The Washington times., 1913-03-12

| rOr in the land.
Under these conditions, | repeat, it would
seem to be the part of good judgment, an act
of free, courageous Americanisn, for men who
think alike politically, whose honest convic.
tons would lead them into one organization to
get together under some name, it doesn't mat
ter little bit what so long as it is not offensive
to the community and restricted in scope. By
so doing, they would form an organization that
would have something definite to say about
what shall and what shall not be done in this
! government of ours.
No Quarrel With Progressives.
| have no quarrel with the Progressives be-
cause of their stand against my proposal for
amalgamation with the Republicans-my pro-
posal or any kindred proposal that could be re-
| allied. From their point of view they are right
right because they do not believe amalgama-
| ton is neceSsary-right because they do not
believe the Republicans are sincere in their cor
dial reception of my suggestion, right because
they distrust the Republican party, controlled
as it still is by the bosses and bandits who looted
the Chicago convention.
Feeling as they do about it, the Progressives
are perfectly right in their stand. And in part |
am in absolute accord with them, in absolute
sympathy with them. The one point on which
/ am not in sympathy with them is their belief
that the Republicans are certain to come over
to them. Of course, do not believe this will
ever happen, especially here in the East. And
failing of its realization it puts an entirely df
ferent complexion on the situation.
With the attitude of the Progressives, as
concerns the bosses and the bandits of the Re-
publican party am in perfect accord But the
bosses and bandits are not representative of all
the individual Republican voters and it is these
individual Republican voters whom we want
with us, and who want us with them, men who
are in substantial accord with us, both in eco-
nomic and national policies, aswell as along all
progressive lines.
To get together the men of all parties who
think alike would be well-nigh an impossibility
without enrolling their names in new party
against which, as matter of course, there
could be no party prejudice.
1t is not an easy thing for lifelong Demo-
crat, or the son of lifelong Democrat, to 60
over to the common enemy, the Republican
party, and the converse of this is equally true
in going from Republicanism to Democracy.
Neither viii Go to the Other.
The Progressive party is new in the field,
and but for the fact that it came into being
through row in the Republican party, it would
be as free from prejudice as brand-new party
formed tomorrow. But under the circumstances
of its origin, it is as bitterly hated by the Re-
publicans as the Republican party is hated by it.
Consequently, there will be no amalgamation
by either going over to the other-there will
not be and there cannot be.
Assuming this to be the fact, and assuming
that it were possible to bring about such con-
ference as suggested, looking toward the for
nation of new party, to be called, let us say,
the Liberal party, isn't such step eminently
worth while to Republicans and ProgreSsives
who are genuinely opposed to the policies of
the Democratic party, and isn't it an eminently
patriotic and honest thing to do?
As concerns the Republicans and Progress
ives, the latter are stronger in numbers and
occupy better battle-ground today than the
Republicans. But the Republicans are better
entrenched and better equipped for an endur-
ance siege Their roots run deep into the ground
and they have great history back of them.
Moreover, they have the sinews of war in
much larger measure than the Progressives.
Organizations cannot be developed and
maintained, and battles fought, without money
and without newspapers. The Republicans are
long on these; the Progressives are short on
these
We might as we'll look at the facts as thev
are, and not permit ourselves to be deceived by
our wishes or our enthusiasm. The Republi-
c,uc bova with then, q varv 1aroa parcanfooa oE