The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1904-08-19

huu thio dSOusdtioh Diou6he d6obhse
them. Several of them have deserved
it. Is Roosevelt numbered by his
enemies among these weaklings? No.
Roosevelt is not accused of being weak.
On the contrary, he is accused of being
too strong, arrogant and despotic.
Then, is he lacking in industry or
ability? Is he an inefficient executive2
Does the government machine run
loosely with his hand at the lever? Is
he not big enough to fill the Officer No,
his adversaries do not say these things
of him. On the contrary, they claim
that his personality is too dominating.
He is too much of an executive. He
has not sufficiently allowed things to
run themselves.
Then. is he behind the times? Is he,
like so many men of great strength,
non progressive? Is he reactionary?
Does he fail to keep step with the times9
Does he fall behind modern thoughts
No. He is not accused of any of these
faults. Indeed, it is urged that he is
too progressive; that he is an advanced
liberal, if not indeed a radical; that he
has brought about the formation OF a
department of commerce and labor that
will let publicity into the industrial
trusts, just as light is now let into the
national banks Roosevelt has stated
that certain control should be exer
cised over great aggregations of capital.
He has recognized that organized labor
is supplement of organized capital.
No, Roosevelt's fault does not lie in
non-progressiveness. The chief objec-
ton to Roosevelt in the opinion of the
moneyed interests, is that he is too pro-
gressive.
Then, is he an impractical man? Is
he unable to get along with his party
in congress? Has he quarreled with
the republican senators in congress?
Has he broken up his party as Johnson
did, and Cleveland? No. He has not
done those things. Shortly after he
was inaugurated his enemies said that
he would be bull in china shop;
that he would wreck his party; that he
could get no legislation in congress-;
that he lacked TACT. adroitness and
political ability. But the party did
not break up. He got on well with the
leaders, both in the senate and the
house. His influence in legislation was
distinctly felt. He showed himself to
be good politician after ALL Under his
hearty manner lay fund of tact. He
was not bull in a china shop. So that
line of talk had to be surrendered.
Quickly the other extreme was reached,
and it was said that he had surrender
ed" to corrupt politicians.
Has the man a disagreeable person
atty? Is he accused, as President
Harrison was, of being cold. No. He
could hardly be called cold or distant.
The fact that the bluest blood in the
country runs in his veins has left no
trace upon his frank, simple personal
ity. He is therefore accused of being
too hearty. too democratic. He is in
formed that it is beneath the dignity of
a president to shake hands with the
engineer and fireman of his train Be-
cause he has lived with cowboys and
made friends with hunters he is set
down by the more esthetically minded
as rough, uncivilized brute, 100 healthy
to be refined.
Is he ever accused, as some Of our
presidents were, of personal cowardice?
Is it ever said of him that he is lacking
in physical courage? No. 1t is now
denied by some of his :bitter enemies
that he has ever proved himself brave
man; but not even the bitterest has
ventured to accuse him of pusillanimity.
The general tsentiment of his adverse
ries seems, however, to be that he is not
only brave, but too braye. 1t is said
that his love of good fight minimizes
the dignity of the arts Of peace.
Has any charge or innuendo been
brought against his private life2 Has
he been Incorporate or immoral? No.
Even his bitterest enemies concede the
wholesomeness and purity of his do
nestle relations.
Thus none of the favorite accusations
brought against previous presidents
seem to have been brought against
Roosevelt. What is his chief fault?
1t is temperamental, say his critics.
He is imperialistic, ambitious, warlike,
reckless, daring, adventurous, arrogant.
overtearing and impulsive. In word
he is not sufficiently grave and rever.
ent."
Upon what are these charges based2
First, on the fact that there is no
more concrete or specific accusation to
bring against him. Second, on the
fact that in the war with Spain he re-
signed good position in order to raise
a regiment of cavalry and take it to
the front. He did take it to the front
and into the fight, and it acquitted it.
self creditably. Like every colonel, he
was proud of his regiment, and he did
not hesitate to say so. Because of this