Contents    Prev    Next    Last

President[ Theodore Roosevelt

         Date[ December 3, 1906

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

As a nation we still continue to enjoy a literally unprecedented

prosperity; and it is probable that only reckless speculation and

disregard of legitimate business methods on the part of the business

world can materially mar this prosperity.

No Congress in our time has done more good work of importance than the

present Congress. There were several matters left unfinished at your

last session, however, which I most earnestly hope you will complete

before your adjournment.

I again recommend a law prohibiting all corporations from contributing

to the campaign expenses of any party. Such a bill has already past one

House of Congress. Let individuals contribute as they desire; but let

us prohibit in effective fashion all corporations from making

contributions for any political purpose, directly or indirectly.

Another bill which has just past one House of the Congress and which it

is urgently necessary should be enacted into law is that conferring

upon the Government the right of appeal in criminal cases on questions

of law. This right exists in many of the States; it exists in the

District of Columbia by act of the Congress. It is of course not

proposed that in any case a verdict for the defendant on the merits

should be set aside. Recently in one district where the Government had

indicted certain persons for conspiracy in connection with rebates, the

court sustained the defendant's demurrer; while in another jurisdiction

an indictment for conspiracy to obtain rebates has been sustained by

the court, convictions obtained under it, and two defendants sentenced

to imprisonment. The two cases referred to may not be in real conflict

with each other, but it is unfortunate that there should even be an

apparent conflict. At present there is no way by which the Government

can cause such a conflict, when it occurs, to be solved by an appeal to

a higher court; and the wheels of justice are blocked without any real

decision of the question. I can not too strongly urge the passage of

the bill in question. A failure to pass it will result in seriously

hampering the Government in its effort to obtain justice, especially

against wealthy individuals or corporations who do wrong; and may also

prevent the Government from obtaining justice for wage-workers who are

not themselves able effectively to contest a case where the judgment of

an inferior court has been against them. I have specifically in view a

recent decision by a district judge leaving railway employees without

remedy for violation of a certain so-called labor statute. It seems an

absurdity to permit a single district judge, against what may be the

judgment of the immense majority of his colleagues on the bench,

to declare a law solemnly enacted by the Congress to be

"unconstitutional," and then to deny to the Government the right to

have the Supreme Court definitely decide the question.

It is well to recollect that the real efficiency of the law often

depends not upon the passage of acts as to which there is great public

excitement, but upon the passage of acts of this nature as to which

there is not much public excitement, because there is little public

understanding of their importance, while the interested parties are

keenly alive to the desirability of defeating them. The importance of

enacting into law the particular bill in question is further increased

by the fact that the Government has now definitely begun a policy of

resorting to the criminal law in those trust and interstate commerce

cases where such a course offers a reasonable chance of success. At

first, as was proper, every effort was made to enforce these laws by

civil proceedings; but it has become increasingly evident that the

action of the Government in finally deciding, in certain cases, to

undertake criminal proceedings was justifiable; and though there have

been some conspicuous failures in these cases, we have had many

successes, which have undoubtedly had a deterrent effect upon

evil-doers, whether the penalty inflicted was in the shape of fine or

imprisonment--and penalties of both kinds have already been inflicted

by the courts. Of course, where the judge can see his way to inflict

the penalty of imprisonment the deterrent effect of the punishment on

other offenders is increased; but sufficiently heavy fines accomplish

much. Judge Holt, of the New York district court, in a recent decision

admirably stated the need for treating with just severity offenders of

this kind. His opinion runs in part as follows:

'The Government's evidence to establish the defendant's guilt was

clear, conclusive, and undisputed. The case was a flagrant one. The

transactions which took place under this illegal contract were very

large; the amounts of rebates returned were considerable; and the

amount of the rebate itself was large, amounting to more than one-fifth

of the entire tariff charge for the transportation of merchandise from

this city to Detroit. It is not too much to say, in my opinion, that if

this business was carried on for a considerable time on that

basis--that is, if this discrimination in favor of this particular

shipper was made with an 18 instead of a 23 cent rate and the tariff

rate was maintained as against their competitors--the result might be

and not improbably would be that their competitors would be driven out

of business. This crime is one which in its nature is deliberate and

premeditated. I think over a fortnight elapsed between the date of

Palmer's letter requesting the reduced rate and the answer of the

railroad company deciding to grant it, and then for months afterwards

this business was carried on and these claims for rebates submitted

month after month and checks in payment of them drawn month after

month. Such a violation of the law, in my opinion, in its essential

nature, is a very much more heinous act than the ordinary common,

vulgar crimes which come before criminal courts constantly for

punishment and which arise from sudden passion or temptation. This

crime in this case was committed by men of education and of large

business experience, whose standing in the community was such that they

might have been expected to set an example of obedience to law upon the

maintenance of which alone in this country the security of their

property depends. It was committed on behalf of a great railroad

corporation, which, like other railroad corporations, has received

gratuitously from the State large and valuable privileges for the

public's convenience and its own, which performs quasi public functions

and which is charged with the highest obligation in the transaction of

its business to treat the citizens of this country alike, and not to

carry on its business with unjust discriminations between different

citizens or different classes of citizens. This crime in its nature is

one usually done with secrecy, and proof of which it is very difficult

to obtain. The interstate commerce act was past in 1887, nearly twenty

years ago. Ever since that time complaints of the granting of rebates

by railroads have been common, urgent, and insistent, and although the

Congress has repeatedly past legislation endeavoring to put a stop to

this evil, the difficulty of obtaining proof upon which to bring

prosecution in these cases is so great that this is the first case that

has ever been brought in this court, and, as I am formed, this case and

one recently brought in Philadelphia are the only cases that have ever

been brought in the eastern part of this country. In fact, but few

cases of this kind have ever been brought in this country, East or

West. Now, under these circumstances, I am forced to the conclusion, in

a case in which the proof is so clear and the facts are so flagrant, it

is the duty of the court to fix a penalty which shall in some degree be

commensurate with the gravity of the offense. As between the two

defendants, in my opinion, the principal penalty should be imposed on

the corporation. The traffic manager in this case, presumably, acted

without any advantage to himself and without any interest in the

transaction, either by the direct authority or in accordance with what

he understood to be the policy or the wishes of his employer.

"The sentence of this court in this case is, that the defendant

Pomeroy, for each of the six offenses upon which he has been convicted,

be fined the sum of $1,000, making six fines, amounting in all to the

sum of $6,000; and the defendant, The New York Central and Hudson River

Railroad Company, for each of the six crimes of which it has been

convicted, be fined the sum of $18,000, making six fines amounting in

the aggregate to the sum of $108,000, and judgment to that effect will

be entered in this case."

In connection with this matter, I would like to call attention to the

very unsatisfactory state of our criminal law, resulting in large part

from the habit of setting aside the judgments of inferior courts on

technicalities absolutely unconnected with the merits of the case, and

where there is no attempt to show that there has been any failure of

substantial justice. It would be well to enact a law providing

something to the effect that:

No judgment shall be set aside or new trial granted in any cause, civil

or criminal, on the ground of misdirection of the jury or the improper

admission or rejection of evidence, or for error as to any matter of

pleading or procedure unless, in the opinion of the court to which the

application is made, after an examination of the entire cause, it shall

affirmatively appear that the error complained of has resulted in a

miscarriage of justice.

In my last message I suggested the enactment of a law in connection

with the issuance of injunctions, attention having been sharply drawn

to the matter by the demand that the right of applying injunctions in

labor cases should be wholly abolished. It is at least doubtful whether

a law abolishing altogether the use of injunctions in such cases would

stand the test of the courts; in which case of course the legislation

would be ineffective. Moreover, I believe it would be wrong altogether

to prohibit the use of injunctions. It is criminal to permit sympathy

for criminals to weaken our hands in upholding the law; and if men seek

to destroy life or property by mob violence there should be no

impairment of the power of the courts to deal with them in the most

summary and effective way possible. But so far as possible the abuse of

the power should be provided against by some such law as I advocated

last year.

In this matter of injunctions there is lodged in the hands of the

judiciary a necessary power which is nevertheless subject to the

possibility of grave abuse. It is a power that should be exercised with

extreme care and should be subject to the jealous scrutiny of all men,

and condemnation should be meted out as much to the judge who fails to

use it boldly when necessary as to the judge who uses it wantonly or

oppressively. Of course a judge strong enough to be fit for his office

will enjoin any resort to violence or intimidation, especially by

conspiracy, no matter what his opinion may be of the rights of the

original quarrel. There must be no hesitation in dealing with disorder.

But there must likewise be no such abuse of the injunctive power as is

implied in forbidding laboring men to strive for their own betterment

in peaceful and lawful ways; nor must the injunction be used merely to

aid some big corporation in carrying out schemes for its own

aggrandizement. It must be remembered that a preliminary injunction in

a labor case, if granted without adequate proof (even when authority

can be found to support the conclusions of law on which it is founded),

may often settle the dispute between the parties; and therefore if

improperly granted may do irreparable wrong. Yet there are many judges

who assume a matter-of-course granting of a preliminary injunction to

be the ordinary and proper judicial disposition of such cases; and

there have undoubtedly been flagrant wrongs committed by judges in

connection with labor disputes even within the last few years, although

I think much less often than in former years. Such judges by their

unwise action immensely strengthen the hands of those who are striving

entirely to do away with the power of injunction; and therefore such

careless use of the injunctive process tends to threaten its very

existence, for if the American people ever become convinced that this

process is habitually abused, whether in matters affecting labor or in

matters affecting corporations, it will be well-nigh impossible to

prevent its abolition.

It may be the highest duty of a judge at any given moment to disregard,

not merely the wishes of individuals of great political or financial

power, but the overwhelming tide of public sentiment; and the judge who

does thus disregard public sentiment when it is wrong, who brushes

aside the plea of any special interest when the pleading is not rounded

on righteousness, performs the highest service to the country. Such a

judge is deserving of all honor; and all honor can not be paid to this

wise and fearless judge if we permit the growth of an absurd convention

which would forbid any criticism of the judge of another type, who

shows himself timid in the presence of arrogant disorder, or who on

insufficient grounds grants an injunction that does grave injustice, or

who in his capacity as a construer, and therefore in part a maker, of

the law, in flagrant fashion thwarts the cause of decent government.

The judge has a power over which no review can be exercised; he himself

sits in review upon the acts of both the executive and legislative

branches of the Government; save in the most extraordinary cases he is

amenable only at the bar of public opinion; and it is unwise to

maintain that public opinion in reference to a man with such power

shall neither be exprest nor led.

The best judges have ever been foremost to disclaim any immunity from

criticism. This has been true since the days of the great English Lord

Chancellor Parker, who said: "Let all people be at liberty to know what

I found my judgment upon; that, so when I have given it in any cause,

others may be at liberty to judge of me." The proprieties of the case

were set forth with singular clearness and good temper by Judge W. H.

Taft, when a United States circuit judge, eleven years ago, in 1895:

"The opportunity freely and publicly to criticize judicial action is of

vastly more importance to the body politic than the immunity of courts

and judges from unjust aspersions and attack. Nothing tends more to

render judges careful in their decisions and anxiously solicitous to do

exact justice than the consciousness that every act of theirs is to be

subjected to the intelligent scrutiny and candid criticism of their

fellow-men. Such criticism is beneficial in proportion as it is fair,

dispassionate, discriminating, and based on a knowledge of sound legal

principles. The comments made by learned text writers and by the acute

editors of the various law reviews upon judicial decisions are

therefore highly useful. Such critics constitute more or less impartial

tribunals of professional opinion before which each judgment is made to

stand or fall on its merits, and thus exert a strong influence to

secure uniformity of decision. But non-professional criticism also is

by no means without its uses, even if accompanied, as it often is, by a

direct attack upon the judicial fairness and motives of the occupants

of the bench; for if the law is but the essence of common sense, the

protest of many average men may evidence a defect in a judicial

conclusion, though based on the nicest legal reasoning and profoundest

learning. The two important elements of moral character in a judge are

an earnest desire to reach a just conclusion and courage to enforce it.

In so far as fear of public comment does not affect the courage of a

judge, but only spurs him on to search his conscience and to reach the

result which approves itself to his inmost heart such comment serves a

useful purpose. There are few men, whether they are judges for life or

for a shorter term, who do not prefer to earn and hold the respect of

all, and who can not be reached and made to pause and deliberate by

hostile public criticism. In the case of judges having a life tenure,

indeed their very independence makes the right freely to comment on

their decisions of greater importance, because it is the only practical

and available instrument in the hands of a free people to keep such

judges alive to the reasonable demands of those they serve.

"On the other hand, the danger of destroying the proper influence of

judicial decisions by creating unfounded prejudices against the courts

justifies and requires that unjust attacks shall be met and answered.

