The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-11-03
TWO TELLING SPEECHES
 ARE MADE BY PARKER

l frequently with prolonged applause and once, when he paid homage to Mir. | Schurz as one who had felt the blight ing power of militarism." Mir. Schurz l came forward and shook Judge Parker ! by the hand and thanked him for his words. The audience stood up and
 shouted their approval Judge Par ker's speech was as follows:
 | Imperial Republics.
 When we speak of the growth of an
 imperialistic tendency in this country we don't mean that we have or care to have ruler with the title of Emperor at the head of the Government or a
 political institution abolishing the re- public and establishing monarchy. ! Rome was substantially an empire be- fore Caesars dictatorship, and France
 was ruled by an imperialistic policy
 while Napoleon Bonaparte still called
 himself the citizen consul of the | French republic.
 With us the tendency towards im-
 perialism in our government took tam gible shape when this republic assum-
 ed the power to rule over distant and
 alien countries and populations. not only without their consent, but dis tinctly without their will, and when. correspondingly. the principles and ideals we have inherited from the founders of the republic gave way to ideas as to the powers of our govern ment which differed widely from Abra- ham Lincoln's conception of democ- racy, that 1t was a government of the people, for the people and by the peo- pie.
 Annexation of Philippines. "when we annexed the Philippine islands. it was done not only with com plete disregard of the rights and the wishes of the people thereof--a disre- gard as absolute as ever caused any of the conquests of the Roman Elm pire, or of the French Empire under Napoleon-but also with hardly less absolute disregard of the spirit of our political institutions.
 The annexation of the islands, and the subjection by force of the Filipinos fighting for their independence. were as different from the intentions of the fathers as government by superior ar tillery is from government by the con- sent of the governed.
 t'when we contemplate the morale of the policy of conquest and subjuga. tion, as 1t has been carried on and is
 now defended by the Republi- can party, we cannot but feel nency of democratic institutions among
 us. The great principles proclaimed by the Declaration of Independence that government derives its just pow CTS from the consent of the governed, stood substantially unauestioned among us until the imperialistic policy | of conquest and arbitrary rule over the
 conquered was entered upon.
 Declaration Scoffed At. "It was recognized as the very es- sence of democratic institutions. Now | it is scoffed at by many of the leaders
 of the Republican party as a glittering | generality, that has no practical mean | ing and applications; as. baby talk, fit | for the infancy of this nation, but ridicu- lous in it's present state of power. In
 deed. 1t is perfectly logical for them to l deride and reject 1t if they mean to | justify, and maintain their policy of conquest and dominion.
 But let me ask them as citizens of a i Democratic republic, what the true
 source of the just powers. can be if not the consent of the governed? Is 1t force 7
 That would be despotism. Is 1t
 wealth? That would be plutocracy Is
 1t the privilege of birth or position in
 society? That would be aristocracy.
 What remains then, as the source | of the just powers of free govern
 ment but the consent of the govern l ed, in its range and effect regulated
 by self made law? You deny that.
 and you deny the vital principles of
 Democratic institutions. And imper
 ialism does deny 1t.
 ImperiaIism at Home.
 Tt denies 1t, first, with regard to
 the subjugated alien populations. If the imperialistic tendency continues
 we shall soon have some experiences at home. In fact they are already beginning to appear. You cannot fail | to notice that whenever you quote the
 principles proclaimed in the declara- | tion of independence In connection
 with the case of the Filipinos. you are fiercely assailed as unpatriotic citi-
 zens. who are stirring up our sub- | jects to revolt.
 Tn fact, a member of the adminis- tration in speaking of the present and future of the Philippines, stops very little short of admonishing us that every public discussion of that sub | ject-unless 1t is in entire harmony with the policy of the administration
 should stop for the reason that 1t might excite hopes among our sub jects' which the administration Is un-
 willing to gratify.
 Now what does this mean? Dem ocratic government Is essentially gov
 ernment by public discussion. And
 now we are told that we should not freely discuss question of such stupendous importance as that wheth- CT the United States should remain a simple Democratic republic or become a colonial empire: that the principles of the declaration of independence, the Fundamental principles of our repub- lie should not be mentioned in con nection with the matter lest our col
 onial subjects hear of it, and that, as the administration knew this bust
 ness best, the people should leave
 it to the administration to determine
 the course to be taken concerning it.. This is only and initial, tentative attempt to dominate public opinion ir
 behalf of the government But there spirit Is permitted to prevail. In this
 respect we must not fail to keep in
 view the greatest power wielded by
 the President in the conduct of our
 foreign relations. The Constitution
 provides that only Congress shall
 have power to proclaim war, yet the
 President is able to create by his con-
 duct of our foreign relations situa-
 tions which make war inevitable.
 Tt may happen that in such an oc- casion Congress being opposed to war
 would not consent to it if consulted
 beforehand, but 1t may be confronted
 by things already done, by accom- plished facts, which make the escape from war exceedingly difficult, If no
 impossible
 The President may then force war
 upon the country. in spite of the ad-
 verse opinion of Congress. He may