>So, keep the air clear with constant discussion. Make every +public servant feel that he is acting in the open and under +scrutiny; and, above all things else, take these great fundamental +questions of your lives with which political platforms concern +themselves and search them through and through by every process of +debate.<a name="Page_108" id="Page_108"></a> Then we shall have a +clear air in which we shall see our way to each kind of social +betterment. When we have freed our government, when we have +restored freedom of enterprise, when we have broken up the +partnerships between money and power which now block us at every +turn, then we shall see our way to accomplish all the handsome +things which platforms promise in vain if they do not start at the +point where stand the gates of liberty.</p> +<p>I am not afraid of the American people getting up and doing +something. I am only afraid they will not; and when I hear a +popular vote spoken of as mob government, I feel like telling the +man who dares so to speak that he has no right to call himself an +American. You cannot make a reckless, passionate force out of a +body of sober people earning their living in a free country. Just +picture to yourselves the voting population of this great land, +from the sea to the far borders in the mountains, going calmly, man +by man, to the polls, expressing its judgment about public affairs: +is that your image of "a mob?"</p> +<p><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109"></a>What is a mob? A mob is a +body of men in hot contact with one another, moved by ungovernable +passion to do a hasty thing that they will regret the next day. Do +you see anything resembling a mob in that voting population of the +countryside, men tramping over the mountains, men going to the +general store up in the village, men moving in little talking +groups to the corner grocery to cast their ballots,—is that +your notion of a mob? Or is that your picture of a free, +self-governing people? I am not afraid of the judgments so +expressed, if you give men time to think, if you give them a clear +conception of the things they are to vote for; because the deepest +conviction and passion of my heart is that the common people, by +which I mean all of us, are to be absolutely trusted.</p> +<p>So, at this opening of a new age, in this its day of unrest and +discontent, it is our part to clear the air, to bring about common +counsel; to set up the parliament of the people; to demonstrate +that we are fighting no man, that we are trying to bring all men to +understand <a name="Page_110" id="Page_110"></a>one another; that +we are not the friends of any class against any other class, but +that our duty is to make classes understand one another. Our part +is to lift so high the incomparable standards of the common +interest and the common justice that all men with vision, all men +with hope, all men with the convictions of America in their hearts, +will crowd to that standard and a new day of achievement may come +for the liberty which we love.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="VI" id="VI"></a><a name="Page_111" id= +"Page_111"></a>VI</h2> +<h2>LET THERE BE LIGHT</h2> +<p>The concern of patriotic men is to put our government again on +its right basis, by substituting the popular will for the rule of +guardians, the processes of common counsel for those of private +arrangement. In order to do this, a first necessity is to open the +doors and let in the light on all affairs which the people have a +right to know about.</p> +<p>In the first place, it is necessary to open up all the processes +of our politics. They have been too secret, too complicated, too +roundabout; they have consisted too much of private conferences and +secret understandings, of the control of legislation by men who +were not legislators, but who stood outside and dictated, +controlling oftentimes by very questionable means, which they would +not have dreamed of allowing to become public. The whole process +<a name="Page_112" id="Page_112"></a>must be altered. We must take +the selection of candidates for office, for example, out of the +hands of small groups of men, of little coteries, out of the hands +of machines working behind closed doors, and put it into the hands +of the people themselves again by means of direct primaries and +elections to which candidates of every sort and degree may have +free access. We must substitute public for private machinery.</p> +<p>It is necessary, in the second place, to give society command of +its own economic life again by denying to those who conduct the +great modern operations of business the privacy that used to belong +properly enough to men who used only their own capital and their +individual energy in business. The processes of capital must be as +open as the processes of politics. Those who make use of the great +modern accumulations of wealth, gathered together by the dragnet +process of the sale of stocks and bonds, and piling up of reserves, +must be treated as under a public obligation; they must be made +responsible for their business methods to the great communities +which are <a name="Page_113" id="Page_113"></a>in fact their +working partners, so that the hand which makes correction shall +easily reach them and a new principle of responsibility be felt +throughout their structure and operation.</p> +<p>What are the right methods of politics? Why, the right methods +are those of public discussion: the methods of leadership open and +above board, not closeted with "boards of guardians" or anybody +else, but brought out under the sky, where honest eyes can look +upon them and honest eyes can judge of them.</p> +<p>If there is nothing to conceal, then why conceal it? If it is a +public game, why play it in private? If it is a public game, then +why not come out into the open and play it in public? You have got +to cure diseased politics as we nowadays cure tuberculosis, by +making all the people who suffer from it live out of doors; not +only spend their days out of doors and walk around, but sleep out +of doors; always remain in the open, where they will be accessible +to fresh, nourishing, and revivifying influences.</p> +<p>I, for one, have the conviction that government ought to be all +outside and no inside. I, for <a name="Page_114" id= +"Page_114"></a>my part, believe that there ought to be no place +where anything can be done that everybody does not know about. It +would be very inconvenient for some gentlemen, probably, if +government were all outside, but we have consulted their +susceptibilities too long already. It is barely possible that some +of these gentlemen are unjustly suspected; in that case they owe it +to themselves to come out and operate in the light. The very fact +that so much in politics is done in the dark, behind closed doors, +promotes suspicion. Everybody knows that corruption thrives in +secret places, and avoids public places, and we believe it a fair +presumption that secrecy means impropriety. So, our honest +politicians and our honorable corporation heads owe it to their +reputations to bring their activities out into the open.</p> +<p>At any rate, whether they like it or not, these affairs are +going to be dragged into the open. We are more anxious about their +reputations than they are themselves. We are too solicitous for +their morals,—if they are not,—to permit them longer to +continue subject to the temptations of secrecy. You know there is +temptation <a name="Page_115" id="Page_115"></a>in loneliness and +secrecy. Haven't you experienced it? I have. We are never so proper +in our conduct as when everybody can look and see exactly what we +are doing. If you are off in some distant part of the world and +suppose that nobody who lives within a mile of your home is +anywhere around, there are times when you adjourn your ordinary +standards. You say to yourself: "Well, I'll have a fling this time; +nobody will know anything about it." If you were on the desert of +Sahara, you would feel that you might permit yourself,—well, +say, some slight latitude in conduct; but if you saw one of your +immediate neighbors coming the other way on a camel,—you +would behave yourself until he got out of sight. The most dangerous +thing in the world is to get off where nobody knows you. I advise +you to stay around among the neighbors, and then you may keep out +of jail. That is the only way some of us can keep out of jail.</p> +<p>Publicity is one of the purifying elements of politics. The best +thing that you can do with anything that is crooked is to lift it +up where <a name="Page_116" id="Page_116"></a>people can see that +it is crooked, and then it will either straighten itself out or +disappear. Nothing checks all the bad practices of politics like +public exposure. You can't be crooked in the light. I don't know +whether it has ever been tried or not; but I venture to say, purely +from observation, that it can't be done.</p> +<p>And so the people of the United States have made up their minds +to do a healthy thing for both politics and big business. Permit me +to mix a few metaphors: They are going to open doors; they are +going to let up blinds; they are going to drag sick things into the +open air and into the light of the sun. They are going to organize +a great hunt, and smoke certain animals out of their burrows. They +are going to unearth the beast in the jungle in which when they +hunted they were caught by the beast instead of catching him. They +have determined, therefore, to take an axe and raze the jungle, and +then see where the beast will find cover. And I, for my part, bid +them God-speed. The jungle breeds nothing but infection and +shelters nothing but the enemies of mankind.</p> +<p><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117"></a>And nobody is going to get +caught in our hunt except the beasts that prey. Nothing is going to +be cut down or injured that anybody ought to wish preserved.</p> +<p>You know the story of the Irishman who, while digging a hole, +was asked, "Pat, what are you doing,—digging a hole?" And he +replied, "No, sir; I am digging the dirt, and laying the hole." It +was probably the same Irishman who, seen digging around the wall of +a house, was asked, "Pat, what are you doing?" And he answered, +"Faith, I am letting the dark out of the cellar." Now, that's +exactly what we want to do,—let the dark out of the +cellar.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Take, first, the relations existing between politics and +business.</p> +<p>It is perfectly legitimate, of course, that the business +interests of the country should not only enjoy the protection of +the law, but that they should be in every way furthered and +strengthened and facilitated by legislation. The country has no +jealousy of any connection between business and politics which is a +legiti<a name="Page_118" id="Page_118"></a>mate connection. It is +not in the least averse from open efforts to accommodate law to the +material development which has so strengthened the country in all +that it has undertaken by supplying its extraordinary life with its +necessary physical foundations.</p> +<p>But the illegitimate connections between business and +legislation are another matter. I would wish to speak on this +subject with soberness and circumspection. I have no desire to +excite anger against anybody. That would be easy, but it would do +no particular good. I wish, rather, to consider an unhappy +situation in a spirit that may enable us to account for it, to some +extent, and so perhaps get at the causes and the remedy. Mere +denunciation doesn't help much to clear up a matter so involved as +is the complicity of business with evil politics in America.</p> +<p>Every community is vaguely aware that the political machine upon +which it looks askance has certain very definite connections with +men who are engaged in business on a large scale, and the suspicion +which attaches to the machine <a name="Page_119" id= +"Page_119"></a>itself has begun to attach also to business +enterprises, just because these connections are known to exist. If +these connections were open and avowed, if everybody knew just what +they involved and just what use was being made of them, there would +be no difficulty in keeping an eye upon affairs and in controlling +them by public opinion. But, unfortunately, the whole process of +law-making in America is a very obscure one. There is no highway of +legislation, but there are many by-ways. Parties are not organized +in such a way in our legislatures as to make any one group of men +avowedly responsible for the course of legislation. The whole +process of discussion, if any discussion at all takes place, is +private and shut away from public scrutiny and knowledge. There are +so many circles within circles, there are so many indirect and +private ways of getting at legislative action, that our communities +are constantly uneasy during legislative sessions. It is this +confusion and obscurity and privacy of our legislative method that +gives the political machine its opportunity. There is no publicly +<a name="Page_120" id="Page_120"></a>responsible man or group of +men who are known to formulate legislation and to take charge of it +from the time of its introduction until the time of its enactment. +It has, therefore, been possible for an outside force,—the +political machine, the body of men who nominated the legislators +and who conducted the contest for their election,—to assume +the rôle of control. Business men who desired something done +in the way of changing the law under which they were acting, or who +wished to prevent legislation which seemed to them to threaten +their own interests, have known that there was this definite body +of persons to resort to, and they have made terms with them. They +have agreed to supply them with money for campaign expenses and to +stand by them in all other cases where money was necessary if in +return they might resort to them for protection or for assistance +in matters of legislation. Legislators looked to a certain man who +was not even a member of their body for instructions as to what +they were to do with particular bills. The machine, which was the +centre of party <a name="Page_121" id="Page_121"></a>organization, +was the natural instrument of control, and men who had business +interests to promote naturally resorted to the body which exercised +the control.</p> +<p>There need have been nothing sinister about this. If the whole +matter had been open and candid and honest, public criticism would +not have centred upon it. But the use of money always results in +demoralization, and goes beyond demoralization to actual +corruption. There are two kinds of corruption,—the crude and +obvious sort, which consists in direct bribery, and the much +subtler, more dangerous, sort, which consists in a corruption of +the will. Business men who have tried to set up a control in +politics through the machine have more and more deceived +themselves, have allowed themselves to think that the whole matter +was a necessary means of self-defence, have said that it was a +necessary outcome of our political system. Having reassured +themselves in this way, they have drifted from one thing to another +until the questions of morals involved have become hopelessly +obscured and submerged.<a name="Page_122" id="Page_122"></a> How +far away from the ideals of their youth have many of our men of +business drifted, enmeshed in the vicious system,—how far +away from the days when their fine young manhood was wrapped in +"that chastity of honor which felt a stain like a wound!"</p> +<p>It is one of the happy circumstances of our time that the most +intelligent of our business men have seen the mistake as well as +the immorality of the whole bad business. The alliance between +business and politics has been a burden to them,—an +advantage, no doubt, upon occasion, but a very questionable and +burdensome advantage. It has given them great power, but it has +also subjected them to a sort of slavery and a bitter sort of +subserviency to politicians. They are as anxious to be freed from +bondage as the country is to be rid of the influences and methods +which it represents. Leading business men are now becoming great +factors in the emancipation of the country from a system which was +leading from bad to worse. There are those, of course, who are +wedded to the old ways and who will stand out <a name="Page_123" +id="Page_123"></a>for them to the last, but they will sink into a +minority and be overcome. The rest have found that their old excuse +(namely, that it was necessary to defend themselves against unfair +legislation) is no longer a good excuse; that there is a better way +of defending themselves than through the private use of money. That +better way is to take the public into their confidence, to make +absolutely open all their dealings with legislative bodies and +legislative officers, and let the public judge as between them and +those with whom they are dealing.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>This discovery on their part of what ought to have been obvious +all along points out the way of reform; for undoubtedly publicity +comes very near being the cure-all for political and economic +maladies of this sort. But publicity will continue to be very +difficult so long as our methods of legislation are so obscure and +devious and private. I think it will become more and more obvious +that the way to purify our politics is to simplify them, and that +the way to simplify them is to <a name="Page_124" id= +"Page_124"></a>establish responsible leadership. We now have no +leadership at all inside our legislative bodies,—at any rate, +no leadership which is definite enough to attract the attention and +watchfulness of the country. Our only leadership being that of +irresponsible persons outside the legislatures who constitute the +political machines, it is extremely difficult for even the most +watchful public opinion to keep track of the circuitous methods +pursued. This undoubtedly lies at the root of the growing demand on +the part of American communities everywhere for responsible +leadership, for putting in authority and keeping in authority those +whom they know and whom they can watch and whom they can constantly +hold to account. The business of the country ought to be served by +thoughtful and progressive legislation, but it ought to be served +openly, candidly, advantageously, with a careful regard to letting +everybody be heard and every interest be considered, the interest +which is not backed by money as well as the interest which is; and +this can be accomplished only by some simplification of our methods +<a name="Page_125" id="Page_125"></a>which will centre the public +trust in small groups of men who will lead, not by reason of legal +authority, but by reason of their contact with and amenability to +public opinion.</p> +<p>I am striving to indicate my belief that our legislative methods +may well be reformed in the direction of giving more open publicity +to every act, in the direction of setting up some form of +responsible leadership on the floor of our legislative halls so +that the people may know who is back of every bill and back of the +opposition to it, and so that it may be dealt with in the open +chamber rather than in the committee room. The light must be let in +on all processes of law-making.</p> +<p>Legislation, as we nowadays conduct it, is not conducted in the +open. It is not threshed out in open debate upon the floors of our +assemblies. It is, on the contrary, framed, digested, and concluded +in committee rooms. It is in committee rooms that legislation not +desired by the interests dies. It is in committee rooms that +legislation desired by the interests is framed and brought forth. +There is not enough <a name="Page_126" id="Page_126"></a>debate of +it in open house, in most cases, to disclose the real meaning of +the proposals made. Clauses lie quietly unexplained and +unchallenged in our statutes which contain the whole gist and +purpose of the act; qualifying phrases which escape the public +attention, casual definitions which do not attract attention, +classifications so technical as not to be generally understood, and +which every one most intimately concerned is careful not to explain +or expound, contain the whole purpose of the law. Only after it has +been enacted and has come to adjudication in the courts is its +scheme as a whole divulged. The beneficiaries are then safe behind +their bulwarks.</p> +<p>Of course, the chief triumphs of committee work, of covert +phrase and unexplained classification, are accomplished in the +framing of tariffs. Ever since the passage of the outrageous +Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act our people have been discovering the +concealed meanings and purposes which lay hidden in it. They are +discovering item by item how deeply and deliberately they were +deceived and cheated. This did <a name="Page_127" id= +"Page_127"></a>not happen by accident; it came about by design, by +elaborated, secret design. Questions put upon the floor in the +House and Senate were not frankly or truly answered, and an +elaborate piece of legislation was foisted on the country which +could not possibly have passed if it had been generally +comprehended.</p> +<p>And we know, those of us who handle the machinery of politics, +that the great difficulty in breaking up the control of the +political boss is that he is backed by the money and the influence +of these very people who are intrenched in these very schedules. +The tariff could never have been built up item by item by public +discussion, and it never could have passed, if item by item it had +been explained to the people of this country. It was built up by +arrangement and by the subtle management of a political +organization represented in the Senate of the United States by the +senior Senator from Rhode Island, and in the House of +Representatives by one of the Representatives from Illinois. These +gentlemen did not build that tariff upon the evidence that was +given before the Com<a name="Page_128" id="Page_128"></a>mittee on +Ways and Means as to what the manufacturer and the workingmen, the +consumers and the producers, of this country want. It was not built +upon what the interests of the country called for. It was built +upon understandings arrived at outside of the rooms where testimony +was given and debate was held.</p> +<p>I am not even now suggesting corrupt influence. That is not my +point. Corruption is a very difficult thing to manage in its +literal sense. The payment of money is very easily detected, and +men of this kind who control these interests by secret arrangement +would not consent to receive a dollar in money. They are following +their own principles,—that is to say, the principles which +they think and act upon,—and they think that they are +perfectly honorable and incorruptible men; but they believe one +thing that I do not believe and that it is evident the people of +the country do not believe: they believe that the prosperity of the +country depends upon the arrangements which certain party leaders +make with certain business <a name="Page_129" id= +"Page_129"></a>leaders. They believe that, but the proposition has +merely to be stated to the jury to be rejected. The prosperity of +this country depends upon the interests of all of us and cannot be +brought about by arrangement between any groups of persons. Take +any question you like out to the country,—let it be threshed +out in public debate,—and you will have made these methods +impossible.</p> +<p>This is what sometimes happens: They promise you a particular +piece of legislation. As soon as the legislature meets, a bill +embodying that legislation is introduced. It is referred to a +committee. You never hear of it again. What happened? Nobody knows +what happened.</p> +<p>I am not intimating that corruption creeps in; I do not know +what creeps in. The point is that we not only do not know, but it +is intimated, if we get inquisitive, that it is none of our +business. My reply is that it is our business, and it is the +business of every man in the state; we have a right to know all the +particulars of that bill's history. There is not any legitimate +<a name="Page_130" id="Page_130"></a>privacy about matters of +government. Government must, if it is to be pure and correct in its +processes, be absolutely public in everything that affects it. I +cannot imagine a public man with a conscience having a secret that +he would keep from the people about their own affairs.</p> +<p>I know how some of these gentlemen reason. They say that the +influences to which they are yielding are perfectly legitimate +influences, but that if they were disclosed they would not be +understood. Well, I am very sorry, but nothing is legitimate that +cannot be understood. If you cannot explain it properly, then there +is something about it that cannot <i>be</i> explained at all. I +know from the circumstances of the case, not what is happening, but +that something private is happening, and that every time one of +these bills gets into committee, something private stops it, and it +never comes out again unless forced out by the agitation of the +press or the courage and revolt of brave men in the legislature. I +have known brave men of that sort. I could name some splendid +examples of men who, as representatives of the people, demanded +<a name="Page_131" id="Page_131"></a>to be told by the chairman of +the committee why the bill was not reported, and who, when they +could not find out from him, investigated and found out for +themselves and brought the bill out by threatening to tell the +reason on the floor of the House.