Courts must ultimately rest their defense upon the inherent strength of

the opinions they deliver as the ground for their conclusions and must

trust to the calm and deliberate judgment of all the people as their

best vindication."

There is one consideration which should be taken into account by the

good people who carry a sound proposition to an excess in objecting to

any criticism of a judge's decision. The instinct of the American

people as a whole is sound in this matter. They will not subscribe to

the doctrine that any public servant is to be above all criticism. If

the best citizens, those most competent to express their judgment in

such matters, and above all those belonging to the great and honorable

profession of the bar, so profoundly influential in American life, take

the position that there shall be no criticism of a judge under any

circumstances, their view will not be accepted by the American people

as a whole. In such event the people will turn to, and tend to accept

as justifiable, the intemperate and improper criticism uttered by

unworthy agitators. Surely it is a misfortune to leave to such critics

a function, right, in itself, which they are certain to abuse. Just and

temperate criticism, when necessary, is a safeguard against the

acceptance by the people as a whole of that intemperate antagonism

towards the judiciary which must be combated by every right-thinking

man, and which, if it became widespread among the people at large,

would constitute a dire menace to the Republic.

In connection with the delays of the law, I call your attention and the

attention of the Nation to the prevalence of crime among us, and above

all to the epidemic of lynching and mob violence that springs up, now

in one part of our country, now in another. Each section, North, South,

East, or West, has its own faults; no section can with wisdom spend its

time jeering at the faults of another section; it should be busy trying

to amend its own shortcomings. To deal with the crime of corruption It

is necessary to have an awakened public conscience, and to supplement

this by whatever legislation will add speed and certainty in the

execution of the law. When we deal with lynching even mote is

necessary. A great many white men are lynched, but the crime is

peculiarly frequent in respect to black men. The greatest existing

cause of lynching is the perpetration, especially by black men, of the

hideous crime of rape--the most abominable in all the category of

crimes, even worse than murder. Mobs frequently avenge the commission

of this crime by themselves torturing to death the man committing it;

thus avenging in bestial fashion a bestial deed, and reducing

themselves to a level with the criminal.

Lawlessness grows by what it feeds upon; and when mobs begin to lynch

for rape they speedily extend the sphere of their operations and lynch

for many other kinds of crimes, so that two-thirds of the lynchings are

not for rape at all; while a considerable proportion of the individuals

lynched are innocent of all crime. Governor Candler, of Georgia, stated

on one occasion some years ago: "I can say of a verity that I have,

within the last month, saved the lives of half a dozen innocent Negroes

who were pursued by the mob, and brought them to trial in a court of

law in which they were acquitted." As Bishop Galloway, of Mississippi,

has finely said: "When the rule of a mob obtains, that which

distinguishes a high civilization is surrendered. The mob which lynches

a negro charged with rape will in a little while lynch a white man

suspected of crime. Every Christian patriot in America needs to lift up

his voice in loud and eternal protest against the mob spirit that is

threatening the integrity of this Republic." Governor Jelks, of

Alabama, has recently spoken as follows: "The lynching of any person

for whatever crime is inexcusable anywhere--it is a defiance of orderly

government; but the killing of innocent people under any provocation is

infinitely more horrible; and yet innocent people are likely to die

when a mob's terrible lust is once aroused. The lesson is this: No good

citizen can afford to countenance a defiance of the statutes, no matter

what the provocation. The innocent frequently suffer, and, it is my

observation, more usually suffer than the guilty. The white people of

the South indict the whole colored race on the ground that even the

better elements lend no assistance whatever in ferreting out criminals

of their own color. The respectable colored people must learn not to

harbor their criminals, but to assist the officers in bringing them to

justice. This is the larger crime, and it provokes such atrocious

offenses as the one at Atlanta. The two races can never get on until

there is an understanding on the part of both to make common cause with

the law-abiding against criminals of any color."

Moreover, where any crime committed by a member of one race against a

member of another race is avenged in such fashion that it seems as if

not the individual criminal, but the whole race, is attacked, the

result is to exasperate to the highest degree race feeling. There is

but one safe rule in dealing with black men as with white men; it is

the same rule that must be applied in dealing with rich men and poor

men; that is, to treat each man, whatever his color, his creed, or his

social position, with even-handed justice on his real worth as a man.

White people owe it quite as much to themselves as to the colored race

to treat well the colored man who shows by his life that he deserves

such treatment; for it is surely the highest wisdom to encourage in the

colored race all those individuals who are honest, industrious,

law-abiding, and who therefore make good and safe neighbors and

citizens. Reward or punish the individual on his merits as an

individual. Evil will surely come in the end to both races if we

substitute for this just rule the habit of treating all the members of

the race, good and bad, alike. There is no question of "social

equality" or "negro domination" involved; only the question of

relentlessly punishing bad men, and of securing to the good man the

right to his life, his liberty, and the pursuit of his happiness as his

own qualities of heart, head, and hand enable him to achieve it.

Every colored man should realize that the worst enemy of his race is

the negro criminal, and above all the negro criminal who commits the

dreadful crime of rape; and it should be felt as in the highest degree

an offense against the whole country, and against the colored race in

particular, for a colored man to fail to help the officers of the law

in hunting down with all possible earnestness and zeal every such

infamous offender. Moreover, in my judgment, the crime of rape should

always be punished with death, as is the case with murder; assault with

intent to commit rape should be made a capital crime, at least in the

discretion of the court; and provision should be made by which the

punishment may follow immediately upon the heels of the offense; while

the trial should be so conducted that the victim need not be wantonly

shamed while giving testimony, and that the least possible publicity

shall be given to the details.

The members of the white race on the other hand should understand that

every lynching represents by just so much a loosening of the bands of

civilization; that the spirit of lynching inevitably throws into

prominence in the community all the foul and evil creatures who dwell

therein. No man can take part in the torture of a human being without

having his own moral nature permanently lowered. Every lynching means

just so much moral deterioration in all the children who have any

knowledge of it, and therefore just so much additional trouble for the

next generation of Americans.

Let justice be both sure and swift; but let it be justice under the

law, and not the wild and crooked savagery of a mob.

There is another matter which has a direct bearing upon this matter of

lynching and of the brutal crime which sometimes calls it forth and at

other times merely furnishes the excuse for its existence. It is out of

the question for our people as a whole permanently to rise by treading

down any of their own number. Even those who themselves for the moment

profit by such maltreatment of their fellows will in the long run also

suffer. No more shortsighted policy can be imagined than, in the

fancied interest of one class, to prevent the education of another

class. The free public school, the chance for each boy or girl to get a

good elementary education, lies at the foundation of our whole

political situation. In every community the poorest citizens, those who

need the schools most, would be deprived of them if they only received

school facilities proportioned to the taxes they paid. This is as true

of one portion of our country as of another. It is as true for the

negro as for the white man. The white man, if he is wise, will decline

to allow the Negroes in a mass to grow to manhood and womanhood without

education. Unquestionably education such as is obtained in our public

schools does not do everything towards making a man a good citizen; but

it does much. The lowest and most brutal criminals, those for instance

who commit the crime of rape, are in the great majority men who have

had either no education or very little; just as they are almost

invariably men who own no property; for the man who puts money by out

of his earnings, like the man who acquires education, is usually lifted

above mere brutal criminality. Of course the best type of education for

the colored man, taken as a whole, is such education as is conferred in

schools like Hampton and Tuskegee; where the boys and girls, the young

men and young women, are trained industrially as well as in the

ordinary public school branches. The graduates of these schools turn

out well in the great majority of cases, and hardly any of them become

criminals, while what little criminality there is never takes the form

of that brutal violence which invites lynch law. Every graduate of

these schools--and for the matter of that every other colored man or

woman--who leads a life so useful and honorable as to win the good will

and respect of those whites whose neighbor he or she is, thereby helps

the whole colored race as it can be helped in no other way; for next to

the negro himself, the man who can do most to help the negro is his

white neighbor who lives near him; and our steady effort should be to

better the relations between the two. Great though the benefit of these

schools has been to their colored pupils and to the colored people, it

may well be questioned whether the benefit, has not been at least as

great to the white people among whom these colored pupils live after

they graduate.

Be it remembered, furthermore, that the individuals who, whether from

folly, from evil temper, from greed for office, or in a spirit of mere

base demagogy, indulge in the inflammatory and incendiary speeches and

writings which tend to arouse mobs and to bring about lynching, not

only thus excite the mob, but also tend by what criminologists call

"suggestion," greatly to increase the likelihood of a repetition of the

very crime against which they are inveighing. When the mob is composed

of the people of one race and the man lynched is of another race, the

men who in their speeches and writings either excite or justify the

action tend, of course, to excite a bitter race feeling and to cause

the people of the opposite race to lose sight of the abominable act of

the criminal himself; and in addition, by the prominence they give to

the hideous deed they undoubtedly tend to excite in other brutal and

depraved natures thoughts of committing it. Swift, relentless, and

orderly punishment under the law is the only way by which criminality

of this type can permanently be supprest.

In dealing with both labor and capital, with the questions affecting

both corporations and trades unions, there is one matter more important

to remember than aught else, and that is the infinite harm done by

preachers of mere discontent. These are the men who seek to excite a

violent class hatred against all men of wealth. They seek to turn wise

and proper movements for the better control of corporations and for

doing away with the abuses connected with wealth, into a campaign of

hysterical excitement and falsehood in which the aim is to inflame to

madness the brutal passions of mankind. The sinister demagogs and

foolish visionaries who are always eager to undertake such a campaign

of destruction sometimes seek to associate themselves with those

working for a genuine reform in governmental and social methods, and

sometimes masquerade as such reformers. In reality they are the worst

enemies of the cause they profess to advocate, just as the purveyors of

sensational slander in newspaper or magazine are the worst enemies of

all men who are engaged in an honest effort to better what is bad in

our social and governmental conditions. To preach hatred of the rich

man as such, to carry on a campaign of slander and invective against

him, to seek to mislead and inflame to madness honest men whose lives

are hard and who have not the kind of mental training which will permit

them to appreciate the danger in the doctrines preached--all this is to

commit a crime against the body politic and to be false to every worthy

principle and tradition of American national life. Moreover, while such

preaching and such agitation may give a livelihood and a certain

notoriety to some of those who take part in it, and may result in the

temporary political success of others, in the long run every such

movement will either fail or else will provoke a violent reaction,

which will itself result not merely in undoing the mischief wrought by

the demagog and the agitator, but also in undoing the good that the

honest reformer, the true upholder of popular rights, has painfully and

laboriously achieved. Corruption is never so rife as in communities

where the demagog and the agitator bear full sway, because in such

communities all moral bands become loosened, and hysteria and

sensationalism replace the spirit of sound judgment and fair dealing as

between man and man. In sheer revolt against the squalid anarchy thus

produced men are sure in the end to turn toward any leader who can

restore order, and then their relief at being free from the intolerable

burdens of class hatred, violence, and demagogy is such that they can

not for some time be aroused to indignation against misdeeds by men of

wealth; so that they permit a new growth of the very abuses which were

in part responsible for the original outbreak. The one hope for success

for our people lies in a resolute and fearless, but sane and

cool-headed, advance along the path marked out last year by this very

Congress. There must be a stern refusal to be misled into following

either that base creature who appeals and panders to the lowest

instincts and passions in order to arouse one set of Americans against

their fellows, or that other creature, equally base but no baser, who

in a spirit of greed, or to accumulate or add to an already huge

fortune, seeks to exploit his fellow Americans with callous disregard

to their welfare of soul and body. The man who debauches others in

order to obtain a high office stands on an evil equality of corruption

with the man who debauches others for financial profit; and when hatred

is sown the crop which springs up can only be evil.

The plain people who think--the mechanics, farmers, merchants, workers

with head or hand, the men to whom American traditions are dear, who

love their country and try to act decently by their neighbors, owe it

to themselves to remember that the most damaging blow that can be given

popular government is to elect an unworthy and sinister agitator on a

platform of violence and hypocrisy. Whenever such an issue is raised in

this country nothing can be gained by flinching from it, for in such

case democracy is itself on trial, popular self-government under

republican forms is itself on trial. The triumph of the mob is just as

evil a thing as the triumph of the plutocracy, and to have escaped one

danger avails nothing whatever if we succumb to the other. In the end

the honest man, whether rich or poor, who earns his own living and

tries to deal justly by his fellows, has as much to fear from the

insincere and unworthy demagog, promising much and performing nothing,

or else performing nothing but evil, who would set on the mob to

plunder the rich, as from the crafty corruptionist, who, for his own

ends, would permit the common people to be exploited by the very

wealthy. If we ever let this Government fall into the hands of men of

either of these two classes, we shall show ourselves false to America's

past. Moreover, the demagog and the corruptionist often work hand in

hand. There are at this moment wealthy reactionaries of such obtuse

morality that they regard the public servant who prosecutes them when

they violate the law, or who seeks to make them bear their proper share

of the public burdens, as being even more objectionable than the

violent agitator who hounds on the mob to plunder the rich. There is

nothing to choose between such a reactionary and such an agitator;

fundamentally they are alike in their selfish disregard of the rights

of others; and it is natural that they should join in opposition to any

movement of which the aim is fearlessly to do exact and even justice to

all.

