Evening Republican, Volume 21, Number 165, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 30 July 1917 — THE MAELSTROM OF PUBLIC OPINION [ARTICLE]

THE MAELSTROM OF PUBLIC OPINION

By ALBERT J. BEVERIDGE.

Former United States Senator Fron? Indiana.

Occasions arise where words of clear-headed, far-seeing guidance from men of knowledge and judgment would be helpful to all of us. We rightfully look for this from prominent men who ought always to he publicists. But in our inconsiderate haste we insist on immediate tions of opinion from those whom we are accustomed to follow. Not only must their views be given instantly, but they must also be sharp and decided. Thus those who should be the leaders of public thought too frequently become panderers to public impatience. They are too often competitors for publicity. They strive to get on the front page of the first edition of the newspapers. To do this, speeches and interviews even on the gravest arid most complicated questions are prepared with frantic precipitancy and in lurid language. That necessary delay required by gathering and mastering data and carefully working out the problem which it presents would make out of date the publication of the conclusions thus formed; while cool and balanced language would lack that sting and eccentricity at present so attractive to our taste. We require that the outgivings of our public men shall be full of “pep” and “punchotherwise they are rejected by a public palate which has become accustomed to high seasoning. Thus our public discussion is peculiarly heated, spasmodic and •charged with error. Instead of a full statement of facts, they are often given only in par# and with prejudiced ardor. Extravagant catchwords more and more frequently take the place of careful reasoning; and explosive epithet rather than clear argument is made the weapon of serious controversy. So it is that public opinion, lashed by inconstant winds, whirls in eddies, now about this point and now about that, instead of flowing in full and constant current. The papers of the statesmen of our. formative period, and indeed of the more‘powerful ones down to recent times, when compared with many produced today, disclose the change in the manner of thinking of public men and their expression of it. Those of recent years appear to be immature, hastily prepared and overemphasized when read in parallel with those of our early and middle history. Yet those calmer and simpler papers dealt with problems as weighty ns any that ever confronted the mind of many-and were written at times when popular passions raged ungovernably. The others discussed questions no greater and appeared at times no more perilous. They indicated that we have indeed acquired the harmless “punch” of extravagance, but have lost the deadly “punch” of moderation. In gaining velocity we seem to have impaired our sense of direction.