The Tucson citizen., 1902-05-13
BRODlE'S OBLIGATIONS.

We are generally able to agree with
the doctrines enunciated by our es-
teemed contemporary, the Bisbee Re
view. On most questions confronting
the people for adjustment, the Review
is sound, and seldom fails to take an
Intelligent and patriotic part in their
discussion. In a recent issue of our
Bisbee contemporary however, we dis
cover a false note and the propagation
Of doctrine that is both spurious and
dangerous. This is so unusual with
our Bisbee contemporary that we feel
assured it will pardon us for calling
attention to it.
Replying to the asseveration OF
cn-temporary that Col. Brodie would
go into Office without feeling under
political obligations to any one save
the President" the Review says:
Can you overlook the fact of the
political obligation of Colonel Brodie.
and President Roosevelt, too, for that
matter, to the boys who forsOok home,
business and professions to go under
the officers to Cuba? Only for the
display of bravery by the Rough
Rider boys. when the shock of battle
came, neither Roosevelt nor Brodie
would have been in line for political
promotion at the end of the Spanish
war. Yes. indeed Colonel Brodie is
under political obligations to the boys
who followed him at Las Guisimas, and
who remained and routed the enemy
after he had been carried, wounded, to
the rear.
This is a statement of fact with
very wrong conclusion. The duty of
the Rough Rider boys" was to their
country, and not to Roosevelt or Bro
die. The feudal days when chieftains led
their vassals and retainers to do battle
for the sovereign are only a reminis-
cence in most civilized countries, and
never were known in this country.
Military service is duty of all citizens
ness and professions" to rally to the
defense of the flag when war with
Spain was declared, were only dis
charging plain duty to their country,
and not comforting a favor on Roose-
welt, Brodie or any one else.
To advance the theory that military
officers in the simple discharge of their
duty are placed under any personal
obligations to the men they are direct
ed to command, is to urge an absurdity
that is composed in about equal parts
of ludicrousness and danger. The
idea advanced by our Bisbee contem-
porary, If carried to its logical devel-
opment, would take us back to the
days of the Norman barons, when there
were only three kinds of men-kings, |
mobiles and vassals,
The Citizen is opposed to American
vassalage in all its forms and in any
guise. We resent the idea that the
brave young men who so promptly |
responded to the call of their country !
Ito go under the officers to Cuba had
other motive than patriotism and the !
maintenance of the honor of the flag.
To go under the officers" was to obey
the mandate of their government and |
to go otherwise would be to go as a
mob.
Comradeship in the army leads to
strong friendships as a general rule,
but to advance the idea that officers
should feel under personal obligations
to the men they commanded is to de-
Stroy the entire superstructure on
which American citizenship is built.
When one serves an individual rather
than his country he ceases to be a fun
damental patriot and becomes mere
follower or hired person.
We admit cheerfully that Roosevelt
and Brodie owe much to chance and
opportunity, but to assert that they
are under personal obligations to the
Rough Riders is to degrade the rank
and file of that regiment from the high
plane Of patriotism they have hereto
fore occupied.
A-4z