</p> +<p>Those are private processes. Those are processes which stand +between the people and the things that are promised them, and I say +that until you drive all of those things into the open, you are not +connected with your government; you are not represented; you are +not participants in your government. Such a scheme of government by +private understanding deprives you of representation, deprives the +people of representative institutions. It has got to be put into +the heads of legislators that public business is public business. I +hold the opinion that there can be no confidences as against the +people with respect to their government, and that it is the duty of +every public officer to explain to his fellow-citizens whenever he +gets a chance,—explain exactly what is going on inside of his +own office.</p> +<p><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132"></a>There is no air so +wholesome as the air of utter publicity.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>There are other tracts of modern life where jungles have grown +up that must be cut down. Take, for example, the entirely +illegitimate extensions made of the idea of private property for +the benefit of modern corporations and trusts. A modern joint stock +corporation cannot in any proper sense be said to base its rights +and powers upon the principles of private property. Its powers are +wholly derived from legislation. It possesses them for the +convenience of business at the sufferance of the public. Its stock +is widely owned, passes from hand to hand, brings multitudes of men +into its shifting partnerships and connects it with the interests +and the investments of whole communities. It is a segment of the +public; bears no analogy to a partnership or to the processes by +which private property is safeguarded and managed, and should not +be suffered to afford any covert whatever to those who are managing +it. Its management is of public and general concern, <a name= +"Page_133" id="Page_133"></a>is in a very proper sense everybody's +business. The business of many of those corporations which we call +public-service corporations, and which are indispensable to our +daily lives and serve us with transportation and light and water +and power,—their business, for instance, is clearly public +business; and, therefore, we can and must penetrate their affairs +by the light of examination and discussion.</p> +<p>In New Jersey the people have realized this for a long time, and +a year or two ago we got our ideas on the subject enacted into +legislation. The corporations involved opposed the legislation with +all their might. They talked about ruin,—and I really believe +they did think they would be somewhat injured. But they have not +been. And I hear I cannot tell you how many men in New Jersey say: +"Governor, we were opposed to you; we did not believe in the things +you wanted to do, but now that you have done them, we take off our +hats. That was the thing to do, it did not hurt us a bit; it just +put us on a normal footing; it took away <a name="Page_134" id= +"Page_134"></a>suspicion from our business." New Jersey, having +taken the cold plunge, cries out to the rest of the states, "Come +on in! The water's fine!" I wonder whether these men who are +controlling the government of the United States realize how they +are creating every year a thickening atmosphere of suspicion, in +which presently they will find that business cannot breathe?</p> +<p>So I take it to be a necessity of the hour to open up all the +processes of politics and of public business,—open them wide +to public view; to make them accessible to every force that moves, +every opinion that prevails in the thought of the people; to give +society command of its own economic life again, not by +revolutionary measures, but by a steady application of the +principle that the people have a right to look into such matters +and to control them; to cut all privileges and patronage and +private advantage and secret enjoyment out of legislation.</p> +<p>Wherever any public business is transacted, wherever plans +affecting the public are laid, <a name="Page_135" id= +"Page_135"></a>or enterprises touching the public welfare, comfort, +or convenience go forward, wherever political programs are +formulated, or candidates agreed on,—over that place a voice +must speak, with the divine prerogative of a people's will, the +words: "Let there be light!"</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="VII" id="VII"></a><a name="Page_136" id= +"Page_136"></a>VII</h2> +<h2>THE TARIFF—"PROTECTION," OR SPECIAL PRIVILEGE?</h2> +<p>Every business question, in this country, comes back, sooner or +later, to the question of the tariff. You cannot escape from it, no +matter in which direction you go. The tariff is situated in +relation to other questions like Boston Common in the old +arrangement of that interesting city. I remember seeing once, in +<i>Life</i>, a picture of a man standing at the door of one of the +railway stations in Boston and inquiring of a Bostonian the way to +the Common. "Take any of these streets," was the reply, "in either +direction." Now, as the Common was related to the winding streets +of Boston, so the tariff question is related to the economic +questions of our day. Take any direction and you will sooner or +later get to the Common. And, in discussing the <a name="Page_137" +id="Page_137"></a>tariff you may start at the centre and go in any +direction you please.</p> +<p>Let us illustrate by standing at the centre, the Common itself. +As far back as 1828, when they knew nothing about "practical +politics" as compared with what we know now, a tariff bill was +passed which was called the "Tariff of Abominations," because it +had no beginning nor end nor plan. It had no traceable pattern in +it. It was as if the demands of everybody in the United States had +all been thrown indiscriminately into one basket and that basket +presented as a piece of legislation. It had been a general scramble +and everybody who scrambled hard enough had been taken care of in +the schedules resulting. It was an abominable thing to the +thoughtful men of that day, because no man guided it, shaped it, or +tried to make an equitable system out of it. That was bad enough, +but at least everybody had an open door through which to scramble +for his advantage. It was a go-as-you-please, free-for-all +struggle, and anybody who could get to Washington and say he +represented an impor<a name="Page_138" id="Page_138"></a>tant +business interest could be heard by the Committee on Ways and +Means.</p> +<p>We have a very different state of affairs now. The Committee on +Ways and Means and the Finance Committee of the Senate in these +sophisticated days have come to discriminate by long experience +among the persons whose counsel they are to take in respect of +tariff legislation. There has been substituted for the unschooled +body of citizens that used to clamor at the doors of the Finance +Committee and the Committee on Ways and Means, one of the most +interesting and able bodies of expert lobbyists that has ever been +developed in the experience of any country,—men who know so +much about the matters they are talking of that you cannot put your +knowledge into competition with theirs. They so overwhelm you with +their familiarity with detail that you cannot discover wherein +their scheme lies. They suggest the change of an innocent fraction +in a particular schedule and explain it to you so plausibly that +you cannot see that it means millions of dollars additional from +the consumers of this country.<a name="Page_139" id="Page_139"></a> +They propose, for example, to put the carbon for electric lights in +two-foot pieces instead of one-foot pieces,—and you do not +see where you are getting sold, because you are not an expert. If +you will get some expert to go through the schedules of the present +Payne-Aldrich tariff, you will find a "nigger" concealed in almost +every woodpile,—some little word, some little clause, some +unsuspected item, that draws thousands of dollars out of the +pockets of the consumer and yet does not seem to mean anything in +particular. They have calculated the whole thing beforehand; they +have analyzed the whole detail and consequence, each one in his +specialty. With the tariff specialist the average business man has +no possibility of competition. Instead of the old scramble, which +was bad enough, we get the present expert control of the tariff +schedules. Thus the relation between business and government +becomes, not a matter of the exposure of all the sensitive parts of +the government to all the active parts of the people, but the +special impression upon them<a name="Page_140" id="Page_140"></a> +of a particular organized force in the business world.</p> +<p>Furthermore, every expedient and device of secrecy is brought +into use to keep the public unaware of the arguments of the high +protectionists, and ignorant of the facts which refute them; and +uninformed of the intentions of the framers of the proposed +legislation. It is notorious, even, that many members of the +Finance Committee of the Senate did not know the significance of +the tariff schedules which were reported in the present tariff bill +to the Senate, and that members of the Senate who asked Mr. Aldrich +direct questions were refused the information they sought; +sometimes, I dare say, because he could not give it, and sometimes, +I venture to say, because disclosure of the information would have +embarrassed the passage of the measure. There were essential +papers, moreover, which could not be got at.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Take that very interesting matter, that will-o'-the-wisp, known +as "the cost of production." It is hard for any man who has ever +studied<a name="Page_141" id="Page_141"></a> economics at all to +restrain a cynical smile when he is told that an intelligent group +of his fellow-citizens are looking for "the cost of production" as +a basis for tariff legislation. It is not the same in any one +factory for two years together. It is not the same in one industry +from one season to another. It is not the same in one country at +two different epochs. It is constantly eluding your grasp. It +nowhere exists, as a scientific, demonstrable fact. But, in order +to carry out the pretences of the "protective" program, it was +necessary to go through the motions of finding out what it was. I +am credibly informed that the government of the United States +requested several foreign governments, among others the government +of Germany, to supply it with as reliable figures as possible +concerning the cost of producing certain articles corresponding +with those produced in the United States. The German government put +the matter into the hands of certain of her manufacturers, who sent +in just as complete answers as they could procure from their books. +The information reached our gov<a name="Page_142" id= +"Page_142"></a>ernment during the course of the debate on the +Payne-Aldrich Bill and was transmitted,—for the bill by that +time had reached the Senate,—to the Finance Committee of the +Senate. But I am told,—and I have no reason to doubt +it,—that it never came out of the pigeonholes of the +committee. I don't know, and that committee doesn't know, what the +information it contained was. When Mr. Aldrich was asked about it, +he first said it was not an official report from the German +government. Afterward he intimated that it was an impudent attempt +on the part of the German government to interfere with tariff +legislation in the United States. But he never said what the cost +of production disclosed by it was. If he had, it is more than +likely that some of the schedules would have been shown to be +entirely unjustifiable.</p> +<p>Such instances show you just where the centre of gravity +is,—and it is a matter of gravity indeed, for it is a very +grave matter! It lay during the last Congress in the one person who +was the accomplished intermediary be<a name="Page_143" id= +"Page_143"></a>tween the expert lobbyists and the legislation of +Congress. I am not saying this in derogation of the character of +Mr. Aldrich. It is no concern of mine what kind of man Mr. Aldrich +is; now, particularly, when he has retired from public life, is it +a matter of indifference. The point is that he, because of his long +experience, his long handling of these delicate and private +matters, was the usual and natural instrument by which the Congress +of the United States informed itself, not as to the wishes of the +people of the United States or of the rank and file of business men +of the country, but as to the needs and arguments of the experts +who came to arrange matters with the committees.</p> +<p>The moral of the whole matter is this: The business of the +United States is not as a whole in contact with the government of +the United States. So soon as it is, the matters which now give +you, and justly give you, cause for uneasiness will disappear. Just +so soon as the business of this country has general, free, welcome +access to the councils of Congress, all the<a name="Page_144" id= +"Page_144"></a> friction between business and politics will +disappear.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>The tariff question is not the question that it was fifteen or +twenty or thirty years ago. It used to be said by the advocates of +the tariff that it made no difference even if there were a great +wall separating us from the commerce of the world, because inside +the United States there was so enormous an area of absolute free +trade that competition within the country kept prices down to a +normal level; that so long as one state could compete with all the +others in the United States, and all the others compete with it, +there would be only that kind of advantage gained which is gained +by superior brain, superior economy, the better plant, the better +administration; all of the things that have made America supreme, +and kept prices in America down, because American genius was +competing with American genius. I must add that so long as that was +true, there was much to be said in defence of the protective +tariff.</p> +<p>But the point now is that the protective tariff<a name= +"Page_145" id="Page_145"></a> has been taken advantage of by some +men to destroy domestic competition, to combine all existing rivals +within our free-trade area, and to make it impossible for new men +to come into the field. Under the high tariff there has been formed +a network of factories which in their connection dominate the +market of the United States and establish their own prices. +Whereas, therefore, it was once arguable that the high tariff did +not create the high cost of living, it is now no longer arguable +that these combinations do not,—not by reason of the tariff, +but by reason of their combination under the tariff,—settle +what prices shall be paid; settle how much the product shall be; +and settle, moreover, what shall be the market for labor.</p> +<p>The "protective" policy, as we hear it proclaimed to-day, bears +no relation to the original doctrine enunciated by Webster and +Clay. The "infant industries," which those statesmen desired to +encourage, have grown up and grown gray, but they have always had +new arguments for special favors. Their demands have gone far +beyond what they dared ask for in the days<a name="Page_146" id= +"Page_146"></a> of Mr. Blaine and Mr. McKinley, though both those +apostles of "protection" were, before they died, ready to confess +that the time had even then come to call a halt on the claims of +the subsidized industries. William McKinley, before he died, showed +symptoms of adjustment to the new age such as his successors have +not exhibited. You remember what the utterances of Mr. McKinley's +last month were with regard to the policy with which his name is +particularly identified; I mean the policy of "protection." You +remember how he joined in opinion with what Mr. Blaine before him +had said—namely, that we had devoted the country to a policy +which, too rigidly persisted in, was proving a policy of +restriction; and that we must look forward to a time that ought to +come very soon when we should enter into reciprocal relations of +trade with all the countries of the world. This was another way of +saying that we must substitute elasticity for rigidity; that we +must substitute trade for closed ports. McKinley saw what his +successors did not see. He saw that we had made for ourselves a +strait-jacket.</p> +<p><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147"></a>When I reflect upon the +"protective" policy of this country, and observe that it is the +later aspects and the later uses of that policy which have built up +trusts and monopoly in the United States, I make this contrast in +my thought: Mr. McKinley had already uttered his protest against +what he foresaw; his successor saw what McKinley had only foreseen, +but he took no action. His successor saw those very special +privileges, which Mr. McKinley himself began to suspect, used by +the men who had obtained them to build up a monopoly for +themselves, making freedom of enterprise in this country more and +more difficult. I am one of those who have the utmost confidence +that Mr. McKinley would not have sanctioned the later developments +of the policy with which his name stands identified.</p> +<p>What is the present tariff policy of the protectionists? It is +not the ancient protective policy to which I would give all due +credit, but an entirely new doctrine. I ask anybody who is +interested in the history of high "protective" tariffs to compare +the latest platforms of the<a name="Page_148" id="Page_148"></a> +two "protective" tariff parties with the old doctrine. Men have +been struck, students of this matter, by an entirely new departure. +The new doctrine of the protectionist is that the tariff should +represent the difference between the cost of production in America +and the cost of production in other countries, <i>plus</i> a +reasonable profit to those who are engaged in industry. This is the +new part of the protective doctrine: "<i>plus</i> a reasonable +profit." It openly guarantees profit to the men who come and ask +favors of Congress. The old idea of a protective tariff was +designed to keep American industries alive and, therefore, keep +American labor employed. But the favors of protection have become +so permanent that this is what has happened: Men, seeing that they +need not fear foreign competition, have drawn together in great +combinations. These combinations include factories (if it is a +combination of factories) of all grades: old factories and new +factories, factories with antiquated machinery and factories with +brand-new machinery; factories that are economically and factories +that are not economically admin<a name="Page_149" id= +"Page_149"></a>istered; factories that have been long in the +family, which have been allowed to run down, and factories with all +the new modern inventions. As soon as the combination is effected +the less efficient factories are generally put out of operation. +But the stock issued in payment for them has to pay dividends. And +the United States government guarantees profit on investment in +factories that have gone out of business. As soon as these +combinations see prices falling they reduce the hours of labor, +they reduce production, they reduce wages, they throw men out of +employment,—in order to do what? In order to keep the prices +up in spite of their lack of efficiency.</p> +<p>There may have been a time when the tariff did not raise prices, +but that time is past; the tariff is now taken advantage of by the +great combinations in such a way as to give them control of prices. +These things do not happen by chance. It does not happen by chance +that prices are and have been rising faster here than in any other +country. That river that divides us from Canada divides us from +much cheaper<a name="Page_150" id="Page_150"></a> living, +notwithstanding that the Canadian Parliament levies duties on +importations.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>But "Ah!" exclaim those who do not understand what is going on; +"you will ruin the country with your free trade!" Who said free +trade? Who proposed free trade? You can't have free trade in the +United States, because the government of the United States is of +necessity, with our present division of the field of taxation +between the federal and state governments, supported in large part +by the duties collected at the ports. I should like to ask some +gentlemen if very much is collected in the way of duties at the +ports under the particular tariff schedules under which they +operate. Some of the duties are practically prohibitive, and there +is no tariff to be got from them.</p> +<p>When you buy an imported article, you pay a part of the price to +the Federal government in the form of customs duty. But, as a rule, +what you buy is, not the imported article, but a domestic article, +the price of which the manufacturer has been able to raise to a +point equal<a name="Page_151" id="Page_151"></a> to, or higher +than, the price of the foreign article <i>plus the duty</i>. But +who gets the tariff tax in this case? The government? Oh, no; not +at all. The manufacturer. The American manufacturer, who says that +while he can't sell goods as low as the foreign manufacturer, all +good Americans ought to buy of him and pay him a tax on every +article for the privilege. Perhaps we ought. The original idea was +that, when he was just starting and needed support, we ought to buy +of him, even if we had to pay a higher price, till he could get on +his feet. Now it is said that we ought to buy of him and pay him a +price 15 to 120 per cent. higher than we need pay the foreign +manufacturer, even if he is a six-foot, bearded "infant," because +the cost of production is necessarily higher here than anywhere +else. I don't know why it should be. The American workingman used +to be able to do so much more and better work than the foreigner +that that more than compensated for his higher wages and made him a +good bargain at any wage.</p> +<p>Of course, if we are going to agree to give any<a name= +"Page_152" id="Page_152"></a> fellow-citizen who takes a notion to +go into some business or other for which the country is not +especially adapted,—if we are going to give him a bonus on +every article he produces big enough to make up for the handicap he +labors under because of some natural reason or other,—why, we +may indeed gloriously diversify our industries, but we shall beggar +ourselves. On this principle, we shall have in Connecticut, or +Michigan, or somewhere else, miles of hothouses in which thousands +of happy American workingmen, with full dinner-pails, will be +raising bananas,—to be sold at a quarter apiece. Some foolish +person, a benighted Democrat like as not, might timidly suggest +that bananas were a greater public blessing when they came from +Jamaica and were three for a nickel, but what patriotic citizen +would listen for a moment to the criticisms of a person without any +conception of the beauty and glory of the great American banana +industry, without realization of the proud significance of the fact +that Old Glory floats over the biggest banana hothouses in the +world!</p> +<p><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153"></a>But that is a matter on one +side. What I am trying to point out to you now is that this +"protective" tariff, so-called, has become a means of fostering the +growth of particular groups of industry at the expense of the +economic vitality of the rest of the country. What the people now +propose is a very practical thing indeed: They propose to unearth +these special privileges and to cut them out of the tariff. They +propose not to leave a single concealed private advantage in the +statutes concerning the duties that can possibly be eradicated +without affecting the part of the business that is sound and +legitimate and which we all wish to see promoted.</p> +<p>Some men talk as if the tariff-reformers, as if the Democrats, +weren't part of the United States. I met a lady the other day, not +an elderly lady, who said to me with pride: "Why, I have been a +Democrat ever since they hunted them with dogs." And you would +really suppose, to hear some men talk, that Democrats were outlaws +and did not share the life of the United States. Why, Democrats +constitute <a name="Page_154" id="Page_154"></a>nearly one half the +voters of this country. They are engaged in all sorts of +enterprises, big and little. There isn't a walk of life or a kind +of occupation in which you won't find them; and, as a Philadelphia +paper very wittily said the other day, they can't commit economic +murder without committing economic suicide. Do you suppose, +therefore, that half of the population of the United States is +going about to destroy the very foundations of our economic life by +simply running amuck amidst the schedules of the tariff? Some of +the schedules are so tough that they wouldn't be hurt, if it did. +But that isn't the program, and anybody who says that it is simply +doesn't understand the situation at all. All that the +tariff-reformers claim is this: that the partnership ought to be +bigger than it is. Just because there are so many of them, they +know how many are outside. And let me tell you, just as many +Republicans are outside. The only thing I have against my +protectionist fellow-citizens is that they have allowed themselves +to be imposed upon so many years. Think of saying that the +"protective"<a name="Page_155" id="Page_155"></a> tariff is for the +benefit of the workingman, in the presence of all those facts that +have just been disclosed in Lawrence, Mass., where the worst +schedule of all—"Schedule K"—operates to keep men on +wages on which they cannot live. Why, the audacity, the impudence, +of the claim is what strikes one; and in face of the fact that the +workingmen of this country who are in unprotected industries are +better paid than those who are in "protected" industries; at any +rate, in the conspicuous industries! The Steel schedule, I dare +say, is rather satisfactory to those who manufacture steel, but is +it satisfactory to those who make the steel with their own tired +hands? Don't you know that there are mills in which men are made to +work seven days in the week for twelve hours a day, and in the +three hundred and sixty-five weary days of the year can't make +enough to pay their bills? And this in one of the giants among our +industries, one of the undertakings which have thriven to gigantic +size upon this very system.