Webster City freeman. [volume] (Webster City, Hamilton County, Iowa) 1884-1946, 1912-07-23
The Republican Party.

The Republican Party.
When mere boy became strong
ly attached to the republican party.
The towering personality Of Abra-
ham Lincoln had just appeared
above the political horizon. His
words and works were mighty in
fuence in shaping the political be-
liefs of that time and of all subse-
quent time. He made very plain,
even to the boyhood of that day, the
vital difference between the repub-
lican and democratic views of the
constitution. The former meant
life, the latter death to the nation
as events were then shaping. The
latter view was based upon the So
called sovereignty of the states with
a denial of the right of the national
government to defend it's own life.
The falacy and reasonable nature
of such a doctrine was made marve-
lously clear by Mr.. Lincoln. Until
recently no attempt has been made
to again bring the question to the
fore. Will the modern advocates of
the doctrine be more successful in
maintaining it than were jeff. Da-
Wis and those associated with him
in the days which SO many of us re-
member? I do not believe they will.
The line of thought herein advanc-
ed is suggested by the attacks here
tofore and now being made upon the
republican national convention re-
Gently held at Chicago. These at
tacks are based upon the denial by
that convention of the right of any
state or number of states to over
turn it's long and well established
course of procedure. Will any one
contend that the convention of a
great party is without the right to
formulate course of procedure and
determine the qualification of it's
members? Conceding such right in
wolves a denial of the right Of any
Sovereign State" so-called, to ov-
errule that course of procedure and
that determination as to who shall
and who shall not be members Of
the convention. A state, in my hum
BILE opinion, has no more right to
overrule the law Of a national con-
vention than it has to repeal a law
of the United States duly enacted
by it's congress.
The preferential primary laws
which caused all the trouble in the
Chicago convention have for their
basis the exploded Sovereign State
falacy. This pernicious doctrine is
befogged and obscured by an attack
on conventions as such. It is con-
tended by the champions OF these
laws that conventions should be
abolished, because corrupt, and the
sovereign states be clothed with the
power, through state presidential
primaries, to nominate the presiden-
tial candidates Of all parties. Is 1t
not pertinent here to ask why this
attack on conventions is made by
the advocates OF this alleged new
but in fact very old and obsolete
doctrine? Was not Lincoln the
choice of a convention and could
that choice have been bettered by a
state preferential primary? Was
not Grant chosen by convention?
Have our state sovereignty friends
any fault to find with that nominal
ton? Then there is Blaine, Garfield,
Mckinley and Roosevelt. Were
their nominations tainted? Even
as recent as four years ago not even
a mist OF political unrighteousness
had cast cloud upon the honesty
and integrity of convention nomina-
lions. Going back to the convention
of 1850, when the aspirations OF
the illustrious Grant were checked
and a third term denied him, no one
said aught against the convention.
Not until the overheated ambition
of another third term aspirant is
rudely checked is there any thought
OF charging representative body OF
leading republicans with dishonesty
and even theft. The attack IL
groundless and will fall fiat long be.
fore the November election.
While my views may run counter
to the prevailing popular sentiment
OF the day I am firmly OF the belief
that the money and. strength now
necessarily expended in the primary
campaign should be reserved for the
battle with the common enemy. The