The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1912-10-12
REPUBLICAN TICKET
For President
WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT
of Ohio
For Vice-President
JAMES SCHO0LCRAFT SHERMAN
of New York
WHERE We DIFFER WIDELY

On page we are publishing a letter
from Prof. Norman Cameron. We pub
lish the letter not because We endorse
it's views, hut because we try to hold
the columns of the WING open as fair
forum for the expression of the opin-
ions of our readers on any matters of
public interest. Hence, wilie glvina
publicity to Prof. Camerons letter, we
do not hesitate to express our disagree.
ment with much of his utterance therein.
Without attempting to discuss his po-
sitions seriatim, we want to refer es-
pecially to that paragraph of his letter
wherein he says, Neither Mr.. Taft's
GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE BY
REPRESENTATIVE CLASS OF THE
PEOPLE, NOR DR. WILSON'S MEDIE-
VAL NOTION THAT THE HISTORY OF
LIBERTY HAS BEEN THE HISTORY
OF THE LIMITATION OF THE POWER
OF GOVERNMENT, will be acceptable to
the people of a democracy" We beg to
ask Prof Cameron who ARE 1.-The peo-
pie" to whom these doctrines are not
acceptable? We claim to be 1.-THE peo-
ple," as much as Prof Cameron, and
they are eminently acceptable doctrines
to US, as they are 10 many another who
goes to make up 1.-The people, OF whom
he talks. We are indeed very fixed in
our faith that COVE. nment of the peo-
pie by representative class OF the peo-
ple' is not only sound American doctrine,
but decided practical sense. This Ameri-
can government, by all it's historic foun-
dation and by its marvellous perdurance,
is a government by REPRESENTATIVE
4
ed it to endure and flourish. Govern
ment is nothing but public business and
can anyone with a grain of practical
business Judgment even think seriously
(much less talk seriously) about putting
a business concern into the hanus of
the multitude. How, for example, would
the gentlemen at the head of the Scott
Fertilizer Factory like to have their
great business managed by the whole
body OF their employees? The men to be
at the head of a successful business con-
Germ are the men with the FITNESS to
be therc-AND NO OTHERS. The same
law should hold good as to PUBLIC buS
ness, and the men who riade this Re-
public INTENDED it to hold good there.
Hence they provided for REPRESENTA-
TIVE government. The great majority
of the people" are not fitted for the
task of conducting 5he public business
and would wreck II if they undertook it..
This may not be popular doctrine, but 1t
is sound political economy and horse
sense. And right here is one place where
we get off, so far as the Progressive
platform is concerned.
Another place whore we likewise get
off, is indicated m he re erence above
TO DR.. Wilson's medieval notion" that
the "his.or of liberty is the history of
the LIMITATION of the power of gov
eminent" Here is one of the few places
where we can have pleasure in agreeing
with DR.. Wilson entire y. There are
many things in the Progressive platform
that are admirable as social or philan-
throp.c program. But they lie, properly,
WHOLLY OUTSIDE THE SPHERE OF
CIVIL GOVERNMENT. We cannot think
it the business of civil government TO
attempt any such extensive paternalisn,
neither can we think it would long sur
vive as a government of civil liberty: if
it did attempt it.
We regret that space will not allow us
10 discuss at more length Prof. Cam
eTon's interesting letter. The only re-
course. under the circumstances, seems
an appeal to the ''joint-de bate that
seems so popular just now in Maryland