Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-10-09
HOW DID THESE THINGS COME
ABOUT?


Either there is in Imperialism dis
tinct menace to this Republic or the
| Democratic party has been guilty of
colossal hypocrisy and equally colossal
stupidity in attempting to make some
thing out of nothing
There are three distinct facts to be
kept in mind in any attempt TO deter
mine which of these alternatives
should be accepted. These facts are:
The testimony of men who are indie
pendent in politics.
The testimony of men now actively
allied with the Republican party.
The testimony of history.
Conccding that the Democrats would
for campaign purposes and to secure q
partisan advantage, have trumped up
the issue of Imperialism, how can the
fact be explained away that many of
the most distinguished men of this
country who are not partisans and
who were in sympathy with the Re-
publicans four years ago, and still are
in sympathy with them on the issues
of four years ago, are now actively al
lied with the Democrats on the sole
issue of Imperialism? How do men
like Carl Schurz and Governor Bout
well, who have known the ms and
outs of politics for n third of CEN
tury, come to be frightened Mt q bug
aboo," trumped up issue? If the issue
of Imperialism is partisan dodge,
why are the ablest men of the country
who are on-partisans the bitterest
antiIlnperialists?
Ii there is nothing in the issue of
Imperialism. how did 1t come to pass
that the Republican candidate for
President daclarcd before Imperialism
was an issue that to take forcible pos
session of the Philippines would be
criminal aggression" How did it
come about that the Republican candi-
date for Vice President, in his role as
historian and biographer, went on rec
| ord as declaring that war for posses
sion of distant and thickly settled dis
| tricts" is opposed to the American
I idea of expansion as eXemplifed by
our growth hitherto? How does it hap
pen that Hon. Chauncey Depew, the
ablest of Republican orators, declared
with emphasis in 1895 that to take the
Philippines meant empire in effect and
that empire in form would follow?
| Why did Hon. David i. Henderson,
| Speaker Of the House, speaking at the
Grand Army of the Republic reunion
as the personal representative of Mr.
Mckinley, declare that %the doctrines
of Hamilton are the text word of the
| hntlc' If Tnnnrfn1icn, Sc Il
than our past policy?" Have the doc
trnes of Hamilton always been the
text word of every hour that has seen
expansion of the national domain?
Here are II few of the "doctrines:"
II believe the British government
forms the best model the world ever
produced"
"All communities divide themselves
into the few and the many. The first
are the rich and well born, the others
the mass of the people,
The people are turbulent ana chang
| ing. They seldom Judge or determine
rightly. Give, therefore, the first class
n distinct and permanent share in the
government"
Nothing but permanent body can
| check the impudence of democracy.
Their turbulent and uncomfortable dis
position requires checks"
"lt is admitted YOU cannot have a
| good executive upon democratic
plan. See the excellency OF the British
executive. Nothing short of such an
executive can be efficient"
| The voice of the people is said to he
the voice Of God, but this maxim is
not true"
a democratic oorcrnmcm Of The mass
Of The people can noror be good
How does it come about that
Froudc, Macaulay, Gibbon. in words
exactly applicable TO Mr.. Mckinlcy's
present policy, uttered emphatic warn :
ings against such policy? Each as
a student of history declared that he
found Impcrialism-the subsection and
government Of distant peoples-to have
| been the cause of the downfall of every
nation that pursued such Il course.
| Shall Mckinley and Roosevelt and
Denew-- speaking as pariisans-out-
weigh Mckinley. Roosevelt and Depew
when they spoke as citizcns, outweigh
the consensus of the independent
thought of the country, historians and
the voice of history?
---------------
The Maryland Republicans are in