Evening Star Newspaper, August 17, 1924, Page 29

EDITORIAL PAGE | NATIONAL PROBLEMS SPECIAL ARTICLES Part 2—14 Pages WHAT NATIONS YIELDED FOR LONDON AGREEMENT Concessions Made by France Do Not Deprive Her of T B Sies | o @il ¢ BY FRANK H. SIMONDS, ITH the recent agreement be- tween the British and French at the London con- ference upon the methods both of applying and inter- preting the Dawes plan, an agreement reached with the assent of Belgium and Ttaly, the other main parties at interest in the matter of reparations, and with the assistance and approval of the United States, a chanter in the after- ‘war history comes to an end. It is then perhaps an appropriate moment to re- iew the long dispute and to explain the ultimate agreements in the light of the recent past, leaving until next week the examination of the second phase of the London conference, that which con- cerns the allies and Germany. To begin at the beginnin question of reparations as bedeviled t Paris and in the treaty of Versailles by the insistence of the British them- eclves, under pressure from their col- onies, to include in the bill to Germany the costs of pensions and sey tion allowances paid the families of s diers. The American representatives Paris opposed this British demand. pri- marily on the ground that it was in dis Tect violation of the armistice terms. by Which Germany agreed to pay the dam- age to civilian populations caused by the invasion of her armies. Held Demand Impossible. i Our representatives further h demand as not only wrong ew of the armistice terms, but im- possible of realization, since they argued | that Germany could mot in any event | pay more than the costs of the actual Physical reconstruction of devastated areas, therefore to include pensions was to swell the bill to impossible figu In fact, as it turned out. the addition of thie item trebled the bill which was ac- tually presented to Germany, since the costs of reconstruction were estimated to be not more than £12.000,000,000, while the total bill was around $33,000,% 000.000. In the end British pressure and the arguments presented to the late President Wilson led him to (’(rll&v’fl[‘ to the inclusion of the pension item;| Gen. Smuts of South Africa actually | prevailed upon the American Presi- | dent By this operation the British share in reparations, which would not have exceeded 4 or 5 per cent, was raised to 22 per cent. But the Paris conference did not and could mot at the moment fix the sum Germany was to pay; instead it created a repara- tions commission, which was to re- port the bill within two years. !-‘nelon- in Reparations. Now all the latter trouble over| reparations turns upon the two fac- tors, the original swelling of the bill, through British effort, and the crea- | tion of the reparations com ssion. This commission was to consist of a representative from each_ of the fol-| lowing countril: “Fgasice, United States, Belgium, Italy and Great Brit- ain. But when shipping, as contr; - ed with land questions, were ‘up Ja- | pan would occupy the Belgian seat. Moreover, and this detail is vital, in case of any tie, the French, whosc representative was also to preside was to enjoy the right to cast the de ciding vote. Since the United States promptly withdrew from the com- mission _and Belgium _consistently voted with France, this at once gave the French representative the casting vote even should the British and Italian agree. to May, 1921, the reparations i on reached only two impor- ons, by the Spa agreement the shares of the several powers in the total of reparations was fixed as follow: per cent; Br ain, 22 per cent; Jtaly, 10 per cen Belgium, 8 per cent, and the remain ing 8 per cent was distributed among the several allied states. 1In addition, the reparations commission at Lon- don, in May, 1921, fixed the German liability at approximately $33,000,- 000,000, and Germany, having pro- tested, was compelled by means of an ultimatum to accept the liability. 'ixed Terms of Payment. Terms and conditions were then fixed by the reparations commission for German payments, which were to be in cash and Kind. But in a very short time Germany began to fall behind and toward the end of 1922 declared that she could mot re- sume payments, which had been tem- porarily suspended by a form of moratorium. She had also fallen be- hind in coal and wood deliveries, In this situation the reparations com- mission voted, as was its duty, on the question as to whether German default was voluntary or not—and obviously if it were voluntary co- ercive measures would be taken. Nows a good deal of confusion has arisen over this vote of the repara- tions commission and many Ameri- cans believe that in some way the French dominated the reparations commission, but in point of fact, while France had the casting vote in case of a tie, in this critical instance Italy, as well as Belgium, voted with ¥rance; thus three of the four mem- bers declared that Germany was in voluntary default, which was recos- nized as the prelude to the exercise of coercion. British Offers Rejected. At the close of 1922, when it was plain_that the coercion