Jasper County Democrat, Volume 21, Number 26, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 June 1918 — EX-GOV. RALSTON IN GREAT ADDRESS [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

EX-GOV. RALSTON IN GREAT ADDRESS

Reviews Platform Recently Adopted by the G. 0. P. State Convention. —— \ ’ ■ WILSON HOPE OF WORLD Fil'bustering by Republicans in the United States Senate Delayed Preparation for War. Indianapolis, June 20. —The following is the full text of Ex-Governor Ralston's speech before ‘he Democratic State Convention yesterday. He said: Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Convention: This is one of the really big days in the world’s history and the eyes of the nation are upon you. From this time henceforth each of you will be a marked man. This will be so, not because of any superior virtues you and your party possess, but because at this crisis in the affairs of nations you have been vested with authority to speak in a representative capacity not only on State and National questions, but also on world issue . Duty therefore bids you take care, that there bp wisdom in all your deliberations. ,'here should be no mistake made in the ticket you will nominate and the

declaration of principles you will adopt. Patriotism, and not partisan politics, should be the polar star of your thought. Put Democrats in Power. Our party is in power in the Nation, bearing not only the burdens of this Nation, but very largely the burdens of all the allied nations, struggling to have human liberty guaranteed everywhere. It is therefore our duty to restore to power in Indiana, the Democratic party —the party that is in sympathy—whole-hearted sympathy—with the National administration, headed by that incomparable statesman, Woodrow Wilson. There are other reasons for putting the Democrats back in power in Indiana. Our party points with pride to its record in this State. Its administration of State affairs under VicePresident Marshall, as Governor, and under the last Democratic Governor, is a guaranty of what the people may reasonably expect of it, if they again call it to power., ? When the last Democratic administration assumed control of the affairs of Indiana, the State was greatly in debt, and was compelled to borrow monej’ from time to time, in sums of §200,000 and §400,000 at a time, frequently at a high rate of interest, to meet her current and outstanding obligations. But our party, as then managed, did i.ot seek to side-step the duty that lay plainly in front of it. It had no desire to shift on to other administrations, the burdens it should bear; but it stood for a sane administration of public affairs, whereby it could liquidate the financial obligations of our commonwealth, and at an early day give the people a reduced rate of taxation. Indiana Out of Debt. By the course thus pursued many appropriations made by previous administrations wens paid; the running expenses of the State were met, and b-'th the domestic and foreign indebtedness of the State were liquidated and Indiana, for the first time in eighty-two years, put out of debt. Notwithstanding the inadequate tax levy in force at the beginning of the D.mocratic administration in 1913 and the many additional and unusual demands made upon the State during the subsequent four years, on account of the increase in the number of institutions and wards of the State; the constant increase in the cost of living; and in round numbers one hundred thousand dollars on account of the mouth and foot disease among the cattle in the State and other items too numerous to mention, it is most gratifying to be able to call your attention to the fact, that at the end of each fiscal year the State treasury shewed

an inerea.e in its annual balances; and that on the last day of that administration there was in the State treasury, over and above all outstanding warrants, $3,755,997.98. And the State out of debt. z And let it be not forgotten, that beginning on the 13th day of January, 1913, our party so managed the affairs of Indiana, that the Governor, in his message to the 70th General Assembly, in January, 1917, was in duty bound to, and did, recommend a reduction in State taxes, of 3 cents on each SIOO. And the State out of debtl Progressive Legislation. A hurried review of the legislation of the past thirty years in Indiana, will show that fully seventy-five per cent, of the really progressive laws of that period was enacted by the Democratic party. Its record in this respect is monumental. We point to it. It is an established fact, but too voluminous to review on an occasion like this. Public Service Commission. I will be however, for referring to one of the laws placed upon the statute books of Indiana, during my administration, in view of the criticises that h,avs been offered of it and of its administration, while I was in office. I have in mind our Public Service Law. And I make bold to say that this law is not surpassed by any law of the .kind in this country. Nor has it, or any other law of the kind, ever been more wisely and ably administered thffn was this law by the Commission I appointed. If any man takes issue with me, I challenge him to a comparison. If it be insisted that this Commission made mistakes in administering this law, I call attention to the fact that, for many months past, the Commission has been Reorganized and new men have had and now have, the controlling power in its administration; but no man, no corporation, municipal or private, has asked the new commission to reduce a single rate, or reverse a single ruling made by the old commission, except in cases where a higher rate has been asked and in many cases granted. No revision downward has been made by the reorganized commission and none will be made. And yet my administration was criticised, abused and villified ■with all the venom of creatures that hiss, because, it was. charged, it fixed rates too high. But that is not all. The old commission saved utility patrons, on an average, SIOO,OOO a year. The new commission has raised rates, and increased the cost of utility service more than SIOO,OOO per year, but no creatures are hissing. We are told, however, that the Commission, through its reorganization, has been taken out of politics. If that be true, things are not what they seem! I concede that the Commission should be kept out of politics, but I maintain it is quite as important that it be not required to submit its findings and deCrees for approval to a power not authorized by law to pass Thereon and not sustaining any official relation with the people. Of this subject, however, more will be said in the future.

