New Britain herald., 1916-08-05
ROBINS RALLIES TO
 SUPPORT OF HUGHES
Says Rebellion in 1912 Was Not
 Permanent Cleavage
MERELY REVOLT IN PARTY

clares Lack of Support for Party
 Tickets in 1914 Indicates It Had
 Little Standing With People.
 Chicago Aug. 5.-Declaring that the voters of the nation in 1912 and 1914 decreed the death of the pro- gressive party, and that all signs pointed to desire on the part of tho American people to work out their political future with the instruments provided by the two dominant par ties Raymond Robins of Illinois, chairman of the 1916 progressive na- tional convention, today issued a state ment calling on his party to support Charles E. Hughes, the republican nominee for the presidency.
 The manner in which the progress sive tickets of 1912 and 1914 were received by the voters, MT. Robins said indicated the movement to be a revolt within party and not a per- manent political cleavage sufficient to warrant the maintenance of pro- gressive party lines.
 The statement in part follows:
 Robins Explanation.
 TUT SO1uG years pT1Or 10 IJlZ Ill common with other progressive citi- zens I had hoped for new cleavage in American political life-a cleavage that would bury the dead issues of 1860, wipe out sectional lines and prejudices-and pretending the vital social and economic issues of the twentieth century, would divide American political parties along true honest ment. When Col. Roosevelt voiced this need and desire and declared himself as willing to serve in realizing a genuine progressive and liberal par ty, l in common with over four mill lion voters responded to his call.
 Tn our first campaign while the actual vote was an extraordinary tes- timony to Col. Roosevelt's personal popularity, we elected no single pro- gressiVe governor, nor legisla ture nor sufficient members to be even a balance of power in congress. In 1914 we had a real test of the pro- gressive voters of 1912 and the willingness of the American people to use a new party in the practical so- lution of the problems of our political life. Generally throughout the na- tion the progressive candidates-an-
 
 all generously supported by Col Roosevelt and as rule fairly treated by the daily press-ran a bad third Nearly three-fourths of the progress sive voters of 1912 refused to sup port the progressive candidates in 1914. By this test throughout the union the progressive voters of 1912 declared in overwhelming majority thpV candidates as the representatives Of a protest and not a party-of a mere revolt rather than a permanent po- litical cleavage.
 Moose Failed As Party.
 'The progressive movement and revolt of 1912 having failed as a permanent political party and the verdict of the voters having been rendered in favor of the republican and democratic parties as their instruments, what is the present duty of the men and women who were loyal to the progressive party and who believe in progressive principles :? In which of these dominant parties ir the long run will progressive prin = | c1ples find most effective support and | where will the rank and file and l leaders of the progressive party find 1 cooperation in the service of our | common country?
 Regarding our national needs how can a progressive hesitate long to choose between the party of nation allsm and party of sectionalism l should not wise and sincere progress slVes go en masse into the republican 1 primaries, and fighting shoulder to 1 shoulder with progressive resolution, l help and be helped in our common struggle for social and industrial jus l tlce in city, state and nation? 1 The present leader of the repub- 1 lican party Is the most conspicuous example in our history of the possl- l bilities of American policies which 1 may hold for success in unself1sh pub l lie services. For myself l gladly en- 1 list with the great majority of the 1 progressives of the nation under the | leadership of Charles Evans Hughes" :"