would take the form of an occupation of the Ruhr, the late Bonar Law rushed to Paris and sought to prevent the step by making various offers to the French-and the other allies in the matter of cancellation of allied debts. But these offers were rejected out of hand by all three countries and the conference of Paris boke up amicably, but with the British and their aliles completely disagreed. Bonar Law, on behalf of Britain, pro- tested that the Ruhr occupation was a mistake in method and would not produce reparations, but, so far from questioning French and allied right to act on the legal side, he, in effect, ‘wished them success, while declining to permit British troops to share in the actual occupation. In January, 1923, then, we had the occupation of the Ruhr, France and Belgium sending troops, Italy par- ticipating in principle through the presence of certain technical men, her interest being obviously to preserve ber shgre in German coal deliveries. Now 1t is_manifest that so far what had happened had been supported by three of the four parties at interest. representing 70 per cent of the repara. tions claims as against 22 per cent held by the British. Many months after the occupation, when Stanley Baldwin had succeeded Bonar Law as Case of Defense. | vasion of Germany would tend to de- opposed | | restoration | votes with premier, the British government did raise the issue of the legality of the Ruhr occupation under the treaty of Versallles, but the French and Bel- glan jurists challenged the British in- terpretation and, since the French Right to Act in and Belgians were actually tn the Ruhr, the point was academie. It is clear, however, why when the Dawas report had been made and the question of its application arvse the British should concentrate all their attention upon taking from the hands of the reparation commission the task of operating the Dawes plan. They desired above all that the com- mission which they could not control should be shorn of its power to de- clare Germany in default and they were equally determined that even in cass of German default no nation should be allowed individually, and no tbece nations against the will of the fourth, which actually happened in tbe Ruhr case, should through the reparations commission declare a de- fault and thereafter resort to mili- tary tanctions. The British were in the first place opposed to military ‘coercion from both political and economic reasons politizal because it would lead to new wars, economic because it gravely threa%ened British commerce with the continent and threatened to increase British unemployment. Dut their strongest argument in the recent con- ference lay in the fact that the Dawes plan required the loan of $200,00,000 to Germany and the money would have to be found by BDritish and American bankers. Since a new in- stroy the security for this loan, as well as interrupt German repayment, and since American bankers naturally took the same view, the British set out to establish as a principle that there should be no more military oc- cupations and that the reparations commission should not have the power to decide as to defaults. The French and Belgian purpose was quite different; they were inter- ested in getting reparations and they were totally unwilling to surrender the power that they had through con- trol of the reparations commission and by reason of their occupation of the Ruhr for nothing. They were in- terested in loans to Germany, part of the proceeds of which would come to | them: they were equally interested in getting reparations as proposed by the Dawes plan, but they desired some assurance that something would be done if Germany again defaulted, as they feared. Reconciling of Interests. All the dispute at London then turned on the question as to how you could reconcile perfectly legiti- mate but wholly conflicting interests. The British were anxious for the of Germany; whether Germany paid France or Belgium was not a material issue for them, but if France and Belgium invaded Germany to collect reparations British trade would suffer, while Anglo-American loans under the Dawes plan might be compromised. The French and Belgians were re- solved that Germany should not be | permitted to recover at their ex- pense, and, having escaped the danger of coercion, repudiate the Dawes plan. Now with this background consider the actual London agreement. In the first place the reparations commis- sion nominally retains its control over the whole field, but, when the | question of default is raised, then a new member, an American, sits and the commission. Thus if | the French and Belgians voted that| Germany was in defauit, the Italians and British that she was not, the American would ¢ the deciding vote in place of the French repre- sentative. This would not, however, have affected the Ruhr incident, for then France and Italy ard Belgium voted Germany to be in default; had America been represented and had we voted with the British, the majority would have still been with the French and the default would have been declared. But under the new London agreement Britain, for example, to