Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1916-10-17
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR |
PROGRESSIVE ON WILSON
To the Editor Of the TeIeerdbh:

Harrisburg, Pa, Oct. 16, 1916.
notice, in one of President Wilson's
front porch" speeches, the statement
that "any man who raises the question
of sectionalism is unworthy of the con-
fidence of the nation" to quote his eX-
act words. To my mind this is one
moro case of President Wilson's Jug
Cling of words to get around a real
issue, for if there ever was a real rea-
son for making "sectionalism" an issue
President Wilson has furnished it in
his administration. 1t is a well-known
fact, in Washington and in the South,
that the majority of the Presidents
Cabinet are Southerners. Most of the
heads of the Treasury Department are
SouthernerS: majority of the heads
of the Post Office Department are
Southerners, likewise the Department
of Justice, the Navy Department, the
Department of Agriculture, and every
important committee in both houses of
Congress are Southerners.
Even this preponderance of sec
tionalism" in our national government
would not necessarily be a subject for
condemnation were it not for the fact
that the Southern men. in control of
the various offices, have adopted, SEEM
ingly, the slogan Southland First"
thereby forcing the isuse of sectional
ISM" OF all the more important laws
framed thus far the majority were
framed with the object of benefiting
the South. Take. for instance, the
tariff law, the reserve bank act. the
various tax and appropriation meas
| ures-all were framed to benefit the
South. with the North trailing bad
second. Is it any wonder, then, that
nf oil ie .
The writer concurs in the belief that
the President should be upheld in all
measures affecting the country's safety,
but feels that it is his privilege to
| criticise such issues when the Presi-
dent forces the issue by decrying criti-
cism for his (not national but Sec
tionaD policies. The writer was for
merly o Progressive, and still con-
! siders himself a Progressive, although
registered as a Republican.
President Wilson has advanced some
good Progressive legislation, but. as
stated before, most of it is sectional,
not national. I have noticed from time
! to time the attempts of would-be
"hecklers" asking Justice Hughes what
he would have done in this and that
| case. which has made me more deter
mined than ever to support Justice
| Hughes. To my mind this is taking
very unfair advantage of Hughes. We
all know what Wilson has done. or
tried to do, even if we were unable to
follow him in some of his devious
windings and evadings. What Hughes
would have done is another matter
In the first place, had Hughes been
President, it is safe to assume that
majority of the issues would not
have arisen. Instead OF our "diplo-
macy" being subject of ridicule in
| foreign countries, q policy of firmness
and backbone would have prevented
| tssee,, ,As
subject, as per the submarine ISSUE"
and such a policy would not have
meant war. but respect. The first
tissues" were "feelers'; the rest fol-
lowed with impunity.
A Iaughable feature of the heck
ling propaganda" happened last week.
When Justice Hughes clearly, and with
sledge-hammer force. explained what
he would have done in the submarine
issue, the Democrats hurriedly decided
| that it really did not matter what
Hughes would have done. To quote
| former Democratic City Chairman
Rromley. of Philadelphia 1.-The people
either will approve the administration S
action or condemn what it has done.
What Mr.. Hughes would have done
does not enter into It," This statement
would be laughable were it not for the
! feeling of sympathy that must neces-
sarily fill orc who has read, so many
times. the Democratic cry of 'What
would Hughes have done?" When he
| does tell them they Immediately de-
eide that 1t doesn't matter ANYWAY.
PROGR ESSINE.