The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-10-06

1t is common charge by foreigners
against the United States government that it
has no fixed and settled policy, that the
treatment of all public questions is subordi-
nate to party politics and therefore liable to
change with every Congress or at least with
every administration. Intelligent Americans
have to admit that there is too much truth
in this The country has suffered incalcula-
BILE harm in business way, not to speak
of the loss of dignity from the lack of
stable policy by having the tariff question,
the money question and others of kindred
nature made footballs of politics. The evil
is, if possible, still more pronounced in our
foreign relations, where a fixed and settled
policy is necessary to maintain the dignity
of the govel nment in the eyes of foreign
governments and peoples. The foreign
policy of Great Britain flows on like river
without regard to changes of Ministry of
majorites in Parliament, or even in the
executive head of the government. There
have been many ministries during the reign
of Queen Victoria, but there has been no
material change in the foreign policy of the
government, nor will there be when the
Queen dies. The main features of Great
Britain's foreign policy are almost as fixed
as the British Constitution itself. The same
is measurably true of other European gov
ernments.
In the nature of things it is not to be
expected that the same degree of fixedness
and steady holding to one line of action
should be attained under our form of party
government with it's frequent changes, and
yet all intelligent Americans must admit
that some approach to it is desirable. 1t
is bad enough to change foreign ambassa-
doris and ministers every four years without
making new departures in the treatment of
foreign affairs as often. 1t is hard to make
foreigners believe in the stability of a gov
eminent which makes practice of undoing
or reversing every few years what has been
done in the years preceding.
The time is at hand when the American
people will have to consider more carefully
than ever before the question of shifting
foreign policy. We have just come out of
war in which we astonished the world by the
energy of our military preparations and by
our decisive victories on sea and land AS
a result of the war we have acquired valua-
BILE new possessions and a new standing
among the nations. If we are to hold the
territory and the standing thus acquired we
must have a foreign policy and adhere to it.
1t must aim at the establishment of national
authority and the maintenance of national
honor and interests. and must hold steadily
to these ends 1t must not be a Republican
policy nor a Democratic policy, but a ma
tional policy. The present temper of the
people is one of strong approval of the con-
duct of the war and of the policy of holding
on TO the new possessions. The civilized
world knows that the war was prosecuted
by President Mckinley and an administra-
ton representing the party which elected
him. The defeat of that party in the first
general election occurring after the war
would be construed by foreigners as vote
of censure on the conduct of the war and
a repudiation Of it's results. They would
say what kind of a nation is that which
votes a great national defense fund. raises
an army OF 100000 men. rushes to war with
alacrity. prosecutes 1t with tremendous
energy TO a successful conclusion. and then
embraces the first opportunity to throw
away the results Of the war or declare they
are not worth having? They would say,
does its people know It's own mind, or has
It none? The inevitable conclusion is that