Taxation. The Republican party of Indiana, recently assembled in convention in this hall, put forth a platform, on which it is proposing to stand in the approaching campaign. This declaration of principles is a sort of crazy quilt combination and is so long and bewildering that it is doubtful if there be an hundred people in the State read it. It is also indefinite on subjects on which it should be explicit. The power to tax is one of the most sweeping powers of government. It is the power to destroy. The fathers of our State, who framed for us our constitution, appreciated the danger the people would encounter, if sane and definite restrictions were not thrown about the exercise of this power. They therefore declared it should be exercised on a basis of uniformity and equality; The present tax law of Indiana is framed on this basis. When honestly executed, and it can be, if we are capable of self-government in this State, it affects alike all property-holders and_to this no mar. should be heard to object. If it be said, it is difficult to have all property assessed on the same basis under this law, the fault is not with the principle underlying the law but in the machinery provided for the application of that principle and this can be corrected by amendment. But those who are against our present tax law cannot be heard to object to it on the ground it is difficult to enforce uniformity and equality under it, since they do not want this uniformity and equality in taxation under any law. The thing they are seeking is to be given a free hand to classify property, so that one class of property may be taxed higher and another class taxed low'. Such a scheme would enable property-holders, able to support a lobby or have a pull, to shift burdens they should bear on to those not financially able to cope-withrthem, for special favors. ‘ The people have not forgotten the long drawn out and bitter wrangle in the last legislature over the attemptto frame a new scheme of taxation. Their opposition to it has continued to grow’ in strength, and to fight this new’ scheme off as long as possible, they opposed with all the influence they could muster the calling of a special session of the legislature. Is there any one so dumb that he does not understand why the legislature has not been convened in special session? v : - In view of the importance of this subject and the aroused feeling thereon, I submit that the declaration in the Republican platform that, “The evils in our present tax system can only be corrected by complete revision of our tax laws,” will not have the approval of the people. It is too indefinite. If it is meant that this proposed'revision should include an excise tax law, candor re-

quireg the admission co nave seen made in the platform. This indefi-* niteness on this all important question should defeat the Republican party. Clerk of Supreme Court. In committing their party to the proposition that the selection of both constitutional and statutory State officers shall be withdrawn from the people, the bosses, in charge of the Republican convention, forgot the insistent and persistent demand, which broadened the Democratic character of our government and gave the people the power to elect their United States senators. In proposing to make of the State officers a personal and political despotism, under the control of the Governor, not necessarily the present Chief Executive, but any Governor, these bosses have failed to remember the exclusive dictation &nd domihation which brought their party .to such ignominious disaster in 1912. When, the people are making such tremendous sacrifices that democracy, that is, government of the people, for the people and by the people, shall be made safe throughout the world, the proposal to make of the government of our beloved State a personal or political machine, is ill-timed and illadvised. The security of free government rests in the people, not in political bosses. i The office of Clerk of the Supreme Court is of constitutional creation and the efficiency with which it has been filled justifies a continuation of the constitutional method of filling it. The proposal to make this officer appointive by the judges of the Supreme Court, wholly ignores the heretofore universally accepted principle that such judges should be separated as widely as possible from participation in practical or partisan politics and will x make of the Supreme Court a political caucus. » A tribunal, organized to administer justice, must hear the whispers of the humblest petitioner, but remain deaf to the thunders of partisanism.