use the same illustra- tion, would have had the right to demand arbitration, and the question would then go to a new arbitration board, made up of three neutrals, one an American, this board to be named either by the reparations commission unanimously or by the president of The Hague Court of International Justice. The decision of this court of arbitration will be final. Action in Default. Assuming, however, that the court decides that Germany is in voluntary and therefore willful default, then the nations in intgrest are left as they were before, ‘that is, free to take such action as they may choose, al- though they are pledged to mive priority to the claims incident to the loans of $200,000,000 to be raised under the Dawes plan. Thus France and Belgium might again occupy the Ruhr, as they dfd in 1923, although the British still insist that this occupation was illegal under the treaty of Versailles. It is plain that what was done at London between the allies was to agree on a compromise which did, in effect, deprive the reparations com- mission of the power to declare a default absolutely and did deprive the French of the advantage of the casting vote by _introducing an American member. ¥hus there is ab- solute guarantee against any ma- licious declaration of default for po- litical purposes by any Franco-Bel- gian combination, to assume which is, of course, to indict both countries, it Seems to me, without warrant, since in the single case, that of 1922, italy, as well as Belgium and France, did agree in declaring the default. So far, however, the allies have deferred to British wishes under the direct pressure of Anglo-American bankers. Now in case there is a defaul, it will first be passed upon by the repa- rations commission with an American sitting in, and then by an arbitra- tion board 3f neutrals. One may as- sume then quite reasonably that & default thus established will be a real default. France and Belgium have thus made full concession to British anxieties, have insisted that when the default is established, if the British do not choose to act with them, they can still act as their in- terests seem to dictate. There is the whole compromise. And it seems to me this compromise satisfies the legitimate interests of all the nations concerned. No Immunity for Invasion. By the compromise Germany, as well as Britain, is protected against any invasion or other coercion, as EDITORIAL SECTION The Sundiy WASHINGTON, D. C., SUNDAY MORNING, AUGUST 17,° 1924. Stae Reduction of Armies, Russ Recognition, Are Issues Europe Next Must Solve BY OLIVER OWEN KUHN. HAT next in KEurope? The question is logical in view of the apparent success of the Lon- don conferente in' healing the breaches that have existed be- tween the allies and bringing Germany closer into the comity of nations, insofar as future -problems, economic and financial, are con- cefned. The results of the London conference have been greater than any single international dellberative sessign since the war, thanks to American activiti® ably directed by Secretary of State Hughes. As a result of decisions in application of the Dawes plan for settle- ment of the noxious reparations problem, it is expected that Europe, within another six months, will have definitely begun to eradicate the hideous sores, virulent since war time. During the expected coming era of prosperity and advance the peoples of the continent may once more take heart and definitely emerge from the depths of hopelessness for years so pronouncely manifest in their outlook. Dificulties Sure to Arise. But with all the prevailing optimistic assur- ances that with the signing and inauguration of London agreements a new era is to be ushered in, there will arise many questions in application of decisions, many frictions de- signed to halt and impede progress. What these may be or what will be their immediate results no man can say, but with an atmos- phere of confidence and a will to eradicate troublesome pitfalls it may be expected that the larger western powers, at least, nations which compose the real balance wheel of the continent, will keep the continent steadfast on its course toward an era of better things. It must not and cannot be understood, how- ever, that everything will be serene. Europe never has been serene for prolonged periods. Europe never will. For Europe is Europe, and composed as she is, of many nations with divergent interests, economic, financial and social, and with each of these steeped in nationalistic prejudice and hatred inspired by past wars of varying intensity and prolonga- tion, it cannot be expected that there will be no future struggles, political, military or otherwise. It is but human nature to advance and perpetuate the best interest of home- lands. As long as peoples of Lurope come into ordinary human contact there must be division of thought, division of effort, and clashes. There will be future struggles, as there have been struggles in the past. Social, political and economic life of the continent cannot be metamorphised even by a London conference or any number of them as long as the floodtides of human emotion are