I call your attention to the need of passing the bill limiting the

number of hours of employment of railroad employees. The measure is a

very moderate one and I can conceive of no serious objection to it.

Indeed, so far as it is in our power, it should be our aim steadily to

reduce the number of hours of labor, with as a goal the general

introduction of an eight-hour day. There are industries in which it is

not possible that the hours of labor should be reduced; just as there

are communities not far enough advanced for such a movement to be for

their good, or, if in the Tropics, so situated that there is no analogy

between their needs and ours in this matter. On the Isthmus of Panama,

for instance, the conditions are in every way so different from what

they are here that an eight-hour day would be absurd; just as it is

absurd, so far as the Isthmus is concerned, where white labor can not

be employed, to bother as to whether the necessary work is done by

alien black men or by alien yellow men. But the wageworkers of the

United States are of so high a grade that alike from the merely

industrial standpoint and from the civic standpoint it should be our

object to do what we can in the direction of securing the general

observance of an eight-hour day. Until recently the eight-hour law on

our Federal statute books has been very scantily observed. Now,

however, largely through the instrumentality of the Bureau of Labor, it

is being rigidly enforced, and I shall speedily be able to say whether

or not there is need of further legislation in reference thereto; .for

our purpose is to see it obeyed in spirit no less than in letter. Half

holidays during summer should be established for Government employees;

it is as desirable for wageworkers who toil with their hands as for

salaried officials whose labor is mental that there should be a

reasonable amount of holiday.

The Congress at its last session wisely provided for a truant court for

the District of Columbia; a marked step in advance on the path of

properly caring for the children. Let me again urge that the Congress

provide for a thorough investigation of the conditions of child labor

and of the labor of women in the United States. More and more our

people are growing to recognize the fact that the questions which are

not merely of industrial but of social importance outweigh all others;

and these two questions most emphatically come in the category of those

which affect in the most far-reaching way the home life of the Nation.

The horrors incident to the employment of young children in factories

or at work anywhere are a blot on our civilization. It is true that

each. State must ultimately settle the question in its own way; but a

thorough official investigation of the matter, with the results

published broadcast, would greatly help toward arousing the public

conscience and securing unity of State action in the matter. There is,

however, one law on the subject which should be enacted immediately,

because there is no need for an investigation in reference thereto, and

the failure to enact it is discreditable to the National Government. A

drastic and thoroughgoing child-labor law should be enacted for the

District of Columbia and the Territories.

Among the excellent laws which the Congress past at the last session

was an employers' liability law. It was a marked step in advance to get

the recognition of employers' liability on the statute books; but the

law did not go far enough. In spite of all precautions exercised by

employers there are unavoidable accidents and even deaths involved in

nearly every line of business connected with the mechanic arts. This

inevitable sacrifice of life may be reduced to a minimum, but it can

not be completely eliminated. It is a great social injustice to compel

the employee, or rather the family of the killed or disabled victim, to

bear the entire burden of such an inevitable sacrifice. In other words,

society shirks its duty by laying the whole cost on the victim, whereas

the injury comes from what may be called the legitimate risks of the

trade. Compensation for accidents or deaths due in any line of industry

to the actual conditions under which that industry is carried on,

should be paid by that portion of the community for the benefit of

which the industry is carried on--that is, by those who profit by the

industry. If the entire trade risk is placed upon the employer he will

promptly and properly add it to the legitimate cost of production and

assess it proportionately upon the consumers of his commodity. It is

therefore clear to my mind that the law should place this entire "risk

of a trade" upon the employer. Neither the Federal law, nor, as far as

I am informed, the State laws dealing with the question of employers'

liability are sufficiently thoroughgoing. The Federal law should of

course include employees in navy-yards, arsenals, and the like.

The commission appointed by the President October 16, 1902, at the

request of both the anthracite coal operators and miners, to inquire

into, consider, and pass upon the questions in controversy in

connection with the strike in the anthracite regions of Pennsylvania

and the causes out of which the controversy arose, in their report,

findings, and award exprest the belief "that the State and Federal

governments should provide the machinery for what may be called the

compulsory investigation of controversies between employers and

employees when they arise." This expression of belief is deserving of

the favorable consideration of the Congress and the enactment of its

provisions into law. A bill has already been introduced to this end.

Records show that during the twenty years from January 1, 1881, to,

December 31, 1900, there were strikes affecting 117,509 establishments,

and 6,105,694 employees were thrown out of employment. During the same

period there were 1,005 lockouts, involving nearly 10,000

establishments, throwing over one million people out of employment.

These strikes and lockouts involved an estimated loss to employees of

$307,000,000 and to employers of $143,000,000, a total of $450,000,000.

The public suffered directly and indirectly probably as great

additional loss. But the money loss, great as it was, did not measure

the anguish and suffering endured by the wives and children of

employees whose pay stopt when their work stopt, or the disastrous

effect of the strike or lockout upon the business of employers, or the

increase in the cost of products and the inconvenience and loss to the

public.

Many of these strikes and lockouts would not have occurred had the

parties to the dispute been required to appear before an unprejudiced

body representing the nation and, face to face, state the reasons for

their contention. In most instances the dispute would doubtless be

found to be due to a misunderstanding by each of the other's rights,

aggravated by an unwillingness of either party to accept as true the

statements of the other as to the justice or injustice of the matters

in dispute. The exercise of a judicial spirit by a disinterested body

representing the Federal Government, such as would be provided by a

commission on conciliation and arbitration, would tend to create an

atmosphere of friendliness and conciliation between contending parties;

and the giving each side an equal opportunity to present fully its case

in the presence of the other would prevent many disputes from

developing into serious strikes or lockouts, and, in other cases, would

enable the commission to persuade the opposing parties to come to

terms.

In this age of great corporate and labor combinations, neither

employers nor employees should be left completely at the mercy of the

stronger party to a dispute, regardless of the righteousness of their

respective claims. The proposed measure would be in the line of

securing recognition of the fact that in many strikes the public has

itself an interest which can not wisely be disregarded; an interest not

merely of general convenience, for the question of a just and proper

public policy must also be considered. In all legislation of this kind

it is well to advance cautiously, testing each step by the actual

results; the step proposed can surely be safely taken, for the

decisions of the commission would not bind the parties in legal

fashion, and yet would give a chance for public opinion to crystallize

and thus to exert its full force for the right.

It is not wise that the Nation should alienate its remaining coal

lands. I have temporarily withdrawn from settlement all the lands which

the Geological Survey has indicated as containing, or in all

probability containing, coal. The question, however, can be properly

settled only by legislation, which in my judgment should provide for

the withdrawal of these lands from sale or from entry, save in certain

especial circumstances. The ownership would then remain in the United

States, which should not, however, attempt to work them, but permit

them to be worked by private individuals under a royalty system, the

Government keeping such control as to permit it to see that no

excessive price was charged consumers. It would, of course, be as

necessary to supervise the rates charged by the common carriers to

transport the product as the rates charged by those who mine it; and

the supervision must extend to the conduct of the common carriers, so

that they shall in no way favor one competitor at the expense of

another. The withdrawal of these coal lands would constitute a policy

analogous to that which has been followed in withdrawing the forest

lands from ordinary settlement. The coal, like the forests, should be

treated as the property of the public and its disposal should be under

conditions which would inure to the benefit of the public as a whole.

The present Congress has taken long strides in the direction of

securing proper supervision and control by the National Government over

corporations engaged in interstate business and the enormous majority

of corporations of any size are engaged in interstate business. The

passage of the railway rate bill, and only to a less degree the passage

of the pure food bill, and the provision for increasing and rendering

more effective national control over the beef-packing industry, mark an

important advance in the proper direction. In the short session it will

perhaps be difficult to do much further along this line; and it may be

best to wait until the laws have been in operation for a number of

months before endeavoring to increase their scope, because only

operation will show with exactness their merits and their shortcomings

and thus give opportunity to define what further remedial legislation

is needed. Yet in my judgment it will in the end be advisable in

connection with the packing house inspection law to provide for putting

a date on the label and for charging the cost of inspection to the

packers. All these laws have already justified their enactment. The

interstate commerce law, for instance, has rather amusingly falsified

the predictions, both of those who asserted that it would ruin the

railroads and of those who asserted that it did not go far enough and

would accomplish nothing. During the last five months the railroads

have shown increased earnings and some of them unusual dividends; while

during the same period the mere taking effect of the law has produced

an unprecedented, a hitherto unheard of, number of voluntary reductions

in freights and fares by the railroads. Since the founding of the

Commission there has never been a time of equal length in which

anything like so many reduced tariffs have been put into effect. On

August 27, for instance, two days before the new law went into effect,

the Commission received notices of over five thousand separate tariffs

which represented reductions from previous rates.

It must not be supposed, however, that with the passage of these laws

it will be possible to stop progress along the line of increasing the

power of the National Government over the use of capital interstate

commerce. For example, there will ultimately be need of enlarging the

powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission along several different

lines, so as to give it a larger and more efficient control over the

railroads.

It can not too often be repeated that experience has conclusively shown

the impossibility of securing by the actions of nearly half a hundred

different State legislatures anything but ineffective chaos in the way

of dealing with the great corporations which do not operate exclusively

within the limits of any one State. In some method, whether by a

national license law or in other fashion, we must exercise, and that at

an early date, a far more complete control than at present over these

great corporations--a control that will among other things prevent the

evils of excessive overcapitalization, and that will compel the

disclosure by each big corporation of its stockholders and of its

properties and business, whether owned directly or through subsidiary

or affiliated corporations. This will tend to put a stop to the

securing of inordinate profits by favored individuals at the expense

whether of the general public, the stockholders, or the wageworkers.

Our effort should be not so much to prevent consolidation as such, but

so to supervise and control it as to see that it results in no harm to

the people. The reactionary or ultraconservative apologists for the

misuse of wealth assail the effort to secure such control as a step

toward socialism. As a matter of fact it is these reactionaries and

ultraconservatives who are themselves most potent in increasing

socialistic feeling. One of the most efficient methods of averting the

consequences of a dangerous agitation, which is 80 per cent wrong, is

to remedy the 20 per cent of evil as to which the agitation is well

rounded. The best way to avert the very undesirable move for the

government ownership of railways is to secure by the Government on

behalf of the people as a whole such adequate control and regulation of

the great interstate common carriers as will do away with the evils

which give rise to the agitation against them. So the proper antidote

to the dangerous and wicked agitation against the men of wealth as such

is to secure by proper legislation and executive action the abolition

of the grave abuses which actually do obtain in connection with the

business use of wealth under our present system--or rather no

system--of failure to exercise any adequate control at all. Some

persons speak as if the exercise of such governmental control would do

away with the freedom of individual initiative and dwarf individual

effort. This is not a fact. It would be a veritable calamity to fail to

put a premium upon individual initiative, individual capacity and

effort; upon the energy, character, and foresight which it is so

important to encourage in the individual. But as a matter of fact the

deadening and degrading effect of pure socialism, and especially of its

extreme form communism, and the destruction of individual character

which they would bring about, are in part achieved by the wholly

unregulated competition which results in a single individual or

corporation rising at the expense of all others until his or its rise

effectually checks all competition and reduces former competitors to a

position of utter inferiority and subordination.

In enacting and enforcing such legislation as this Congress already has

to its credit, we are working on a coherent plan, with the steady

endeavor to secure the needed reform by the joint action of the

moderate men, the plain men who do not wish anything hysterical or

dangerous, but who do intend to deal in resolute common-sense fashion

with the real and great evils of the present system. The reactionaries

and the violent extremists show symptoms of joining hands against us.

Both assert, for instance, that, if logical, we should go to government

ownership of railroads and the like; the reactionaries, because on such

an issue they think the people would stand with them, while the

extremists care rather to preach discontent and agitation than to

achieve solid results. As a matter of fact, our position is as remote

from that of the Bourbon reactionary as from that of the impracticable

or sinister visionary. We hold that the Government should not conduct

the business of the nation, but that it should exercise such

supervision as will insure its being conducted in the interest of the

nation. Our aim is, so far as may be, to secure, for all decent, hard

working men, equality of opportunity and equality of burden.

The actual working of our laws has shown that the effort to prohibit

all combination, good or bad, is noxious where it is not ineffective.

