Moral Forces in Politics

“ .—The moral forces in politics, of which I am to speak, found a most striking illustration in the recent Presidential election. As you all remember, before the last National Democratic Convention was held, many well-meaning Democrats honestly believed that, with Mr. Cleveland as a candidate, the Democratic party would be doomed to certain defeat. They thought that a man who, instead of truckling to other people's prejudices, had always expressed his own convictions of right and duty with defiant frankness, must have provoked an insuperable opposition and could not be popular; that a candidate who had made every rascal his open or secret enemy could not find honest men enough to elect him; that, therefore, Mr. Cleveland was utterly unavailable.

This was the view of the so-called practical politician. He smiled disdainfully at the political idealism of those who believed Mr. Cleveland's election possible. But it turned out, as it often does, that the political idealist was far the more practical politician of the two. The professional had made a characteristic mistake. He had, indeed, estimated the spirit of the rascals correctly: but he had underestimated the number and spirit of the honest men. He had judged aright the motives animating the ward caucus, but he had misjudged the motives most potential with the great American people. In one word, he had left out of his calculation the moral forces in American politics. But just these moral forces were the decisive factor, for they turned to Mr. Cleveland for every Democratic vote he lost, several times as many votes of patriotic men who had not been Democrats before, but were Democrats with him. ”

“ What are these moral forces? They are the patriotism which subordinates every other consideration to the general welfare, honor and greatness of the country: that instinct of justice which loves right as right, abhors wrong as wrong, and wishes every man to have his due; that sense of duty which incites a conscientious endeavor to understand what is best for the country and for every citizen in it; that honest purpose and courage to do what is right which inspire sympathy and respect for honest purpose and courage in others; that proud manliness which disdains shams and subterfuges, and admires with a hearty admiration a straightforwardness defying opposition and a plucky disinterested zeal for the public good doing the best it can.

“ And how did these moral forces come into play? Here was a system of taxation flagrantly unjust in benefiting the few at the expense of the many; laws bought by the rich to make them still richer; a political party subsidized by a formidable money power to serve its greed; corruptions in elections developed into a political system threatening utterly to demoralize our political life; a settled purpose of the party in power to control the electoral machinery by government agents. This on the one side. And on the other an earnest endeavor to ward off the threatened evils; to wrest the power of the government from the grasp of the power of money; to supplant monopoly and legislative favoritism with a just system of taxation; and at the head of this movement as a candidate for the Presidency a man known as a champion of good government in every sense—a man commanding universal respect and confidence by his integrity, his principles and his courage. These were the things that appealed to the moral forces in politics, and the moral forces responded.

“ Stirred by these moral forces, came forth the rank and file of the Democratic party,

the honest masses whose enthusiasm for a good cause and a worthy leader brushed away like cobweb all opposition and all feeble considerations of expediency in the party councils. Then came forth the “Independents,” the men who, as has been said of Edmund Burke, “sometimes change their front, but never change their ground;” the men who, in struggling for good government, had the courage to expose themselves to the pelting storms of political warfare without the shelter of a party roof over their heads; the men whom the partisan politician call s “those enlightened, unselfish and patriotic citizens who rise above party,” provided they rise above the other party, but whom he calls “a lot of dudes and Pharisees amounting to nothing” when they happen to rise above his own party. And among them came the college professor, the disinterested man of studious thought, the truest representative of the intellectual honesty of the country—the college professor whom the Republican party proudly had called its own when it was the party of moral ideas, but whom it now affects to despise as an impracticable theorist, since it has became the party of immoral practices. Indeed a significant spectacle it is; on one side, with few individual exceptions, Harvard and Yale and Columbia and Amherst and Cornell and Ann Arbor and many more: and on the other side, the high and mighty tariff, with Major McKinley as the professor of its science, with Matt Quay and Dave Martin as the exponents of its politics, and with John Wanamaker as the illustration of its sanctity. But still more came—thousands of old republicans, who reluct l antly severed the ties binding them to the party to which they had been long and warmly attached, and who, obeying the voice of their conscience, went where they could serve the public good.

Thus, at the call of the moral forces in politics, was the powerful combination of elements formed, to which the Democratic cause and the Democratic candidate owe their triumphant success. To make this success fruitful and enduring, this combination of elements which achieved it should be welded into a compact and permanent party organization. Can this be done? Certainly it can. That the independent elements whose aid made so great a Democratic victory possible supported rather a cause and its champion than a party and its leader is true. That they have reserved to themselves future freedom of action is also true. But that they would be glad to be able to exercise that freedom of action in favor of permanently attaching themselves to the Democratic party is no less true. Let it not be said that they despise loyal attachment to party. They sincerely and highly appreciate and esteem organization in the service of principles, ideas and sound policies. But they distrust principles and ideas in the service of organization, and they condemn and despise organization without principle and ideas.

If the Democratic party wishes to attach them firmly and loyally to its organization, it has only to attach itself firmly and faithfully to the principles, ideas and policies which attract them.

So long as Democracy means the preservation of popular self-government in its whole sphere, the maintenance of sound constitutional doctrines, honesty and wise economy in administration, war upon the corrupting agencies in our political life, war upon selfish monopoly and favoritism by law, taxation not for the advantages of the few at the expense of the many, but just to all and for the benefit of all; a currency system that will cheat nobody and keep us in harmony with the money of the world's commerce, a public service not the spoil of party, but honestly organized upon the principle that public office is a public trust; so long as Democracy means in this sense a government of the people, for the people and by the people, so long will those who recently came from outside of the Democratic party to vote for Cleveland faithfully continue to march in its ranks, and every one of them will proudly say, “I am a Democrat.” And thus wedding to itself those moral forces which made it invincible on November 8, the Democratic Party of our day will not only become stronger than it was before, but it will become intellectually, morally and numerically one of the most powerful national parties known in our history. And he is the best Democrat who works most faithfully to bring out this consummation.

