The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1900-06-21
agree from them In respect Il
lesser objects.


lesser objects.
Democrats, get together. And
not Democrats only, but all you Of
every political faith who would
first save the union from the threat
of imperialism, from the curse OF
militarism and from the blight of
monopoly, and after that Is done
would agree to disagree while de-
termining other questions. Our
appeal is not the appeal Of the
Democratic party as n political or
ganization. 1t is an appeal to the
honor and the interest of our land,
from all those who believe that
George Washington was right and
George Third was wrong.
We must have long pull,
strong pull and pull altogether.
And that will be the end of Mark
Hanna's "puli" with this govern
ment.
When we point to the Signs of
Empire and their dangers, which
have appeared on every hand,
multiplying every day since the
hour when William Mckinley took
oath before God and his country
men that he would support the con-
stitution of the United States, we
are told that there is no imperial
ism. But they who say there is no
Imperialism are the very ones aim
ing to destroy the republic and cre-
ate the empire. Their own teach
ings, their own conduct, their own
purposes are startling evidences
that they lie, ignorantly or vicious
Iy, when they say there is no inn
perialism. AS a matter of fact the
empire is at hand today, both in
our dealings with our own people
and our policy toward other
peoples. The present administra-
tion has established and fostered
an industrial Imperialism at home
and military imperialism abroad.
An army of soldiers is not more
imperialistic than any army OF
trusts. The waters of Asiatic seas
are not more treacherous to our
welfare than the water in millions
of watered stock. A military and
an industrial dictatorship go hand
in hand. The man who would rule
others against their will by the
bayonet, and the man who would
rule others against their will by
power of monopoly, deserve but
one name-the name of tyrant; and
tyranny will not be endured by the
American people. Suppose the
czar of Russia, by royal edict, were
to arbitrarily raise the price OF
bread throughout his dominions to
all his subjects; would not that be
called a wantOn act of Imperialism ?
But how would 1T differ from the
edict of a trust in the United
States, arbitrarily raising the price
of any particular necessity of life
which it might have the power tt
control? If a king anywhere or
earth were to lay hands upon the
sources of production among hi.
people, and thereupon were to lin
it the supply, control the distribu
ton and fix the price of natura
products for his own benefit, woulC
not that be called an act of i'm
perialism But how would it dit
fer from the imperialism of trust
as practiced in this country today
The truth is that trusts do what
kings would never dare. The kinl
of England laid tax on tea il
Boston barber, and as conse
quence lost an empire; but tn
king of monopoly in the United
States lays tax on every article
in universal use, and as conse
quence expects his dupes to re
elect president who will confirm
this power. Show me snywher'
on earth an act Of Monarch or Die
tator more imperiOus than an &C
of congi ess that turns the highes
functions of government over t,
national banks and makes tn
magnitude of the peoples debts tn
index OF their prosperity. Show
me in the worlds history a NOR
arbitrary use of imperial pswe
than is implied when the none.
trust controls the circulating me
dium of country and the othe
trusts control all its MANUFACTURED
and many of its natural products
} You cannot show it. Aud still Ou
opponents say there is no imperial
ism there is only "duty" and "des
tiny" and responsibility" Mean
while Duty wears crown, Destin.
carries a scepter and Responsible
ity benignly smiles on both ant
says: "God bless you, my children