The Attorney General. The office of Attorney General was created by an Act of the General As-' sembly in 1855 and made elective by the voters of the State. The Republican party is now proposing to deny the people the right 'to choose this official and to give the Governor the power to appoint him. The Attorney General is one of the most important officials of the State. He is the law interpreter for the public. When he comes to construe the laws of the State a ten-year-old child fighting potato bugs is as big in his eye as is the Governor of the State. But if you give the Governor the power to appoint him, you are likely to place the private citizen at a disadvantage in a legal controversy with the Chief Executive. The Attorney General is expected to be a check upon the executive the same as he is upon the private citizen. It is true the Attorney General’s office is created by statute, but this statute has been acquiesced in and approved by all the people of all political parties for more than sixty years and it has thereby come to have, in effect, the sanctity and practical force of a constitutional maildate. It has been endorsed by such eminent governors and lawyers as Marton, Baker and Hendricks, and the political that would seek to make a personal asset or a political football of this great office ought to be repudiated by the people. Humof. We cannot of course consider all the planks of the platform, to which we have been referring, but it should be noted our Republican friends did not overlook the subject of humor. They declare that, “The province of a political committee is to elect candidates and not select them.” As the chautauqua season is here, I want to suggest that the people of Indiana be afforded the pleasure of hearing a lecture on that subject by my friend, Dr. Ellis, Superintendent of Public Instruction. I do not know how badly his trousers were damaged, but I do know he was taken by the nape of the neck and the seat of the breeches and tossed out of his own headquarters and denied the right to be a candidate.

National Issues. But this remarkable platform, put forth for the Republicans of Indiana to climb upon, assures us of the patriotism of the Republican party, and of its intention to support the National Administration while the great war is on. It will not be my intention by anything I here say, to call in question the patriotisTh of the Republican party, but I shall remain free to ask the fathers and mothers of our boys “over there”,, to say from the facts, just how sincerely, and to what purpose, certain Republican leaders are supporting our President in this war. ~ < The platform to which we have been making reference tells us that the refusal of the Democrats to prepare for war in 1914 and 1915, has not lessened the support of the National administration by Republicans. In all the Republican leaders have to say of the war, however, they seek to leave the impression that the Wilson administration is open to condemnation for not getting into the war sooner. In this ha.ll the Republican party adopted a platform in 1916, two years after they claim the Wilson administration should have prepared for war. In that platform this party declared: ’“We demand that the United States observe an attitude of strict neutrality toward the nations engaged in the European war. * *. * We wish to continue our friendship with the whole world.” There is nothing very warlike in that. And the Republican National Convention of the same year, made in effect the same declaration. Even the Progressive National glatform of 1916, in dealing with the luropean war said: .... “Whatever our country can legitimately do to attain peace for warstricken Europe, and to aid in the procurement of equal rights, without discrimination because of race or creed, to all men in all landa. should be

done.” There is nothing very warlike in that either. The truth is, all parties honestly believed, when their respective conventions were held in 1916, thkt we would be able to avoid war with Germany. And all patriots were laboring to this end. This was the thought and hope of the late lamented Charles W. Fairbanks. I heard a leading Republican say at a bar meeting, held in his honor a few days ago, that, “No man sensed the publican conscience more accurately that he”; and you will recall that Mr. Fairbanks, in addressing a meeting of Republican editors at home in 1916, commended the course of President Wilson in keeping our country out of war. And at no time in the campaign of 1916 did the Republican candidate for president, indicate he was in favor of war. He wanted the country to believe he could avoid war. ' ■ /. , The German Pledge. President Wilson beliftved in 1916 he could avoid war. May 4, 1916, Germany pledged the President that “Merchant vessels both within and without the area declared a naval war zone, shall not be sunk without warning and without saving human lives, unless the ship attempts to escape, dr offers resistance.” This pledge, you will recall, was made after the President- had threatened to break off diplomatic relations with Germany on account of the attack on the Sussex. And afterwards, when Germany gave notice it would resume submarine warfare February 1, 1917, the President broke off diplomatic relations with that country as soon as he got the official text of the note, and so notified Congress, February 3, 1917.