</p> +<p>Ah, the whole mass of the fraud is falling <a name="Page_156" +id="Page_156"></a>away, and men are beginning to see disclosed +little groups of persons maintaining a control over the dominant +party and through the dominant party over the government, in their +own interest, and not in the interest of the people of the United +States!</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Let me repeat: There cannot be free trade in the United States +so long as the established fiscal policy of the federal government +is maintained. The federal government has chosen throughout all the +generations that have preceded us to maintain itself chiefly on +indirect instead of direct taxation. I dare say we shall never see +a time when it can alter that policy in any substantial degree; and +there is no Democrat of thoughtfulness that I have met who +contemplates a program of free trade.</p> +<p>But what we intend to do, what the House of Representatives has +been attempting to do and will attempt to do again, and succeed in +doing, is to weed this garden that we have been cultivating. +Because, if we have been laying at the roots of our industrial +enterprises this <a name="Page_157" id="Page_157"></a>fertilization +of protection, if we have been stimulating it by this policy, we +have found that the stimulation was not equal in respect of all the +growths in the garden, and that there are some growths, which every +man can distinguish with the naked eye, which have so overtopped +the rest, which have so thrown the rest into destroying shadow, +that it is impossible for the industries of the United States as a +whole to prosper under their blighting shade. In other words, we +have found out that this that professes to be a process of +protection has become a process of favoritism, and that the +favorites of this policy have flourished at the expense of all the +rest. And now we are going into this garden and weed it. We are +going into this garden and give the little plants air and light in +which to grow. We are going to pull up every root that has so +spread itself as to draw the nutriment of the soil from the other +roots. We are going in there to see to it that the fertilization of +intelligence, of invention, of origination, is once more applied to +a set of industries now threatening to be stagnant, be<a name= +"Page_158" id="Page_158"></a>cause threatening to be too much +concentrated. The policy of freeing the country from the +restrictive tariff will so variegate and multiply the undertakings +in the country that there will be a wider market and a greater +competition for labor; it will let the sun shine through the clouds +again as once it shone on the free, independent, unpatronized +intelligence and energy of a great people.</p> +<p>One of the counts of the indictment against the so-called +"protective" tariff is that it has robbed Americans of their +independence, resourcefulness, and self-reliance. Our industry has +grown invertebrate, cowardly, dependent on government aid. When I +hear the argument of some of the biggest business men in this +country, that if you took the "protection" of the tariff off they +would be overcome by the competition of the world, I ask where and +when it happened that the boasted genius of America became afraid +to go out into the open and compete with the world? Are we +children, are we wards, are we still such puerile infants that we +have to be fed out of a bottle? Isn't <a name="Page_159" id= +"Page_159"></a>it true that we know how to make steel in America +better than anybody else in the world? Yet they say, "For Heaven's +sake don't expose us to the chill of prices coming from any other +quarter of the globe." Mind you, we can compete with those prices. +Steel is sold abroad, steel made in America is sold abroad in many +of its forms, much cheaper than it is sold in America. It is so +hard for people to get that into their heads!</p> +<p>We set up a kindergarten in New York. We called it the Chamber +of Horrors. We exhibited there a great many things manufactured in +the United States, with the prices at which they were sold in the +United States, and the prices at which they were sold outside of +the United States, marked on them. If you tell a woman that she can +buy a sewing machine for eighteen dollars in Mexico that she has to +pay thirty dollars for in the United States, she will not heed it +or she will forget it unless you take her and show her the machine +with the price marked on it. My very distinguished friend, Senator +Gore, of Oklahoma, made this interesting pro<a name="Page_160" id= +"Page_160"></a>posal: that we should pass a law that every piece of +goods sold in the United States should have on it a label bearing +the price at which it sells under the tariff and the price at which +it would sell if there were no tariff, and then the Senator +suggests that we have a very easy solution for the tariff question. +He does not want to oblige that great body of our fellow-citizens +who have a conscientious belief in "protection" to turn away from +it. He proposes that everybody who believes in the "protective" +tariff should pay it and the rest of us should not; if they want to +subscribe, it is open to them to subscribe.</p> +<p>As for the rest of us, the time is coming when we shall not have +to subscribe. The people of this land have made up their minds to +cut all privilege and patronage out of our fiscal legislation, +particularly out of that part of it which affects the tariff. We +have come to recognize in the tariff as it is now constructed, not +a system of protection, but a system of favoritism, of privilege, +too often granted secretly and by subterfuge, instead of openly and +<a name="Page_161" id="Page_161"></a>frankly and legitimately, and +we have determined to put an end to the whole bad business, not by +hasty and drastic changes, but by the adoption of an entirely new +principle,—by the reformation of the whole purpose of +legislation of that kind. We mean that our tariff legislation +henceforth shall have as its object, not private profit, but the +general public development and benefit. We shall make our fiscal +laws, not like those who dole out favors, but like those who serve +a nation. We are going to begin with those particular items where +we find special privilege intrenched. We know what those items are; +these gentlemen have been kind enough to point them out themselves. +What we are interested in first of all with regard to the tariff is +getting the grip of special interests off the throat of Congress. +We do not propose that special interests shall any longer camp in +the rooms of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House and the +Finance Committee of the Senate. We mean that those shall be places +where the people of the United States shall come and be +represented, in order <a name="Page_162" id="Page_162"></a>that +everything may be done in the general interest, and not in the +interest of particular groups of persons who already dominate the +industries and the industrial development of this country. Because +no matter how wise these gentlemen may be, no matter how patriotic, +no matter how singularly they may be gifted with the power to +divine the right courses of business, there isn't any group of men +in the United States or in any other country who are wise enough to +have the destinies of a great people put into their hands as +trustees. We mean that business in this land shall be released, +emancipated.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="VIII" id="VIII"></a><a name="Page_163" id= +"Page_163"></a>VIII</h2> +<h2>MONOPOLY, OR OPPORTUNITY?</h2> +<p>Gentlemen say, they have been saying for a long time, and, +therefore, I assume that they believe, that trusts are inevitable. +They don't say that big business is inevitable. They don't say +merely that the elaboration of business upon a great co-operative +scale is characteristic of our time and has come about by the +natural operation of modern civilization. We would admit that. But +they say that the particular kind of combinations that are now +controlling our economic development came into existence naturally +and were inevitable; and that, therefore, we have to accept them as +unavoidable and administer our development through them. They take +the analogy of the railways. The railways were clearly inevitable +if we were to have transportation, but railways after they are once +built stay <a name="Page_164" id="Page_164"></a>put. You can't +transfer a railroad at convenience; and you can't shut up one part +of it and work another part. It is in the nature of what +economists, those tedious persons, call natural monopolies; simply +because the whole circumstances of their use are so stiff that you +can't alter them. Such are the analogies which these gentlemen +choose when they discuss the modern trust.</p> +<p>I admit the popularity of the theory that the trusts have come +about through the natural development of business conditions in the +United States, and that it is a mistake to try to oppose the +processes by which they have been built up, because those processes +belong to the very nature of business in our time, and that +therefore the only thing we can do, and the only thing we ought to +attempt to do, is to accept them as inevitable arrangements and +make the best out of it that we can by regulation.</p> +<p>I answer, nevertheless, that this attitude rests upon a +confusion of thought. Big business is no doubt to a large extent +necessary and natural. The development of business <a name= +"Page_165" id="Page_165"></a>upon a great scale, upon a great scale +of co-operation, is inevitable, and, let me add, is probably +desirable. But that is a very different matter from the development +of trusts, because the trusts have not grown. They have been +artificially created; they have been put together, not by natural +processes, but by the will, the deliberate planning will, of men +who were more powerful than their neighbors in the business world, +and who wished to make their power secure against competition.</p> +<p>The trusts do not belong to the period of infant industries. +They are not the products of the time, that old laborious time, +when the great continent we live on was undeveloped, the young +nation struggling to find itself and get upon its feet amidst older +and more experienced competitors. They belong to a very recent and +very sophisticated age, when men knew what they wanted and knew how +to get it by the favor of the government.</p> +<p>Did you ever look into the way a trust was made? It is very +natural, in one sense, in the same sense in which human greed is +natural.<a name="Page_166" id="Page_166"></a> If I haven't +efficiency enough to beat my rivals, then the thing I am inclined +to do is to get together with my rivals and say: "Don't let's cut +each other's throats; let's combine and determine prices for +ourselves; determine the output, and thereby determine the prices: +and dominate and control the market." That is very natural. That +has been done ever since freebooting was established. That has been +done ever since power was used to establish control. The reason +that the masters of combination have sought to shut out competition +is that the basis of control under competition is brains and +efficiency. I admit that any large corporation built up by the +legitimate processes of business, by economy, by efficiency, is +natural; and I am not afraid of it, no matter how big it grows. It +can stay big only by doing its work more thoroughly than anybody +else. And there is a point of bigness,—as every business man +in this country knows, though some of them will not admit +it,—where you pass the limit of efficiency and get into the +region of clumsiness and unwieldiness. You can make <a name= +"Page_167" id="Page_167"></a>your combine so extensive that you +can't digest it into a single system; you can get so many parts +that you can't assemble them as you would an effective piece of +machinery. The point of efficiency is overstepped in the natural +process of development oftentimes, and it has been overstepped many +times in the artificial and deliberate formation of trusts.</p> +<p>A trust is formed in this way: a few gentlemen "promote" +it—that is to say, they get it up, being given enormous fees +for their kindness, which fees are loaded on to the undertaking in +the form of securities of one kind or another. The argument of the +promoters is, not that every one who comes into the combination can +carry on his business more efficiently than he did before; the +argument is: we will assign to you as your share in the pool twice, +three times, four times, or five times what you could have sold +your business for to an individual competitor who would have to run +it on an economic and competitive basis. We can afford to buy it at +such a figure because we are shutting out competition. We can +afford to make the stock <a name="Page_168" id="Page_168"></a>of +the combination half a dozen times what it naturally would be and +pay dividends on it, because there will be nobody to dispute the +prices we shall fix.</p> +<p>Talk of that as sound business? Talk of that as inevitable? It +is based upon nothing except power. It is not based upon +efficiency. It is no wonder that the big trusts are not prospering +in proportion to such competitors as they still have in such parts +of their business as competitors have access to; they are +prospering freely only in those fields to which competition has no +access. Read the statistics of the Steel Trust, if you don't +believe it. Read the statistics of any trust. They are constantly +nervous about competition, and they are constantly buying up new +competitors in order to narrow the field. The United States Steel +Corporation is gaining in its supremacy in the American market only +with regard to the cruder manufactures of iron and steel, but +wherever, as in the field of more advanced manufactures of iron and +steel, it has important competitors, its portion of the product is +not increasing, but is decreasing, <a name="Page_169" id= +"Page_169"></a>and its competitors, where they have a foothold, are +often more efficient than it is.</p> +<p>Why? Why, with unlimited capital and innumerable mines and +plants everywhere in the United States, can't they beat the other +fellows in the market? Partly because they are carrying too much. +Partly because they are unwieldy. Their organization is imperfect. +They bought up inefficient plants along with efficient, and they +have got to carry what they have paid for, even if they have to +shut some of the plants up in order to make any interest on their +investments; or, rather, not interest on their investments, because +that is an incorrect word,—on their alleged capitalization. +Here we have a lot of giants staggering along under an almost +intolerable weight of artificial burdens, which they have put on +their own backs, and constantly looking about lest some little +pigmy with a round stone in a sling may come out and slay them.</p> +<p>For my part, I want the pigmy to have a chance to come out. And +I foresee a time when the pigmies will be so much more athletic, so +<a name="Page_170" id="Page_170"></a>much more astute, so much more +active, than the giants, that it will be a case of Jack the +giant-killer. Just let some of the youngsters I know have a chance +and they'll give these gentlemen points. Lend them a little money. +They can't get any now. See to it that when they have got a local +market they can't be squeezed out of it. Give them a chance to +capture that market and then see them capture another one and +another one, until these men who are carrying an intolerable load +of artificial securities find that they have got to get down to +hard pan to keep their foothold at all. I am willing to let Jack +come into the field with the giant, and if Jack has the brains that +some Jacks that I know in America have, then I should like to see +the giant get the better of him, with the load that he, the giant, +has to carry,—the load of water. For I'll undertake to put a +water-logged giant out of business any time, if you will give me a +fair field and as much credit as I am entitled to, and let the law +do what from time immemorial law has been expected to do,—see +fair play.</p> +<p><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171"></a>As for watered stock, I +know all the sophistical arguments, and they are many, for +capitalizing earning capacity. It is a very attractive and +interesting argument, and in some instances it is legitimately +used. But there is a line you cross, above which you are not +capitalizing your earning capacity, but capitalizing your control +of the market, capitalizing the profits which you got by your +control of the market, and didn't get by efficiency and economy. +These things are not hidden even from the layman. These are not +half-hidden from college men. The college men's days of innocence +have passed, and their days of sophistication have come. They know +what is going on, because we live in a talkative world, full of +statistics, full of congressional inquiries, full of trials of +persons who have attempted to live independently of the statutes of +the United States; and so a great many things have come to light +under oath, which we must believe upon the credibility of the +witnesses who are, indeed, in many instances very eminent and +respectable witnesses.</p> +<p><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172"></a>I take my stand absolutely, +where every progressive ought to take his stand, on the proposition +that private monopoly is indefensible and intolerable. And there I +will fight my battle. And I know how to fight it. Everybody who has +even read the newspapers knows the means by which these men built +up their power and created these monopolies. Any decently equipped +lawyer can suggest to you statutes by which the whole business can +be stopped. What these gentlemen do not want is this: they do not +want to be compelled to meet all comers on equal terms. I am +perfectly willing that they should beat any competitor by fair +means; but I know the foul means they have adopted, and I know that +they can be stopped by law. If they think that coming into the +market upon the basis of mere efficiency, upon the mere basis of +knowing how to manufacture goods better than anybody else and to +sell them cheaper than anybody else, they can carry the immense +amount of water that they have put into their enterprises in order +to buy up rivals, then they are perfectly wel<a name="Page_173" id= +"Page_173"></a>come to try it. But there must be no squeezing out +of the beginner, no crippling his credit; no discrimination against +retailers who buy from a rival; no threats against concerns who +sell supplies to a rival; no holding back of raw material from him; +no secret arrangements against him. All the fair competition you +choose, but no unfair competition of any kind. And then when unfair +competition is eliminated, let us see these gentlemen carry their +tanks of water on their backs. All that I ask and all I shall fight +for is that they shall come into the field against merit and brains +everywhere. If they can beat other American brains, then they have +got the best brains.</p> +<p>But if you want to know how far brains go, as things now are, +suppose you try to match your better wares against these gentlemen, +and see them undersell you before your market is any bigger than +the locality and make it absolutely impossible for you to get a +fast foothold. If you want to know how brains count, originate some +invention which will improve the kind of machinery they are using, +and then see <a name="Page_174" id="Page_174"></a>if you can borrow +enough money to manufacture it. You may be offered something for +your patent by the corporation,—which will perhaps lock it up +in a safe and go on using the old machinery; but you will not be +allowed to manufacture. I know men who have tried it, and they +could not get the money, because the great money lenders of this +country are in the arrangement with the great manufacturers of this +country, and they do not propose to see their control of the market +interfered with by outsiders. And who are outsiders? Why, all the +rest of the people of the United States are outsiders.</p> +<p>They are rapidly making us outsiders with respect even of the +things that come from the bosom of the earth, and which belong to +us in a peculiar sense. Certain monopolies in this country have +gained almost complete control of the raw material, chiefly in the +mines, out of which the great body of manufactures are carried on, +and they now discriminate, when they will, in the sale of that raw +material between those who are rivals of the monopoly and those +<a name="Page_175" id="Page_175"></a>who submit to the monopoly. We +must soon come to the point where we shall say to the men who own +these essentials of industry that they have got to part with these +essentials by sale to all citizens of the United States with the +same readiness and upon the same terms. Or else we shall tie up the +resources of this country under private control in such fashion as +will make our independent development absolutely impossible.</p> +<p>There is another injustice that monopoly engages in. The trust +that deals in the cruder products which are to be transformed into +the more elaborate manufactures often will not sell these crude +products except upon the terms of monopoly,—that is to say, +the people that deal with them must buy exclusively from them. And +so again you have the lines of development tied up and the +connections of development knotted and fastened so that you cannot +wrench them apart.</p> +<p>Again, the manufacturing monopolies are so interlaced in their +personal relationships with the great shipping interests of this +country, <a name="Page_176" id="Page_176"></a>and with the great +railroads, that they can often largely determine the rates of +shipment.</p> +<p>The people of this country are being very subtly dealt with. You +know, of course, that, unless our Commerce Commissions are +absolutely sleepless, you can get rebates without calling them such +at all. The most complicated study I know of is the classification +of freight by the railway company. If I wanted to make a special +rate on a special thing, all I should have to do is to put it in a +special class in the freight classification, and the trick is done. +And when you reflect that the twenty-four men who control the +United States Steel Corporation, for example, are either presidents +or vice-presidents or directors in 55 per cent. of the railways of +the United States, reckoning by the valuation of those railroads +and the amount of their stock and bonds, you know just how close +the whole thing is knitted together in our industrial system, and +how great the temptation is. These twenty-four gentlemen administer +that corporation as if it belonged to them. The amazing thing to me +is that the people of the<a name="Page_177" id="Page_177"></a> +United States have not seen that the administration of a great +business like that is not a private affair; it is a public +affair.</p> +<p>I have been told by a great many men that the idea I have, that +by restoring competition you can restore industrial freedom, is +based upon a failure to observe the actual happenings of the last +decades in this country; because, they say, it is just free +competition that has made it possible for the big to crush the +little.</p> +<p>I reply, it is not free competition that has done that; it is +illicit competition. It is competition of the kind that the law +ought to stop, and can stop,—this crushing of the little +man.</p> +<p>You know, of course, how the little man is crushed by the +trusts. He gets a local market. The big concerns come in and +undersell him in his local market, and that is the only market he +has; if he cannot make a profit there, he is killed. They can make +a profit all through the rest of the Union, while they are +underselling him in his locality, and recouping themselves by what +they can earn elsewhere. Thus their competitors can be put out of +business, one by <a name="Page_178" id="Page_178"></a>one, wherever +they dare to show a head. Inasmuch as they rise up only one by one, +these big concerns can see to it that new competitors never come +into the larger field. You have to begin somewhere. You can't begin +in space. You can't begin in an airship. You have got to begin in +some community. Your market has got to be your neighbors first and +those who know you there. But unless you have unlimited capital +(which of course you wouldn't have when you were beginning) or +unlimited credit (which these gentlemen can see to it that you +shan't get), they can kill you out in your local market any time +they try, on the same basis exactly as that on which they beat +organized labor; for they can sell at a loss in your market because +they are selling at a profit everywhere else, and they can recoup +the losses by which they beat you by the profits which they make in +fields where they have beaten other fellows and put them out. If +ever a competitor who by good luck has plenty of money does break +into the wider market, then the trust has to buy him out, paying +three or four times <a name="Page_179" id="Page_179"></a>what the +business is worth. Following such a purchase it has got to pay the +interest on the price it has paid for the business, and it has got +to tax the whole people of the United States, in order to pay the +interest on what it borrowed to do that, or on the stocks and bonds +it issued to do it with. Therefore the big trusts, the big +combinations, are the most wasteful, the most uneconomical, and, +after they pass a certain size, the most inefficient, way of +conducting the industries of this country.