The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-02-18
AMERICAN IDEALS.


To the Editor Of the indianapolis Journal:
l note in the Journal this morning an
Associated Press dispatch from New York
stating that the government has declined
10 furnish any more money with which to
light Bartholdi's Statue of Liberty, and
that henceforth that imposing and inspir-
ing figure will be "snuffed out for all time"
AS the Journal headlines pithily put 1t,
the government has mo money to burn
for sentiment.
/ also notice in the same paper the dec
laration of Mr.. Foulke before a patriotic
society to the effect that no danger threat
ems American ideals from our present
method of expansion. together with the
Journals editorial approval thereof. In
stinctively putting this and that to-
gether," 1 cannot escape the conviction
that the Journal and Mr.. Foulke are wrong.
When the New York dispatch says the
sentiment which has kept the beacon
burning all these years can no longer keep
1t alight,' does that not mean a popular
decadence in that sentiment-the traditional
American spirt-and is this not prophetic
of the shattering of American ideals?
When one recalls the startling change in
American public opinion on the subject of
expansion in the last FIVE years, a change
involving the basic principles of republican
government, one must be optimistic indeed
TO see no possible menace therefrom. When
such intelligent, courageous and patriotic
leaders of public opinion as the Journal
and Mr.. Foulke are alike Indifferent TO
this fundamental change, is not this alone
one Of the most conclusive proofs of the
existence of a real, il insidious. danger to
American ideals?
One can understand, however, IL not SYM
pathize with, the present attitude of abe
Journal because OF it's obligation as a party
organ to acquiesce in the actions and poll
icy of its party when once formally adopt
ed. 1t must do this or surrender its party
prerogatiYes. But Mr.. Foulke was not
bound by partisan ties. AS an avowed and
honest independent he is in duty bound to
give good reasons for his righ~t-about-face
on American expansion via colonization
and conquest since he so strongly con-
demned Hawaiian annexation a few years
ago.
the republican to the imperial policy, from
a government by consent TO a government
by force-for that is what the last analysis
reveals-is so violent that the grave re-
sponsibility rests upon the authors and
abettOrs of this change to prove its wisdom
and justice. Certainly Mr.. Foulke's argu-
ment that the next generation of F%flipinos
will approve our coercion of their ia
theirs does not meet the case, for the eff
feet of coercion upOn them is only one and
the lesser consideration. The paramount
question is, what is the effect of this coer-
cion upon America life and character?
That is essentially a moral question, one
of common honesty and fair play. Can a
ItDuDllC lOuS MAINTAIN is NANaAAN dho IL
tegrity as a republic at home, while viO-
lating its spirit and repudiating its funda-
mental doctrines abroad? Can il do this
in a spirit of sincerity? If not, can 1t do
this at all without doing a grave and
double wrong? And does not the wrong
doer suffer more in reality than the victim?
Can might make right? Can great riches
repay men and nations for the loss Of good
character? Will more power compensate
for less or low-grade patriotism? viii the
waving of the flag over a hundred con-
--- -oo-fo- for tho loss Of
the cherished ideals of liberty and equality
that "old glory once stood for?
IL devolves on Mr.. Foulke and his fellow
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS statesmen. cap
tains of industry and political parasites-to
meet these questions and TO solve the prob
lem Of destiny which they suggest These
leaders of the Republic have challenged the
very law Of its birth and being, and IL is
for them to meet the issue with wisdom
and justice. as we'll as with much-Vaunted
courage. Il. B. JOHNSON.
Rirbmnpd Feb II