Forest City press. (Forest City, Potter County, D.T. [S.D.]) 1883-19??, 1917-04-20

lust of tyrants: Of world politics which
mad never even heard of such a thing
as popular right. Those who doubt
this may be reminded OF the black
~treachery OF England to her allies after
M%alplaquet; the -Seckendorf intrigues
at Berlin, carried on for Austria's benz
eft; the partition of Poland: and, in
the Nineteenth century. England's de-
%struction of the fleet of Denmark, Il
friendly and neutral power. Germany's
military policy Of force and frightful-
ness today is no new thing; it is merely
a survival. 1t may be matched. detail
for detail, from the histories of Eng
land. France and Austria in the Eight
zenith century.
During this century. in France and
IN the English colonies especially, the
mine of mankind began fiercely to
question the right of kings to Cypress
peoples. This was no mere iEtellec-
tlal movements: in fact, men do not
think unless they have to. But bur
dened men and wronged men. seeking
liberty and freedom, naturally look
everywhere for help. Among other pos
sible sources they turn to theories of
government n of popular right.
Among the fruits of this process were
the American revolution of 1916, the
theories and discussions of the French
statesmen and scholars known as the
men of 1883" and the French revo-
luton.
All this did not touch Prussia. Why?
because it was simply-a movement in
dliced by the failure of government to
achieve general welfare, and in this
Prussia's government had not failed.
In the pragmatic sense, absolutism
worked in Prussia. No wonder the
French peasantry We're dissatisfied;
they struggled against deepening pow
erty. caused by increasing burden. of
taxation to support a wasteful gov
eminent. What was thai to the Prus-
sian tillers of the soil, whose govern
ment set am example in thrift and fru-
gallty to the most careful farmer in
the land: Every month that passed
bore overpOwering testimony to the
wisdom of the Prussian kings and of
their policy of governmental frugality
e~fflclency; every mont witnessed
the folly OF rulers whose people grew
sedittous because they were hungry and
despised their rulers simply because
they were d%cspicable.
We know that Prussia was politi-
caliN n victim of a happy accident.
we know that her wonderful growth
development between 1913 and 1856
did not prove that absolutism was q
good thing; it simply proved that for
once IN human history two geniuses in
economic administration happened &c
cesslvely to occupy a throne in a criti-
cal hour in the development of a peo-
pie. But the Prussians could o be
expected to understand this. They felt
that their increasing prosperity and
contentment during the very three
quarters of a century which increased
poverty and discomfort in France were
the result partly OF the superiority of
their governmental methods and partly
Of tne superiority of sensible Germans
to flighty Frenchnen-just as you and
i should have felt in their place.
When French political ideas. finally
touched Prussia. they did not come as
suggestions to the Prussian mind, the
came as peril to the Prussian state.
They came, finally, incarnate in Napo-
leon. How impossible it was that the
which represented progress. which
stood for an dvance beyond their own
position! Part OF what we may cal
Napoleonism was familiar to them. The
Corsican codified the laws, as Fred
erick William had done. He stood for
the construction of great public works
n for the selection Of officials for
effectiveness, and these had been
Watchwords of Prussian administration
for 100 years. They might have been
stolen from Frederick William. The
constructive side of Napoleonism Prus-
STA a long been familiar with; it's
destructive side Prussia attributed to
impious and pernicious ideas of liberty
and equality-diseases Of the mind in
duced by the revolt of an. unhappy peo-
PAS 5$AiiS q 6ONSA ilI1lclI WHICH H1Q
forgotten the first lessons of efficiency
and a line of kings which had forgot
ten that noblesse oblige.
The French people were not demo-
cratic in their theories OF government
in the beginning of the Nineteenth
century because of their reasoning
powers or their intellectual experience;
they were democratic because absolute
ism in France had broken down
starved the people n ruined the coun-
try-and. kingly right and kingly power
having failed them, popular right and
popular power were all they ia left.
The Prussians were not reverent and
submissive monarchists because of any
popularity OF the Prussian mind; they
were so because absolutism in. Ger
many a turned q poor country into
a prosperous one, n a weak nation
into a great military power. You only
reason about a machine when it breaks
down. AT the beginning of the nine-
teenth century Prussia had an eco
nomic- military system which, almost
100 years old, was still more thar 100
years ahead of the systems OF England
and France. She had produced the SUI
preme military genius of the country
before Napoleon. She had had expert
ence OF democracy as a force generated
by national waste, injustice, and want,
which. once produced. violated her ev-s
cry cherished conception Of interna-
tionai right and aspired to tear down
the structures of nations and put its
heel on h neck OF the world. She
saw in NapoleOn's most lauded con-
structive policies nothing that Freder-
lex William had not known and prac-
ticed. In accounting for Germany's
present day attitude toward democracy
we must e forget that; at the close
OF hree-QuartersO OF a century OF nur-
ture under two kings who stand among
tho AlnnpAnnn NaNof~0 0ANfsHuA1 10 49,