The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-07-27
Is GOVERNMENT A "JoBs"

Is the spirit Of patriotism vanished
from the land? Is there nowhere
among the masses Of men any survival
of that spirit which makes sacrifice Of
self for the common good? Is there
no more Of that wise self-denial of
present advantage for the individual
that justice may be done to all? What
has become of the question that should
be precedent to action: Is it right?
Is all government really only job,
and he, as the cynical Randolph said,
truest to himself who is falsest to
the country? Is there no interest in
our common government save when
the individual can make something
out Of it? Are all public questions to
be gagged by citizens by their effect
to increase or diminish their wealth?
Or is there among all this seething
mass Of selfishness the saving rem
nant, the ten who were missing in the
cities on the plain?
Those questions come to any one who
comes in touch with public station,
but they come now overwhelmingly to
one who peers through the oratorical
dust of these three great national con-
ventions and catches the spirit that
animates them all. What was the
most striking feature of the st. Louis
June convention that the platitudes of
the platform cannot conceal? What
was the motive there unless it was the
organized appetite of men who saw
in the party there represented a power
that might increase their gains by re-
stricting or preventing the competi-
ton that would lessen them? What
were they after but the chance to en-
list the powerful taxing arm Of the gov
eminent in their behalf? That such use
is innately wrong; that 1t is unpatri-
otto; that it is incarnate greed and
selfshness; that 1t is an attempt to
commit robbery under the form of law
and was none the less so because So
disguised, seems not to have occurred
to those who participated in it. This
bunting of the moral sense to so dull
an edge that conduct men would abhor
in their private business becomes legit-
innate in public affairs is one of the
worst and most dangerous results of
the policy Of protection.
Then what did the Chicago conven-
ton present of motive to the dispas-
sionate observer? Stripped Of It's
swathing Of oratory, what was its ac-
ton but purpose to use the power of
the nation to permit one class to de-
fraud another class by paying the lat
ter 80 cents on the dollar borrowed?
What were the appeals made to others?
To their love of justice, Of country?
To their honor and patriotism? TIC
what motive Of men was the appeal
made that promised them, in the adop-
ton of the proposed policy, an increase
of price for what they had to sell?
in what did it differ from the motive
that dominated the St. Louis conven-
ton that preceded it? Who must pay
that increase? How are they to get
the means with which to pay? That
the conditions of the masses are made
harder when the price of their necessi-
ties rise; that 1t is a monstrous abuse
OF government to use it so as to cause
this; that. like it's st. Louis prototype.
1T is none the less robbery because
perpetrated under form of law, was
consideration as absent there as in st.
Louis.
And now we are presented with pre-
cisely the same picture in this second
St Louis convention; masses of men
representative of classes of men, eager
ly demanding that the government be
diverted from its proper and only lie
Ultimate province Of seeing that eacl