Jasper County Democrat, Volume 15, Number 77, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 28 December 1912 — The New Nationalism. [ARTICLE]

The New Nationalism.

It is a strange thing that the doctrine of the new nationalism should have such a lure for people who ought to know better than to he beguiled by it. But this only makes clear the importance of fighting it, no matter in what form it reveals itself. Here, tor instance, are certain democrats, among them Rep. resentative Hay, of Virginia, chairman of the military committee of the house, actually favoring the militia pay hill, which would be, if it became a law, ore of the most deadliy assaults on the principal of state rights. Under this law the federal government would become the paymaster of the national guard and the President would become its -.comanan der-in-ch ief.

This proposed law ought to l>e especially objectionable to people of Indiana, since it is ini Hat violation of their Constitution, which provides “that the Governor shall be com-mander-in-chief of the military and naval forces,” and gives to him power to “call out sudh forces to execute the laws, or to suppress insurrection, or to repel 'invasion." That is a power that he ought to have. Yet under the militia pay bill the President could call out the militia of Indiana, not only in time of war or when war threatened, but in every grave emergency when troops in excess of those constituting the regular army were required. We do not at all subscribe to the extreme southern view of state sovereignty, nor to the New England view, as recently formulated by a distinguished man, who said that If the' question had been presented to him that had been presented to Lee he would have decided it 'in the same way. As we see it, the nation and its flag are supreme over all. But, nevertheless, the very existence of the nation depends upon' the maintenance of the rights of the states.. And the states ought to control their own military forces. There is, it seems to us, a special reason why the Democrats should oppose this measure. They intend to stand for economy. I ’

Yet the chairman of the house military committee—himself of Virginia—is said to favor ,a bill which will call for $8,000,000 <a year; "and this is just a starter. We know how greedy men become when once they find their way into the public treasury. > In short, there are no limits tx> the demands that might be made—that would be made—should this vicious bill become a law. The, Democrats profess to be very strongly opposed to militarism, and yet some of them are supporting a measure the effect of which would he to create a great military machine compared with which the present regular armiy machine would amount to nothing. The bill thus antagonizes three fundamental principals. It is opposed to the economic administration of public affairs, to gtate rights, and to the supremacy of the civil over the military authority. Also it is entirely unnecessaryThe national guard is doing very well as it is. We have done much to relate It to the regular army,

and have provided for its instruction and there is no need to go further. We can have a trained citizen soldiery without creating a great army subject only to the will of the PresL der.it. The nation has never lacked defenders, and it never will lack them. It is the duty of every citizen who is true to the old ideals to stand firmly against this form of the new nationalism. There is no more dangerous form of centralization than the centralization of military forces and power. The military bill should meet a crushing defeat. —Indianapolis News.