Combination of capital like combination of labor is a necessary element

of our present industrial system. It is not possible completely to

prevent it; and if it were possible, such complete prevention would do

damage to the body politic. What we need is not vainly to try to

prevent all combination, but to secure such rigorous and adequate

control and supervision of the combinations as to prevent their

injuring the public, or existing in such form as inevitably to threaten

injury--for the mere fact that a combination has secured practically

complete control of a necessary of life would under any circumstances

show that such combination was to be presumed to be adverse to the

public interest. It is unfortunate that our present laws should forbid

all combinations, instead of sharply discriminating between those

combinations which do good and those combinations which do evil.

Rebates, for instance, are as often due to the pressure of big shippers

(as was shown in the investigation of the Standard Oil Company and as

has been shown since by the investigation of the tobacco and sugar

trusts) as to the initiative of big railroads. Often railroads would

like to combine for the purpose of preventing a big shipper from

maintaining improper advantages at the expense of small shippers and of

the general public. Such a combination, instead of being forbidden by

law, should be favored. In other words, it should be permitted to

railroads to make agreements, provided these agreements were sanctioned

by the Interstate Commerce Commission and were published. With these

two conditions complied with it is impossible to see what harm such a

combination could do to the public at large. It is a public evil to

have on the statute books a law incapable of full enforcement because

both judges and juries realize that its full enforcement would destroy

the business of the country; for the result is to make decent railroad

men violators of the law against their will, and to put a premium on

the behavior of the wilful wrongdoers. Such a result in turn tends to

throw the decent man and the wilful wrongdoer into close association,

and in the end to drag down the former to the latter's level; for the

man who becomes a lawbreaker in one way unhappily tends to lose all

respect for law and to be willing to break it in many ways. No more

scathing condemnation could be visited upon a law than is contained in

the words of the Interstate Commerce Commission when, in commenting

upon the fact that the numerous joint traffic associations do

technically violate the law, they say: "The decision of the United

States Supreme Court in the Trans-Missouri case and the Joint Traffic

Association case has produced no practical effect upon the railway

operations of the country. Such associations, in fact, exist now as

they did before these decisions, and with the same general effect. In

justice to all parties, we ought probably to add that it is difficult

to see how our interstate railways could be operated with due regard to

the interest of the shipper and the railway without concerted action of

the kind afforded through these associations."

This means that the law as construed by the Supreme Court is such that

the business of the country can not be conducted without breaking it. I

recommend that you give careful and early consideration to this

subject, and if you find the opinion of the Interstate Commerce

Commission justified, that you amend the law so as to obviate the evil

disclosed.

The question of taxation is difficult in any country, but it is

especially difficult in ours with its Federal system of government.

Some taxes should on every ground be levied in a small district for use

in that district. Thus the taxation of real estate is peculiarly one

for the immediate locality in which the real estate is found. Again,

there is no more legitimate tax for any State than a tax on the

franchises conferred by that State upon street railroads and similar

corporations which operate wholly within the State boundaries,

sometimes in one and sometimes in several municipalities or other minor

divisions of the State. But there are many kinds of taxes which can

only be levied by the General Government so as to produce the best

results, because, among other reasons, the attempt to impose them in

one particular State too often results merely in driving the

corporation or individual affected to some other locality or other

State. The National Government has long derived its chief revenue from

a tariff on imports and from an internal or excise tax. In addition to

these there is every reason why, when next our system of taxation is

revised, the National Government should impose a graduated inheritance

tax, and, if possible, a graduated income tax. The man of great wealth

owes a peculiar obligation to the State, because he derives special

advantages from the mere existence of government. Not only should he

recognize this obligation in the way he leads his daily life and in the

way he earns and spends his money, but it should also be recognized by

the way in which he pays for the protection the State gives him. On the

one hand, it is desirable that he should assume his full and proper

share of the burden of taxation; on the other hand, it is quite as

necessary that in this kind of taxation, where the men who vote the tax

pay but little of it, there should be clear recognition of the danger

of inaugurating any such system save in a spirit of entire justice and

moderation. Whenever we, as a people, undertake to remodel our taxation

system along the lines suggested, we must make it clear beyond

peradventure that our aim is to distribute the burden of supporting the

Government more equitably than at present; that we intend to treat rich

man and poor man on a basis of absolute equality, and that we regard it

as equally fatal to true democracy to do or permit injustice to the one

as to do or permit injustice to the other.

I am well aware that such a subject as this needs long and careful

study in order that the people may become familiar with what is

proposed to be done, may clearly see the necessity of proceeding with

wisdom and self-restraint, and may make up their minds just how far

they are willing to go in the matter; while only trained legislators

can work out the project in necessary detail. But I feel that in the

near future our national legislators should enact a law providing for a

graduated inheritance tax by which a steadily increasing rate of duty

should be put upon all moneys or other valuables coming by gift,

bequest, or devise to any individual or corporation. It may be well to

make the tax heavy in proportion as the individual benefited is remote

of kin. In any event, in my judgment the pro rata of the tax should

increase very heavily with the increase of the amount left to any one

individual after a certain point has been reached. It is most desirable

to encourage thrift and ambition, and a potent source of thrift and

ambition is the desire on the part of the breadwinner to leave his

children well off. This object can be attained by making the tax very

small on moderate amounts of property left; because the prime object

should be to put a constantly increasing burden on the inheritance of

those swollen fortunes which it is certainly of no benefit to this

country to perpetuate.

There can be no question of the ethical propriety of the Government

thus determining the conditions upon which any gift or inheritance

should be received. Exactly how far the inheritance tax would, as an

incident, have the effect of limiting the transmission by devise or

gift of the enormous fortunes in question it is not necessary at

present to discuss. It is wise that progress in this direction should

be gradual. At first a permanent national inheritance tax, while it

might be more substantial than any such tax has hitherto been, need not

approximate, either in amount or in the extent of the increase by

graduation, to what such a tax should ultimately be.

This species of tax has again and again been imposed, although only

temporarily, by the National Government. It was first imposed by the

act of July 6, 1797, when the makers of the Constitution were alive and

at the head of affairs. It was a graduated tax; though small in amount,

the rate was increased with the amount left to any individual,

exceptions being made in the case of certain close kin. A similar tax

was again imposed by the act of July 1, 1862; a minimum sum of one

thousand dollars in personal property being excepted from taxation, the

tax then becoming progressive according to the remoteness of kin. The

war-revenue act of June 13, 1898, provided for an inheritance tax on

any sum exceeding the value of ten thousand dollars, the rate of the

tax increasing both in accordance with the amounts left and in

accordance with the legatee's remoteness of kin. The Supreme Court has

held that the succession tax imposed at the time of the Civil War was

not a direct tax but an impost or excise which was both constitutional

and valid. More recently the Court, in an opinion delivered by Mr.

Justice White, which contained an exceedingly able and elaborate

discussion of the powers of the Congress to impose death duties,

sustained the constitutionality of the inheritance-tax feature of the

war-revenue act of 1898.

In its incidents, and apart from the main purpose of raising revenue,

an income tax stands on an entirely different footing from an

inheritance tax; because it involves no question of the perpetuation of

fortunes swollen to an unhealthy size. The question is in its essence a

question of the proper adjustment of burdens to benefits. As the law

now stands it is undoubtedly difficult to devise a national income tax

which shall be constitutional. But whether it is absolutely impossible

is another question; and if possible it is most certainly desirable.

The first purely income-tax law was past by the Congress in 1861, but

the most important law dealing with the subject was that of 1894. This

the court held to be unconstitutional.

The question is undoubtedly very intricate, delicate, and troublesome.

The decision of the court was only reached by one majority. It is the

law of the land, and of course is accepted as such and loyally obeyed

by all good citizens. Nevertheless, the hesitation evidently felt by

the court as a whole in coming to a conclusion, when considered

together with the previous decisions on the subject, may perhaps

indicate the possibility of devising a constitutional income-tax law

which shall substantially accomplish the results aimed at. The

difficulty of amending the Constitution is so great that only real

necessity can justify a resort thereto. Every effort should be made in

dealing with this subject, as with the subject of the proper control by

the National Government over the use of corporate wealth in interstate

business, to devise legislation which without such action shall attain

the desired end; but if this fails, there will ultimately be no

alternative to a constitutional amendment.

It would be impossible to overstate (though it is of course difficult

quantitatively to measure) the effect upon a nation's growth to

greatness of what may be called organized patriotism, which necessarily

includes the substitution of a national feeling for mere local pride;

with as a resultant a high ambition for the whole country. No country

can develop its full strength so long as the parts which make up the

whole each put a feeling of loyalty to the part above the feeling of

loyalty to the whole. This is true of sections and it is just as true

of classes. The industrial and agricultural classes must work together,

capitalists and wageworkers must work together, if the best work of

which the country is capable is to be done. It is probable that a

thoroughly efficient system of education comes next to the influence of

patriotism in bringing about national success of this kind. Our federal

form of government, so fruitful of advantage to our people in certain

ways, in other ways undoubtedly limits our national effectiveness. It

is not possible, for instance, for the National Government to take the

lead in technical industrial education, to see that the public school

system of this country develops on all its technical, industrial,

scientific, and commercial sides. This must be left primarily to the

several States. Nevertheless, the National Government has control of

the schools of the District of Columbia, and it should see that these

schools promote and encourage the fullest development of the scholars

in both commercial and industrial training. The commercial training

should in one of its branches deal with foreign trade. The industrial

training is even more important. It should be one of our prime objects

as a Nation, so far as feasible, constantly to work toward putting the

mechanic, the wageworker who works with his hands, on a higher plane of

efficiency and reward, so as to increase his effectiveness in the

economic world, and the dignity, the remuneration, and the power of his

position in the social world. Unfortunately, at present the effect of

some of the work in the public schools is in the exactly opposite

direction. If boys and girls are trained merely in literary

accomplishments, to the total exclusion of industrial, manual, and

technical training, the tendency is to unfit them for industrial work

and to make them reluctant to go into it, or unfitted to do well if

they do go into it. This is a tendency which should be strenuously

combated. Our industrial development depends largely upon technical

education, including in this term all industrial education, from that

which fits a man to be a good mechanic, a good carpenter, or

blacksmith, to that which fits a man to do the greatest engineering

feat. The skilled mechanic, the skilled workman, can best become such

by technical industrial education. The far-reaching usefulness of

institutes of technology and schools of mines or of engineering is now

universally acknowledged, and no less far--reaching is the effect of a

good building or mechanical trades school, a textile, or watch-making,

or engraving school. All such training must develop not only manual

dexterity but industrial intelligence. In international rivalry this

country does not have to fear the competition of pauper labor as much

as it has to fear the educated labor of specially trained competitors;

and we should have the education of the hand, eye, and brain which will

fit us to meet such competition.

In every possible way we should help the wageworker who toils with his

hands and who must (we hope in a constantly increasing measure) also

toil with his brain. Under the Constitution the National Legislature

can do but little of direct importance for his welfare save where he is

engaged in work which permits it to act under the interstate commerce

clause of the Constitution; and this is one reason why I so earnestly

hope that both the legislative and judicial branches of the Government

will construe this clause of the Constitution in the broadest possible

manner. We can, however, in such a matter as industrial training, in

such a matter as child labor and factory laws, set an example to the

States by enacting the most advanced legislation that can wisely be

enacted for the District of Columbia.

The only other persons whose welfare is as vital to the welfare of the

whole country as is the welfare of the wageworkers are the tillers of

the soil, the farmers. It is a mere truism to say that no growth of

cities, no growth of wealth, no industrial development can atone for

any falling off in the character and standing of the farming

population. During the last few decades this fact has been recognized

with ever-increasing clearness. There is no longer any failure to

realize that farming, at least in certain branches, must become a

technical and scientific profession. This means that there must be open

to farmers the chance for technical and scientific training, not

theoretical merely but of the most severely practical type. The farmer

represents a peculiarly high type of American citizenship, and he must

have the same chance to rise and develop as other American citizens

have. Moreover, it is exactly as true of the farmer, as it is of the

business man and the wageworker, that the ultimate success of the

Nation of which he forms a part must be founded not alone on material

prosperity but upon high moral, mental, and physical development. This

education of the farmer--self-education by preference but also

education from the outside, as with all other men--is peculiarly

necessary here in the United States, where the frontier conditions even

in the newest States have now nearly vanished, where there must be a

substitution of a more intensive system of cultivation for the old

wasteful farm management, and where there must be a better business

organization among the farmers themselves.

Several factors must cooperate in the improvement of the farmer's

condition. He must have the chance to be educated in the widest

possible sense--in the sense which keeps ever in view the intimate

relationship between the theory of education and the facts of life. In

all education we should widen our aims. It is a good thing to produce a

certain number of trained scholars and students; but the education

superintended by the State must seek rather to produce a hundred good

citizens than merely one scholar, and it must be turned now and then

from the class book to the study of the great book of nature itself.