per- mitted to run rampant. Even with economic and financial progress, it always will rem: a question as to just how long prejudices, ever hatreds, can be kept into the back- ground. As long as they are—then progress from the vale of tribulation besetting the Old World. The chief task of statesmen of Europe most interested in seeing the peace an effec- tive thing will be to steer clear of old preju- dices, but in the steering many issues loom as dangerous. Influence by Socialists. of the war disposed of, the people of a greater part of Western Europe, at least, will look toward the removal of those things which have been provocative of war. Notwithstanding the loud clamoring of cer- tain politiclans and statesmen, the peoples of Europe, falling as they are more and more under the sway of socialistic doctrines, are made to bglieve that through the League of Nations there may be found salvation from future struggle. But they realize this instru- ment is only as strong as the allied powers want it to be, and only in prolonged peaceful and co-operative arrangements of France, England, Belgium and Italy can it really be effective. There always is the possibility of these friends falling out at future periods. Therefore, the people are arguing there should be some minimization of those instru- ments which are more and more generally recognized as provocative. In short, they belleve that military forces, so long impeding progress by virtue of the drain upon various national treasuries, should be curtailed to a point of reasonable safety. In all nations save France military forces could and would be cut to mere shells if there was a concerted move to this end with subse- quent agreement. The next great issue to be solved in Europe will be curtailment of mili- tary forces—not disarmament—but a sub- stantial reduction of instruments of war,-with their accompanying burdens. Economic and financial demands placed upon all nations by virtue of the last war are greater than ever in history. Peoples must emerge from their presgnt plIght if there is to be real progress. With substantially reduced armies, national exchequers would be relieved. Hence dis- armament demands are but a logical step in the general rehabllitative procgss. Issue 10 Go Before League. ‘The issue will come to a head during the forthcoming sessions of the League of Nations, when, it is declared, France will seek to have the league supervise the disarmament pro- visions of the treaty of Versailles. This neces- sarily need not open up the general question, but the league's special commission on mili- tary, naval and air questions is to convene in Geneva within the course of the next few days, and it is stated that representatives of all allied powers, possibly save France, will urge that a general program of reduction of armies and military establishment be devised and submitted to the league council for action. The greatest opponent of such agreement is France, and it is expected that Premier Herriot will go slow before committing his country to any definite program, so great is French fear of future Germanic incursion. However, France made concessions in London, and if some definite scheme not entirely prejudicial to French interest can be devised during the sessions of the league, it would not be surprising to see France fall in line. But too great optimism on this score would be decidedly imprudent. However, it is one of the foremost great questions remaining to be solved before the peace 8o longed for by the people of Europe definitely can be realized. It is the one great issue that must be met by each nmation before disastrous economic situations can be squared with the general desire for velief from finan- cial woes. And, as in all post-war problems, armies and not loud protestations of mere desirability. And there is every indication that the test is at hand. What of Russiat Next Question. Paradoxical as it may seem, in the face of @ desire on the part of the la?ge western nations to curtail armies, rumors of war and dangers to the peace of the continent prevail in the eastern section of the continent, which con- tinues to be the stamping ground of Soviet Russian mechanitions. Unquestionably one of the great questions to be solved, and, possibly, concurrently with other remaining issues, is, what shall be done in regard to Russia? The MacDonald govern- ment in London has gone a long way in set- tling this question, insofar as England alone is concerned. A treaty between England and Russia has been signed. It provides favored nation treatment for England, and, in turn, Russia gaing a degree ,of recognition from England and promises of large loans that will enable Russia to remedy, in large measure, an extremely evil economic condition. The next question naturally ariges, will France, without Soviet recognition of the czarist debts, follow England’s steps, and will other nations effect agreements with Moscow that event- ually will bring Russia into direct and favorable contact? Or will Russia continue to be ostracized by various powers in the hope of weakening the bolshevik grip on this once- great empire, and