Washington Journal., 1916-08-25
Vote for Charles {. Hughes.
BY JAN VAN VELTHUs.
(special-c rrespondence


From time to time we hear about
American citizens of German ancestry
and tradition who have not yet under
stood that they have no choice about the
matter. They do not yet realize that
they simply cannot do differently than
vote for Hughes at the coming election.
There are, of course, no such citizens
who contemplate voting for Wilson.
There may be individuals with German
names who propose to do so. The very
fact that they can even entertain the
idea of supporting a candidate who has
call them "venomous creatures" and
charged them with ~disloyalty to their
country, proves that they do o belong
to the great and patriotic German
American element, whatever their ante
cedents may have been.
They are Knownothings, or the dupes
and slaves of Knownothings.
1t is stated, however, that there are
German-Americans in various States
who realize that they cannot vote for
Woodrow Wilson and retain their self
respect. Yet they are, for various rea-
sons, opposed to Hughes. Therefore
they threaten to throw away their
VOTE" as the saying goes They will not
vote at all-at least for presidential
electors. Or they will vote for one Of
the various minor candidates, who have
not the remotest chance of election-in
most cases, presumably, for the Socialist.
Do these citizens realize that in doing
SO, they cast half a vote for Woodrow
Wilson?
The reasons ordinarily given are two
pfold: Hughes is supported by men who
are VIGOROUSLY and bitterly anti-Ger-
man-Roosevelt, Lodge, Root and others
of that ilk. The other reason given
is that Hughes is suspected of being in
favor of national prohibition.
To take the second reason first: No
body has any right to claim hat Hughes
is a prohibitionist. He has never said
so. Assuming, however, that he were,
would his election to the presidency
bring the prohibitionists a single step
nearer to their goal? National prohibi-
ton is possible only by an amendment
to the Constitution of the United States.
Such an amendment requires the con-
sent of th~ree-fourths of the States.
The President has absolutely no power
even to propose such an amendment.
Congress might do SO, and if it chooses
to adopt such a resolution, the President
could not even veto it.
Is it not silly to bring this argument
against Hughes?
The second argument is no more rea-
| sonable.
Does anybody pretend that a candi-
date is necessarily in agreement with
everything for which any of his sup
porters stand? Roosevelt and the resi-
Of the pro-British are for Hughes and
against Wilson for reasons sufficient tc
themselves. They are so notwithstand-
ing the fact that platform on which
Hughes stands declares in unequivoca
terms against an alliance with Great
Britain and equal neutrality towards al
sides in the European war.
But it is said that Hughes has MOI
come out in SO many words against the
British; that in his speeches he does no
mention the European war nor the Shy.
phen issue"
That is true. But is any voter SC
foolish as to require his candidate de.
liberately to repel half of those who
are willing to support him? Are W,
voting to show that we believe in thi.
principle or the other, or do we vot,
in order to elect a President who is tc