Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-11-30

| Republicans In the Bay state. Therefore
II is ell the more gratifying to note the
high plane TO which our anti-annexation
New England contemporaries have risen
In the present instance. II Is true that
the economic phases OF the issue have
been touched upon on occasions. but as
rule these have been subordinated 10
loftier considerations The more general
tendency has been TO so back TO first
principles and argue the case from the
viewpoint of those who laid the founda-
ton of the republic. The controlling in
iuence with the New England anti-im-
perialists has been the conviction that
imperialism would endanger our :epubli-
can institutions. They have had regard
for the patriotic warnings Of Washington.
| Jefferson, Adams Monroe, and the other
earlier statesmen. Tho New England
! feeling and belief as TO what imperialism
means is pretty well crystallzed In the
| declaration OF Senator Hoar that IL the
United States annexed the Philippines the
| downfall OF the American republic would
| date from the administration of William
| Mckinley. And this antagonism Of New
| England 10 imperialism has carried with
Il distinct swing of the pendulum back
| towards decentralization. In II there is
an incidental but none the less earnest
and significant protest against the con-
centration OF power in the hands of the
Federal Government. II shows a revival
happy sign-of New England's old jealous
les as TO the rights of States. Willingly
or unwittngly, New England, in fighting
the specific proposition to annex the
Philippines is fighting Capitalization. for
imperialism and Capitalization are synony
nous. The doctrine that inspires opposi-
ton to the one Is the doctrine that in
spires opposition TO the other. The logic
Of warning against the one is the logic Of
warning against the other
The Springfield CMass) Republican has
proved itself one Of the most ardent and
consistent champions of anti-expansion.
1t has stood four square against impe
rialism, fighting it at every point and |
every turn. In a recent issue. however, |
in discussing Reform in our military |
system" il makes a dangerous break and |
gets on questionable ground. 1t says that |
ii is clear that our militia system must |
be reorganized, strengthened, and placed |
in closer touch with the National Govern
ment and the regular army. This and the |
general tenor of the Republicans article
excite the suspicion that our contempt
rary has been caught by the scheme to
establish national militia" which has
been persistently advocated in certain
quarters-quarters in which Mr. Mckinley
and his imperialistic advisers have, 1t is
suspected, Il vast deal of influ-
ence
Unquestionably our war with Spain has
taught us that the militia forces Of the
several States need to be recognized and
brought up to q condition Of greater eff
cheney. But the Constitution leaves am
pie room for this to be done without
bringing the militia into closer touch in
the sense we understand the Republican,
with the National Government and the
regular army. The trainers Of the Consti-
tuition erected an unmistakabe barrier
between the National Government and
he regular army and the State militia,
and since the Constitution wes adopted
many Of our wisest statesmen have
sought by their utterances to strengthen
hat barrier. These men saw In too close
touch between the Federal Government
and the regular army and the militia,
which was their abomina-
ton. They saw in it the temptation TO
)reak away from all the safeguards they |
lad thrown around our Republican insti-
utions. They saw in il a menace TO the
ibarties OF the people. They saw in it the
LANCER Of the States being made practi-
ally satrapies, as were the Southern
states in Reconstruction days The es-
ablishment of national militia would
)e utterly destructive OF the constitution
Il barrier referred to. 1t would be the
irst step towards militarism in all that
hat term implies, Ii would be an en- {
TO further Federal usurp- {
ion at home, and would but increase the
wills that already Turk in the policy Of ,,
expansion. 1t would but emphasize the ;
respect Of Mr.. Hoars prophecy's being 2
UTILIZED. Therefore, we say that il our
springfield contemporary would be entire
y consistent. let it fight the movement
or Matchmaking the militia as strenu- I
nents leading TO imperialism. 1t cannot 5
)gically maintain its attitude touching
hese latter movements If 1t does not an I
agonize militarism.