New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-11-03
MR.. HUGHES THE PROGRESSIVE
More in Accord with Principles of
Party than Mr.. Wilson
To the Editor Of The Tribune,

To the Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir: In giving his reasons for capitu-
lating to Mr.. Wilson, Victor Murdoch
displays remarkable ability to dog
Matte, but convincing argument is
noticeable for its absence.
Mr.. Murdoch emphasizes the record
Of the Wilson Administration as en-
titling it to Endorsement and prefer
ence on Election Day. No one will
deny that few bills have been passed
BY the present Congress that can be
called progressive in character. These
a,e the bills that have been before the
public for some time. Opinion had
formed as to their desirability and the
time was ripe for Congress to pass
them. There is no question that the
credit for their formulation and author
ship belonged to other administrations.
It would have been suicidal to ignore
the public demand for their enactment
We might attribute to the President
different motives and accord to HIM the
full need Of praise given by Mr.. Muir
dock but for the enactment OF other
legislation passed at other times and
with different coacomitants that lead
irresistibly to an inference Withholding
communication. From the past record
Of the Democratic party and many pre-
sious utterances of the President, II is
seen that the two bills on which MI
Murdoch lays such stress, namely, the
Underwood tariff and the Adamson
"eight-hour" law, are genuinely Demo
cratic and truly indicative OF MI. VII
sons practice and belief. These bills
show that Mr.. Wilson has by no means
discarded his own or his partys Pc
culiar tenets.
II is to the Progressive point OF we"
that Mr.. Murdoch would call attention
II there is an acid test anywhere II
NAV be found in the Progressive plat
form of 1912. That is the creed OF the
party as it was composed then and as
il exists to-day. A careful examina-
ton of this platform will show that
Mr.. Hughes is more in accord with lts
principles than Mr.. Wilson.
The latter has assumed to speak for
the people or tell what the people
ought 10 think, whereas Mr.. Hughes
has said that under similar circum-
stances 81 should have gone straight TO
the American people and put the re-
sponsibility where it belonged" The
Progressive platform, under the caption
"The Rule OF the People" says that the
"party is committed to the principle OF
a self-controlled democracy" and de-
mand was made for certain reforms
like the direct primaries for nomlna-
ton of state and national officers and
tho initiative and referendum. II is
only a widening of the application OF
| this principle to invoke its use when
arbitration is refused.
The opposing position Of the two can
didates for the Presidency on the ques-
ton of the defence of American rights
in foreign lands need not be restated
The Progressive declaration is entirely
! in accord with that of Mr.. Hughes. To
quote the 1912 platform, it says on this
point: ave pledge our party to protect
the rights of American citizenship at
/ home and abroad"
The conclusion must be forced upon
US tina. Mr. Hughes has not failed to
measure up to Progressive standards
but that Mr.. Murdoch has abandoned
! the cause he once espoused. Attention
might be called TO many other ideals
illustrated by the stand which Mr.
Hughes has taken that would class him
as a Progressive.
FRANK T. ELLISON.
Rochester, n. Y, Oct. rs, 1916.