</p> +<p>A notable example is the way in which Mr. Carnegie was bought +out of the steel business. Mr. Carnegie could build better mills +and make better steel rails and make them cheaper than anybody else +connected with what afterward became the United States Steel +Corporation. They didn't dare leave him outside. He had so much +more brains in finding out the best processes; he had so much more +shrewdness in surrounding himself with the most successful +assistants; he knew so well when a young man who came into his +employ was fit for promotion <a name="Page_180" id= +"Page_180"></a>and was ripe to put at the head of some branch of +his business and was sure to make good, that he could undersell +every mother's son of them in the market for steel rails. And they +bought him out at a price that amounted to three or four +times,—I believe actually five times,—the estimated +value of his properties and of his business, because they couldn't +beat him in competition. And then in what they charged afterward +for their product,—the product of his mills +included,—they made us pay the interest on the four or five +times the difference.</p> +<p>That is the difference between a big business and a trust. A +trust is an arrangement to get rid of competition, and a big +business is a business that has survived competition by conquering +in the field of intelligence and economy. A trust does not bring +efficiency to the aid of business; it <i>buys efficiency out of +business</i>. I am for big business, and I am against the trusts. +Any man who can survive by his brains, any man who can put the +others out of the business by making the thing cheaper to the +consumer at the same time that he is increas<a name="Page_181" id= +"Page_181"></a>ing its intrinsic value and quality, I take off my +hat to, and I say: "You are the man who can build up the United +States, and I wish there were more of you."</p> +<p>There will not be more, unless we find a way to prevent +monopoly. You know perfectly well that a trust business staggering +under a capitalization many times too big is not a business that +can afford to admit competitors into the field; because the minute +an economical business, a business with its capital down to hard +pan, with every ounce of its capital working, comes into the field +against such an overloaded corporation, it will inevitably beat it +and undersell it; therefore it is to the interest of these +gentlemen that monopoly be maintained. They cannot rule the markets +of the world in any way but by monopoly. It is not surprising to +find them helping to found a new party with a fine program of +benevolence, but also with a tolerant acceptance of monopoly.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>There is another matter to which we must direct our attention, +whether we like or not.<a name="Page_182" id="Page_182"></a> I do +not take these things into my mouth because they please my palate; +I do not talk about them because I want to attack anybody or upset +anything; I talk about them because only by open speech about them +among ourselves shall we learn what the facts are.</p> +<p>You will notice from a recent investigation that things like +this take place: A certain bank invests in certain securities. It +appears from evidence that the handling of these securities was +very intimately connected with the maintenance of the price of a +particular commodity. Nobody ought, and in normal circumstances +nobody would, for a moment think of suspecting the managers of a +great bank of making such an investment in order to help those who +were conducting a particular business in the United States maintain +the price of their commodity; but the circumstances are not normal. +It is beginning to be believed that in the big business of this +country nothing is disconnected from anything else. I do not mean +in this particular instance to which I have referred, and I do not +have in mind to draw any inference at all, <a name="Page_183" id= +"Page_183"></a>for that would be unjust; but take any investment of +an industrial character by a great bank. It is known that the +directorate of that bank interlaces in personnel with ten, twenty, +thirty, forty, fifty, sixty boards of directors of all sorts, of +railroads which handle commodities, of great groups of +manufacturers which manufacture commodities, and of great merchants +who distribute commodities; and the result is that every great bank +is under suspicion with regard to the motive of its investments. It +is at least considered possible that it is playing the game of +somebody who has nothing to do with banking, but with whom some of +its directors are connected and joined in interest. The ground of +unrest and uneasiness, in short, on the part of the public at +large, is the growing knowledge that many large undertakings are +interlaced with one another, are indistinguishable from one another +in personnel.</p> +<p>Therefore, when a small group of men approach Congress in order +to induce the committee concerned to concur in certain legislation, +nobody knows the ramifications of the interests <a name="Page_184" +id="Page_184"></a>which those men represent; there seems no frank +and open action of public opinion in public counsel, but every man +is suspected of representing some other man and it is not known +where his connections begin or end.</p> +<p>I am one of those who have been so fortunately circumstanced +that I have had the opportunity to study the way in which these +things come about in complete disconnection from them, and I do not +suspect that any man has deliberately planned the system. I am not +so uninstructed and misinformed as to suppose that there is a +deliberate and malevolent combination somewhere to dominate the +government of the United States. I merely say that, by certain +processes, now well known, and perhaps natural in themselves, there +has come about an extraordinary and very sinister concentration in +the control of business in the country.</p> +<p>However it has come about, it is more important still that the +control of credit also has become dangerously centralized. It is +the mere truth to say that the financial resources of the <a name= +"Page_185" id="Page_185"></a>country are not at the command of +those who do not submit to the direction and domination of small +groups of capitalists who wish to keep the economic development of +the country under their own eye and guidance. The great monopoly in +this country is the monopoly of big credits. So long as that +exists, our old variety and freedom and individual energy of +development are out of the question. A great industrial nation is +controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is +privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and +all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their +action be honest and intended for the public interest, are +necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their +own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their +own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic +freedom. This is the greatest question of all, and to this +statesmen must address themselves with an earnest determination to +serve the long future and the true liberties of men.</p> +<p>This money trust, or, as it should be more <a name="Page_186" +id="Page_186"></a>properly called, this credit trust, of which +Congress has begun an investigation, is no myth; it is no imaginary +thing. It is not an ordinary trust like another. It doesn't do +business every day. It does business only when there is occasion to +do business. You can sometimes do something large when it isn't +watching, but when it is watching, you can't do much. And I have +seen men squeezed by it; I have seen men who, as they themselves +expressed it, were put "out of business by Wall Street," because +Wall Street found them inconvenient and didn't want their +competition.</p> +<p>Let me say again that I am not impugning the motives of the men +in Wall Street. They may think that that is the best way to create +prosperity for the country. When you have got the market in your +hand, does honesty oblige you to turn the palm upside down and +empty it? If you have got the market in your hand and believe that +you understand the interest of the country better than anybody +else, is it patriotic to let it go? I can imagine them using this +argument to themselves.</p> +<p><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187"></a>The dominating danger in +this land is not the existence of great individual +combinations,—that is dangerous enough in all +conscience,—but the combination of the combinations,—of +the railways, the manufacturing enterprises, the great mining +projects, the great enterprises for the development of the natural +water-powers of the country, threaded together in the personnel of +a series of boards of directors into a "community of interest" more +formidable than any conceivable single combination that dare appear +in the open.</p> +<p>The organization of business has become more centralized, vastly +more centralized, than the political organization of the country +itself. Corporations have come to cover greater areas than states; +have come to live under a greater variety of laws than the citizen +himself, have excelled states in their budgets and loomed bigger +than whole commonwealths in their influence over the lives and +fortunes of entire communities of men. Centralized business has +built up vast structures of organization and equipment which +overtop all states and seem <a name="Page_188" id="Page_188"></a>to +have no match or competitor except the federal government +itself.</p> +<p>What we have got to do,—and it is a colossal task not to +be undertaken with a light head or without judgment,—what we +have got to do is to disentangle this colossal "community of +interest." No matter how we may purpose dealing with a single +combination in restraint of trade, you will agree with me in this, +that no single, avowed, combination is big enough for the United +States to be afraid of; but when all the combinations are combined +and this final combination is not disclosed by any process of +incorporation or law, but is merely an identity of personnel, or of +interest, then there is something that even the government of the +nation itself might come to fear,—something for the law to +pull apart, and gently, but firmly and persistently, dissect.</p> +<p>You know that the chemist distinguishes between a chemical +combination and an amalgam. A chemical combination has done +something which I cannot scientifically describe, but its molecules +have become intimate with <a name="Page_189" id="Page_189"></a>one +another and have practically united, whereas an amalgam has a mere +physical union created by pressure from without. Now, you can +destroy that mere physical contact without hurting the individual +elements, and this community of interest is an amalgam; you can +break it up without hurting any one of the single interests +combined. Not that I am particularly delicate of some of the +interests combined,—I am not under bonds to be unduly polite +to them,—but I am interested in the business of the country, +and believe its integrity depends upon this dissection. I do not +believe any one group of men has vision enough or genius enough to +determine what the development of opportunity and the +accomplishment by achievement shall be in this country.</p> +<p>The facts of the situation amount to this: that a comparatively +small number of men control the raw material of this country; that +a comparatively small number of men control the water-powers that +can be made useful for the economical production of the energy to +drive our machinery; that that same number of men <a name= +"Page_190" id="Page_190"></a>largely control the railroads; that by +agreements handed around among themselves they control prices, and +that that same group of men control the larger credits of the +country.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>When we undertake the strategy which is going to be necessary to +overcome and destroy this far-reaching system of monopoly, we are +rescuing the business of this country, we are not injuring it; and +when we separate the interests from each other and dismember these +communities of connection, we have in mind a greater community of +interest, a vaster community of interest, the community of interest +that binds the virtues of all men together, that community of +mankind which is broad and catholic enough to take under the sweep +of its comprehension all sorts and conditions of men; that vision +which sees that no society is renewed from the top but that every +society is renewed from the bottom. Limit opportunity, restrict the +field of originative achievement, and you have cut out the heart +and root of all prosperity.</p> +<p><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191"></a>The only thing that can +ever make a free country is to keep a free and hopeful heart under +every jacket in it. Honest American industry has always thriven, +when it has thriven at all, on freedom; it has never thriven on +monopoly. It is a great deal better to shift for yourselves than to +be taken care of by a great combination of capital. I, for my part, +do not want to be taken care of. I would rather starve a free man +than be fed a mere thing at the caprice of those who are organizing +American industry as they please to organize it. I know, and every +man in his heart knows, that the only way to enrich America is to +make it possible for any man who has the brains to get into the +game. I am not jealous of the size of any business that has +<i>grown</i> to that size. I am not jealous of any process of +growth, no matter how huge the result, provided the result was +indeed obtained by the processes of wholesome development, which +are the processes of efficiency, of economy, of intelligence, and +of invention.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="IX" id="IX"></a><a name="Page_192" id= +"Page_192"></a>IX</h2> +<h2>BENEVOLENCE, OR JUSTICE?</h2> +<p>The doctrine that monopoly is inevitable and that the only +course open to the people of the United States is to submit to and +regulate it found a champion during the campaign of 1912 in the new +party, or branch of the Republican party, founded under the +leadership of Mr. Roosevelt, with the conspicuous aid,—I +mention him with no satirical intention, but merely to set the +facts down accurately,—of Mr. George W. Perkins, organizer of +the Steel Trust and the Harvester Trust, and with the support of +more than three millions of citizens, many of them among the most +patriotic, conscientious and high-minded men and women of the land. +The fact that its acceptance of monopoly was a feature of the new +party platform from which the attention of the generous and just +was diverted by the <a name="Page_193" id="Page_193"></a>charm of a +social program of great attractiveness to all concerned for the +amelioration of the lot of those who suffer wrong and privation, +and the further fact that, even so, the platform was repudiated by +the majority of the nation, render it no less necessary to reflect +on the significance of the confession made for the first time by +any party in the country's history. It may be useful, in order to +the relief of the minds of many from an error of no small +magnitude, to consider now, the heat of a presidential contest +being past, exactly what it was that Mr. Roosevelt proposed.</p> +<p>Mr. Roosevelt attached to his platform some very splendid +suggestions as to noble enterprises which we ought to undertake for +the uplift of the human race; but when I hear an ambitious platform +put forth, I am very much more interested in the dynamics of it +than in the rhetoric of it. I have a very practical mind, and I +want to know who are going to do those things and how they are +going to be done. If you have read the trust plank in that platform +as often as I have read it, you have found it very <a name= +"Page_194" id="Page_194"></a>long, but very tolerant. It did not +anywhere condemn monopoly, except in words; its essential meaning +was that the trusts have been bad and must be made to be good. You +know that Mr. Roosevelt long ago classified trusts for us as good +and bad, and he said that he was afraid only of the bad ones. Now +he does not desire that there should be any more bad ones, but +proposes that they should all be made good by discipline, directly +applied by a commission of executive appointment. All he explicitly +complains of is lack of publicity and lack of fairness; not the +exercise of power, for throughout that plank the power of the great +corporations is accepted as the inevitable consequence of the +modern organization of industry. All that it is proposed to do is +to take them under control and regulation. The national +administration having for sixteen years been virtually under the +regulation of the trusts, it would be merely a family matter were +the parts reversed and were the other members of the family to +exercise the regulation. And the trusts, apparently, which might, +in such circumstances, comfortably con<a name="Page_195" id= +"Page_195"></a>tinue to administer our affairs under the mollifying +influences of the federal government, would then, if you please, be +the instrumentalities by which all the humanistic, benevolent +program of the rest of that interesting platform would be carried +out!</p> +<p>I have read and reread that plank, so as to be sure that I get +it right. All that it complains of is,—and the complaint is a +just one, surely,—that these gentlemen exercise their power +in a way that is secret. Therefore, we must have publicity. +Sometimes they are arbitrary; therefore they need regulation. +Sometimes they do not consult the general interests of the +community; therefore they need to be reminded of those general +interests by an industrial commission. But at every turn it is the +trusts who are to do us good, and not we ourselves.</p> +<p>Again, I absolutely protest against being put into the hands of +trustees. Mr. Roosevelt's conception of government is Mr. Taft's +conception, that the Presidency of the United States is the +presidency of a board of directors. I am willing to admit that if +the people of the United<a name="Page_196" id="Page_196"></a> +States cannot get justice for themselves, then it is high time that +they should join the third party and get it from somebody else. The +justice proposed is very beautiful; it is very attractive; there +were planks in that platform which stir all the sympathies of the +heart; they proposed things that we all want to do; but the +question is, Who is going to do them? Through whose +instrumentality? Are Americans ready to ask the trusts to give us +in pity what we ought, in justice, to take?</p> +<p>The third party says that the present system of our industry and +trade has come to stay. Mind you, these artificially built up +things, these things that can't maintain themselves in the market +without monopoly, have come to stay, and the only thing that the +government can do, the only thing that the third party proposes +should be done, is to set up a commission to regulate them. It +accepts them. It says: "We will not undertake, it were futile to +undertake, to prevent monopoly, but we will go into an arrangement +by which we will make these monopolies kind to you. We will +guarantee <a name="Page_197" id="Page_197"></a>that they shall be +pitiful. We will guarantee that they shall pay the right wages. We +will guarantee that they shall do everything kind and +public-spirited, which they have never heretofore shown the least +inclination to do."</p> +<p>Don't you realize that that is a blind alley? You can't find +your way to liberty that way. You can't find your way to social +reform through the forces that have made social reform +necessary.</p> +<p>The fundamental part of such a program is that the trusts shall +be recognized as a permanent part of our economic order, and that +the government shall try to make trusts the ministers, the +instruments, through which the life of this country shall be justly +and happily developed on its industrial side. Now, everything that +touches our lives sooner or later goes back to the industries which +sustain our lives. I have often reflected that there is a very +human order in the petitions in our Lord's prayer. For we pray +first of all, "Give us this day our daily bread," knowing that it +is useless to pray for spiritual <a name="Page_198" id= +"Page_198"></a>graces on an empty stomach, and that the amount of +wages we get, the kind of clothes we wear, the kind of food we can +afford to buy, is fundamental to everything else.</p> +<p>Those who administer our physical life, therefore, administer +our spiritual life; and if we are going to carry out the fine +purpose of that great chorus which supporters of the third party +sang almost with religious fervor, then we have got to find out +through whom these purposes of humanity are going to be realized. +It is a mere enterprise, so far as that part of it is concerned, of +making the monopolies philanthropic.</p> +<p>I do not want to live under a philanthropy. I do not want to be +taken care of by the government, either directly, or by any +instruments through which the government is acting. I want only to +have right and justice prevail, so far as I am concerned. Give me +right and justice and I will undertake to take care of myself. If +you enthrone the trusts as the means of the development of this +country under the supervision of the government, then I shall pray +the old Spanish proverb, "God save me from my <a name="Page_199" +id="Page_199"></a>friends, and I'll take care of my enemies." +Because I want to be saved from these friends. Observe that I say +these friends, for I am ready to admit that a great many men who +believe that the development of industry in this country through +monopolies is inevitable intend to be the friends of the people. +Though they profess to be my friends, they are undertaking a way of +friendship which renders it impossible that they should do me the +fundamental service that I demand—namely, that I should be +free and should have the same opportunities that everybody else +has.</p> +<p>For I understand it to be the fundamental proposition of +American liberty that we do not desire special privilege, because +we know special privilege will never comprehend the general +welfare. This is the fundamental, spiritual difference between +adherents of the party now about to take charge of the government +and those who have been in charge of it in recent years. They are +so indoctrinated with the idea that only the big business interests +of this country understand the United States and can <a name= +"Page_200" id="Page_200"></a>make it prosperous that they cannot +divorce their thoughts from that obsession. They have put the +government into the hands of trustees, and Mr. Taft and Mr. +Roosevelt were the rival candidates to preside over the board of +trustees. They were candidates to serve the people, no doubt, to +the best of their ability, but it was not their idea to serve them +directly; they proposed to serve them indirectly through the +enormous forces already set up, which are so great that there is +almost an open question whether the government of the United States +with the people back of it is strong enough to overcome and rule +them.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Shall we try to get the grip of monopoly away from our lives, or +shall we not? Shall we withhold our hand and say monopoly is +inevitable, that all that we can do is to regulate it? Shall we say +that all that we can do is to put government in competition with +monopoly and try its strength against it? Shall we admit that the +creature of our own hands is stronger than we are? We have been +dreading all along the <a name="Page_201" id="Page_201"></a>time +when the combined power of high finance would be greater than the +power of the government. Have we come to a time when the President +of the United States or any man who wishes to be the President must +doff his cap in the presence of this high finance, and say, "You +are our inevitable master, but we will see how we can make the best +of it?"</p> +<p>We are at the parting of the ways. We have, not one or two or +three, but many, established and formidable monopolies in the +United States. We have, not one or two, but many, fields of +endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the +independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have +restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have +come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely +controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized +world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a +government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a +government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of +dominant men.