Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1904-11-02
Roosevelt Described as "A Modern
Andrew Jackson by a Writer Fs.
millar With Traits Of Both.
BOTH MEN OF THE PEOPLE
Daring to Do Right Regardless Of the
Flimsy Techniealties in Which
Lawyers Delight.
portland Oregonian.)

less; may compromise the country
and plunge il into war; hat he usurps
the powers and functions of congress,
is impatient of constitutional re-
strain, and disposed TO substitute his
own will for rules of order. law and
government. This sort of description
might characterize a mar like Presi-
dent Jackson, whom all Democrats
worship or revere 1t is wholly for
elm 10 President Roosevelt man
oil strong character. indeed, but a man
of large and varied and general Gull
tuIc, a man of energetic nature. in
tull harmony with the best thought
and feeling and action of his time
He is a man, but no manikin. lie
SHOWS his country; he is a student
of its history and has written admir-.
able books upon IL; he is a represen.
tative of its best energies and aspira.
tons. None better. He comes of
stock which ever has stood for order
and law and constitutional govern
ment, and which has had the cour.
age and vigor to impress its purposes
and It's character upon the history of
the world.
But he is no puppet of politicians.
Nobody uses HIM. He doesn't send
delegations to conventions to play for
him in secrecy and hugger-mugger.
awaiting the psychological moment
of the game" when it may be safe
To speak. Nobody is left in doubt as
to how he stands on any important
question. He has a mind strong and
bold, independent and decisive. Do
you admire a mind OF that description,
or do you like one of studied conceal
ment and creeping subtlety, bound ! II
party slavery heretofore to wrong pol
icies, but now afraid to speak out,
lest its real principles be known?
What are the charge against Theo
dore Roosevelt? In what has he
shown himself violent and head
strong? Is he coarse. cantankerous
and quarrelsome, as Jackson was; a
duelist as Jackson was; defying the
courts. law and authority, as Jack
son did; hanging men brutaliy, as
Jackson did, and threatening openly
to hang eminent men OF the country
who oppose him, as Jackson did? Has
he strained the constitution OF the
country and the law of the national
and International commerce To the nj
tcrnust, as jefferson did by The en-
barge act? Has he forced The QUA
try into foreign war. as Madison did
with Jefferson's advice and support
No; he has done none Of these things
nor others like them. What, then
has he done. on which the charge i.
based that he is a headstrong an,
dangerous man, and a usurper of au
thority?
The specific allegations are these
His intervention in the coal strike
the course pursued toward Colombo;
in the Panama matter. and his orde
as 10 pensions. This comprises thu
list-for the real grievance of all tn
grievances against him. IN which al
this opposition arises, CANNOT b
avowed. That was his Intervention ii
the Northern Securities case. In tina
he simply executed the law: but tn
act has inspired the chief part of thi
opposition; and the ruling juggler>
hurt by the act and seeking revenge
supply the influence and money I
support the attack.
In the anthracite coal strike he sill
ply requested the coal operators I
come TO an agreement with their worl
men. He usurped no authority in asl
ing the coal operators and the co
miners to submit their controversy
arbitration. His interposition was |
behalf of the public-the consumer
of coal-as well as of the parties be
llGerent. What was wrong about II
lie acted in the matter wholly as a
individual. and he rendered the couI
thy and all parties concerned a res
service. which was universally reCo;
nized al the time as highly commend
able. The objection came later, fC
political fustian. In the Panama ma
ter he acted entirely within the la
and treaty. and for the highest Intc
. ests of the United States. Our go.
eminent had nothing to do whateve
with the secession of Panama. Cri
lCal and hostile inquiry, through tl
senate of the United States, coul
! discover no breach of ~internationi
obligation. For under treaty with c,
lombia we had "A right and il was OF
duty to preserve the peace on the ISL
mus, for commerce in transit. w
mad long kept a force there for thu
purpose. When Panama secede,
President Roosevelt merely preserve
the peace, and let things take the
course. The independence of Pan;
ma was soon recognized, not only i
the United States. but by all the IL
portant nations Of the earth; an
President Roosevelt made a treat
with Panama, negotiating fol III
tight to build the ship canal. vii
stipulation for payment TO Panama
the full sum for The right that WI
to have been paid to Colombia. Not
ing wrong about il whatever: and ii
whole negotiation and transaction wa
: ratified. with the help of Democrat
votes in the senate. and couldn't hay
been ratified without them. AS TO III
pension order, il Mas just as far froI
being an act of %usurpatiOn. 1t nero,
gave further application TO previol
rules Of the pension office-followin
= exactly an order made by Presidel
Cleveland; so If there a usurpaIlo
there was Democratic precedent Il
il. But will the critics say the ord,
ought 10 be reversed? Would the
have congress reverse 1t? They ha
cn't dared and wouldn't dare to touc
ii. The objection is for a party pu
pose only.