Republican Filibuster. February 26, 1917, he asked Congress to pass an armed neutrality bill. The Democratic House passed it, but it was defeated in the Senate by a Republican filibuster, led by LaFollette. bfever at any time has our President been neglectful of his duty regarding the war, or the probabilities of war. Before hostilities occurred, he organized the Council of National Defense, and set about to mobilize the industries of the nation. More than that. In 1914 he asked Congress to authorize the creation of a shipping board and he sought to have the building of ships inaugurated on a large scale. He knew this country could not fight a war without ships. The House acted favorably on his recommendation, but because of a Republican filibuster in the Senate, led by Senator John W. Weeks, the bill had to be withdrawn. The President was defeated, but the blood of thousands of innocent allied soldiers will mark the men who defeated his plan, till they go to their graves. Speeches at Republican State Conventions. The spirit of hostility, shown toward the President in the filibustering to which I have referred, was shown toward him by the leading speakers in the late Republican convention in this hall. Malice toward the President malice aforethought - sizzed from between their teeth at every breach. So anxious were they to arouse public prejudice against him, they made themselves ridiculous by some things they said. With great solemnity they all declared in effect that we are not in this war to determine the form of government any other nation shall have, seeking by implication, to leave the impression that when the President said we wanted to see the world made safe for democracy, he was proposing to have a voice in determining the form of government other nations should have. But they forgot that •the people remember the President said in his great war message of April 2, 1917, in most elegant style, what he has restated more than once, that we were going to war “for the rights of nations great and small, and the privilege of men everywhere to choose their way of life and of obedience.” Before these gentlemen assault the President again in public speech, they ought to commit to memory what he has said on this and kindred subjects.

My friend, the Governor, took occasion to say in his convention speech, by way of criticism of the President for wanting to see the world made free for democracy, that: “We are not a democracy. No democracy has been engaged on either side of this war, except for the brief period when Russia gave us the object lesson of a pure democracy at war. Not being a democracy ourselves the average American may wonder why we should sacrifice our lives , and our property to impose upon other people a form of government that we have not yet adopted, or even expressed a willingness to adopt.” When I read this statement from our Chief Executive, I confess I was surprised. I remembered something he had said on a former occasion so unlike this; but it did not at first occur to me that a change had come over him, out of a desire to be against the President. I found on investigation, that on March 28, 1918, he made a Speech before the Hoosier troops at Camp Zachary Taylor, and that he then talked like a true American. .To those boys he said: “We are indeed fighting for democracy, and it is for that great democracy which was born in the days of the revolution, a democracy that when but an infant, endured untold hardship, and arose to full manhood in that great struggle, and was re-baptised with fire in the days of the Civil War. * ♦ * When you have won this war, as you will, there can be no fear about the future of democracy, wherever and / whenever its seeds find fertile soil in which to grow.” When the Governor talks as .an American, and not as a politician