There may be politicians in this, as there are in other parties, to whom the accession of a large force of such recruits is not welcome. You may always be sure that politicians who, by repelling such recruits, seek to make their party conveniently select, want to keep it small for the purpose of keeping it subservient to their selfish ends. But those who think they can make use of the recent victory to turn the increased power of the victorious party to their selfish advantage and still preserve that

power to enjoy it, are most woefully mistaken. The fruit will turn to ashes on their lips. The Democratic party of to-day can live and prosper only if it does justice to the requirements of the times. It can keep its power only as a party of progress and reform. It will be strong so long as it has the moral forces in American politics on its side. It will instantly begin to decline as soon as those forces leave it. He is the enemy of the Democracy who seeks to drive them away. He is its best friend who binds them and the party most firmly together.

There are those, also, who think that the great mass of citizens care little about higher views and objects in politics. Surely, he who thinks so has too mean an opinion of the American people. Let me speak a word to the young men before me who can still look forward to a long life of public usefulness. It is true you may see here and there large numbers of men organized under selfish and unscrupulous leadership pursuing mercenary ends. You may sometimes observe curious errors or heresies like mental contagion wield a strange sway over the minds of a multitude. I pray you let not those things, alarming as they seem, discourage your trust in the people. Those mercenary organizations are mostly born of vicious local circumstances and are local in their nature. The political and economic errors are heresies which come like epidemics, and like epidemics they pass away. They would often pass away more quickly but for the cowardice of the politicians, who, although knowing better, bend before every breeze to save their little stock of popularity. But the people in the large sense earnestly wish to understand what is right and to act upon their understanding.

There are and always will be differences of opinion among them and different conceptions of duty, but these differences are honest. They are partisan, but they honestly wish their parties to be honorable and pure and fit instruments of good government. Some of them want to be postmasters, and they have friends to urge their claims; and there are politicians who clamor for places to build up their local machines. But the mass of citizens wish public place to be an honor, and are disgusted at heart when their party, after a victory, pounces upon the offices of the government like an army of mercenaries looting a conquered town. They may sometimes be carried away in their political action by the prospect of some small advantage to themselves; but the masses will in the end always be found to care, above all things, for the welfare and the honor and greatness of their country. The fortunes of political parties and the destinies of the Republic are at least determined by an irresistible, overruling public opinion. That public opinion is certainly finally to pronounce a substantially just and patriotic judgment. The politician is doomed to failure and disgrace who speculates upon the theory that the masses are mainly fools and knaves. As an old campaigner with the experience of long public activity, I can affirm that those arguments and appeals are most powerful with the American people that are addressed to their reason, rectitude, honor and patriotism, and that invoke the highest order of motives. Believe me, young men, your names cannot be too noble, nor your ideals too high, to suit the tastes and to win the appreciation of your countrymen.

If you ask for proof of this, look at the man whom you elected President on November 8. I cannot think of that election without remembering the words of Henry Clay:—“I would rather be right than be President”—suggesting a melancholy doubt as to whether he could be President if he determined to be right. But what do we behold here? Youth of America, study this example well! Here you behold a man who frankly spoke what he thought, no matter who agreed or who disagreed with him; aggressively honest, no matter whom that aggressive honesty might make his enemy; with firm resolution following his convictions of the public interest and his conception of duty, no matter what prejudice he might provoke, whatever temporary current of opinion he might defy, what powerful interest he might offend; in his favor the justice of his cause and the popular respect and confidence won by his rectitude and courage; against him the bitter enmity of a great money power threatened in its advantages; against him a fierce opposition within his own party; against him the animosity of politicians he had refused to serve; against him the regular delegation from his own State; against him the doubts of well-meaning friends as to whether he could be elected; against him all the traditional customs and all the notions of availability which usually govern party councils; and this man taken up by the moral forces in politics as their favorite champion, nominated as a candidate with an irresistable rush and by an overwhelming majority of the American people elected President just because he dared to be right!

President elect of the United States, pardon me if I address a word directly to you. Here you are among friends—friends who share not only one or two, but all the articles of your political faith, whether they touch constitutional principles, or the tariff, or the currency, or the reform of the public service; friends devoted heart and soul to the great cause you represent, and heart and soul devoted to you, because you honestly and courageously represent it. These friends rejoice to know that you will enter upon your high duties not only unembarrassed by personal pledges, but unburdened by any personal obligations.

No man and no set of men have a claim upon your political gratitude, for the uprising of the people for your cause and yourself was so spontaneous and overwhelming that there is no man and no set of men whose efforts in behalf of your election might not safely have been spared. Whatever of personal triumph there is in this you owe only to the generous confidence of the American people, and their confidence greets you at the threshold of your second administration with an abundance that has but few precedents in the past history of the Republic.

But great as is the popular confidence, so is the popular expectation. This consciousness, no doubt, rests upon your heart as a heavy load of respnsibility. But be assured, as you are true to the moral forces in American politics which nominated and elected you, so those moral forces will be true to you to the end. Doubt nọt, whatever struggles and perplexities your efforts for good government may bring upon you, you may always confidently appeal to the good sense, the honesty and the patriotism of the American people—and you will never appeal in vain—against any unjust assault from the opposite party, as well as against any cabal of selfishness within your own.

And thus, sir, we offer you our hearty congratulations and good wishes. As your nomination and election marked a most hopeful revival in political morals, so may your administration, born of the noblest impulses of the American people, become a lasting example of good government, to serve as an instruction and encouragement to coming generations and to write your name into the annals of the Republic with imperishable honor. [Applause.]