This is especially true of the farmer, as has been pointed out again

and again by all observers most competent to pass practical judgment on

the problems of our country life. All students now realize that

education must seek to train the executive powers of young people and

to confer more real significance upon the phrase "dignity of labor,"

and to prepare the pupils so that, in addition to each developing in

the highest degree his individual capacity for work, they may together

help create a right public opinion, and show in many ways social and

cooperative spirit. Organization has become necessary in the business

world; and it has accomplished much for good in the world of labor. It

is no less necessary for farmers. Such a movement as the grange

movement is good in itself and is capable of a well-nigh infinite

further extension for good so long as it is kept to its own legitimate

business. The benefits to be derived by the association of farmers for

mutual advantage are partly economic and partly sociological.

Moreover, while in the long run voluntary efforts will prove more

efficacious than government assistance, while the farmers must

primarily do most for themselves, yet the Government can also do much.

The Department of Agriculture has broken new ground in many directions,

and year by year it finds how it can improve its methods and develop

fresh usefulness. Its constant effort is to give the governmental

assistance in the most effective way; that is, through associations of

farmers rather than to or through individual farmers. It is also

striving to coordinate its work with the agricultural departments of

the several States, and so far as its own work is educational to

coordinate it with the work of other educational authorities.

Agricultural education is necessarily based upon general education, but

our agricultural educational institutions are wisely specializing

themselves, making their courses relate to the actual teaching of the

agricultural and kindred sciences to young country people or young city

people who wish to live in the country.

Great progress has already been made among farmers by the creation of

farmers' institutes, of dairy associations, of breeders' associations,

horticultural associations, and the like. A striking example of how the

Government and the farmers can cooperate is shown in connection with

the menace offered to the cotton growers of the Southern States by the

advance of the boll weevil. The Department is doing all it can to

organize the farmers in the threatened districts, just as it has been

doing all it can to organize them in aid of its work to eradicate the

cattle fever tick in the South. The Department can and will cooperate

with all such associations, and it must have their help if its own work

is to be done in the most efficient style.

Much is now being done for the States of the Rocky Mountains and Great

Plains through the development of the national policy of irrigation and

forest preservation; no Government policy for the betterment of our

internal conditions has been more fruitful of good than this. The

forests of the White Mountains and Southern Appalachian regions should

also be preserved; and they can not be unless the people of the States

in which they lie, through their representatives in the Congress,

secure vigorous action by the National Government.

I invite the attention of the Congress to the estimate of the Secretary

of War for an appropriation to enable him to begin the preliminary work

for the construction of a memorial amphitheater at Arlington. The Grand

Army of the Republic in its national encampment has urged the erection

of such an amphitheater as necessary for the proper observance Of

Memorial Day and as a fitting monument to the soldier and sailor dead

buried there. In this I heartily concur and commend the matter to the

favorable consideration of the Congress.

I am well aware of how difficult it is to pass a constitutional

amendment. Nevertheless in my judgment the whole question of marriage

and divorce should be relegated to the authority of the National

Congress. At present the wide differences in the laws of the different

States on this subject result in scandals and abuses; and surely there

is nothing so vitally essential to the welfare of the nation, nothing

around which the nation should so bend itself to throw every safeguard,

as the home life of the average citizen. The change would be good from

every standpoint. In particular it would be good because it would

confer on the Congress the power at once to deal radically and

efficiently with polygamy; and this should be done whether or not

marriage and divorce are dealt with. It is neither safe nor proper to

leave the question of polygamy to be dealt with by the several States.

Power to deal with it should be conferred on the National Government.

When home ties are loosened; when men and women cease to regard a

worthy family life, with all its duties fully performed, and all its

responsibilities lived up to, as the life best worth living; then evil

days for the commonwealth are at hand. There are regions in our land,

and classes of our population, where the birth rate has sunk below the

death rate. Surely it should need no demonstration to show that wilful

sterility is, from the standpoint of the nation, from the standpoint of

the human race, the one sin for which the penalty is national death,

race death; a sin for which there is no atonement; a sin which is the

more dreadful exactly in proportion as the men and women guilty thereof

are in other respects, in character, and bodily and mental powers,

those whom for the sake of the state it would be well to see the

fathers and mothers of many healthy children, well brought up in homes

made happy by their presence. No man, no woman, can shirk the primary

duties of life, whether for love of ease and pleasure, or for any other

cause, and retain his or her self-respect.

Let me once again call the attention of the Congress to two subjects

concerning which I have frequently before communicated with them. One

is the question of developing American shipping. I trust that a law

embodying in substance the views, or a major part of the views, exprest

in the report on this subject laid before the House at its last session

will be past. I am well aware that in former years objectionable

measures have been proposed in reference to the encouragement of

American shipping; but it seems to me that the proposed measure is as

nearly unobjectionable as any can be. It will of course benefit

primarily our seaboard States, such as Maine, Louisiana, and

Washington; but what benefits part of our people in the end benefits

all; just as Government aid to irrigation and forestry in the West is

really of benefit, not only to the Rocky Mountain States, but to all

our country. If it prove impracticable to enact a law for the

encouragement of shipping generally, then at least provision should be

made for better communication with South America, notably for fast mail

lines to the chief South American ports. It is discreditable to us that

our business people, for lack of direct communication in the shape of

lines of steamers with South America, should in that great sister

continent be at a disadvantage compared to the business people of

Europe.

I especially call your attention to the second subject, the condition

of our currency laws. The national bank act has ably served a great

purpose in aiding the enormous business development of the country; and

within ten years there has been an increase in circulation per capita

from $21.41 to $33.08. For several years evidence has been accumulating

that additional legislation is needed. The recurrence of each crop

season emphasizes the defects of the present laws. There must soon be a

revision of them, because to leave them as they are means to incur

liability of business disaster. Since your body adjourned there has

been a fluctuation in the interest on call money from 2 per cent to 30

per cent; and the fluctuation was even greater during the preceding six

months. The Secretary of the Treasury had to step in and by wise action

put a stop to the most violent period of oscillation. Even worse than

such fluctuation is the advance in commercial rates and the uncertainty

felt in the sufficiency of credit even at high rates. All commercial

interests suffer during each crop period. Excessive rates for call

money in New York attract money from the interior banks into the

speculative field; this depletes the fund that would otherwise be

available for commercial uses, and commercial borrowers are forced to

pay abnormal rates; so that each fall a tax, in the shape of increased

interest charges, is placed on the whole commerce of the country.

The mere statement of these has shows that our present system is

seriously defective. There is need of a change. Unfortunately, however,

many of the proposed changes must be ruled from consideration because

they are complicated, are not easy of comprehension, and tend to,

disturb existing rights and interests. We must also rule out any plan

which would materially impair the value of the United States 2 per cent

bonds now pledged to secure circulations, the issue of which was made

under conditions peculiarly creditable to the Treasury. I do not press

any especial plan. Various plans have recently been proposed by expert

committees of bankers. Among the plans which are possibly feasible and

which certainly should receive your consideration is that repeatedly

brought to your attention by the present Secretary of the Treasury, the

essential features of which have been approved by many prominent

bankers and business men. According to this plan national banks should

be permitted to issue a specified proportion of their capital in notes

of a given kind, the issue to be taxed at so high a rate as to drive

the notes back when not wanted in legitimate trade. This plan would not

permit the issue of currency to give banks additional profits, but to

meet the emergency presented by times of stringency.

I do not say that this is the right system. I only advance it to

emphasize my belief that there is need for the adoption of some system

which shall be automatic and open to all sound banks, so as to avoid

all possibility of discrimination and favoritism. Such a plan would

tend to prevent the spasms of high money and speculation which now

obtain in the New York market; for at present there is too much

currency at certain seasons of the year, and its accumulation at New

York tempts bankers to lend it at low rates for speculative purposes;

whereas at other times when the crops are being moved there is urgent

need for a large but temporary increase in the currency supply. It must

never be forgotten that this question concerns business men generally

quite as much as bankers; especially is this true of stockmen, farmers,

and business men in the West; for at present at certain seasons of the

year the difference in interest rates between the East and the West is

from 6 to 10 per cent, whereas in Canada the corresponding difference

is but 2 per cent. Any plan must, of course, guard the interests of

western and southern bankers as carefully as it guards the interests of

New York or Chicago bankers; and must be drawn from the standpoints of

the farmer and the merchant no less than from the standpoints of the

city banker and the country banker.

The law should be amended so as specifically to provide that the funds

derived from customs duties may be treated by the Secretary of the

Treasury as he treats funds obtained under the internal-revenue laws.

There should be a considerable increase in bills of small

denominations. Permission should be given banks, if necessary under

settled restrictions, to retire their circulation to a larger amount

than three millions a month.

I most earnestly hope that the bill to provide a lower tariff for or

else absolute free trade in Philippine products will become a law. No

harm will come to any American industry; and while there will be some

small but real material benefit to the Filipinos, the main benefit will

come by the showing made as to our purpose to do all in our power for

their welfare. So far our action in the Philippines has been abundantly

justified, not mainly and indeed not primarily because of the added

dignity it has given us as a nation by proving that we are capable

honorably and efficiently to bear the international burdens which a

mighty people should bear, but even more because of the immense benefit

that has come to the people of the Philippine Islands. In these islands

we are steadily introducing both liberty and order, to a greater degree

than their people have ever before known. We have secured justice. We

have provided an efficient police force, and have put down ladronism.

Only in the islands of Leyte and Samar is the authority of our

Government resisted and this by wild mountain tribes under the

superstitious inspiration of fakirs and pseudo-religions leaders. We

are constantly increasing the measure of liberty accorded the

islanders, and next spring, if conditions warrant, we shall take a

great stride forward in testing their capacity for self-government by

summoning the first Filipino legislative assembly; and the way in which

they stand this test will largely determine whether the self-government

thus granted will be increased or decreased; for if we have erred at

all in the Philippines it has been in proceeding too rapidly in the

direction of granting a large measure of self-government. We are

building roads. We have, for the immeasurable good of the people,

arranged for the building of railroads. Let us also see to it that they

are given free access to our markets. This nation owes no more

imperative duty to itself and mankind than the duty of managing the

affairs of all the islands under the American flag--the Philippines,

Porto Rico, and Hawaii--so as to make it evident that it is in every

way to their advantage that the flag should fly over them.

American citizenship should be conferred on the citizens of Porto Rico.

The harbor of San Juan in Porto Rico should be dredged and improved.

The expenses of the federal court of Porto Rico should be met from the

Federal Treasury. The administration of the affairs of Porto Rico,

together with those of the Philippines, Hawaii, and our other insular

possessions, should all be directed under one executive department; by

preference the Department of State or the Department of War.

The needs of Hawaii are peculiar; every aid should be given the

islands; and our efforts should be unceasing to develop them along the

lines of a community of small freeholders, not of great planters with

coolie-tilled estates. Situated as this Territory is, in the middle of

the Pacific, there are duties imposed upon this small community which

do not fall in like degree or manner upon any other American community.

This warrants our treating it differently from the way in which we

treat Territories contiguous to or surrounded by sister Territories or

other States, and justifies the setting aside of a portion of our

revenues to be expended for educational and internal improvements

therein. Hawaii is now making an effort to secure immigration fit in

the end to assume the duties and burdens of full American citizenship,

and whenever the leaders in the various industries of those islands

finally adopt our ideals and heartily join our administration in

endeavoring to develop a middle class of substantial citizens, a way

will then be found to deal with the commercial and industrial problems

which now appear to them so serious. The best Americanism is that which

aims for stability and permanency of prosperous citizenship, rather

than immediate returns on large masses of capital.

Alaska's needs have been partially met, but there must be a complete

reorganization of the governmental system, as I have before indicated

to you. I ask your especial attention to this. Our fellow-citizens who

dwell on the shores of Puget Sound with characteristic energy are

arranging to hold in Seattle the Alaska Yukon Pacific Exposition. Its

special aims include the upbuilding of Alaska and the development of

American commerce on the Pacific Ocean. This exposition, in its

purposes and scope, should appeal not only to the people of the Pacific

slope, but to the people of the United States at large. Alaska since it

was bought has yielded to the Government eleven millions of dollars of

revenue, and has produced nearly three hundred millions of dollars in

gold, furs, and fish. When properly developed it will become in large

degree a land of homes. The countries bordering the Pacific Ocean have

a population more numerous than that of all the countries of Europe;

their annual foreign commerce amounts to over three billions of

dollars, of which the share of the United States is some seven hundred

millions of dollars. If this trade were thoroughly understood and

pushed by our manufacturers and producers, the industries not only of

the Pacific slope, but of all our country, and particularly of our

cotton-growing States, would be greatly benefited. Of course, in order

to get these benefits, we must treat fairly the countries with which we

trade.

