New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-10-27
Mr.. Wilson'S Broken Pledges;

intends TO recall some Of the breaches
of faith of which he has been guilty.
Not all of them because they are
far too numerous), but enough 70
show what little confidence can be
placed in a statesman who seldom
concerns himself about living up TO
his promises or his words.
Mr.. Wilson's candidacy for re-
election itself represents a broken
pledge. The pledge in this case is
not one which ne made on his own
behalf. He probably would never
have volunteered it. 1t was fastened
on him by deliberate party declara-
ton. It was made for him by the
Democratic National Convention Of
1912-put into the Democratic plat
form on which he was to stand as a
binding assurance to the country OF
his devotion to the principle Of a
single Presidential term.
For this reason the pledge 70
which Mr.. Wilson subscribed when
he accepted the Democratic nomina-
ton and sought election on the Dem
ocratic platform differs materially
from the pledges made by other
Presidents not to run for reelection.
Mr.. Cleveland, for instance, lntl-
mated in state paper, written IN
the course of his first adminlstra-
ton, that he would not be a candl-
date for another term. Colonel Roose-
Welt announced on election night in
1904 that he would not seek renomi-
nation. But these were mere ex-
pressions of personal opinion and in
tention. They were not made before
an election, for the purpose of in
fuencing votes. They did not con-
constitute prediction contract such
as Mr.. Wilson made with the voters
who supported him in 1912.
The makers Of the Democratic
platform of 1912 did not simply COM
nit the party in a general way to
the single term policy. 1t did not
merely recommend that Democratic
Congress should submit TO the state
legislatures an amendment to the
Constitution making President in
eligible for reelection. 1t went much
further than that. It expressly
pledged the candidate Of the conven-
ton Of 1912 to an acceptance Of the
single-term principle. Here is the
one-term plank of the Baltimore
platform:
1--WE favor a single Presiden-
tial term, and to that end urge
the adoption Of an amendment
making the President of the
United States ineligible for re-
election, and rGe pledge the cam
didate Of this convention to this
principle"
The makers Of the platform knew
exactly what they were about. They
knew that the process Of constitu-
tional amendment is slow and
tedious. They foresaw that even if
a Democratic Congress should be
chosen in 1912 a one-term amend.
ment might still be unratifed when
the campaign Of 1916 came on. Sc
they pledged the candidate for Pres
\ ident to the single term idea, making
1t incumbent on him, if elected, tC
conform to the theory and purpose
Of the amendment, whether it hac
then reached the stage Of ratifica
ton or not. Mr.. Wilson was bound
If he accepted the platform, 10 dem
orstrate by his own action in 1915
the sincerity Of the Democratic
party's desire 10 relieve a President
from the temptation 70 use the grea'
power of the Presidency 70 force hi,
own denomination and election.
He did stand on the Democrat,
platform and was elected. Nam
PEOPLE suspected his loyalty TO th'
single term pledge. During the cam
paign Mr. Bryan, 10 whom, NOR
than 20 any one else, he owed hi
nomination, laid great stress on tht
one-tern declaration. The President
allowed Mr.. Bryan's pointed assur
ances that the declaration meant
what it said, 80 far as the Demo
cratic candidate was concerned, u
pass without protest. lie never
repudiated the pledge-as he wa'
bound in honor TO do II he intended
10 disregard II. He was elected or
the explicit understanding that h
would live up 10 the single term dec
laration.
The Democrats in Congress tool
the Baltimore platform seriously. Al
the short session following Mr.. vii
sons election the Senate voted :,