THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES.
THE American people in choosing their next President will be taking one of the most important decisions in their history. They will have to decide by what means they intend to make secure the great principles on which the life, happiness, and influence for good of their great democracy depends in all its international relations. The ideals of Americans of all parties are good because they are democratic, but there are oceans of difference between the various methods of realizing those ideals and exerting them for the benefit of the world. All rational men desire peace, but there are several ways in which men try to guarantee peace, and those who profess to love it most are not always its best friends. What is called " the new Americanism "- the doctrine of the strong man armed to defend his own rights and champion the weak—is certainly a method of ensuring peace, and in the present state of the world it is the only satisfactory method; but it would not be recognized as such by those who think that peace is destroyed immediately a man takes the precaution of teaching himself how to shoot. " Americanism " no doubt implies that the United States must take her place in the councils of the Great Powers ; it implies that invention in annihilating distance has ended the possibility for her of living a kind of hermit existence either honourably or safely. The opponents of " Americanism " would rather wait on events. They believe in" preparedness " by land and sea to some extent not precisely specified, but they certainly do not want to go out to meet their " manifest destiny " until it is made a little more manifest than it seems to them now. Such are the broad issues behind the dusty and prolonged conflict that will end in the election of a President.
It would be an impertinence on our part to say whom we think Americans would do well to choose as their President. The electoral campaign has not yet begun, and the policies of both the Democratic and Republican candidates may suffer substantial expansions or modifications as the campaign proceeds. There can be no impertinence, however, in saying that, as sincere friends of the United States, we earnestly hope that the American people will see to it that whoever they choose for their President will stand in a most real and practical sense for the " preparedness " in which nearly every one professes to believe. No country is safe which is not strong. It may have the noblest ideals in the world, but if it is not strong it is at the mercy of any bully and treaty-breaker who has taken care to be stronger. Consider the case of the United States herself. She makes the Monroe Doctrine a cardinal point in her policy, and we are well content that she should insist upon that very convenient instrument, forged, remember, to meet the first practical essay in militant pacificism—the Holy Alliance. But what is likely to happen after the war I Germany, so soon as she has recovered from her exhaustion, will look for new openings. We cannot allow her to return to places where she has disgraced herself by arrogance and oppression. The day will inevitably come when she will cast the eyes of covetousness upon the Republics of South America. These are formally or theoretically protected by the Monroe Doctrine. Are the American people seriously prepared to vindicate and safeguard the Doctrine if it is assailed in that part of the world ? Have they estimated how great a Navy will be required for this purpose ? We do not ask the question in any spirit of mis- chief or irony. It is really to our advantage that the British Navy should not be challenged upon the seas, and such a Navy as the Americans would need would unquestionably be a challenge. All the same, we feel so strongly that it is for the interests of the world that the United States should be strong and secure that we hope she will create a very considerable Navy and do it very soon. All that has happened lately in the United States—the Republican Convention at Chicago, the Democratic Conven- tion which is proceeding at St. Louis as we write, and the public speeches of the political leaders—shows how command- ing in importance is the question of preparedness. We read, for instance, in Thursday's Times that the President himself headed a procession in the interests of this policy :- " The procession started from the Peace Monument, with Mr. Wilson leading. The President wore a straw hat, a blue serge coat, cream- coloured trousers, and white shoes, and he carried a small American
flag over his shoulder. He continued in the procession until the review- ing stand was reached, when he entered the stand and reviewed the rest of the parade. The President's action was taken on his on a initiative, to emphasize the Government's belief in the vital necessity for America to prepare for possible war."
It will be seen that when a Democratic President plays this part there is no question of any candidate denying the importance of preparedness. What Americans who believe m reality and not in make-believe have to decide is who is the man who can be most trusted to carry through the work of reorganizing the defences of the country and bringing them t* as high as possible a pitch of strength and perfection. Anv English newspaper-reader would say that much the most definite proposals of all have come from Mr. Roosevelt. He has demanded universal military training on the Swiss model, and a Navy which shall be the second in the world—as the American Navy used to be before Germany challenged our position. But Mr. Roosevelt had not nearly a large enough following to force his nomination at the Chicago Convention as the candidate of the reunited Republican and Progressive Parties. Even the " record " cheer which lasted for an hour and a half after his name had been proposed was of no avail. Mr. Hughes was easily the favourite of the Convention, and it only remains to be seen whether Mr. Roosevelt will consent to merge the Progressives (who are of course seceders from the Republican machine) in the original party. The signs at present all indicate that he will do so. Ho speaks of his support of Mr. Hughes as conditional, we imagine, only because he earnestly desires to have a weapon with which to force the Republicans into a very definite and far-reaching pro- gramme of defence. We take it, then, that there will be a straight fight between Mr. Hughes and the Democratic can- didate, with no third candidate intervening. Although the Democratic Convention has not when we write made any announcement, the nomination of Mr. Wilson is certain. Ni other candidate is in it with him. Mr. Bryan, who was once; talked of as a " peace " and " prohibition " candidate, attends the Democratic Convention only as a reporter, and Mr. Ford, who was also talked of as a candidate, has faded away. The apparent success of Mr. Wilson's methods in the submarine controversy have served him well at an opportune moment.
Mr. Hughes has said nothing about universal military training, but has demanded more vaguely ample reserves all ready drilled and disciplined." As for the Navy, he has merely asserted that it must be " efficient." On the other hand, Mr. Wilson's motto of " Peace, preparedness, and prosperity " is still more indefinite, and may be thought to contain elements of contradiction in fact if not in form. Mr. Hughes, who is fifty-three years old, is extremely wel known as a Judge of the Supreme Court, and as the Governor of New York State who showed a memorably courageous intolerance of corruption and " bossism." He has the repu- tation of being an austere man, but that is a reputation which very easily and quite falsely attaches itself to an uncom- promising enemy of evil. " The King of Icicles " some one called him at the Chicago Convention, and again " That tribute to the Arctic Circle." But such phrases are only a " tribute " to his reticence and his contempt for ordinary political intrigue. He is said by those who know him best to be a man of much humour and an excellent conversationalist_ The Republicans have chosen a man who has not the electri,f; quality of Mr. Roosevelt, but who will no doubt bo abso- lutely faithful to his trust. It seems that he has a very good chance of being supported by the German-American vote. Not of course that he has asked for it. Indeed, he has declared his indifference to it. It is as strange a situation as can be imagined ; the German-Americans dislike Mr. Wilson so much that they seriously contemplate voting for a man who probably dislikes them and their objects more than Mr. Wilson ever confessed to doing. To tell the truth, both_ sides are painfully embarrassed by the prospect of German support. Their attitude towards the Teutonic voter might not be unfairly expressed in an adaptation of a verso once famous in English history :— " 0 hyphened Him, we thee Implore To go away and bomb no more; Or, if that effort be too great, To go away at any rate."
To sum up, both Mr. Wilson and Mr. Hughes have used words about the issue of the hour which are in effect blank cheques. Tho voters must judge from the past record of the candidates, and from the campaign to come, how those cheques aro likely to be filled in. If we were American citizens, wo should vote according as we felt able to answer the questions : " Who is more likely to give us security f Who is more likely to make his words good I "
Previous page