It is a mistake, and it betrays a spirit of foolish cynicism, to

maintain that all international governmental action is, and must ever

be, based upon mere selfishness, and that to advance ethical reasons

for such action is always a sign of hypocrisy. This is no more

necessarily true of the action of governments than of the action of

individuals. It is a sure sign of a base nature always to ascribe base

motives for the actions of others. Unquestionably no nation can afford

to disregard proper considerations of self-interest, any more than a

private individual can so do. But it is equally true that the average

private individual in any really decent community does many actions

with reference to other men in which he is guided, not by

self-interest, but by public spirit, by regard for the rights of

others, by a disinterested purpose to do good to others, and to raise

the tone of the community as a whole. Similarly, a really great nation

must often act, and as a matter of fact often does act, toward other

nations in a spirit not in the least of mere self-interest, but paying

heed chiefly to ethical reasons; and as the centuries go by this

disinterestedness in international action, this tendency of the

individuals comprising a nation to require that nation to act with

justice toward its neighbors, steadily grows and strengthens. It is

neither wise nor right for a nation to disregard its own needs, and it

is foolish--and may be wicked--to think that other nations will

disregard theirs. But it is wicked for a nation only to regard its own

interest, and foolish to believe that such is the sole motive that

actuates any other nation. It should be our steady aim to raise the

ethical standard of national action just as we strive to raise the

ethical standard of individual action.

Not only must we treat all nations fairly, but we must treat with

justice and good will all immigrants who come here under the law.

Whether they are Catholic or Protestant, Jew or Gentile; whether they

come from England or Germany, Russia, Japan, or Italy, matters nothing.

All we have a right to question is the man's conduct. If he is honest

and upright in his dealings with his neighbor and with the State, then

he is entitled to respect and good treatment. Especially do we need to

remember our duty to the stranger within our gates. It is the sure mark

of a low civilization, a low morality, to abuse or discriminate against

or in any way humiliate such stranger who has come here lawfully and

who is conducting himself properly. To remember this is incumbent on

every American citizen, and it is of course peculiarly incumbent on

every Government official, whether of the nation or of the several

States.

I am prompted to say this by the attitude of hostility here and there

assumed toward the Japanese in this country. This hostility is sporadic

and is limited to a very few places. Nevertheless, it is most

discreditable to us as a people, and it may be fraught with the gravest

consequences to the nation. The friendship between the United States

and Japan has been continuous since the time, over half a century ago,

when Commodore Perry, by his expedition to Japan, first opened the

islands to western civilization. Since then the growth of Japan has

been literally astounding. There is not only nothing to parallel it,

but nothing to approach it in the history of civilized mankind. Japan

has a glorious and ancient past. Her civilization is older than that of

the nations of northern Europe--the nations from whom the people of the

United States have chiefly sprung. But fifty years ago Japan's

development was still that of the Middle Ages. During that fifty years

the progress of the country in every walk in life has been a marvel to

mankind, and she now stands as one of the greatest of civilized

nations; great in the arts of war and in the arts of peace; great in

military, in industrial, in artistic development and achievement.

Japanese soldiers and sailors have shown themselves equal in combat to

any of whom history makes note. She has produced great generals and

mighty admirals; her fighting men, afloat and ashore, show all the

heroic courage, the unquestioning, unfaltering loyalty, the splendid

indifference to hardship and death, which marked the Loyal Ronins; and

they show also that they possess the highest ideal of patriotism.

Japanese artists of every kind see their products eagerly sought for in

all lands. The industrial and commercial development of Japan has been

phenomenal; greater than that of any other country during the same

period. At the same time the advance in science and philosophy is no

less marked. The admirable management of the Japanese Red Cross during

the late war, the efficiency and humanity of the Japanese officials,

nurses, and doctors, won the respectful admiration of all acquainted

with the facts. Through the Red Cross the Japanese people sent over

$100,000 to the sufferers of San Francisco, and the gift was accepted

with gratitude by our people. The courtesy of the Japanese, nationally

and individually, has become proverbial. To no other country has there

been such an increasing number of visitors from this land as to Japan.

In return, Japanese have come here in great numbers. They are welcome,

socially and intellectually, in all our colleges and institutions of

higher learning, in all our professional and social bodies. The

Japanese have won in a single generation the right to stand abreast of

the foremost and most enlightened peoples of Europe and America; they

have won on their own merits and by their own exertions the right to

treatment on a basis of full and frank equality. The overwhelming mass

of our people cherish a lively regard and respect for the people of

Japan, and in almost every quarter of the Union the stranger from Japan

is treated as he deserves; that is, he is treated as the stranger from

any part of civilized Europe is and deserves to be treated. But here

and there a most unworthy feeling has manifested itself toward the

Japanese--the feeling that has been shown in shutting them out from the

common schools in San Francisco, and in mutterings against them in one

or two other places, because of their efficiency as workers. To shut

them out from the public schools is a wicked absurdity, when there are

no first-class colleges in the land, including the universities and

colleges of California, which do not gladly welcome Japanese students

and on which Japanese students do not reflect credit. We have as much

to learn from Japan as Japan has to learn from us; and no nation is fit

to teach unless it is also willing to learn. Throughout Japan Americans

are well treated, and any failure on the part of Americans at home to

treat the Japanese with a like courtesy and consideration is by just so

much a confession of inferiority in our civilization.

Our nation fronts on the Pacific, just as it fronts on the Atlantic. We

hope to play a constantly growing part in the great ocean of the

Orient. We wish, as we ought to wish, for a great commercial

development in our dealings with Asia; and it is out of the question

that we should permanently have such development unless we freely and

gladly extend to other nations the same measure of justice and good

treatment which we expect to receive in return. It is only a very small

body of our citizens that act badly. Where the Federal Government has

power it will deal summarily with any such. Where the several States

have power I earnestly ask that they also deal wisely and promptly with

such conduct, or else this small body of wrongdoers may bring shame

upon the great mass of their innocent and right-thinking fellows--that

is, upon our nation as a whole. Good manners should be an international

no less than an individual attribute. I ask fair treatment for the

Japanese as I would ask fair treatment for Germans or Englishmen,

Frenchmen, Russians, or Italians. I ask it as due to humanity and

civilization. I ask it as due to ourselves because we must act

uprightly toward all men.

I recommend to the Congress that an act be past specifically providing

for the naturalization of Japanese who come here intending to become

American citizens. One of the great embarrassments attending the

performance of our international obligations is the fact that the

Statutes of the United States are entirely inadequate. They fail to

give to the National Government sufficiently ample power, through

United States courts and by the use of the Army and Navy, to protect

aliens in the rights secured to them under solemn treaties which are

the law of the land. I therefore earnestly recommend that the criminal

and civil statutes of the United States be so amended and added to as

to enable the President, acting for the United States Government, which

is responsible in our international relations, to enforce the rights of

aliens under treaties. Even as the law now is something can be done by

the Federal Government toward this end, and in the matter now before me

affecting the Japanese everything that it is in my power to do will be

done, and all of the forces, military and civil, of the United States

which I may lawfully employ will be so employed. There should, however,

be no particle of doubt as to the power of the National Government

completely to perform and enforce its own obligations to other nations.

The mob of a single city may at any time perform acts of lawless

violence against some class of foreigners which would plunge us into

war. That city by itself would be powerless to make defense against the

foreign power thus assaulted, and if independent of this Government it

would never venture to perform or permit the performance of the acts

complained of. The entire power and the whole duty to protect the

offending city or the offending community lies in the hands of the

United States Government. It is unthinkable that we should continue a

policy under which a given locality may be allowed to commit a crime

against a friendly nation, and the United States Government limited,

not to preventing the commission of the crime, but, in the last resort,

to defending the people who have committed it against the consequences

of their own wrongdoing.

Last August an insurrection broke out in Cuba which it speedily grew

evident that the existing Cuban Government was powerless to quell. This

Government was repeatedly asked by the then Cuban Government to

intervene, and finally was notified by the President of Cuba that he

intended to resign; that his decision was irrevocable; that none of the

other constitutional officers would consent to carry on the Government,

and that he was powerless to maintain order. It was evident that chaos

was impending, and there was every probability that if steps were not

immediately taken by this Government to try to restore order the

representatives of various European nations in the island would apply

to their respective governments for armed intervention in order to

protect the lives and property of their citizens. Thanks to the

preparedness of our Navy, I was able immediately to send enough ships

to Cuba to prevent the situation from becoming hopeless; and I

furthermore dispatched to Cuba the Secretary of War and the Assistant

Secretary of State, in order that they might grapple with the situation

on the ground. All efforts to secure an agreement between the

contending factions, by which they should themselves come to an

amicable understanding and settle upon some modus vivendi--some

provisional government of their own--failed. Finally the President of

the Republic resigned. The quorum of Congress assembled failed by

deliberate purpose of its members, so that there was no power to act on

his resignation, and the Government came to a halt. In accordance with

the so-called Platt amendment, which was embodied in the constitution

of Cuba, I thereupon proclaimed a provisional government for the

island, the Secretary of War acting as provisional governor until he

could be replaced by Mr. Magoon, the late minister to Panama and

governor of the Canal Zone on the Isthmus; troops were sent to support

them and to relieve the Navy, the expedition being handled with most

satisfactory speed and efficiency. The insurgent chiefs immediately

agreed that their troops should lay down their arms and disband; and

the agreement was carried out. The provisional government has left the

personnel of the old government and the old laws, so far as might be,

unchanged, and will thus administer the island for a few months until

tranquillity can be restored, a new election properly held, and a new

government inaugurated. Peace has come in the island; and the

harvesting of the sugar-cane crop, the great crop of the island, is

about to proceed.

When the election has been held and the new government inaugurated in

peaceful and orderly fashion the provisional government will come to an

end. I take this opportunity of expressing upon behalf of the American

people, with all possible solemnity, our most earnest hope that the

people of Cuba will realize the imperative need of preserving justice

and keeping order in the Island. The United States wishes nothing of

Cuba except that it shall prosper morally and materially, and wishes

nothing of the Cubans save that they shall be able to preserve order

among themselves and therefore to preserve their independence. If the

elections become a farce, and if the insurrectionary habit becomes

confirmed in the Island, it is absolutely out of the question that the

Island should continue independent; and the United States, which has

assumed the sponsorship before the civilized world for Cuba's career as

a nation, would again have to intervene and to see that the government

was managed in such orderly fashion as to secure the safety of life and

property. The path to be trodden by those who exercise self-government

is always hard, and we should have every charity and patience with the

Cubans as they tread this difficult path. I have the utmost sympathy

with, and regard for, them; but I most earnestly adjure them solemnly

to weigh their responsibilities and to see that when their new

government is started it shall run smoothly, and with freedom from

flagrant denial of right on the one hand, and from insurrectionary

disturbances on the other.

The Second International Conference of American Republics, held in

Mexico in the years 1901-2, provided for the holding of the third

conference within five years, and committed the fixing of the time and

place and the arrangements for the conference to the governing board of

the Bureau of American Republics, composed of the representatives of

all the American nations in Washington. That board discharged the duty

imposed upon it with marked fidelity and painstaking care, and upon the

courteous invitation of the United States of Brazil the conference was

held at Rio de Janeiro, continuing from the 23d of July to the 29th of

August last. Many subjects of common interest to all the American

nations were discust by the conference, and the conclusions reached,

embodied in a series of resolutions and proposed conventions, will be

laid before you upon the coming in of the final report of the American

delegates. They contain many matters of importance relating to the

extension of trade, the increase of communication, the smoothing away

of barriers to free intercourse, and the promotion of a better

knowledge and good understanding between the different countries

represented. The meetings of the conference were harmonious and the

conclusions were reached with substantial unanimity. It is interesting

to observe that in the successive conferences which have been held the

representatives of the different American nations have been learning to

work together effectively, for, while the First Conference in

Washington in 1889, and the Second Conference in Mexico in 1901-2,

occupied many months, with much time wasted in an unregulated and

fruitless discussion, the Third Conference at Rio exhibited much of the

facility in the practical dispatch of business which characterizes

permanent deliberative bodies, and completed its labors within the

period of six weeks originally allotted for its sessions.

Quite apart from the specific value of the conclusions reached by the

conference, the example of the representatives of all the American

nations engaging in harmonious and kindly consideration and discussion

of subjects of common interest is itself of great and substantial value

for the promotion of reasonable and considerate treatment of all

international questions. The thanks of this country are due to the

Government of Brazil and to the people of Rio de Janeiro for the

generous hospitality with which our delegates, in common with the

others, were received, entertained, and facilitated in their work.

Incidentally to the meeting of the conference, the Secretary of State

visited the city of Rio de Janeiro and was cordially received by the

conference, of which he was made an honorary president. The

announcement of his intention to make this visit was followed by most

courteous and urgent invitations from nearly all the countries of South

America to visit them as the guest of their Governments. It was deemed

that by the acceptance of these invitations we might appropriately

express the real respect and friendship in which we hold our sister

Republics of the southern continent, and the Secretary, accordingly,

visited Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Panama, and Colombia.

