Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1901-10-09

having constitutional government. 1t
is the proud boast Of the .Englishman
that his government, monarchical
though 1t be, recognizes the right of
the subject to free speech. 1t is no
less the pride of the American citizen
that in this republic every citizen can
proclaim his opinions fearlessly with
out molestation by those whom the peo-
pie have put in authority. Every four
years the people of the United States
have the privilege of changing the pol
icy of their government, transferring
the control, IL majority of them de-
sire to do so, from one political party
to another. The press and public
speakers discuss the issue and the can
didates for the enlightenment Of the
people. The people discuss the ques-
tions involved, the advantages to be de-
rived from existing policies and from
the policies which it Is proposed to sub
stitute. Party feeling may be reused
to high pitch-and 1t usually is, for
most Americans are partisans-but
press, orators and voters have only one
object in view-a change in policy and
administration by orderly methods.
Whatever the decision of the voters
may be, their purpose is not to destroy
government, but to perpetuate it. That
is the American ids idea and it hos 81 Fits
republic The ballot is the only weapon
which the citizen of this country uses
to bring about a change in men and in
measures. For nearly century and
n quarter we have preserved our free
institutions and strengthened them by
absolute freedom of discussion. Such
conditions are possible only in those
countries which permit liberty of
speech and criticism and where gov
ernments have no power to shape and
control the opinions Of citizens. In
Great Britain, which is constitutional
monarchy, members of Parliament dc
not hesitate to denounce the policy OF
the Government even in time of war.
Such men as Mr.. Bryce, Mr.. Morley and
Sir Henry Campbell Zimmerman pro-
test fearlessly and vigorously against
the military policy of their government.
British newspapers and statesmen are
equally outspoken In condemnlng the
men whom they hold responsible for
the war in South Africa. In our own
country there were decided differences
of opinion about the wisdom and ne
cessity Of acquiring remote territory
by conquest. The matter was referred
to the people, and they have settled 1t,
temporarily at least. There has been
prompt acquiescence in the result, how
ever disappointing it may have been.
That is the British and American way
Of settling controversies, Of clearing the
political atmosphere. They make ap-
peals to reason, to public sentiment and
to political expediency, but when the
i&ues are decided Mt the polls they
quietly accept the decision. No Eng
lishman or American thinks of assas-
sination as a remedy for political evils.
Now that is not the anarchists way.
They do not believe in law, in author
ity and in government. All rulers, in
their opinion. are despots, all govern
ments are tyrannies. They want to
annihilate government, to abolish au-
thority The man who shot President
Mckinley was not influenced by the
fact that the President is Republican.
1t would have been all the same to him
II the chief magistrate Of the nation
were Democrat, Populist or Pro-
hibltlonist. From Czolgosz's standpoint
the fact that Mr.. Mckinley. was the
head Of the government was sufficient
to Justify his removal by violent means.
1t would have been the same II Mr..
Bryan had been, elected President. AS
the chief magistrate Of the nation he
would have been as Objectionable to
anarchists as Mr.. Mckinley. For the
anarchist is no respecter of parties. He
is not swayed by the considerations
which influence other men. He wants
chaos. II he belongs to the violent class
of anarchists. II he is an anarchist Of
the philosophical school he wants the
impossible and the unattainable. He
wants men so perfect that they will not
require the restraints Of government.
The American and the Briton, who
have the most liberal governments and
the free institutions of all the nations
of the world, know by experience that
governments are Indispensable; that
authority must be exercised by some
power created by the people and sus-
tanned by them. They criticise officials,
as 1t is their privilege: they denounce
policies and condemn administrations,
as 1t is their prerogatiye to do. but their
purpose is solely to perfect government,
not to tear 1t down and destroy it. AS
long as government by party exists
men will differ as to principles, meth
DDS and candidates. Such differences
are inevitable and unavoidable under a
system of popular government, where
the authority is created by the people
and exists solely by their consent. AS
long as the right of untrammeled dis
cussion is recognized, as long as the
citizen is free to speak and to vote as
he pleases. party differences In the
United States will be settled, as they
have been settled for more than Gen.
tury, by appeals to reason. Our revolu-