</p> +<p>If the government is to tell big business men <a name="Page_202" +id="Page_202"></a>how to run their business, then don't you see +that big business men have to get closer to the government even +than they are now? Don't you see that they must capture the +government, in order not to be restrained too much by it? Must +capture the government? They have already captured it. Are you +going to invite those inside to stay inside? They don't have to get +there. They are there. Are you going to own your own premises, or +are you not? That is your choice. Are you going to say: "You didn't +get into the house the right way, but you are in there, God bless +you; we will stand out here in the cold and you can hand us out +something once in a while?"</p> +<p>At the least, under the plan I am opposing, there will be an +avowed partnership between the government and the trusts. I take it +that the firm will be ostensibly controlled by the senior member. +For I take it that the government of the United States is at least +the senior member, though the younger member has all along been +running the business. But when all the momentum, when all the +energy, when a great <a name="Page_203" id="Page_203"></a>deal of +the genius, as so often happens in partnerships the world over, is +with the junior partner, I don't think that the superintendence of +the senior partner is going to amount to very much. And I don't +believe that benevolence can be read into the hearts of the trusts +by the superintendence and suggestions of the federal government; +because the government has never within my recollection had its +suggestions accepted by the trusts. On the contrary, the +suggestions of the trusts have been accepted by the government.</p> +<p>There is no hope to be seen for the people of the United States +until the partnership is dissolved. And the business of the party +now entrusted with power is going to be to dissolve it.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Those who supported the third party supported, I believe, a +program perfectly agreeable to the monopolies. How those who have +been fighting monopoly through all their career can reconcile the +continuation of the battle under the banner of the very men they +have been fighting, I cannot imagine. I challenge the <a name= +"Page_204" id="Page_204"></a>program in its fundamentals as not a +progressive program at all. Why did Mr. Gary suggest this very +method when he was at the head of the Steel Trust? Why is this very +method commended here, there, and everywhere by the men who are +interested in the maintenance of the present economic system of the +United States? Why do the men who do not wish to be disturbed urge +the adoption of this program? The rest of the program is very +handsome; there is beating in it a great pulse of sympathy for the +human race. But I do not want the sympathy of the trusts for the +human race. I do not want their condescending assistance.</p> +<p>And I warn every progressive Republican that by lending his +assistance to this program he is playing false to the very cause in +which he had enlisted. That cause was a battle against monopoly, +against control, against the concentration of power in our economic +development, against all those things that interfere with +absolutely free enterprise. I believe that some day these gentlemen +will wake up and realize <a name="Page_205" id="Page_205"></a>that +they have misplaced their trust, not in an individual, it may be, +but in a program which is fatal to the things we hold dearest.</p> +<p>If there is any meaning in the things I have been urging, it is +this: that the incubus that lies upon this country is the present +monopolistic organization of our industrial life. That is the thing +which certain Republicans became "insurgents" in order to throw +off. And yet some of them allowed themselves to be so misled as to +go into the camp of the third party in order to remove what the +third party proposed to legalize. My point is that this is a method +conceived from the point of view of the very men who are to be +controlled, and that this is just the wrong point of view from +which to conceive it.</p> +<p>I said not long ago that Mr. Roosevelt was promoting a plan for +the control of monopoly which was supported by the United States +Steel Corporation. Mr. Roosevelt denied that he was being supported +by more than one member of that corporation. He was thinking of +money. I was thinking of ideas. I did not say that he was getting +money from these gentlemen; it <a name="Page_206" id= +"Page_206"></a>was a matter of indifference to me where he got his +money; but it was a matter of a great deal of difference to me +where he got his ideas. He got his idea with regard to the +regulation of monopoly from the gentlemen who form the United +States Steel Corporation. I am perfectly ready to admit that the +gentlemen who control the United States Steel Corporation have a +perfect right to entertain their own ideas about this and to urge +them upon the people of the United States; but I want to say that +their ideas are not my ideas; and I am perfectly certain that they +would not promote any idea which interfered with their monopoly. +Inasmuch, therefore, as I hope and intend to interfere with +monopoly just as much as possible, I cannot subscribe to +arrangements by which they know that it will not be disturbed.</p> +<p>The Roosevelt plan is that there shall be an industrial +commission charged with the supervision of the great monopolistic +combinations which have been formed under the protection of the +tariff, and that the government of the United States shall see to +it that these gentle<a name="Page_207" id="Page_207"></a>men who +have conquered labor shall be kind to labor. I find, then, the +proposition to be this: That there shall be two masters, the great +corporation, and over it the government of the United States; and I +ask who is going to be master of the government of the United +States? It has a master now,—those who in combination control +these monopolies. And if the government controlled by the +monopolies in its turn controls the monopolies, the partnership is +finally consummated.</p> +<p>I don't care how benevolent the master is going to be, I will +not live under a master. That is not what America was created for. +America was created in order that every man should have the same +chance as every other man to exercise mastery over his own +fortunes. What I want to do is analogous to what the authorities of +the city of Glasgow did with tenement houses. I want to light and +patrol the corridors of these great organizations in order to see +that nobody who tries to traverse them is waylaid and maltreated. +If you will but hold off the adversaries, if you will but see +<a name="Page_208" id="Page_208"></a>to it that the weak are +protected, I will venture a wager with you that there are some men +in the United States, now weak, economically weak, who have brains +enough to compete with these gentlemen and who will presently come +into the market and put these gentlemen on their mettle. And the +minute they come into the market there will be a bigger market for +labor and a different wage scale for labor.</p> +<p>Because it is susceptible of convincing proof that the high-paid +labor of America,—where it is high paid,—is cheaper +than the low-paid labor of the continent of Europe. Do you know +that about ninety per cent. of those who are employed in labor in +this country are not employed in the "protected" industries, and +that their wages are almost without exception higher than the wages +of those who are employed in the "protected" industries? There is +no corner on carpenters, there is no corner on bricklayers, there +is no corner on scores of individual classes of skilled laborers; +but there is a corner on the poolers in the furnaces, there is a +corner on the men who dive down into the mines; they are in +<a name="Page_209" id="Page_209"></a>the grip of a controlling +power which determines the market rates of wages in the United +States. Only where labor is free is labor highly paid in +America.</p> +<p>When I am fighting monopolistic control, therefore, I am +fighting for the liberty of every man in America, and I am fighting +for the liberty of American industry.</p> +<p>It is significant that the spokesman for the plan of adopting +monopoly declares his devoted adherence to the principle of +"protection." Only those duties which are manifestly too high even +to serve the interests of those who are directly "protected" ought +in his view to be lowered. He declares that he is not troubled by +the fact that a very large amount of money is taken out of the +pocket of the general taxpayer and put into the pocket of +particular classes of "protected" manufacturers, but that his +concern is that so little of this money gets into the pocket of the +laboring man and so large a proportion of it into the pockets of +the employers. I have searched his program very thoroughly for an +indication of what he expects to do in <a name="Page_210" id= +"Page_210"></a>order to see to it that a larger proportion of this +"prize" money gets into the pay envelope, and have found none. Mr. +Roosevelt, in one of his speeches, proposed that manufacturers who +did not share their profits liberally enough with their workmen +should be penalized by a sharp cut in the "protection" afforded +them; but the platform, so far as I could see, proposed +nothing.</p> +<p>Moreover, under the system proposed, most employers,—at +any rate, practically all of the most powerful of them,—would +be, to all intents and purposes, wards and protégés +of the government which is the master of us all; for no part of +this program can be discussed intelligently without remembering +that monopoly, as handled by it, is not to be prevented, but +accepted. It is to be accepted and regulated. All attempt to resist +it is to be given up. It is to be accepted as inevitable. The +government is to set up a commission whose duty it will be, not to +check or defeat it, but merely to regulate it under rules which it +is itself to frame and develop. So that the chief employers will +have this tremendous authority behind them:<a name="Page_211" id= +"Page_211"></a> what they do, they will have the license of the +federal government to do.</p> +<p>And it is worth the while of the workingmen of the country to +recall what the attitude toward organized labor has been of these +masters of consolidated industries whom it is proposed that the +federal government should take under its patronage as well as under +its control. They have been the stoutest and most successful +opponents of organized labor, and they have tried to undermine it +in a great many ways. Some of the ways they have adopted have worn +the guise of philanthropy and good-will, and have no doubt been +used, for all I know, in perfect good faith. Here and there they +have set up systems of profit sharing, of compensation for +injuries, and of bonuses, and even pensions; but every one of these +plans has merely bound their workingmen more tightly to themselves. +Rights under these various arrangements are not legal rights. They +are merely privileges which employees enjoy only so long as they +remain in the employment and observe the rules of the great +industries for which they work. If they refuse to be weaned +<a name="Page_212" id="Page_212"></a>away from their independence +they cannot continue to enjoy the benefits extended to them.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>When you have thought the whole thing out, therefore, you will +find that the program of the new party legalizes monopolies and +systematically subordinates workingmen to them and to plans made by +the government both with regard to employment and with regard to +wages. Take the thing as a whole, and it looks strangely like +economic mastery over the very lives and fortunes of those who do +the daily work of the nation; and all this under the overwhelming +power and sovereignty of the national government. What most of us +are fighting for is to break up this very partnership between big +business and the government. We call upon all intelligent men to +bear witness that if this plan were consummated, the great +employers and capitalists of the country would be under a more +overpowering temptation than ever to take control of the government +and keep it subservient to their purpose.</p> +<p>What a prize it would be to capture! How <a name="Page_213" id= +"Page_213"></a>unassailable would be the majesty and the tyranny of +monopoly if it could thus get sanction of law and the authority of +government! By what means, except open revolt, could we ever break +the crust of our life again and become free men, breathing an air +of our own, living lives that we wrought out for ourselves?</p> +<p>You cannot use monopoly in order to serve a free people. You +cannot use great combinations of capital to be pitiful and +righteous when the consciences of great bodies of men are enlisted, +not in the promotion of special privilege, but in the realization +of human rights. When I read those beautiful portions of the +program of the third party devoted to the uplift of mankind and see +noble men and women attaching themselves to that party in the hope +that regulated monopoly may realize these dreams of humanity, I +wonder whether they have really studied the instruments through +which they are going to do these things. The man who is leading the +third party has not changed his point of view since he was +President of the United States. I am not asking him to change +<a name="Page_214" id="Page_214"></a>it. I am not saying that he +has not a perfect right to retain it. But I do say that it is not +surprising that a man who had the point of view with regard to the +government of this country which he had when he was President was +not chosen as President again, and allowed to patent the present +processes of industry and personally direct them how to treat the +people of the United States.</p> +<p>There has been a history of the human race, you know, and a +history of government; it is recorded; and the kind of thing +proposed has been tried again and again and has always led to the +same result. History is strewn all along its course with the wrecks +of governments that tried to be humane, tried to carry out humane +programs through the instrumentality of those who controlled the +material fortunes of the rest of their fellow-citizens.</p> +<p>I do not trust any promises of a change of temper on the part of +monopoly. Monopoly never was conceived in the temper of tolerance. +Monopoly never was conceived with the purpose of general +development. It was conceived <a name="Page_215" id= +"Page_215"></a>with the purpose of special advantage. Has monopoly +been very benevolent to its employees? Have the trusts had a soft +heart for the working people of America? Have you found trusts that +cared whether women were sapped of their vitality or not? Have you +found trusts who are very scrupulous about using children in their +tender years? Have you found trusts that were keen to protect the +lungs and the health and the freedom of their employees? Have you +found trusts that thought as much of their men as they did of their +machinery? Then who is going to convert these men into the chief +instruments of justice and benevolence?</p> +<p>If you will point me to the least promise of disinterestedness +on the part of the masters of our lives, then I will conceive you +some ray of hope; but only upon this hypothesis, only upon this +conjecture: that the history of the world is going to be reversed, +and that the men who have the power to oppress us will be kind to +us, and will promote our interests, whether our interests jump with +theirs or not.</p> +<p><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216"></a>After you have made the +partnership between monopoly and your government permanent, then I +invite all the philanthropists in the United States to come and sit +on the stage and go through the motions of finding out how they are +going to get philanthropy out of their masters.</p> +<p>I do not want to see the special interests of the United States +take care of the workingmen, women, and children. I want to see +justice, righteousness, fairness and humanity displayed in all the +laws of the United States, and I do not want any power to intervene +between the people and their government. Justice is what we want, +not patronage and condescension and pitiful helpfulness. The trusts +are our masters now, but I for one do not care to live in a country +called free even under kind masters. I prefer to live under no +masters at all.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>I agree that as a nation we are now about to undertake what may +be regarded as the most difficult part of our governmental +enterprises. We have gone along so far without very much <a name= +"Page_217" id="Page_217"></a>assistance from our government. We +have felt, and felt more and more in recent months, that the +American people were at a certain disadvantage as compared with the +people of other countries, because of what the governments of other +countries were doing for them and our government omitting to do for +us.</p> +<p>It is perfectly clear to every man who has any vision of the +immediate future, who can forecast any part of it from the +indications of the present, that we are just upon the threshold of +a time when the systematic life of this country will be sustained, +or at least supplemented, at every point by governmental activity. +And we have now to determine what kind of governmental activity it +shall be; whether, in the first place, it shall be direct from the +government itself, or whether it shall be indirect, through +instrumentalities which have already constituted themselves and +which stand ready to supersede the government.</p> +<p>I believe that the time has come when the governments of this +country, both state and national, have to set the stage, and set it +very <a name="Page_218" id="Page_218"></a>minutely and carefully, +for the doing of justice to men in every relationship of life. It +has been free and easy with us so far; it has been go as you +please; it has been every man look out for himself; and we have +continued to assume, up to this year when every man is dealing, not +with another man, in most cases, but with a body of men whom he has +not seen, that the relationships of property are the same that they +always were. We have great tasks before us, and we must enter on +them as befits men charged with the responsibility of shaping a new +era.</p> +<p>We have a great program of governmental assistance ahead of us +in the co-operative life of the nation; but we dare not enter upon +that program until we have freed the government. That is the point. +Benevolence never developed a man or a nation. We do not want a +benevolent government. We want a free and a just government. Every +one of the great schemes of social uplift which are now so much +debated by noble people amongst us is based, when rightly +conceived, upon justice, not upon benevolence. It is based upon the +right of <a name="Page_219" id="Page_219"></a>men to breathe pure +air, to live; upon the right of women to bear children, and not to +be overburdened so that disease and breakdown will come upon them; +upon the right of children to thrive and grow up and be strong; +upon all these fundamental things which appeal, indeed, to our +hearts, but which our minds perceive to be part of the fundamental +justice of life.</p> +<p>Politics differs from philanthropy in this: that in philanthropy +we sometimes do things through pity merely, while in politics we +act always, if we are righteous men, on grounds of justice and +large expediency for men in the mass. Sometimes in our pitiful +sympathy with our fellow-men we must do things that are more than +just. We must forgive men. We must help men who have gone wrong. We +must sometimes help men who have gone criminally wrong. But the law +does not forgive. It is its duty to equalize conditions, to make +the path of right the path of safety and advantage, to see that +every man has a fair chance to live and to serve himself, to see +that injustice and wrong are not wrought upon any.</p> +<p><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220"></a>We ought not to permit +passion to enter into our thoughts or our hearts in this great +matter; we ought not to allow ourselves to be governed by +resentment or any kind of evil feeling, but we ought, nevertheless, +to realize the seriousness of our situation. That seriousness +consists, singularly enough, not in the malevolence of the men who +preside over our industrial life, but in their genius and in their +honest thinking. These men believe that the prosperity of the +United States is not safe unless it is in their keeping. If they +were dishonest, we might put them out of business by law; since +most of them are honest, we can put them out of business only by +making it impossible for them to realize their genuine convictions. +I am not afraid of a knave. I am not afraid of a rascal. I am +afraid of a strong man who is wrong, and whose wrong thinking can +be impressed upon other persons by his own force of character and +force of speech. If God had only arranged it that all the men who +are wrong were rascals, we could put them out of business very +easily, because they would give themselves away sooner or later; +but God has <a name="Page_221" id="Page_221"></a>made our task +heavier than that,—he has made some good men who think wrong. +We cannot fight them because they are bad, but because they are +wrong. We must overcome them by a better force, the genial, the +splendid, the permanent force of a better reason.</p> +<p>The reason that America was set up was that she might be +different from all the nations of the world in this: that the +strong could not put the weak to the wall, that the strong could +not prevent the weak from entering the race. America stands for +opportunity. America stands for a free field and no favor. America +stands for a government responsive to the interests of all. And +until America recovers those ideals in practice, she will not have +the right to hold her head high again amidst the nations as she +used to hold it.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>It is like coming out of a stifling cellar into the open where +we can breathe again and see the free spaces of the heavens to turn +away from such a doleful program of submission and dependence +toward the other plan, the confi<a name="Page_222" id= +"Page_222"></a>dent purpose for which the people have given their +mandate. Our purpose is the restoration of freedom. We purpose to +prevent private monopoly by law, to see to it that the methods by +which monopolies have been built up are legally made impossible. We +design that the limitations on private enterprise shall be removed, +so that the next generation of youngsters, as they come along, will +not have to become protégés of benevolent trusts, but +will be free to go about making their own lives what they will; so +that we shall taste again the full cup, not of charity, but of +liberty,—the only wine that ever refreshed and renewed the +spirit of a people.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="X" id="X"></a><a name="Page_223" id= +"Page_223"></a>X</h2> +<h2>THE WAY TO RESUME IS TO RESUME</h2> +<p>One of the wonderful things about America, to my mind, is this: +that for more than a generation it has allowed itself to be +governed by persons who were not invited to govern it. A singular +thing about the people of the United States is their almost +infinite patience, their willingness to stand quietly by and see +things done which they have voted against and do not want done, and +yet never lay the hand of disorder upon any arrangement of +government.</p> +<p>There is hardly a part of the United States where men are not +aware that secret private purposes and interests have been running +the government. They have been running it through the agency of +those interesting persons whom we call political "bosses." A boss +is not so much a politician as the business agent <a name= +"Page_224" id="Page_224"></a>in politics of the special interests. +The boss is not a partisan; he is quite above politics! He has an +understanding with the boss of the other party, so that, whether it +is heads or tails, we lose. The two receive contributions from the +same sources, and they spend those contributions for the same +purposes.</p> +<p>Bosses are men who have worked their way by secret methods to +the place of power they occupy; men who were never elected to +anything; men who were not asked by the people to conduct their +government, and who are very much more powerful than if you had +asked them, so long as you leave them where they are, behind closed +doors, in secret conference. They are not politicians; they have no +policies,—except concealed policies of private +aggrandizement. A boss isn't a leader of a party. Parties do not +meet in back rooms; parties do not make arrangements which do not +get into the newspapers. Parties, if you reckon them by voting +strength, are great masses of men who, because they can't vote any +other ticket, vote the ticket that was prepared for them by the +<a name="Page_225" id="Page_225"></a>aforesaid arrangement in the +aforesaid back room in accordance with the aforesaid understanding. +A boss is the manipulator of a "machine." A "machine" is that part +of a political organization which has been taken out of the hands +of the rank and file of the party, captured by half a dozen men. It +is the part that has ceased to be political and has become an +agency for the purposes of unscrupulous business.</p> +<p>Do not lay up the sins of this kind of business to political +organizations. Organization is legitimate, is necessary, is even +distinguished, when it lends itself to the carrying out of great +causes. Only the man who uses organization to promote private +purposes is a boss. Always distinguish between a political leader +and a boss. I honor the man who makes the organization of a great +party strong and thorough, in order to use it for public service. +But he is not a boss. A boss is a man who uses this splendid, open +force for secret purposes.