Coulee City dispatch. [volume] (Coulee City, Wash.) 19??-19??, 1918-01-10
ROOSEVELT
AS A CRITIC

The Kansas City star is in receipt
of the following letter of criticism
of Theodore Roosevelt.
81 am astonished at the miserable
things Colonel Roosevelt says about
the President. l now think he is
malicious. He is at least unloyal to
our President" -Jacob Johnson.
The answer of the paper is as
follows:
This letter doubtless indicates a
more or less prevalent frame of
mind. Arthur Brisbane inquiries in
the Washing Times why postmaster
General Burleson doesn't suppress
Colonel Roosevelt. N. D. Cochran,
editor. of the Teledo News-Bee is
certain that Roosevelts criticism
throughout the war? Are important
mistakes to the passed over in sill
ence? Are we to take over the old
maxim of royalty. The king can
do no wrong?"
To these questions there can be
only one answer from patriotic Am
ercians who are not blind by. party
prejudice. The only way to get mis-
takes corrected is to point tenn out
There is not business institution
in the country that can stand inn
munity from criticism When the
heads of a business makes them
selves mutual admiration society
and sit around telling each other
how fine they are, then that bust
ness is dying chorus of praise for
what the administration is, doing
how would the President learn
where the weak places were? An
executive may not enjoy criticism
But he knows he can't succeed with
out it.
Roosevelt criticized the admins
tration for not declaring war en-
Germany's allies. A few weeks lat
err came the Austrian drive against
Italy. The nation suddenly realized
that the defeat of Italy would be
our defeat and the government az
ranged to hurry supplies there and
called for a declaration against Aus
tria.
w as Roosevelt unjustified in crit
izing when at least half of the crit
icism was accepted by the admir-
stration?
Back to September Roosevelt GEN.
sured General Crozier's manage
ment of the ordnance bureau on the
grounds that he was not getting the
necessary production of ordnance
In December Crozier is relived of
the management of the ordnance bru
eau.
Was the ordnance criticism unjust
fled?
Three month ago Roosevelt crit
icized the quartermaster's depart
ment for its failure to get necessary
supplies of clothing to the soldiers
In December the surgeon general
attributes pneumonia epidermics to
insufficient clothing, the quarter
master general is relieved and the
senate committee on military affairs
asks Secretary Baker to cut out red
tape and get supplies to the camps!
Was the criticism of the supply de
partncnt unjustfied?
This war is not nice, gentle little
family party from which every dis
cordant note must be barred. 1t is
a tremendous crisis that will require
every ounce of the nations energy
to meet, and in which every day
counts.
If we are to win the war, if we
are not to throw lives away, we
must discover and correct mistakes
at the earliest moment; we must
get rid Of incompetent men in i'm
portant positions. These things can
not be accomplished without plain
speaking and frank criticism.
1t was only this sort of criticism
that saved England from going on
with an incompetent ordnance de-
partment, and that instituted the
ministry of munitions on a modern
basis. 1t was only this sort of criti-
cism that finally turned out the
whole bunch of Asquith's easy 60
ing, incompetent department heads
and replaced them with an efficient
war cabinet.
This war is bigger than any one
man or set of men. The loyalty that
America needs is loyalty to country,
not to the man who happens 10 be
head of the government.
Recognition of the claims of this
higher loyalty made Roosevelt ex-
pose the short comings of the Nc
Kinley administration in the Span
ish War. 1t is the same loyalty that