The Nome daily nugget., 1914-03-17

| 8Ay&S D8ssSSD sBtseSs ~D eN~ e%S s~FS~
 iiean party when Roosevelt led tn progressive hosts out into the wilder
 ness. the party is ruined. This is 90 | ' netional politics. It is 70 in stat
 politics. as shown in New York. an
 1t Ia equally so in county. town or pro
 cinct politics. No party divided agains
 itself will ever progress or even hol,
 what 1t has won.
 Most of the splits In the parties hay, occurred over nc thing more serious than personal ambition, personal feel
 ing or personal piaue. One man ol few men in . state or county or pre- cinct who are more concerned with their own advancement, their own re- tantion Of power or their own personal influence and asEandissmsnt bs6ors the public than they are with the party soeA. vii eventually ruin the party in that stats. county or precinct. It has happened times without numbsr % many times that by now it should be considsrsd an axiom and known 10 ovsry man who makes any prstsn. tiens to political aeumsn.
 Certainly there have been examples enough spread upon the political black beard for the vsriest dunce of a poll. tical student to learn that party split means q party defeat. It means also the loss of party power in places here, perhaps the defeat of the par ty means very little in the grand total of national politics.
 Certainly in any organization. .poli- ticaL or of any other nature. the less tho harmony. the less the power and the less the consideration given the members of the organization.
 One very good example of this has very recently been given in the cas" of the army and the navy of the Unit ed States. Both large and important services and both filled with men de- oted to their service. But each one of these branches of the government has felt the utter hopelessness of ad- vancing it's interests unless 1t will get together and go to congress united ns to what 1t needs And neither the army nor the navy will get to- gether.
 rAoe \. vm>.>,xs er swamnlA nf thC utter futility of pulling apart. An other example is the rout of the re- prblicans when the progressive drew away because of an internal party mixup. Another example is now be- fore the public in the case of the dem ocratic party in New York.
 It will not do. Never has a party rrospered, be 1t in a community of millions or in q community of hun dreds. where those who would lead or those who seek perfermsnt will n ruli together. A party organization split and pulling against itself has two courses open to 1t and it should take enc or the other as soon as 1t finds that 1t is in the deplorable state of split" It should either go out of business or it's members should adjust their personal differences and come te gether Ike men for the sake of the cause.
 If the republican leaders had let the personal mattesr go. who knows but that right now there might have leen a republican administration in Washington. If the New York demo- crats had sunk their personal differ snc+s for the good of their common bcrty that party would today be stronger in New York.
 It was personal spite and piaue and desire which ruined the republicans. It was personal spit and pique and desire which ruined the democrats in New York and the same things will ruin any party anywhere when its members are not big enough to ignore the personal and pull and work to- geether for the good of the party.
 Harmony within the party organ ization. be It great or small. harmony. even at the cost of some personal sacrifice is the most desirable thing foi any party organization and with out 1t any party organization is a use- less thing. Harmony. the sinking of all personal differences should be the one aim of any political organization. After that let tho talk of influence and o; place be heard. But first harmony and a pull together.