</p> +<p>One of the worst features of the boss system is this fact, that +it works secretly. I would <a name="Page_226" id="Page_226"></a>a +great deal rather live under a king whom I should at least know, +than under a boss whom I don't know. A boss is a much more +formidable master than a king, because a king is an obvious master, +whereas the hands of the boss are always where you least expect +them to be.</p> +<p>When I was in Oregon, not many months ago, I had some very +interesting conversations with Mr. U'Ren, who is the father of what +is called the Oregon System, a system by which he has put bosses +out of business. He is a member of a group of public-spirited men +who, whenever they cannot get what they want through the +legislature, draw up a bill and submit it to the people, by means +of the initiative, and generally get what they want. The day I +arrived in Portland, a morning paper happened to say, very +ironically, that there were two legislatures in Oregon, one at +Salem, the state capital, and the other going around under the hat +of Mr. U'Ren. I could not resist the temptation of saying, when I +spoke that evening, that, while I was the last man to suggest that +power should be concentrated in <a name="Page_227" id= +"Page_227"></a>any single individual or group of individuals, I +would, nevertheless, after my experience in New Jersey, rather have +a legislature that went around under the hat of somebody in +particular whom I knew I could find than a legislature that went +around under God knows who's hat; because then you could at least +put your finger on your governing force; you would know where to +find it.</p> +<p>Why do we continue to permit these things? Isn't it about time +that we grew up and took charge of our own affairs? I am tired of +being under age in politics. I don't want to be associated with +anybody except those who are politically over twenty-one. I don't +wish to sit down and let any man take care of me without my having +at least a voice in it; and if he doesn't listen to my advice, I am +going to make it as unpleasant for him as I can. Not because my +advice is necessarily good, but because no government is good in +which every man doesn't insist upon his advice being heard, at +least, whether it is heeded or not.</p> +<p>Some persons have said that representative <a name="Page_228" +id="Page_228"></a>government has proved too indirect and clumsy an +instrument, and has broken down as a means of popular control. +Others, looking a little deeper, have said that it was not +representative government that had broken down, but the effort to +get it. They have pointed out that, with our present methods of +machine nomination and our present methods of election, which give +us nothing more than a choice between one set of machine nominees +and another, we do not get representative government at +all,—at least not government representative of the people, +but merely government representative of political managers who +serve their own interests and the interests of those with whom they +find it profitable to establish partnerships.</p> +<p>Obviously, this is something that goes to the root of the whole +matter. Back of all reform lies the method of getting it. Back of +the question, What do you want, lies the question,—the +fundamental question of all government,—How are you going to +get it? How are you going to get public servants who will obtain +<a name="Page_229" id="Page_229"></a>it for you? How are you going +to get genuine representatives who will serve your interests, and +not their own or the interests of some special group or body of +your fellow-citizens whose power is of the few and not of the many? +These are the queries which have drawn the attention of the whole +country to the subject of the direct primary, the direct choice of +their officials by the people, without the intervention of the +nominating machine; to the subject of the direct election of United +States Senators; and to the question of the initiative, referendum, +and recall.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>The critical moment in the choosing of officials is that of +their nomination more often than that of their election. When two +party organizations, nominally opposing each other but actually +working in perfect understanding and co-operation, see to it that +both tickets have the same kind of men on them, it is Tweedledum or +Tweedledee, so far as the people are concerned; the political +managers have us coming and going. We may delude ourselves with +<a name="Page_230" id="Page_230"></a>the pleasing belief that we +are electing our own officials, but of course the fact is we are +merely making an indifferent and ineffectual choice between two +sets of men named by interests which are not ours.</p> +<p>So that what we establish the direct primary for is this: to +break up the inside and selfish determination of the question who +shall be elected to conduct the government and make the laws of our +commonwealths and our nation. Everywhere the impression is growing +stronger that there can be no means of dominating those who have +dominated us except by taking this process of the original +selection of nominees into our own hands. Does that upset any +ancient foundations? Is it not the most natural and simple thing in +the world? You say that it does not always work; that the people +are too busy or too lazy to bother about voting at primary +elections? True, sometimes the people of a state or a community do +let a direct primary go by without asserting their authority as +against the bosses. The electorate of the United States <a name= +"Page_231" id="Page_231"></a>is occasionally like the god Baal: it +is sometimes on a journey or it is sometimes asleep; but when it +does awake, it does not resemble the god Baal in the slightest +degree. It is a great self-possessed power which effectually takes +control of its own affairs. I am willing to wait. I am among those +who believe so firmly in the essential doctrines of democracy that +I am willing to wait on the convenience of this great sovereign, +provided I know that he has got the instrument to dominate whenever +he chooses to grasp it.</p> +<p>Then there is another thing that the conservative people are +concerned about: the direct election of United States Senators. I +have seen some thoughtful men discuss that with a sort of shiver, +as if to disturb the original constitution of the United States +Senate was to do something touched with impiety, touched with +irreverence for the Constitution itself. But the first thing +necessary to reverence for the United States Senate is respect for +United States Senators. I am not one of those who <a name= +"Page_232" id="Page_232"></a>condemn the United States Senate as a +body; for, no matter what has happened there, no matter how +questionable the practices or how corrupt the influences which have +filled some of the seats in that high body, it must in fairness be +said that the majority in it has all the years through been +untouched by stain, and that there has always been there a +sufficient number of men of integrity to vindicate the self-respect +and the hopefulness of America with regard to her institutions.</p> +<p>But you need not be told, and it would be painful to repeat to +you, how seats have been bought in the Senate; and you know that a +little group of Senators holding the balance of power has again and +again been able to defeat programs of reform upon which the whole +country had set its heart; and that whenever you analyzed the power +that was behind those little groups you have found that it was not +the power of public opinion, but some private influence, hardly to +be discerned by superficial scrutiny, that had put those men there +to do that thing.</p> +<p><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233"></a>Now, returning to the +original principles upon which we profess to stand, have the people +of the United States not the right to see to it that every seat in +the Senate represents the unbought United States of America? Does +the direct election of Senators touch anything except the private +control of seats in the Senate? We remember another thing: that we +have not been without our suspicions concerning some of the +legislatures which elect Senators. Some of the suspicions which we +entertained in New Jersey about them turned out to be founded upon +very solid facts indeed. Until two years ago New Jersey had not in +half a generation been represented in the United States Senate by +the men who would have been chosen if the process of selecting them +had been free and based upon the popular will.</p> +<p>We are not to deceive ourselves by putting our heads into the +sand and saying, "Everything is all right." Mr. Gladstone declared +that the American Constitution was the most perfect instrument ever +devised by the brain of man. We have been praised all over the +world for our <a name="Page_234" id="Page_234"></a>singular genius +for setting up successful institutions, but a very thoughtful +Englishman, and a very witty one, said a very instructive thing +about that: he said that to show that the American Constitution had +worked well was no proof that it is an excellent constitution, +because Americans could run any constitution,—a compliment +which we laid like sweet unction to our soul; and yet a criticism +which ought to set us thinking.</p> +<p>While it is true that when American forces are awake they can +conduct American processes without serious departure from the +ideals of the Constitution, it is nevertheless true that we have +had many shameful instances of practices which we can absolutely +remove by the direct election of Senators by the people themselves. +And therefore I, for one, will not allow any man who knows his +history to say to me that I am acting inconsistently with either +the spirit or the essential form of the American government in +advocating the direct election of United States Senators.</p> +<p>Take another matter. Take the matter of <a name="Page_235" id= +"Page_235"></a>the initiative and referendum, and the recall. There +are communities, there are states in the Union, in which I am quite +ready to admit that it is perhaps premature, that perhaps it will +never be necessary, to discuss these measures. But I want to call +your attention to the fact that they have been adopted to the +general satisfaction in a number of states where the electorate had +become convinced that they did not have representative +government.</p> +<p>Why do you suppose that in the United States, the place in all +the world where the people were invited to control their own +government, we should set up such an agitation as that for the +initiative and referendum and the recall. When did this thing +begin? I have been receiving circulars and documents from little +societies of men all over the United States with regard to these +matters, for the last twenty-five years. But the circulars for a +long time kindled no fire. Men felt that they had representative +government and they were content. But about ten or fifteen years +ago the fire began to burn,—and it has been <a name= +"Page_236" id="Page_236"></a>sweeping over wider and wider areas of +the country, because of the growing consciousness that something +intervenes between the people and the government, and that there +must be some arm direct enough and strong enough to thrust aside +the something that comes in the way.</p> +<p>I believe that we are upon the eve of recovering some of the +most important prerogatives of a free people, and that the +initiative and referendum are playing a great part in that +recovery. I met a man the other day who thought that the referendum +was some kind of an animal, because it had a Latin name; and there +are still people in this country who have to have it explained to +them. But most of us know and are deeply interested. Why? Because +we have felt that in too many instances our government did not +represent us, and we have said: "We have got to have a key to the +door of our own house. The initiative and referendum and the recall +afford such a key to our own premises. If the people inside the +house will run the place as we want it run, they <a name="Page_237" +id="Page_237"></a>may stay inside and we will keep the latchkeys in +our pockets. If they do not, we shall have to re-enter upon +possession."</p> +<p>Let no man be deceived by the cry that somebody is proposing to +substitute direct legislation by the people, or the direct +reference of laws passed in the legislature, to the vote of the +people, for representative government. The advocates of these +reforms have always declared, and declared in unmistakable terms, +that they were intending to recover representative government, not +supersede it; that the initiative and referendum would find no use +in places where legislatures were really representative of the +people whom they were elected to serve. The initiative is a means +of seeing to it that measures which the people want shall be +passed,—when legislatures defy or ignore public opinion. The +referendum is a means of seeing to it that the unrepresentative +measures which they do not want shall not be placed upon the +statute book.</p> +<p>When you come to the recall, the principle is that if an +administrative officer,—for we will begin with the +administrative officer,—is <a name="Page_238" id= +"Page_238"></a>corrupt or so unwise as to be doing things that are +likely to lead to all sorts of mischief, it will be possible by a +deliberate process prescribed by the law to get rid of that officer +before the end of his term. You must admit that it is a little +inconvenient sometimes to have what has been called an astronomical +system of government, in which you can't change anything until +there has been a certain number of revolutions of the seasons. In +many of our oldest states the ordinary administrative term is a +single year. The people of those states have not been willing to +trust an official out of their sight more than twelve months. +Elections there are a sort of continuous performance, based on the +idea of the constant touch of the hand of the people on their own +affairs. That is exactly the principle of the recall. I don't see +how any man grounded in the traditions of American affairs can find +any valid objection to the recall of administrative officers. The +meaning of the recall is merely this,—not that we should have +unstable government, not that officials should not know how long +their power <a name="Page_239" id="Page_239"></a>might +last,—but that we might have government exercised by +officials who know whence their power came and that if they yield +to private influences they will presently be displaced by public +influences.</p> +<p>You will of course understand that, both in the case of the +initiative and referendum and in that of the recall, the very +existence of these powers, the very possibilities which they imply, +are half,—indeed, much more than half,—the battle. They +rarely need to be actually exercised. The fact that the people may +initiate keeps the members of the legislature awake to the +necessity of initiating themselves; the fact that the people have +the right to demand the submission of a legislative measure to +popular vote renders the members of the legislature wary of bills +that would not pass the people; the very possibility of being +recalled puts the official on his best behavior.</p> +<p>It is another matter when we come to the judiciary. I myself +have never been in favor of the recall of judges. Not because some +judges have not deserved to be recalled. That <a name="Page_240" +id="Page_240"></a>isn't the point. The point is that the recall of +judges is treating the symptom instead of the disease. The disease +lies deeper, and sometimes it is very virulent and very dangerous. +There have been courts in the United States which were controlled +by private interests. There have been supreme courts in our states +before which plain men could not get justice. There have been +corrupt judges; there have been controlled judges; there have been +judges who acted as other men's servants and not as the servants of +the public. Ah, there are some shameful chapters in the story! The +judicial process is the ultimate safeguard of the things that we +must hold stable in this country. But suppose that that safeguard +is corrupted; suppose that it does not guard my interests and +yours, but guards merely the interests of a very small group of +individuals; and, whenever your interest clashes with theirs, yours +will have to give way, though you represent ninety per cent. of the +citizens, and they only ten per cent. Then where is your +safeguard?</p> +<p><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241"></a>The just thought of the +people must control the judiciary, as it controls every other +instrument of government. But there are ways and ways of +controlling it. If,—mark you, I say <i>if</i>,—at one +time the Southern Pacific Railroad owned the supreme court of the +State of California, would you remedy that situation by recalling +the judges of the court? What good would that do, so long as the +Southern Pacific Railroad could substitute others for them? You +would not be cutting deep enough. Where you want to go is to the +process by which those judges were selected. And when you get +there, you will reach the moral of the whole of this discussion, +because the moral of it all is that the people of the United States +have suspected, until their suspicions have been justified by all +sorts of substantial and unanswerable evidence, that, in place +after place, at turning-points in the history of this country, we +have been controlled by private understandings and not by the +public interest; and that influences which were improper, if not +corrupt, have determined everything from the <a name="Page_242" id= +"Page_242"></a>making of laws to the administration of justice. The +disease lies in the region where these men get their nominations; +and if you can recover for the people the <i>selecting</i> of +judges, you will not have to trouble about their recall. Selection +is of more radical consequence than election.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>I am aware that those who advocate these measures which we have +been discussing are denounced as dangerous radicals. I am +particularly interested to observe that the men who cry out most +loudly against what they call radicalism are the men who find that +their private game in politics is being spoiled. Who are the +arch-conservatives nowadays? Who are the men who utter the most +fervid praise of the Constitution of the United States and the +constitutions of the states? They are the gentlemen who used to get +behind those documents to play hide-and-seek with the people whom +they pretended to serve. They are the men who entrenched themselves +in the laws which they misinterpreted and misused. If now they are +afraid that "radicalism" will <a name="Page_243" id= +"Page_243"></a>sweep them away,—and I believe it +will,—they have only themselves to thank.</p> +<p>Yet how absurd is the charge that we who are demanding that our +government be made representative of the people and responsive to +their demands,—how fictitious and hypocritical is the charge +that we are attacking the fundamental principles of republican +institutions! These very men who hysterically profess their alarm +would declaim loudly enough on the Fourth of July of the +Declaration of Independence; they would go on and talk of those +splendid utterances in our earliest state constitutions, which have +been copied in all our later ones, taken from the Petition of +Rights, or the Declaration of Rights, those great fundamental +documents of the struggle for liberty in England; and yet in these +very documents we read such uncompromising statements as this: +that, when at any time the people of a commonwealth find that their +government is not suitable to the circumstances of their lives or +the promotion of their liberties, it is their privilege to alter it +at their pleasure, and alter <a name="Page_244" id= +"Page_244"></a>it in any degree. That is the foundation, that is +the very central doctrine, that is the ground principle, of +American institutions.</p> +<p>I want you to read a passage from the Virginia Bill of Rights, +that immortal document which has been a model for declarations of +liberty throughout the rest of the continent:</p> +<blockquote> +<p>That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the +people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at +all times amenable to them.</p> +<p>That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common +benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or +community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that +is the best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of +happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the +danger of mal-administration; and that, when any government shall +be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of +the community bath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible +right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be +judged most conducive to the public weal.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>I have heard that read a score of times on the Fourth of July, +but I never heard it read <a name="Page_245" id= +"Page_245"></a>where actual measures were being debated. No man who +understands the principles upon which this Republic was founded has +the slightest dread of the gentle,—though very +effective,—measures by which the people are again resuming +control of their own affairs.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Nor need any lover of liberty be anxious concerning the outcome +of the struggle upon which we are now embarked. The victory is +certain, and the battle is not going to be an especially sanguinary +one. It is hardly going to be worth the name of a battle. Let me +tell the story of the emancipation of one State,—New +Jersey:</p> +<p>It has surprised the people of the United States to find New +Jersey at the front in enterprises of reform. I, who have lived in +New Jersey the greater part of my mature life, know that there is +no state in the Union which, so far as the hearts and intelligence +of its people are concerned, has more earnestly desired reform than +has New Jersey. There are men who have been prominent in the +affairs of the State who <a name="Page_246" id="Page_246"></a>again +and again advocated with all the earnestness that was in them the +things that we have at last been able to do. There are men in New +Jersey who have spent some of the best energies of their lives in +trying to win elections in order to get the support of the citizens +of New Jersey for programs of reform.</p> +<p>The people had voted for such things very often before the +autumn of 1910, but the interesting thing is that nothing had +happened. They were demanding the benefit of remedial measures such +as had been passed in every progressive state of the Union, +measures which had proved not only that they did not upset the life +of the communities to which they were applied but that they +quickened every force and bettered every condition in those +communities. But the people of New Jersey could not get them, and +there had come upon them a certain pessimistic despair. I used to +meet men who shrugged their shoulders and said: "What difference +does it make how we vote? Nothing ever results from our votes." The +force that is behind the new party that has recently been <a name= +"Page_247" id="Page_247"></a>formed, the so-called "Progressive +Party," is a force of discontent with the old parties of the United +States. It is the feeling that men have gone into blind alleys +often enough, and that somehow there must be found an open road +through which men may pass to some purpose.</p> +<p>In the year 1910 there came a day when the people of New Jersey +took heart to believe that something could be accomplished. I had +no merit as a candidate for Governor, except that I said what I +really thought, and the compliment that the people paid me was in +believing that I meant what I said. Unless they had believed in the +Governor whom they then elected, unless they had trusted him deeply +and altogether, he could have done absolutely nothing. The force of +the public men of a nation lies in the faith and the backing of the +people of the country, rather than in any gifts of their own. In +proportion as you trust them, in proportion as you back them up, in +proportion as you lend them your strength, are they strong. The +things that have happened in New Jersey since 1910 have happened +because the seed was <a name="Page_248" id="Page_248"></a>planted +in this fine fertile soil of confidence, of trust, of renewed +hope.</p> +<p>The moment the forces in New Jersey that had resisted reform +realized that the people were backing new men who meant what they +had said, they realized that they dare not resist them. It was not +the personal force of the new officials; it was the moral strength +of their backing that accomplished the extraordinary result.</p> +<p>And what was accomplished? Mere justice to classes that had not +been treated justly before.</p> +<p>Every schoolboy in the State of New Jersey, if he cared to look +into the matter, could comprehend the fact that the laws applying +to laboring-men with respect of compensation when they were hurt in +their various employments had originated at a time when society was +organized very differently from the way in which it is organized +now, and that because the law had not been changed, the courts were +obliged to go blindly on administering laws which were cruelly +unsuitable to existing con<a name="Page_249" id= +"Page_249"></a>ditions, so that it was practically impossible for +the workingmen of New Jersey to get justice from the courts; the +legislature of the commonwealth had not come to their assistance +with the necessary legislation. Nobody seriously debated the +circumstances; everybody knew that the law was antiquated and +impossible; everybody knew that justice waited to be done. Very +well, then, why wasn't it done?