seeking to break down a political opKnent, on the subject of democracy, out-Wilsons Wilson. As he stood before those soldier boys he had a vision in which he saw the seeds.of democracy—of our democracy here grown to full manhood —planted in the back door yards of Berlin, and the Kaiser fairly smothered by the rankness of the growth of the plant. What of Watson. What of my friend Jim Watson? In his convention speech he was willing to go to any length to arouse the people against the Wilson administration. One reference will characterize the whole speech. He says he doesn’t like the sectionalism of this administration. “In the namejof patriotism,” he says, “the wealth of the country is being redistributed.” He points out how it is being taken from the North and given to the South, and with a most scathing tongue, he wallops the administration for putting so many cantonments in the South. The Junior Senator really grows bitter on this subject, but fortunately we have some sane, big and patriotic Republicans in this country, who do not endorse the views of our Junjor Senator. ExPresident William Howard Tart is such a man. He visited, last winter, every cantonment in the South, and on March 15, 1918, he delivered a lecture on his observations, which is published in the March number of The National Geographic Magazine, and I want to place an excerpt from that lecture against our Junior Senator’s position. Mr. Taft says: “I think it would have been wiser if all the camps in the Northern States had been placed in Southern States. Even to a layman visiting, camps, the greater opportunity for drill was apparent in the marching, of the men. > A review of 25,000 men, which I was permitted to see at Camp Travis, in San Antonio, showed a degree of drill that could not have been equalled, I think, in any other camp. There I witnessed, too, bayonet drill, bayonet charges over trenches, a sham battle over trenches, with hand grenades, and everything & but a barrage of The difference in progress between that command and those in the far North, could not escape the observer.”

Where do you think the good people will stand on this question, when they go to the ballot box ? Don’t you know they will add to the deathless glory of our Starry Banner by lining up with Mr. Taft on the side of Woodrow Wilson? These Republican politicians taught us with the statement that the war is ot 3,000 miles away. We say it is, and if we can suppress pro-German sympathizers and snipers at home, with the help of God, we will keep it 3,000 miles away. Wilson Greatest Power for Liberty. Fortunately for this Nation—yes, for humanity and civilization —we have Woodrow Wilson for President. In sweep of vision and constructive statesmanship, he is absolutely without a peer. It is not surprising that the leading newspapers across the sea, supporting the allied potvers, enthusiastically hail our President as the greatest influence back of the movement for world-wide liberty. The leading statesman, the great literary, scientific and religious organizations of England and France do not hesitate to endorse the policies advocated by him, and to follow where he leads. This is the man, under whose leadership our country has made as great preparation for war in three years as Germany did in 45 years; under whose our country made as great preparation for war in three months as England and France did in three years. The efficiency he displayed and had displayed in marshalling our forces, in feeding and clothing our boys, and in mobilizing the industries of the Nation, surpasses anything of the kind in the history of the world. In three months after the declaration of war, an American army, 80,000 strong, swept across the seas and marched through the streets of Paris, under the folds of Old Glory, shouting for their country and for human liberty evervwhere. This is the man, leading his Nation with wisdom and a fine spirituality, against the Kaiser and his associates in crime, who have broken the peace of the world; who seek to crush out .free institutions with the heel of militarism; who have torn the breasts from the bodies of praying women and girls, trampled them in the dust and thrown them to the who have outraged the virtues of womanhood with a fiendishness unknown to the jungles. t These are some of the things our President has done. But, my friends, you will read in vain the Republican platform put forth in this hall a few days ago; you will' read in vain the 13,000 worded speech of Governor Goodrich; you will read in vain the speech of Senator New smelling of brimstone, and you read in vain the speech of Senator Watson surcharged with the vitriol of partisanism —all this you will do in vain in a search for a single sentence, a single phrase or a single woi;d of approval of a single act of our President in this war. And in these deliverances, you will find iriore criticism of the President than you will find of the Kaiser. May my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth and my right hand forget her cunning when I shall fail in this trembling crisis to approve whatever Governor Goodrich and his administration do toward helping to win the war. Constructive Criticism. We are told by the Republican press and by Republican orators, it is essential to the public welfare that the right be maintained to indulge in constructive criticism of the administration during the war. Who is to determine what is constructive criticism? The Kaiser? This sort of talk always reminds me of what I heard a preacher say to his congregation several years ago in a little church out in the country. The minister was not an educated man, but die had ah abundance of common sense. In the course of his sermon