He refrained from visiting Paraguay, Bolivia, and Ecuador only because

the distance of their capitals from the seaboard made it impracticable

with the time at his disposal. He carried with him a message of peace

and friendship, and of strong desire for good understanding and mutual

helpfulness; and he was everywhere received in the spirit of his

message. The members of government, the press, the learned professions,

the men of business, and the great masses of the people united

everywhere in emphatic response to his friendly expressions and in

doing honor to the country and cause which he represented.

In many parts of South America there has been much misunderstanding of

the attitude and purposes of the United States towards the other

American Republics. An idea had become prevalent that our assertion of

the Monroe Doctrine implied, or carried with it, an assumption of

superiority, and of a right to exercise some kind of protectorate over

the countries to whose territory that doctrine applies. Nothing could

be farther from the truth. Yet that impression continued to be a

serious barrier to good understanding, to friendly intercourse, to the

introduction of American capital and the extension of American trade.

The impression was so widespread that apparently it could not be

reached by any ordinary means.

It was part of Secretary Root's mission to dispel this unfounded

impression, and there is just cause to believe that he has succeeded.

In an address to the Third Conference at Rio on the 31st of July--an

address of such note that I send it in, together with this message--he

said:

"We wish for no victories but those of peace; for no territory except

our own; for no sovereignty except the sovereignty over ourselves. We

deem the independence and equal rights of the smallest and weakest

member of the family of nations entitled to as much respect as those of

the greatest empire, and we deem the observance of that respect the

chief guaranty of the weak against the oppression of the strong. We

neither claim nor desire any rights or privileges or powers that we do

not freely concede to every American Republic. We wish to increase our

prosperity, to extend our trade, to grow in wealth, in wisdom, and in

spirit, but our conception of the true way to accomplish this is not to

pull down others and profit by their ruin, but to help all friends to a

common prosperity and a common growth, that we may all become greater

and stronger together. Within a few months for the first time the

recognized possessors of every foot of soil upon the American

continents can be and I hope will be represented with the acknowledged

rights of equal sovereign states in the great World Congress at The

Hague. This will be the world's formal and final acceptance of the

declaration that no part of the American continents is to be deemed

subject to colonization. Let us pledge ourselves to aid each other in

the full performance of the duty to humanity which that accepted

declaration implies, so that in time the weakest and most unfortunate

of our Republics may come to march with equal step by the side of the

stronger and more fortunate. Let us help each other to show that for

all the races of men the liberty for which we have fought and labored

is the twin sister of justice and peace. Let us unite in creating and

maintaining and making effective an all-American public opinion, whose

power shall influence international conduct and prevent international

wrong, and narrow the causes of war, and forever preserve our free

lands from the burden of such armaments as are massed behind the

frontiers of Europe, and bring us ever nearer to the perfection of

ordered liberty. So shall come security and prosperity, production and

trade, wealth, learning, the arts, and happiness for us all."

These words appear to have been received with acclaim in every part of

South America. They have my hearty approval, as I am sure they will

have yours, and I can not be wrong in the conviction that they

correctly represent the sentiments of the whole American people. I can

not better characterize the true attitude of the United States in its

assertion of the Monroe Doctrine than in the words of the distinguished

former minister of foreign affairs of Argentina, Doctor Drago, in his

speech welcoming Mr. Root at Buenos Ayres. He spoke of--

"The traditional policy of the United States (which) without

accentuating superiority or seeking preponderance, condemned the

oppression of the nations of this part of the world and the control of

their destinies by the great Powers of Europe."

It is gratifying to know that in the great city of Buenos Ayres, upon

the arches which spanned the streets, entwined with Argentine and

American flags for the reception of our representative, there were

emblazoned not' only the names of Washington and Jefferson and

Marshall, but also, in appreciative recognition of their services to

the cause of South American independence, the names of James Monroe,

John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, and Richard Rush. We take especial

pleasure in the graceful courtesy of the Government of Brazil, which

has given to the beautiful and stately building first used for the

meeting of the conference the name of "Palacio Monroe." Our grateful

acknowledgments are due to the Governments and the people of all the

countries visited by the Secretary of State for the courtesy, the

friendship, and the honor shown to our country in their generous

hospitality to him.

In my message to you on the 5th of December, 1905, I called your

attention to the embarrassment that might be caused to this Government

by the assertion by foreign nations of the right to collect by force of

arms contract debts due by American republics to citizens of the

collecting nation, and to the danger that the process of compulsory

collection might result in the occupation of territory tending to

become permanent. I then said:

"Our own Government has always refused to enforce such contractual

obligations on behalf of its citizens by an appeal to arms. It is much

to be wisht that all foreign governments would take the same view."

This subject was one of the topics of consideration at the conference

at Rio and a resolution was adopted by that conference recommending to

the respective governments represented "to consider the advisability of

asking the Second Peace Conference at The Hague to examine the question

of the compulsory collection of public debts, and, in general, means

tending to diminish among nations conflicts of purely pecuniary

origin."

This resolution was supported by the representatives of the United

States in accordance with the following instructions:

"It has long been the established policy of the United States not to

use its armed forces for the collection of ordinary contract debts due

to its citizens by other governments. We have not considered the use of

force for such a purpose consistent with that respect for the

independent sovereignty of other members of the family of nations which

is the most important principle of international law and the chief

protection of weak nations against the oppression of the strong. It

seems to us that the practise is injurious in its general effect upon

the relations of nations and upon the welfare of weak and disordered

states, whose development ought to be encouraged in the interests of

civilization; that it offers frequent temptation to bullying and

oppression and to unnecessary and unjustifiable warfare. We regret that

other powers, whose opinions and sense of justice we esteem highly,

have at times taken a different view and have permitted themselves,

though we believe with reluctance, to collect such debts by force. It

is doubtless true that the non-payment of public debts may be

accompanied by such circumstances of fraud and wrongdoing or violation

of treaties as to justify the use of force. This Government would be

glad to see an international consideration of the subject which shall

discriminate between such cases and the simple nonperformance of a

contract with a private person, and a resolution in favor of reliance

upon peaceful means in cases of the latter class.

"It is not felt, however, that the conference at Rio should undertake

to make such a discrimination or to resolve upon such a rule. Most of

the American countries are still debtor nations, while the countries of

Europe are the creditors. If the Rio conference, therefore, were to

take such action it would have the appearance of a meeting of debtors

resolving how their creditors should act, and this would not inspire

respect. The true course is indicated by the terms of the program,

which proposes to request the Second Hague Conference, where both

creditors and debtors will be assembled, to consider the subject."

Last June trouble which had existed for some time between the Republics

of Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras culminated in war--a war which

threatened to be ruinous to the countries involved and very destructive

to the commercial interests of Americans, Mexicans, and other

foreigners who are taking an important part in the development of these

countries. The thoroughly good understanding which exists between the

United States and Mexico enabled this Government and that of Mexico to

unite in effective mediation between the warring Republics; which

mediation resulted, not without long-continued and patient effort, in

bringing about a meeting of the representatives of the hostile powers

on board a United States warship as neutral territory, and peace was

there concluded; a peace which resulted in the saving of thousands of

lives and in the prevention of an incalculable amount of misery and the

destruction of property and of the means of livelihood. The Rio

Conference past the following resolution in reference to this action:

"That the Third International American Conference shall address to the

Presidents of the United States of America and of the United States of

Mexico a note in which the conference which is being held at Rio

expresses its satisfaction at the happy results of their mediation for

the celebration of peace between the Republics of Guatemala, Honduras,

and Salvador."

This affords an excellent example of one way in which the influence of

the United States can properly be exercised for the benefit of the

peoples of the Western Hemisphere; that is, by action taken in concert

with other American republics and therefore free from those suspicions

and prejudices which might attach if the action were taken by one

alone. In this way it is possible to exercise a powerful influence

toward the substitution of considerate action in the spirit of justice

for the insurrectionary or international violence which has hitherto

been so great a hindrance to the development of many of our neighbors.

Repeated examples of united action by several or many American

republics in favor of peace, by urging cool and reasonable, instead of

excited and belligerent, treatment of international controversies, can

not fail to promote the growth of a general public opinion among the

American nations which will elevate the standards of international

action, strengthen the sense of international duty among governments,

and tell in favor of the peace of mankind.

I have just returned from a trip to Panama and shall report to you at

length later on the whole subject of the Panama Canal.

The Algeciras Convention, which was signed by the United States as well

as by most of the powers of Europe, supersedes the previous convention

of 1880, which was also signed both by the United States and a majority

of the European powers. This treaty confers upon us equal commercial

rights with all European countries and does not entail a single

obligation of any kind upon us, and I earnestly hope it may be speedily

ratified. To refuse to ratify it would merely mean that we forfeited

our commercial rights in Morocco and would not achieve another object

of any kind. In the event of such refusal we would be left for the

first time in a hundred and twenty years without any commercial treaty

with Morocco; and this at a time when we are everywhere seeking new

markets and outlets for trade.

The destruction of the Pribilof Islands fur seals by pelagic sealing

still continues. The herd which, according to the surveys made in 1874

by direction of the Congress, numbered 4,700,000, and which, according

to the survey of both American and Canadian commissioners in 1891,

amounted to 1,000,000, has now been reduced to about 180,000. This

result has been brought about by Canadian and some other sealing

vessels killing the female seals while in the water during their annual

pilgrimage to and from the south, or in search of food. As a rule the

female seal when killed is pregnant, and also has an unweaned pup on

land, so that, for each skin taken by pelagic sealing, as a rule, three

lives are destroyed--the mother, the unborn offspring, and the nursing

pup, which is left to starve to death. No damage whatever is done to

the herd by the carefully regulated killing on land; the custom of

pelagic sealing is solely responsible for all of the present evil, and

is alike indefensible from the economic standpoint and from the

standpoint of humanity.

In 1896 over 16,000 young seals were found dead from starvation on the

Pribilof Islands. In 1897 it was estimated that since pelagic sealing

began upward of 400,000 adult female seals had been killed at sea, and

over 300,000 young seals had died of starvation as the result. The

revolting barbarity of such a practise, as well as the wasteful

destruction which it involves, needs no demonstration and is its own

condemnation. The Bering Sea Tribunal, which sat in Paris in 1893, and

which decided against the claims of the United States to exclusive

jurisdiction in the waters of Bering Sea and to a property right in the

fur seals when outside of the three-mile limit, determined also upon

certain regulations which the Tribunal considered sufficient for the

proper protection and preservation of the fur seal in, or habitually

resorting to, the Bering Sea. The Tribunal by its regulations

established a close season, from the 1st of May to the 31st of July,

and excluded all killing in the waters within 60 miles around the

Pribilof Islands. They also provided that the regulations which they

had determined upon, with a view to the protection and preservation of

the seals, should be submitted every five years to new examination, so

as to enable both interested Governments to consider whether, in the

light of past experience, there was occasion for any modification

thereof.

The regulations have proved plainly inadequate to accomplish the object

of protection and preservation of the fur seals, and for a long time

this Government has been trying in vain to secure from Great Britain

such revision and modification of the regulations as were contemplated

and provided for by the award of the Tribunal of Paris.

The process of destruction has been accelerated during recent years by

the appearance of a number of Japanese vessels engaged in pelagic

sealing. As these vessels have not been bound even by the inadequate

limitations prescribed by the Tribunal of Paris, they have paid no

attention either to the close season or to the sixty-mile limit imposed

upon the Canadians, and have prosecuted their work up to the very

islands themselves. On July 16 and 17 the crews from several Japanese

vessels made raids upon the island of St. Paul, and before they were

beaten off by the very meager and insufficiently armed guard, they

succeeded in killing several hundred seals and carrying off the skins

of most of them. Nearly all the seals killed were females and the work

was done with frightful barbarity. Many of the seals appear to have

been skinned alive and many were found half skinned and still alive.

The raids were repelled only by the use of firearms, and five of the

raiders were killed, two were wounded, and twelve captured, including

the two wounded. Those captured have since been tried and sentenced to

imprisonment. An attack of this kind had been wholly unlookt for, but

such provision of vessels, arms, and ammunition will now be made that

its repetition will not be found profitable.

Suitable representations regarding the incident have been made to the

Government of Japan, and we are assured that all practicable measures

will be taken by that country to prevent any recurrence of the outrage.

On our part, the guard on the island will be increased and better

equipped and organized, and a better revenue-cutter patrol service

about the islands will be established; next season a United States war

vessel will also be sent there.

We have not relaxed our efforts to secure an agreement with Great

Britain for adequate protection of the seal herd, and negotiations with

Japan for the same purpose are in progress.