</p> +<p>There was another thing that we wanted to do: We wanted to +regulate our public service corporations so that we could get the +proper service from them, and on reasonable terms. That had been +done elsewhere, and where it had been done it had proved just as +much for the benefit of the corporations themselves as for the +benefit of the people. Of course it was somewhat difficult to +convince the corporations. It happened that one of the men who knew +the least about the subject was the president of the Public Service +Corporation of New Jersey. I have heard speeches from that +gentleman that exhibited a total lack of acquaintance with the +circumstances of our times. I have never <a name="Page_250" id= +"Page_250"></a>known ignorance so complete in its detail; and, +being a man of force and ignorance, he naturally set all his energy +to resist the things that he did not comprehend.</p> +<p>I am not interested in questioning the motives of men in such +positions. I am only sorry that they don't know more. If they would +only join the procession they would find themselves benefited by +the healthful exercise, which, for one thing, would renew within +them the capacity to learn which I hope they possessed when they +were younger. We were not trying to do anything novel in New Jersey +in regulating the Public Service Corporation; we were simply trying +to adopt there a tested measure of public justice. We adopted it. +Has anybody gone bankrupt since? Does anybody now doubt that it was +just as much for the benefit of the Public Service Corporation as +for the people of the State?</p> +<p>Then there was another thing that we modestly desired: We wanted +fair elections; we did not want candidates to buy themselves into +office. That seemed reasonable. So we <a name="Page_251" id= +"Page_251"></a>adopted a law, unique in one particular, namely: +that if you bought an office, you didn't get it. I admit that that +is contrary to all commercial principles, but I think it is pretty +good political doctrine. It is all very well to put a man in jail +for buying an office, but it is very much better, besides putting +him in jail, to show him that if he has paid out a single dollar +for that office, he does not get it, though a huge majority voted +for him. We reversed the laws of trade; when you buy something in +politics in New Jersey, you do not get it. It seemed to us that +that was the best way to discourage improper political argument. If +your money does not produce the goods, then you are not tempted to +spend your money.</p> +<p>We adopted a Corrupt Practices Act, the reasonable foundation of +which no man could question, and an Election Act, which every man +predicted was not going to work, but which did work,—to the +emancipation of the voters of New Jersey.</p> +<p>All these things are now commonplaces with us. We like the laws +that we have passed, <a name="Page_252" id="Page_252"></a>and no +man ventures to suggest any material change in them. Why didn't we +get them long ago? What hindered us? Why, because we had a closed +government; not an open government. It did not belong to us. It was +managed by little groups of men whose names we knew, but whom +somehow we didn't seem able to dislodge. When we elected men +pledged to dislodge them, they only went into partnership with +them. Apparently what was necessary was to call in an amateur who +knew so little about the game that he supposed that he was expected +to do what he had promised to do.</p> +<p>There are gentlemen who have criticised the Governor of New +Jersey because he did not do certain things,—for instance, +bring a lot of indictments. The Governor of New Jersey does not +think it necessary to defend himself; but he would like to call +attention to a very interesting thing that happened in his State: +When the people had taken over control of the government, a curious +change was wrought in the souls of a great many men; a sudden moral +awakening took place, and we simply could not <a name="Page_253" +id="Page_253"></a>find culprits against whom to bring indictments; +it was like a Sunday school, the way they obeyed the laws.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>So I say, there is nothing very difficult about resuming our own +government. There is nothing to appall us when we make up our minds +to set about the task. "The way to resume is to resume," said +Horace Greeley, once, when the country was frightened at a prospect +which turned out to be not in the least frightful; it was at the +moment of the resumption of specie payments for Treasury notes. The +Treasury simply resumed,—there was not a ripple of danger or +excitement when the day of resumption came around.</p> +<p>It will be precisely so when the people resume control of their +own government. The men who conduct the political machines are a +small fraction of the party they pretend to represent, and the men +who exercise corrupt influences upon them are only a small fraction +of the business men of the country. What we are banded together to +fight is not a party, is not a great <a name="Page_254" id= +"Page_254"></a>body of citizens; we have to fight only little +coteries, groups of men here and there, a few men, who subsist by +deceiving us and cannot subsist a moment after they cease to +deceive us.</p> +<p>I had occasion to test the power of such a group in the State of +New Jersey, and I had the satisfaction of discovering that I had +been right in supposing that they did not possess any power at all. +It looked as if they were entrenched in a fortress; it looked as if +the embrasures of the fortress showed the muzzles of guns; but, as +I told my good fellow-citizens, all they had to do was to press a +little upon it and they would find that the fortress was a mere +cardboard fabric; that it was a piece of stage property; that just +so soon as the audience got ready to look behind the scenes they +would learn that the army which had been marching and +counter-marching in such terrifying array consisted of a single +company that had gone in one wing and around and out at the other +wing, and could have thus marched in procession for twenty-four +hours. You only need about twenty-four men to do the trick. These +men are impostors.<a name="Page_255" id="Page_255"></a> They are +powerful only in proportion as we are susceptible to absurd fear of +them. Their capital is our ignorance and our credulity.</p> +<p>To-day we are seeing something that some of us have waited all +of our lives to see. We are witnessing a rising of the country. We +are seeing a whole people stand up and decline any longer to be +imposed upon. The day has come when men are saying to each other: +"It doesn't make a peppercorn's difference to me what party I have +voted with. I am going to pick out the men I want and the policies +I want, and let the label take care of itself. I do not find any +great difference between my table of contents and the table of +contents of those who have voted with the other party, and who, +like me, are very much dissatisfied with the way in which their +party has rewarded their faithfulness. They want the same things +that I want, and I don't know of anything under God's heaven to +prevent our getting together. We want the same things, we have the +same faith in the old traditions of the American people, and we +have made up our minds that we are going <a name="Page_256" id= +"Page_256"></a>to have now at last the reality instead of the +shadow."</p> +<p>We Americans have been too long satisfied with merely going +through the motions of government. We have been having a mock game. +We have been going to the polls and saying: "This is the act of a +sovereign people, but we won't be the sovereign yet; we will +postpone that; we will wait until another time. The managers are +still shifting the scenes; we are not ready for the real thing +yet."</p> +<p>My proposal is that we stop going through the mimic play; that +we get out and translate the ideals of American politics into +action; so that every man, when he goes to the polls on election +day, will feel the thrill of executing an actual judgment, as he +takes again into his own hands the great matters which have been +too long left to men deputized by their own choice, and seriously +sets about carrying into accomplishment his own purposes.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="XI" id="XI"></a><a name="Page_257" id= +"Page_257"></a>XI</h2> +<h2>THE EMANCIPATION OF BUSINESS</h2> +<p>In the readjustments that are about to be undertaken in this +country not one single legitimate or honest arrangement is going to +be disturbed; but every impediment to business is going to be +removed, every illegitimate kind of control is going to be +destroyed. Every man who wants an opportunity and has the energy to +seize it, is going to be given a chance. All that we are going to +ask the gentlemen who now enjoy monopolistic advantages to do is to +match their brains against the brains of those who will then +compete with them. The brains, the energy, of the rest of us are to +be set free to go into the game,—that is all. There is to be +a general release of the capital, the enterprise, of millions of +people, a general opening of the doors of opportunity. With what a +spring of determination, with what a <a name="Page_258" id= +"Page_258"></a>shout of jubilance, will the people rise to their +emancipation!</p> +<p>I am one of those who believe that we have had such restrictions +upon the prosperity of this country that we have not yet come into +our own, and that by removing those restrictions we shall set free +an energy which in our generation has not been known. It is for +that reason that I feel free to criticise with the utmost frankness +these restrictions, and the means by which they have been brought +about. I do not criticise as one without hope; in describing +conditions which so hamper, impede, and imprison, I am only +describing conditions from which we are going to escape into a +contrasting age. I believe that this is a time when there should be +unqualified frankness. One of the distressing circumstances of our +day is this: I cannot tell you how many men of business, how many +important men of business, have communicated their real opinions +about the situation in the United States to me privately and +confidentially. They are afraid of somebody. They are afraid to +make their real opinions known publicly; <a name="Page_259" id= +"Page_259"></a>they tell them to me behind their hand. That is very +distressing. That means that we are not masters of our own +opinions, except when we vote, and even then we are careful to vote +very privately indeed.</p> +<p>It is alarming that this should be the case. Why should any man +in free America be afraid of any other man? Or why should any man +fear competition,—competition either with his +fellow-countrymen or with anybody else on earth?</p> +<p>It is part of the indictment against the protective policy of +the United States that it has weakened and not enhanced the vigor +of our people. American manufacturers who know that they can make +better things than are made elsewhere in the world, that they can +sell them cheaper in foreign markets than they are sold in these +very markets of domestic manufacture, are afraid,—afraid to +venture out into the great world on their own merits and their own +skill. Think of it, a nation full of genius and yet paralyzed by +timidity! The timidity of the business men of America is to me +nothing less <a name="Page_260" id="Page_260"></a>than amazing. +They are tied to the apron strings of the government at Washington. +They go about to seek favors. They say: "For pity's sake, don't +expose us to the weather of the world; put some homelike cover over +us. Protect us. See to it that foreign men don't come in and match +their brains with ours." And, as if to enhance this peculiarity of +ours, the strongest men amongst us get the biggest favors; the men +of peculiar genius for organizing industries, the men who could run +the industries of any country, are the men who are most strongly +intrenched behind the highest rates in the schedules of the tariff. +They are so timid morally, furthermore, that they dare not stand up +before the American people, but conceal these favors in the +verbiage of the tariff schedule itself,—in "jokers." Ah! but +it is a bitter joke when men who seek favors are so afraid of the +best judgment of their fellow-citizens that they dare not avow what +they take.</p> +<p>Happily, the general revival of conscience in this country has +not been confined to those <a name="Page_261" id="Page_261"></a>who +were consciously fighting special privilege. The awakening of +conscience has extended to those who were <i>enjoying</i> special +privileges, and I thank God that the business men of this country +are beginning to see our economic organization in its true light, +as a deadening aristocracy of privilege from which they themselves +must escape. The small men of this country are not deluded, and not +all of the big business men of this country are deluded. Some men +who have been led into wrong practices, who have been led into the +practices of monopoly, because that seemed to be the drift and +inevitable method of supremacy, are just as ready as we are to turn +about and adopt the process of freedom. For American hearts beat in +a lot of these men, just as they beat under our jackets. They will +be as glad to be free as we shall be to set them free. And then the +splendid force which has lent itself to things that hurt us will +lend itself to things that benefit us.</p> +<p>And we,—we who are not great captains of industry or +business,—shall do them more good <a name="Page_262" id= +"Page_262"></a>than we do now, even in a material way. If you have +to be subservient, you are not even making the rich fellows as rich +as they might be, because you are not adding your originative force +to the extraordinary production of wealth in America. America is as +rich, not as Wall Street, not as the financial centres in Chicago +and St. Louis and San Francisco; it is as rich as the people that +make those centres rich. And if those people hesitate in their +enterprise, cower in the face of power, hesitate to originate +designs of their own, then the very fountains which make these +places abound in wealth are dried up at the source. By setting the +little men of America free, you are not damaging the giants.</p> +<p>It may be that certain things will happen, for monopoly in this +country is carrying a body of water such as men ought not to be +asked to carry. When by regulated competition,—that is to +say, fair competition, competition that fights fair,—they are +put upon their mettle, they will have to economize, and they cannot +economize unless they get rid of that water.<a name="Page_263" id= +"Page_263"></a> I do not know how to squeeze the water out, but +they will get rid of it, if you will put them to the necessity. +They will have to get rid of it, or those of us who don't carry +tanks will outrun them in the race. Put all the business of America +upon the footing of economy and efficiency, and then let the race +be to the strongest and the swiftest.</p> +<p>Our program is a program of prosperity; a program of prosperity +that is to be a little more pervasive than the present +prosperity,—and pervasive prosperity is more fruitful than +that which is narrow and restrictive. I congratulate the monopolies +of the United States that they are not going to have their way, +because, quite contrary to their own theory, the fact is that the +people are wiser than they are. The people of the United States +understand the United States as these gentlemen do not, and if they +will only give us leave, we will not only make them rich, but we +will make them happy. Because, then, their conscience will have +less to carry. I have lived in a state that was owned by a series +of corporations.<a name="Page_264" id="Page_264"></a> They handed +it about. It was at one time owned by the Pennsylvania Railroad; +then it was owned by the Public Service Corporation. It was owned +by the Public Service Corporation when I was admitted, and that +corporation has been resentful ever since that I interfered with +its tenancy. But I really did not see any reason why the people +should give up their own residence to so small a body of men to +monopolize; and, therefore, when I asked them for their title deeds +and they couldn't produce them, and there was no court except the +court of public opinion to resort to, they moved out. Now they eat +out of our hands; and they are not losing flesh either. They are +making just as much money as they made before, only they are making +it in a more respectable way. They are making it without the +constant assistance of the legislature of the State of New Jersey. +They are making it in the normal way, by supplying the people of +New Jersey with the service in the way of transportation and gas +and water that they really need. I do not believe that there are +<a name="Page_265" id="Page_265"></a>any thoughtful officials of +the Public Service Corporation of New Jersey that now seriously +regret the change that has come about. We liberated government in +my state, and it is an interesting fact that we have not suffered +one moment in prosperity.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>What we propose, therefore, in this program of freedom, is a +program of general advantage. Almost every monopoly that has +resisted dissolution has resisted the real interests of its own +stockholders. Monopoly always checks development, weighs down +natural prosperity, pulls against natural advance.</p> +<p>Take but such an everyday thing as a useful invention and the +putting of it at the service of men. You know how prolific the +American mind has been in invention; how much civilization has been +advanced by the steamboat, the cotton-gin, the sewing-machine, the +reaping-machine, the typewriter, the electric light, the telephone, +the phonograph. Do you know, have you had occasion to learn, that +there is no hospitality for invention nowadays? There <a name= +"Page_266" id="Page_266"></a>is no encouragement for you to set +your wits at work to improve the telephone, or the camera, or some +piece of machinery, or some mechanical process; you are not invited +to find a shorter and cheaper way to make things or to perfect +them, or to invent better things to take their place. There is too +much money invested in old machinery; too much money has been spent +advertising the old camera; the telephone plants, as they are, cost +too much to permit their being superseded by something better. +Wherever there is monopoly, not only is there no incentive to +improve, but, improvement being costly in that it "scraps" old +machinery and destroys the value of old products, there is a +positive motive against improvement. The instinct of monopoly is +against novelty, the tendency of monopoly is to keep in use the old +thing, made in the old way; its disposition is to "standardize" +everything. Standardization may be all very well,—but suppose +everything had been standardized thirty years ago,—we should +still be writing by hand, by gas-light, we should be without the +inestimable aid of <a name="Page_267" id="Page_267"></a>the +telephone (sometimes, I admit, it is a nuisance), without the +automobile, without wireless telegraphy. Personally, I could have +managed to plod along without the aeroplane, and I could have been +happy even without moving-pictures.</p> +<p>Of course, I am not saying that all invention has been stopped +by the growth of trusts, but I think it is perfectly clear that +invention in many fields has been discouraged, that inventors have +been prevented from reaping the full fruits of their ingenuity and +industry, and that mankind has been deprived of many comforts and +conveniences, as well as of the opportunity of buying at lower +prices.</p> +<p>The damper put on the inventive genius of America by the trusts +operates in half a dozen ways: The first thing discovered by the +genius whose device extends into a field controlled by a trust is +that he can't get capital to make and market his invention. If you +want money to build your plant and advertise your product and +employ your agents and make a market for it, where are you going to +get it? The <a name="Page_268" id="Page_268"></a>minute you apply +for money or credit, this proposition is put to you by the banks: +"This invention will interfere with the established processes and +the market control of certain great industries. We are already +financing those industries, their securities are in our hands; we +will consult them."</p> +<p>It may be, as a result of that consultation, you will be +informed that it is too bad, but it will be impossible to +"accommodate" you. It may be you will receive a suggestion that if +you care to make certain arrangements with the trust, you will be +permitted to manufacture. It may be you will receive an offer to +buy your patent, the offer being a poor consolation dole. It may be +that your invention, even if purchased, will never be heard of +again.</p> +<p>That last method of dealing with an invention, by the way, is a +particularly vicious misuse of the patent laws, which ought not to +allow property in an idea which is never intended to be realized. +One of the reforms waiting to be undertaken is a revision of our +patent laws.</p> +<p>In any event, if the trust doesn't want you <a name="Page_269" +id="Page_269"></a>to manufacture your invention, you will not be +allowed to, unless you have money of your own and are willing to +risk it fighting the monopolistic trust with its vast resources. I +am generalizing the statement, but I could particularize it. I +could tell you instances where exactly that thing happened. By the +combination of great industries, manufactured products are not only +being standardized, but they are too often being kept at a single +point of development and efficiency. The increase of the power to +produce in proportion to the cost of production is not studied in +America as it used to be studied, because if you don't have to +improve your processes in order to excel a competitor, if you are +human you aren't going to improve your processes; and if you can +prevent the competitor from coming into the field, then you can sit +at your leisure, and, behind this wall of protection which prevents +the brains of any foreigner competing with you, you can rest at +your ease for a whole generation.</p> +<p>Can any one who reflects on merely this attitude of the trusts +toward invention fail to <a name="Page_270" id= +"Page_270"></a>understand how substantial, how actual, how great +will be the effect of the release of the genius of our people to +originate, improve, and perfect the instruments and circumstances +of our lives? Who can say what patents now lying, unrealized, in +secret drawers and pigeonholes, will come to light, or what new +inventions will astonish and bless us, when freedom is +restored?</p> +<p>Are you not eager for the time when the genius and initiative of +all the people shall be called into the service of business? when +newcomers with new ideas, new entries with new enthusiasms, +independent men, shall be welcomed? when your sons shall be able to +look forward to becoming, not employees, but heads of some small, +it may be, but hopeful, business, where their best energies shall +be inspired by the knowledge that they are their own masters, with +the paths of the world open before them? Have you no desire to see +the markets opened to all? to see credit available in due +proportion to every man of character and serious purpose who can +use it safely and to advantage? to see <a name="Page_271" id= +"Page_271"></a>business disentangled from its unholy alliance with +politics? to see raw material released from the control of +monopolists, and transportation facilities equalized for all? and +every avenue of commercial and industrial activity levelled for the +feet of all who would tread it? Surely, you must feel the +inspiration of such a new dawn of liberty!</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>There is the great policy of conservation, for example; and I do +not conceive of conservation in any narrow sense. There are forests +to conserve, there are great water powers to conserve, there are +mines whose wealth should be deemed exhaustible, not inexhaustible, +and whose resources should be safeguarded and preserved for future +generations. But there is much more. There are the lives and +energies of the people to be physically safeguarded.</p> +<p>You know what has been the embarrassment about conservation. The +federal government has not dared relax its hold, because, not +<i>bona fide</i> settlers, not men bent upon the legitimate +development of great states, but men bent upon <a name="Page_272" +id="Page_272"></a>getting into their own exclusive control great +mineral, forest, and water resources, have stood at the ear of the +government and attempted to dictate its policy. And the government +of the United States has not dared relax its somewhat rigid policy +because of the fear that these forces would be stronger than the +forces of individual communities and of the public interest. What +we are now in dread of is that this situation will be made +permanent. Why is it that Alaska has lagged in her development? Why +is it that there are great mountains of coal piled up in the +shipping places on the coast of Alaska which the government at +Washington will not permit to be sold? It is because the government +is not sure that it has followed all the intricate threads of +intrigue by which small bodies of men have tried to get exclusive +control of the coal fields of Alaska. The government stands itself +suspicious of the forces by which it is surrounded.