he said: “My brethren, do you know what I think of this higher criticism we are reading so much about nowadays?’’ Then pausing for a moment he shouted: “Higher criticism is the Devil’s interpretation of God’s word.” And when I read some of the so-called constructive criticism going the rounds on our National administration, I am constrained to say, it is the Kaiser’s criticism of Americanism. My friends, is no time to hunt for excuses to criticise. ,Our country is in distress. Civilization is in the balance. Humanity is bleeding ‘at every pore. Portions of the earth have been filled with hunger by Kaiserism and Heaven itself apparently, deafened by the groans and lamentations of the innocent, crushed by oppression. But in the midst of this awful condition, Woodrow'Wilson, unswayed from his course by “Constructive Critics,” is looked to as the hope of the world and the movei ment now under way to encompass his rebuke at tne polls, will in tne end encompass the rebuke of those back of it. The people understand what is* going on and no amount of camouflage will mislead them. I seek to bind no man, except myself, by what I say here. In these troublesome days, I care not the snap of my finger for a certain precedent we have highly regarded in times of peace. I shall not stand for a precedent that would interfere—with efficiency in carrying on the war or that would deny the country the services of t+ffe best ability in the reconstructive period to follow the war. I maintain therefore the exigencies of the times call for the renomination and election, in 1920, of Woodrow Wilson. The duty of the hour is to stand by men seeking office, who approve the course of the National administration in the war. To demand this is not unreasonable. Germany must not get the impression that tne people of this country are not back of our government in this war, and that impression is likely to be made in other nations if the people do not stand by the President’s party in the approaching election.

In 1898 this country was in war with old decrepit Spain. In the fall of that year Colonel Roosevelt was a candidate for Governor of New York. In one of his speeches he said: “Remember that whether you will or not, your votes this year will be viewed by the nations, of Europe from one standpoint only. They will draw no fine distinctions. A refusal to sustain the President this year will, in their eyes, be read as a refusal to sustain the war and to sustain the efforts of our peace commission to secure the fruits of the war. Such a refusal may not inconceivably bring about a rupture of the peace negotiations. It will give heart, to our defeated antagonists; it will make possible the interference of those doubtful neutral nations, who in this struggle have wished us ill.” I would not seek to minimize the importance of the consequences of our war with Spain, but it is a fact it was but an afternoon tea party compared with the trouble we are now having. So if the failure of voters to support the Republican party in 1898 would have been in the eyes of foreign nations a failure to support the President and what he did in the SpanishAmerican war, how would other countries interpret the defeat of the Democratic party this fall? We fathers and mothers of the boys over there cannot afford to see Wood row Wilson’s party defeated at the -next election. Such a defeat might prolong the struggle and make additional sacrifices in life and property necessary. War Mothers. And just here, gentlemen, let me remind you, that you are honored today in your deliberations by a body of women, who with those they represent, are more interested than any other persons in this country in having the war won with as few losses as possible. They are the War Mothers of Indiana. They understand in a way you and I do not that upon the destruction of Americanism, Prussianism has resolved and that the only thing that will save the former to us and to the world is a wall bf human hearts —hearts of love, hearts of faith, and hearts of dauntless courage, given to humanity and to God by the sweet and noble motherhood of a Christian civilization. In your name I welcome these mothers to this convention. After the War.

But it is urged the Republican party must come back to power, so the country will have the its skill in the reconstruction period, following the war. Lay its achievements of forty years side by side with those of the present administration and a comparison will put it in the primer class of statesmanship: After forty years of power that party left to its credit a financial law, that placed the country at the absolute mercy of Wall Street. Under the financial legislation of that party this country could not have got started in this war, unless it had, submitted to beirig bled at every pore by the great money powers. On this one question, God should be thanked for Woodrow Wilson. > After forty years of power, Repub;licans left as a legacy to the country the railroads in a dilapidated condition and so full of water and graft they could not meet the war demands made upon them, and the government had to take them over. The war cannot be fought without money ahd railroads over here. No party in the history of our Nation has triumphed over as many difficult conditions as our party has in the last five years. ’ No party has done the one-hun-dredth part as much as our party has done in the last five years, toward determining the destiny of other Nations/ No party has done the one-thou-sandth part as much as our party has done in the last five years in carrying the blessings of our institutions, the inspiration of our civilization and the ideals of our Americanism, to other peoples, living under the flag* of other nations.

SAMUEL M. RALSTON.