The laws for the protection of the seals within the jurisdiction of the

United States need revision and amendment. Only the islands of St. Paul

and St. George are now, in terms, included in the Government

reservation, and the other islands are also to be included. The landing

of aliens as well as citizens upon the islands, without a permit from

the Department of Commerce and Labor, for any purpose except in case of

stress of weather or for water, should be prohibited under adequate

penalties. The approach of vessels for the excepted purposes should be

regulated. The authority of the Government agents on the islands should

be enlarged, and the chief agent should have the powers of a committing

magistrate. The entrance of a vessel into the territorial waters

surrounding the islands with intent to take seals should be made a

criminal offense and cause of forfeiture. Authority for seizures in

such cases should be given and the presence on any such vessel of seals

or sealskins, or the paraphernalia for taking them, should be made

prima facie evidence of such intent. I recommend what legislation is

needed to accomplish these ends; and I commend to your attention the

report of Mr. Sims, of the Department of Commerce and Labor, on this

subject.

In case we are compelled to abandon the hope of making arrangements

with other governments to put an end to the hideous cruelty now

incident to pelagic sealing, it will be a question for your serious

consideration how far we should continue to protect and maintain the

seal herd on land with the result of continuing such a practise, and

whether it is not better to end the practice by exterminating the herd

ourselves in the most humane way possible.

In my last message I advised you that the Emperor of Russia had taken

the initiative in bringing about a second peace conference at The

Hague. Under the guidance of Russia the arrangement of the

preliminaries for such a conference has been progressing during the

past year. Progress has necessarily been slow, owing to the great

number of countries to be consulted upon every question that has

arisen. It is a matter of satisfaction that all of the American

Republics have now, for the first time, been invited to join in the

proposed conference.

The close connection between the subjects to be taken up by the Red

Cross Conference held at Geneva last summer and the subjects which

naturally would come before The Hague Conference made it apparent that

it was desirable to have the work of the Red Cross Conference completed

and considered by the different powers before the meeting at The Hague.

The Red Cross Conference ended its labors on the 6th day of July, and

the revised and amended convention, which was signed by the American

delegates, will be promptly laid before the Senate.

By the special and highly appreciated courtesy of the Governments of

Russia and the Netherlands, a proposal to call The Hague Conference

together at a time which would conflict with the Conference of the

American Republics at Rio de Janeiro in August was laid aside. No other

date has yet been suggested. A tentative program for the conference has

been proposed by the Government of Russia, and the subjects which it

enumerates are undergoing careful examination and consideration in

preparation for the conference.

It must ever be kept in mind that war is not merely justifiable, but

imperative, upon honorable men, upon an honorable nation, where peace

can only be obtained by the sacrifice of conscientious conviction or of

national welfare. Peace is normally a great good, and normally it

coincides with righteousness; but it is righteousness and not peace

which should bind the conscience of a nation as it should bind the

conscience of an individual; and neither a nation nor an individual can

surrender conscience to another's keeping. Neither can a nation, which

is an entity, and which does not die as individuals die, refrain from

taking thought for the interest of the generations that are to come, no

less than for the interest of the generation of to-day; and no public

men have a right, whether from shortsightedness, from selfish

indifference, or from sentimentality, to sacrifice national interests

which are vital in character. A just war is in the long run far better

for a nation's soul than the most prosperous peace obtained by

acquiescence in wrong or injustice. Moreover, though it is criminal for

a nation not to prepare for war, so that it may escape the dreadful

consequences of being defeated in war, yet it must always be remembered

that even to be defeated in war may be far better than not to have

fought at all. As has been well and finely said, a beaten nation is not

necessarily a disgraced nation; but the nation or man is disgraced if

the obligation to defend right is shirked.

We should as a nation do everything in our power for the cause of

honorable peace. It is morally as indefensible for a nation to commit a

wrong upon another nation, strong or weak, as for an individual thus to

wrong his fellows. We should do all in our power to hasten the day when

there shall be peace among the nations--a peace based upon justice and

not upon cowardly submission to wrong. We can accomplish a good deal in

this direction, but we can not accomplish everything, and the penalty

of attempting to do too much would almost inevitably be to do worse

than nothing; for it must be remembered that fantastic extremists are

not in reality leaders of the causes which they espouse, but are

ordinarily those who do most to hamper the real leaders of the cause

and to damage the cause itself. As yet there is no likelihood of

establishing any kind of international power, of whatever sort, which

can effectively check wrongdoing, and in these circumstances it would

be both a foolish and an evil thing for a great and free nation to

deprive itself of the power to protect its own rights and even in

exceptional cases to stand up for the rights of others. Nothing would

more promote iniquity, nothing would further defer the reign upon earth

of peace and righteousness, than for the free and enlightened peoples

which, though with much stumbling and many shortcomings, nevertheless

strive toward justice, deliberately to render themselves powerless

while leaving every despotism and barbarism armed and able to work

their wicked will. The chance for the settlement of disputes

peacefully, by arbitration, now depends mainly upon the possession by

the nations that mean to do right of sufficient armed strength to make

their purpose effective.

The United States Navy is the surest guarantor of peace which this

country possesses. It is earnestly to be wisht that we would profit by

the teachings of history in this matter. A strong and wise people will

study its own failures no less than its triumphs, for there is wisdom

to be learned from the study of both, of the mistake as well as of the

success. For this purpose nothing could be more instructive than a

rational study of the war of 1812, as it is told, for instance, by

Captain Mahan. There was only one way in which that war could have been

avoided. If during the preceding twelve years a navy relatively as

strong as that which this country now has had been built up, and an

army provided relatively as good as that which the country now has,

there never would have been the slightest necessity of fighting the

war; and if the necessity had arisen the war would under such

circumstances have ended with our speedy and overwhelming triumph. But

our people during those twelve years refused to make any preparations

whatever, regarding either the Army or the Navy. They saved a million

or two of dollars by so doing; and in mere money paid a hundredfold for

each million they thus saved during the three years of war which

followed--a war which brought untold suffering upon our people, which

at one time threatened the gravest national disaster, and which, in

spite of the necessity of waging it, resulted merely in what was in

effect a drawn battle, while the balance of defeat and triumph was

almost even.

I do not ask that we continue to increase our Navy. I ask merely that

it be maintained at its present strength; and this can be done only if

we replace the obsolete and outworn ships by new and good ones, the

equals of any afloat in any navy. To stop building ships for one year

means that for that year the Navy goes back instead of forward. The old

battle ship Texas, for instance, would now be of little service in a

stand-up fight with a powerful adversary. The old double-turret

monitors have outworn their usefulness, while it was a waste of money

to build the modern single-turret monitors. All these ships should be

replaced by others; and this can be done by a well-settled program of

providing for the building each year of at least one first-class battle

ship equal in size and speed to any that any nation is at the same time

building; the armament presumably to consist of as large a number as

possible of very heavy guns of one caliber, together with smaller guns

to repel torpedo attack; while there should be heavy armor, turbine

engines, and in short, every modern device. Of course, from time to

time, cruisers, colliers, torpedo-boat destroyers or torpedo boats,

Will have to be built also. All this, be it remembered, would not

increase our Navy, but would merely keep it at its present strength.

Equally of course, the ships will be absolutely useless if the men

aboard them are not so trained that they can get the best possible

service out of the formidable but delicate and complicated mechanisms

intrusted to their care. The marksmanship of our men has so improved

during the last five years that I deem it within bounds to say that the

Navy is more than twice as efficient, ship for ship, as half a decade

ago. The Navy can only attain proper efficiency if enough officers and

men are provided, and if these officers and men are given the chance

(and required to take advantage of it) to stay continually at sea and

to exercise the fleets singly and above all in squadron, the exercise

to be of every kind and to include unceasing practise at the guns,

conducted under conditions that will test marksmanship in time of war.

In both the Army and the Navy there is urgent need that everything

possible should be done to maintain the highest standard for the

personnel, alike as regards the officers and the enlisted men. I do not

believe that in any service there is a finer body of enlisted men and

of junior officer than we have in both the Army and the Navy, including

the Marine Corps. All possible encouragement to the enlisted men should

be given, in pay and otherwise, and everything practicable done to

render the service attractive to men of the right type. They should be

held to the strictest discharge of their duty, and in them a spirit

should be encouraged which demands not the mere performance of duty,

but the performance of far more than duty, if it conduces to the honor

and the interest of the American nation; and in return the amplest

consideration should be theirs.

West Point and Annapolis already turn out excellent officers. We do not

need to have these schools made more scholastic. On the contrary we

should never lose sight of the fact that the aim of each school is to

turn out a man who shall be above everything else a fighting man. In

the Army in particular it is not necessary that either the cavalry or

infantry officer should have special mathematical ability. Probably in

both schools the best part of the education is the high standard of

character and of professional morale which it confers.

But in both services there is urgent need for the establishment of a

principle of selection which will eliminate men after a certain age if

they can not be promoted from the subordinate ranks, and which will

bring into the higher ranks fewer men, and these at an earlier age.

This principle of selection will be objected to by good men of mediocre

capacity, who are fitted to do well while young in the lower positions,

but who are not fitted to do well when at an advanced age they come

into positions of command and of great responsibility. But the desire

of these men to be promoted to positions which they are not competent

to fill should not weigh against the interest of the Navy and the

country. At present our men, especially in the Navy, are kept far too

long in the junior grades, and then, at much too advanced an age, are

put quickly through the senior grades, often not attaining to these

senior grades until they are too old to be of real use in them; and if

they are of real use, being put through them so quickly that little

benefit to the Navy comes from their having been in them at all.

The Navy has one great advantage over the Army in the fact that the

officers of high rank are actually trained in the continual performance

of their duties; that is, in the management of the battle ships and

armored cruisers gathered into fleets. This is not true of the army

officers, who rarely have corresponding chances to exercise command

over troops under service conditions. The conduct of the Spanish war

showed the lamentable loss of life, the useless extravagance, and the

inefficiency certain to result, if during peace the high officials of

the War and Navy Departments are praised and rewarded only if they save

money at no matter what cost to the efficiency of the service, and if

the higher officers are given no chance whatever to exercise and

practise command. For years prior to the Spanish war the Secretaries of

War were praised chiefly if they practised economy; which economy,

especially in connection with the quartermaster, commissary, and

medical departments, was directly responsible for most of the

mismanagement that occurred in the war itself--and parenthetically be

it observed that the very people who clamored for the misdirected

economy in the first place were foremost to denounce the mismanagement,

loss, and suffering which were primarily due to this same misdirected

economy and to the lack of preparation it involved. There should soon

be an increase in the number of men for our coast defenses; these men

should be of the right type and properly trained; and there should

therefore be an increase of pay for certain skilled grades, especially

in the coast artillery. Money should be appropriated to permit troops

to be massed in body and exercised in maneuvers, particularly in

marching. Such exercise during the summer just past has been of

incalculable benefit to the Army and should under no circumstances be

discontinued. If on these practise marches and in these maneuvers

elderly officers prove unable to bear the strain, they should be

retired at once, for the fact is conclusive as to their unfitness for

war; that is, for the only purpose because of which they should be

allowed to stay in the service. It is a real misfortune to have scores

of small company or regimental posts scattered throughout the country;

the Army should be gathered in a few brigade or division posts; and the

generals should be practised in handling the men in masses. Neglect to

provide for all of this means to incur the risk of future disaster and

disgrace.

The readiness and efficiency of both the Army and Navy in dealing with

the recent sudden crisis in Cuba illustrate afresh their value to the

Nation. This readiness and efficiency would have been very much less

had it not been for the existence of the General Staff in the Army and

the General Board in the Navy; both are essential to the proper

development and use of our military forces afloat and ashore. The

troops that were sent to Cuba were handled flawlessly. It was the

swiftest mobilization and dispatch of troops over sea ever accomplished

by our Government. The expedition landed completely equipped and ready

for immediate service, several of its organizations hardly remaining in

Havana over night before splitting up into detachments and going to

their several posts, It was a fine demonstration of the value and

efficiency of the General Staff. Similarly, it was owing in large part

to the General Board that the Navy was able at the outset to meet the

Cuban crisis with such instant efficiency; ship after ship appearing on

the shortest notice at any threatened point, while the Marine Corps in

particular performed indispensable service. The Army and Navy War

Colleges are of incalculable value to the two services, and they

cooperate with constantly increasing efficiency and importance.

The Congress has most wisely provided for a National Board for the

promotion of rifle practise. Excellent results have already come from

this law, but it does not go far enough. Our Regular Army is so small

that in any great war we should have to trust mainly to volunteers; and

in such event these volunteers should already know how to shoot; for if

a soldier has the fighting edge, and ability to take care of himself in

the open, his efficiency on the line of battle is almost directly

Proportionate to excellence in marksmanship. We should establish

shooting galleries in all the large public and military schools, should

maintain national target ranges in different parts of the country, and

should in every way encourage the formation of rifle clubs throughout

all parts of the land. The little Republic of Switzerland offers us an

excellent example in all matters connected with building up an

efficient citizen soldiery.

	Contents    Prev    Next    Last