</p> +<p>The trouble about conservation is that the government of the +United States hasn't any policy at present. It is simply marking +time.<a name="Page_273" id="Page_273"></a> It is simply standing +still. Reservation is not conservation. Simply to say, "We are not +going to do anything about the forests," when the country needs to +use the forests, is not a practicable program at all. To say that +the people of the great State of Washington can't buy coal out of +the Alaskan coal fields doesn't settle the question. You have got +to have that coal sooner or later. And if you are so afraid of the +Guggenheims and all the rest of them that you can't make up your +mind what your policies are going to be about those coal fields, +how long are we going to wait for the government to throw off its +fear? There can't be a working program until there is a free +government. The day when the government is free to set about a +policy of positive conservation, as distinguished from mere +negative reservation, will be an emancipation day of no small +importance for the development of the country.</p> +<p>But the question of conservation is a very much bigger question +than the conservation of our natural resources; because in summing +up our natural resources there is one great natural <a name= +"Page_274" id="Page_274"></a>resource which underlies them all, and +seems to underlie them so deeply that we sometimes overlook it. I +mean the people themselves.</p> +<p>What would our forests be worth without vigorous and intelligent +men to make use of them? Why should we conserve our natural +resources, unless we can by the magic of industry transmute them +into the wealth of the world? What transmutes them into that +wealth, if not the skill and the touch of the men who go daily to +their toil and who constitute the great body of the American +people? What I am interested in is having the government of the +United States more concerned about human rights than about property +rights. Property is an instrument of humanity; humanity isn't an +instrument of property. And yet when you see some men riding their +great industries as if they were driving a car of juggernaut, not +looking to see what multitudes prostrate themselves before the car +and lose their lives in the crushing effect of their industry, you +wonder how long men are going to be permitted to think more of +their machinery than they think of their <a name="Page_275" id= +"Page_275"></a>men. Did you never think of it,—men are cheap, +and machinery is dear; many a superintendent is dismissed for +overdriving a delicate machine, who wouldn't be dismissed for +overdriving an overtaxed man. You can discard your man and replace +him; there are others ready to come into his place; but you can't +without great cost discard your machine and put a new one in its +place. You are less apt, therefore, to look upon your men as the +essential vital foundation part of your whole business. It is time +that property, as compared with humanity, should take second place, +not first place. We must see to it that there is no over-crowding, +that there is no bad sanitation, that there is no unnecessary +spread of avoidable diseases, that the purity of food is +safeguarded, that there is every precaution against accident, that +women are not driven to impossible tasks, nor children permitted to +spend their energy before it is fit to be spent. The hope and +elasticity of the race must be preserved; men must be preserved +according to their individual needs, and not according to the +programs of <a name="Page_276" id="Page_276"></a>industry merely. +What is the use of having industry, if we perish in producing it? +If we die in trying to feed ourselves, why should we eat? If we die +trying to get a foothold in the crowd, why not let the crowd +trample us sooner and be done with it? I tell you that there is +beginning to beat in this nation a great pulse of irresistible +sympathy which is going to transform the processes of government +amongst us. The strength of America is proportioned only to the +health, the energy, the hope, the elasticity, the buoyancy of the +American people.</p> +<p>Is not that the greatest thought that you can have of +freedom,—the thought of it as a gift that shall release men +and women from all that pulls them back from being their best and +from doing their best, that shall liberate their energy to its +fullest limit, free their aspirations till no bounds confine them, +and fill their spirits with the jubilance of realizable hope?</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<h2><a name="XII" id="XII"></a><a name="Page_277" id= +"Page_277"></a>XII</h2> +<h2>THE LIBERATION OF A PEOPLE'S VITAL ENERGIES</h2> +<p>No matter how often we think of it, the discovery of America +must each time make a fresh appeal to our imaginations. For +centuries, indeed from the beginning, the face of Europe had been +turned toward the east. All the routes of trade, every impulse and +energy, ran from west to east. The Atlantic lay at the world's +back-door. Then, suddenly, the conquest of Constantinople by the +Turk closed the route to the Orient. Europe had either to face +about or lack any outlet for her energies; the unknown sea at the +west at last was ventured upon, and the earth learned that it was +twice as big as it had thought. Columbus did not find, as he had +expected, the civilization of Cathay; he found an empty continent. +In that part of the world, upon that new-found half of the globe, +mankind, late in <a name="Page_278" id="Page_278"></a>its history, +was thus afforded an opportunity to set up a new civilization; here +it was strangely privileged to make a new human experiment.</p> +<p>Never can that moment of unique opportunity fail to excite the +emotion of all who consider its strangeness and richness; a +thousand fanciful histories of the earth might be contrived without +the imagination daring to conceive such a romance as the hiding +away of half the globe until the fulness of time had come for a new +start in civilization. A mere sea captain's ambition to trace a new +trade route gave way to a moral adventure for humanity. The race +was to found a new order here on this delectable land, which no man +approached without receiving, as the old voyagers relate, you +remember, sweet airs out of woods aflame with flowers and murmurous +with the sound of pellucid waters. The hemisphere lay waiting to be +touched with life,—life from the old centres of living, +surely, but cleansed of defilement, and cured of weariness, so as +to be fit for the virgin purity of a new bride. The whole thing +springs into the imagination like a wonderful vision, an exquisite +<a name="Page_279" id="Page_279"></a>marvel which once only in all +history could be vouchsafed.</p> +<p>One other thing only compares with it; only one other thing +touches the springs of emotion as does the picture of the ships of +Columbus drawing near the bright shores,—and that is the +thought of the choke in the throat of the immigrant of to-day as he +gazes from the steerage deck at the land where he has been taught +to believe he in his turn shall find an earthly paradise, where, a +free man, he shall forget the heartaches of the old life, and enter +into the fulfilment of the hope of the world. For has not every +ship that has pointed her prow westward borne hither the hopes of +generation after generation of the oppressed of other lands? How +always have men's hearts beat as they saw the coast of America rise +to their view! How it has always seemed to them that the dweller +there would at last be rid of kings, of privileged classes, and of +all those bonds which had kept men depressed and helpless, and +would there realize the full fruition of his sense of honest +manhood, would there be one of a great body <a name="Page_280" id= +"Page_280"></a>of brothers, not seeking to defraud and deceive one +another, but seeking to accomplish the general good!</p> +<p>What was in the writings of the men who founded +America,—to serve the selfish interests of America? Do you +find that in their writings? No; to serve the cause of humanity, to +bring liberty to mankind. They set up their standards here in +America in the tenet of hope, as a beacon of encouragement to all +the nations of the world; and men came thronging to these shores +with an expectancy that never existed before, with a confidence +they never dared feel before, and found here for generations +together a haven of peace, of opportunity, of equality.</p> +<p>God send that in the complicated state of modern affairs we may +recover the standards and repeat the achievements of that heroic +age!</p> +<p>For life is no longer the comparatively simple thing it was. Our +relations one with another have been profoundly modified by the new +agencies of rapid communication and transportation, tending swiftly +to concentrate life, widen communities, fuse interests, and +compli<a name="Page_281" id="Page_281"></a>cate all the processes +of living. The individual is dizzily swept about in a thousand new +whirlpools of activities. Tyranny has become more subtle, and has +learned to wear the guise of mere industry, and even of +benevolence. Freedom has become a somewhat different matter. It +cannot,—eternal principle that it is,—it cannot have +altered, yet it shows itself in new aspects. Perhaps it is only +revealing its deeper meaning.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>What is liberty?</p> +<p>I have long had an image in my mind of what constitutes liberty. +Suppose that I were building a great piece of powerful machinery, +and suppose that I should so awkwardly and unskilfully assemble the +parts of it that every time one part tried to move it would be +interfered with by the others, and the whole thing would buckle up +and be checked. Liberty for the several parts would consist in the +best possible assembling and adjustment of them all, would it not? +If you want the great piston of the engine to run with absolute +freedom, give it <a name="Page_282" id="Page_282"></a>absolutely +perfect alignment and adjustment with the other parts of the +machine, so that it is free, not because it is let alone or +isolated, but because it has been associated most skilfully and +carefully with the other parts of the great structure.</p> +<p>What it liberty? You say of the locomotive that it runs free. +What do you mean? You mean that its parts are so assembled and +adjusted that friction is reduced to a minimum, and that it has +perfect adjustment. We say of a boat skimming the water with light +foot, "How free she runs," when we mean, how perfectly she is +adjusted to the force of the wind, how perfectly she obeys the +great breath out of the heavens that fills her sails. Throw her +head up into the wind and see how she will halt and stagger, how +every sheet will shiver and her whole frame be shaken, how +instantly she is "in irons," in the expressive phrase of the sea. +She is free only when you have let her fall off again and have +recovered once more her nice adjustment to the forces she must obey +and cannot defy.</p> +<p>Human freedom consists in perfect adjust<a name="Page_283" id= +"Page_283"></a>ments of human interests and human activities and +human energies.</p> +<p>Now, the adjustments necessary between individuals, between +individuals and the complex institutions amidst which they live, +and between those institutions and the government, are infinitely +more intricate to-day than ever before. No doubt this is a tiresome +and roundabout way of saying the thing, yet perhaps it is worth +while to get somewhat clearly in our mind what makes all the +trouble to-day. Life has become complex; there are many more +elements, more parts, to it than ever before. And, therefore, it is +harder to keep everything adjusted,—and harder to find out +where the trouble lies when the machine gets out of order.</p> +<p>You know that one of the interesting things that Mr. Jefferson +said in those early days of simplicity which marked the beginnings +of our government was that the best government consisted in as +little governing as possible. And there is still a sense in which +that is true. It is still intolerable for the government to +<a name="Page_284" id="Page_284"></a>interfere with our individual +activities except where it is necessary to interfere with them in +order to free them. But I feel confident that if Jefferson were +living in our day he would see what we see: that the individual is +caught in a great confused nexus of all sorts of complicated +circumstances, and that to let him alone is to leave him helpless +as against the obstacles with which he has to contend; and that, +therefore, law in our day must come to the assistance of the +individual. It must come to his assistance to see that he gets fair +play; that is all, but that is much. Without the watchful +interference, the resolute interference, of the government, there +can be no fair play between individuals and such powerful +institutions as the trusts. Freedom to-day is something more than +being let alone. The program of a government of freedom must in +these days be positive, not negative merely.</p> +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> +<p>Well, then, in this new sense and meaning of it, are we +preserving freedom in this land of ours, the hope of all the +earth?</p> +<p><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285"></a>Have we, inheritors of this +continent and of the ideals to which the fathers consecrated +it,—have we maintained them, realizing them, as each +generation must, anew? Are we, in the consciousness that the life +of man is pledged to higher levels here than elsewhere, striving +still to bear aloft the standards of liberty and hope, or, +disillusioned and defeated, are we feeling the disgrace of having +had a free field in which to do new things and of not having done +them?</p> +<p>The answer must be, I am sure, that we have been in a fair way +of failure,—tragic failure. And we stand in danger of utter +failure yet except we fulfil speedily the determination we have +reached, to deal with the new and subtle tyrannies according to +their deserts. Don't deceive yourselves for a moment as to the +power of the great interests which now dominate our development. +They are so great that it is almost an open question whether the +government of the United States can dominate them or not. Go one +step further, make their organized power permanent, and it may be +too late <a name="Page_286" id="Page_286"></a>to turn back. The +roads diverge at the point where we stand. They stretch their +vistas out to regions where they are very far separated from one +another; at the end of one is the old tiresome scene of government +tied up with special interests; and at the other shines the +liberating light of individual initiative, of individual liberty, +of individual freedom, the light of untrammeled enterprise. I +believe that that light shines out of the heavens itself that God +has created. I believe in human liberty as I believe in the wine of +life. There is no salvation for men in the pitiful condescensions +of industrial masters. Guardians have no place in a land of +freemen. Prosperity guaranteed by trustees has no prospect of +endurance. Monopoly means the atrophy of enterprise. If monopoly +persists, monopoly will always sit at the helm of the government. I +do not expect to see monopoly restrain itself. If there are men in +this country big enough to own the government of the United States, +they are going to own it; what we have to determine now is whether +we are big enough, whether we are <a name="Page_287" id= +"Page_287"></a>men enough, whether we are free enough, to take +possession again of the government which is our own. We haven't had +free access to it, our minds have not touched it by way of +guidance, in half a generation, and now we are engaged in nothing +less than the recovery of what was made with our own hands, and +acts only by our delegated authority.</p> +<p>I tell you, when you discuss the question of the tariffs and of +the trusts, you are discussing the very lives of yourselves and +your children. I believe that I am preaching the very cause of some +of the gentlemen whom I am opposing when I preach the cause of free +industry in the United States, for I think they are slowly girding +the tree that bears the inestimable fruits of our life, and that if +they are permitted to gird it entirely nature will take her revenge +and the tree will die.</p> +<p>I do not believe that America is securely great because she has +great men in her now. America is great in proportion as she can +make sure of having great men in the next generation. She is rich +in her unborn children; rich, that is to <a name="Page_288" id= +"Page_288"></a>say, if those unborn children see the sun in a day +of opportunity, see the sun when they are free to exercise their +energies as they will. If they open their eyes in a land where +there is no special privilege, then we shall come into a new era of +American greatness and American liberty; but if they open their +eyes in a country where they must be employees or nothing, if they +open their eyes in a land of merely regulated monopoly, where all +the conditions of industry are determined by small groups of men, +then they will see an America such as the founders of this Republic +would have wept to think of. The only hope is in the release of the +forces which philanthropic trust presidents want to monopolize. +Only the emancipation, the freeing and heartening of the vital +energies of all the people will redeem us. In all that I may have +to do in public affairs in the United States I am going to think of +towns such as I have seen in Indiana, towns of the old American +pattern, that own and operate their own industries, hopefully and +happily. My thought is going to be bent upon the multiplication of +<a name="Page_289" id="Page_289"></a>towns of that kind and the +prevention of the concentration of industry in this country in such +a fashion and upon such a scale that towns that own themselves will +be impossible. You know what the vitality of America consists of. +Its vitality does not lie in New York, nor in Chicago; it will not +be sapped by anything that happens in St. Louis. The vitality of +America lies in the brains, the energies, the enterprise of the +people throughout the land; in the efficiency of their factories +and in the richness of the fields that stretch beyond the borders +of the town; in the wealth which they extract from nature and +originate for themselves through the inventive genius +characteristic of all free American communities.</p> +<p>That is the wealth of America, and if America discourages the +locality, the community, the self-contained town, she will kill the +nation. A nation is as rich as her free communities; she is not as +rich as her capital city or her metropolis. The amount of money in +Wall Street is no indication of the wealth of the American people. +That indication can be found <a name="Page_290" id= +"Page_290"></a>only in the fertility of the American mind and the +productivity of American industry everywhere throughout the United +States. If America were not rich and fertile, there would be no +money in Wall Street. If Americans were not vital and able to take +care of themselves, the great money exchanges would break down. The +welfare, the very existence of the nation, rests at last upon the +great mass of the people; its prosperity depends at last upon the +spirit in which they go about their work in their several +communities throughout the broad land. In proportion as her towns +and her country-sides are happy and hopeful will America realize +the high ambitions which have marked her in the eyes of all the +world.</p> +<p>The welfare, the happiness, the energy and spirit of the men and +women who do the daily work in our mines and factories, on our +railroads, in our offices and ports of trade, on our farms and on +the sea, is the underlying necessity of all prosperity. There can +be nothing wholesome unless their life is wholesome; there can be +no contentment unless they are contented.<a name="Page_291" id= +"Page_291"></a> Their physical welfare affects the soundness of the +whole nation. How would it suit the prosperity of the United +States, how would it suit business, to have a people that went +every day sadly or sullenly to their work? How would the future +look to you if you felt that the aspiration had gone out of most +men, the confidence of success, the hope that they might improve +their condition? Do you not see that just so soon as the old +self-confidence of America, just so soon as her old boasted +advantage of individual liberty and opportunity, is taken away, all +the energy of her people begins to subside, to slacken, to grow +loose and pulpy, without fibre, and men simply cast about to see +that the day does not end disastrously with them?</p> +<p>So we must put heart into the people by taking the heartlessness +out of politics, business, and industry. We have got to make +politics a thing in which an honest man can take his part with +satisfaction because he knows that his opinion will count as much +as the next man's, and that the boss and the interests have been +<a name="Page_292" id="Page_292"></a>dethroned. Business we have +got to untrammel, abolishing tariff favors, and railroad +discrimination, and credit denials, and all forms of unjust +handicaps against the little man. Industry we have got to +humanize,—not through the trusts,—but through the +direct action of law guaranteeing protection against dangers and +compensation for injuries, guaranteeing sanitary conditions, proper +hours, the right to organize, and all the other things which the +conscience of the country demands as the workingman's right. We +have got to cheer and inspirit our people with the sure prospects +of social justice and due reward, with the vision of the open gates +of opportunity for all. We have got to set the energy and the +initiative of this great people absolutely free, so that the future +of America will be greater than the past, so that the pride of +America will grow with achievement, so that America will know as +she advances from generation to generation that each brood of her +sons is greater and more enlightened than that which preceded it, +know that she is fulfilling the promise that she has made to +mankind.</p> +<p><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293"></a>Such is the vision of some +of us who now come to assist in its realization. For we Democrats +would not have endured this long burden of exile if we had not seen +a vision. We could have traded; we could have got into the game; we +could have surrendered and made terms; we could have played the +rôle of patrons to the men who wanted to dominate the +interests of the country,—and here and there gentlemen who +pretended to be of us did make those arrangements. They couldn't +stand privation. You never can stand it unless you have within you +some imperishable food upon which to sustain life and courage, the +food of those visions of the spirit where a table is set before us +laden with palatable fruits, the fruits of hope, the fruits of +imagination, those invisible things of the spirit which are the +only things upon which we can sustain ourselves through this weary +world without fainting. We have carried in our minds, after you had +thought you had obscured and blurred them, the ideals of those men +who first set their foot upon America, those little bands who came +to make a foothold <a name="Page_294" id="Page_294"></a>in the +wilderness, because the great teeming nations that they had left +behind them had forgotten what human liberty was, liberty of +thought, liberty of religion, liberty of residence, liberty of +action.</p> +<p>Since their day the meaning of liberty has deepened. But it has +not ceased to be a fundamental demand of the human spirit, a +fundamental necessity for the life of the soul. And the day is at +hand when it shall be realized on this consecrated soil,—a +New Freedom,—a Liberty widened and deepened to match the +broadened life of man in modern America, restoring to him in very +truth the control of his government, throwing wide all gates of +lawful enterprise, unfettering his energies, and warming the +generous impulses of his heart,—a process of release, +emancipation, and inspiration, full of a breath of life as sweet +and wholesome as the airs that filled the sails of the caravels of +Columbus and gave the promise and boast of magnificent Opportunity +in which America <i>dare not fail</i>.</p> +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><b>THE COUNTRY LIFE PRESS, GARDEN CITY, +N.Y.</b></p> + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The New Freedom, by Woodrow Wilson + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NEW FREEDOM *** + +***** This file should be named 14811-h.htm or 14811-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + https://www.gutenberg.org/1/4/8/1/14811/ + +Produced by Rick Niles, Melissa Er-Raqabi and the Online Distributed +Proofreading Team. + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +https://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +https://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at https://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit https://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including including checks, online payments and credit card +donations. To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + https://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> |