The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-09-05
NO LONGER A DEMOCRAT
OPEN LETTER TO YOUNG INDIANIANs
FROM MAURICE THOMPSON.
Says Annexation Will Be n Political
Issue. and Urges Them TO Ac-
cept Republican Policy.



but neither he nor any other truly great
man has ever said or thought that wisdom
Is due TO senility. Indeed as the world has
advanced and the true methods of investiga-
ton have been applied TO all the open fields
OF thought it has become more and more
apparent that young men who bring the
1resh, clear vigor of unhasgng maturity to
the duties of life are far more efficient than
old men whose powers are waning and
whose faith in life is shaken
l would rot be understood as saying or
thinking that old men are necessarily I'M
wise; the bedrock truth is that after a
man passes his prime he should not be ex-
pected to have the strength, courage and
certainty of vision which belong to the
trimming physical and mental vitality of
early life. The old man is apt to let his own
failures, disappohtments ard physical ills
get into mis- view of men. measures and con-
dtons; he shrinks from change and re-
sponsibility, and would have every thing so
on forever just it did when he was a
boy.
AL the present moment in our national
history we need, we never before have
needed, the clear vision. the high courage
and the Astounding self-trust Of youth 1t is
time for us to stand on firm legs to look
facts in the face and to feel competent
we nave come to our early prime. If we
limp and lag now the VIII Die future will be
failure and a regret If we act with
boldness, energy and patriotism the life of
our Nation will take on a new and splendid
power
To the young men of Indiana I have
something to say, and I should be glad if
every young man in America could hear
me. Who are the young men? AS would
define youth they the men who have
young minds. young hearts young feelings,
no matter what their age in years A man
of eighty is young if he still is open to con-
Viction, TO new ideas. to wholesome change
OF view, to the broadening influence of
progress. Any man is old, though not vet
twenty-one, who is content to live upon the
past and is unwilling to accent new con-
ditions and new ideas. With this UNDER
standing of what / mean when say that
young men must control the future Of
America, l respectfully ask young men of
indiana between the ages of eighteen and
elghty-hye to give me a hearing. l pur-
pose to deal in facts.
And first; few historical facts about
papers the statement or formula of the So
called friends of Cuba to the effect that
IT is not American to make conquest of
territory, or to be guilty of land-gra6bing
country is history of 'land-gra bling
rum It's beginning TO this hour Am /
right! Let US see. How did we get Massa-
chusetts: How did we get Virginia9 Go TO
your histories and read how we took them
by bloody conquest from the Indians who
held them by immemorial right of possess
sion. To come home, how did we get In
dlana? Go read the history of the Miami
people, the biography of Tecumseh. We
TOOK Indiana by conquest from a nobler
race than the large majority of Cubans
eru te rrH we acquire our great southwest
ana California? right bloody little war
was the main influence. We whipped Mex
leo and took territory from her. These
facts will suggest others to the intelligent
young mind, and | need not go further in
proving that it is American, historically
territory by conquest Almost all the ter
rltory we possess, INCLUDING most of our.
states. has been acquired by'forciby taking
II from its owners. History is better evil
dence than editorials
TERRITORIAL DEPENDENCIES.
Another fallacy oracularly and insistently
urged upon public attention as the very
truth is the declare alton that as a nation
we are unable to maintain colonial possess
sions. In fact, however every territory that
we possess which has not been formed into
State is nothing but a tribute-paying
colonial dependency. Our government coll
lects its revenues in Alaska and in every
Western Territory alike. Nor is there any
way in which Congress can be forced IN
act in the matter of erecting a State out
OF Territory. Our government as in the
case of Utah, can take it's time. We have
now Alaska ard Hawaii to refute the argu-
nent against constitutional right and we
nave the whole history of our country to
show that territorial dependencies have
Deen governed by US, and well governed IN
diana was governed a colonial depen-
oency before II became a State What
difference in law or right does ii make
whether a Territory is divided from us by
land line or a water line? We have shown
our ability to take Cuba from Spain; why
cannot We govern 1t? The proposition that
we cannot is simply absurd and unpatriotic.
We hear the phrase consent of the gov
erned" banded about by the opponents of
progress, who tell US that 1t is an insult TO
American history and character to propose
q government for Cuba without first gain
ing the consent Of the Cubans. Again, the
very foundations of American history
against the oracles. The Indians never con-
scented to the erection of the American gov
eminent, yet it was erected The Spaniards
and Frenchmen OF Louisiana, the cOlOniStS
and creOles from the old world who actual
ly owned Louisiana were never asked TO
consent 10 the annexation of that terri
tory. They were, in fact bitterly opposed
to it; but we took them by purchase and
governed them willing or unwilling. 1t was
the same with Florida. Neither the Span
ish and French inhabitants nor the original
owners of Florida, the Seminoes, gave
their consent TO our occupation, but we
took the territory and governed il well. And
here again the intelligent young man Will
take the cue of history and go on discover
ing that il has not been Enthusiastically
OF the governed in all cases. But there Is
a tremendous instance and example in our
recent history which settles forever what
we nation think of the consent of the
governed" as a universal maxim. Every
State of this Union south of the Ohio river
broke away from our government as Cuba
has done from Spain and formed the Con-
federate States. The people OF those states
refused to give their consent to be governed
from Washington. But the United states
government by a terrible war settled II that
the people OF those States had 10 De gov
erned from Washington whether they con-
scented" or not Florida and Louisiana and
Texas came into the Union in the nrst
place without the legal consent OF their m
hahitants; they went out with their con-
sent and were thrashed back into the Union
without their consent. This Is history, ana
history is more convincing than editorials
Who Of us doubts that time has proven the
wisdom of forcing consent OF the gov
erned' where it was for their good?
THAT SOLEMN PROMISE"
Won have heard and seen 1t reiterated. in
season and out of season, 'our solemn
promise" that we would not annex Cuba.
What solemn promise? To whom was it
made. and where, and how? The so-caed
promise was a part of the congressional
resolution passed just before war was de-
clared 1t reads thus:
THAT the United States hereby disclams
any intention to exercise sovereignty juris-
diction or control over said island (Cuba),
except for the pacification thereof and as
serts IT'S determination. when that is accom-
pished to leave the government and con-
troll of the island to its people.
rT-alrs fxrf viii historical Ia