Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1906-09-13
SECRETARY sHAw's SPEECH.
Large CoucOurss of People Greet Head OF
Treasury Department,

Der of other prominent party men. he
was met at the station by a delegation
of business men of Martinsville and
prominent party men of the district,
headed by DR.. John w. Simmons, Re-
publican candidate for Congress.
At one o'clock Mr.. Shaw addressed
one.of the largest audiences ever assem-
bled in Martinsville to hear prominent
speaker, being introduced by Common
wealth's Attorney Smith. The Secre-
tary was listened to with rapt atten-
ton, and his logical arguments were
greeted with hearty applause. Thesub-
ject of his speech was "Self-Govern-
ment," and he spoke, in part, as fol-
lows:
ELF-GOVERNMENT.
"Self-Government is the severest task
which God, in His wisdom, ever placed
upon His children. 1t took six thousand
wears to develop people into whose
hands He dared commit their own polit-
ical affairs. The thought expressed in
the Declaration of Independence that
governments are institutions among
men for the purpose of securing to all
their certain inalienable rights, and that
they derive their just powers from the
consent of the governed, was a novel
and unheard of pronouncement. Ancient
history, and much that is modern, con-
veys the idea that people exist for the
sake of the Government. That gov
ernment should exist for the benefit, and
in aid of the people, is comparatively
modern innovation. Even now it's the
oretical recognition is far more prevail
ent throughout the world than its prac-
tical application.
''Not all republics in name are repub-
lies in fact. In several those who have
secured the executive chair by force of
arms outnumber several fold those who
have been elected to the Office of Presi-
dent. Go put your finger on the map,
and the chances are you will find a peo-
pie incompetent of self-government-
"When our constitution was adopted,
the world doubted the wisdom of the ex-
pertinent. The world did not believe it
possible that men differing in political
thought would walk side by side to the
polls and there, in peace, cast opposing
ballots, and then each demand for the
other the same integrity of count as he
asked for himself. In other words, they
thought this people, like so many 9th
ers, would prove insufficient in self-poise
and self-restraint to maintain and exer-
else self government.
''Statecraft is not an exact science,
nor is it natural attribute of the race.
Neither would popular or universal
scholastic attainments prove complete
guarantee of capacity for self-govern-
ment. We send our children to the
schools and spend much money in their
education, in the hope that in after years
they may be able to protect themselves
in the market places. declare to you
that if the American people shall con-
tinue great self-governing, self-gov-
erned people, they must spend more
time in the study Of statecraft.
eve are a busy people-intensely
busy. We are physically and mentally
active-intensely active. Our thoughts,
our efforts and our dreams are centraliz-
ed on our personal affairs-lntensely
centralized. We are benevolent and
even altruistic in our affections and in
the play of our religious emotions, but
we plan and execute for ourselves and
for ourselves alone. About the only
time we study statecraft is during
political campaign, and not always then
are our thoughts directed to public ques-
tions and to analyses of the principles
underlying the administration of nation
al affairs. Would it be safe to say that
we place too great value on candidates
and underestimate the Importance of
the principles of the parties as outlined
in their platforms and exemplified in
their records? Candidates are relative
ly nothing as compared to the principles
of the parties they represent.
SIN republic like this, government
of necessity must be by parties rather
than by individuals. We read that in
olden times certain countries prospered,
advanced, under the rulership of this
monarch and that emperor; and Ian
guished, refrigerated, under the reign
of others. We know that this country
has prospered during certain periods,
and that it has languished, retrograded,
during other periods. Why? Can the
cause be traced to the chief executive?
Perhaps so, in limited degree. Can it
be traced primarily to the party in pow
er? think it can, both primarily and
principally.
) "Was it by accident that Israel grew
fat under David and went to pieces un-
der Ahab7 Was it by accident taat Rus
sia prospered under the reign of Peter
the Great, or that she has not always
prospered since? Was it by accident
that 1892 was the best year this country
had then ever seen, and that two years
later we were in the midst of financial