then restoring Russia to a semblance of its one-time greatness? Necewsary to Progress. Upon some sort of working arrangements with Russia will depend much of the future prospertiy of the continent. Bolshevik or not, Russia is an essential unit in the general con- tinental scheme of things from any standpoint one wishes to view the question, and particu- larly in an economio way. If agreements eventuate with any existing government in Moscow, and these agreements are abided by by all signatories, then Russian ‘“perils, “menaces” and “dangers” to the political fab- ric of other nations will cease. There is no question but that all would profit handsomely. All have recognized this, but political ques- tions have stood in the way. The Soviet's ex- ample of government and its threats to extend this form to other nations through persistently diabolical efforts since Russia got out of the World War always have stood in the way of everything but extremely cautious attempts to sound out the Soviets in regard to trade relations sans recognition. The Soviet has insisted on recognition, beyond all things, in- asmuch as this not only would mean accept- ance of the peculiar forms adopted by Lenin and Trotsky. but would open up the way for facilitating the general scheme of bolsheviz- ing the world. This never has been out of the minds of Moscow leaders, and it is a thing they cling to today. How_to approach the general question of bringing other national policies in line with the bolsheviks 5o as to restore a portion of the trade that once flowed into and out of Russia is one of the vital questions that must be solyed by all, and which England seems in a fair way of doimg. The general test will come in Soviet good will. If good faith can be proved by Moscow, and if agreements with England are carried out in measure, it may be expected that other nations will fall into long as she tries honestly to comply with the terms of the Dawes plan, but she does not get any immunity from coercion if she willfully de- fauits, which would be the case if France and Belgium had actually surrendered their right to act once (Continued on mrteen?.fi_ Page) With the assumption that the Dawes report is to be carried out, insuring settled order in Germany and co-operative working arrange- ments with allled nations, looking toward the discharge of obligations inflicted by virtue there must be comp! military forces. The LATIN AMERICA FIELD FOR COMMUNIST WORK, CAMPAIGNING BY RADIO before there can be general curtailment of desire for prolonged peace will come in ex- emplification of a willingness romise without stint line, perfidy of real test of Europe's to curtail not that they desire to recognize the bolshevik principles, but merely because trade relations with the Soviet will bring closer the day of general stabilization. economic FACILITIES WILL LIMIT Propagandists Are Attempting to Array|Politicians Will Be Unable to “Hold” Southern Neighbors Against American “Capitalism” BY HENRY L. SWEINHART. HE Communist International at Moscow {s attempting to ralse the red flag of revolu- tion in some of the Latin American countries and through them march on into the United States. The workers and the Peasants in Mexico, Central America, Cuba and some of the South American countries are being urged to join in the fight against capitalism. In liter- ature filled with many false charges and with glaring—almost humorous at times—misstatements and exag- gerations, the laboring classes of Latin America are incited against their alleged oppressors, “whether it be domestic, native capitalism, or the capitalism of the United States.” The President-eléct of Mexico, Gen. Plutarco Elias Calles, who has just passed thrdugh the United States en route to Europe, and who while in this country conferred with Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor, is declared by the Communists to be an “opportun- ist” In spite of his known friend- liness to labor and of the statements he has made to that effect, it is as- serted that he will “suppress the trade unions opposed to him and persecute the Communists; he will not hesitate to shoot them down if neces- sary.” The Communists assert that Calles “will wed himself to Gompers and his whole treacherous clique.” Making Mexico “Firiag Line.” Mexico is one of the chief centers of activity of the Communist Inter- national on the American continent. The hope of the Russian revolution- ary organization is to spread its doc- trine into the United States across the Mexican border. “The United States hopes ‘Iin time’ to parcel Mexico out into single ‘in- dependent’ territories,” says a letter addressed by the Communist Inter- national to the Mexican Communist party. “It is already openly advo- cating the annexation of fruitful Lower California to the~United States as a territory. In Yucatan and in the State of Chiapas, the Americans are fanning the flames of the separatist government. The Communists assert, however, that “in Mexico the revolutionary labor movement has such strong roots that neither the claws of American capital nor of any other capital can tear it to pleces.” In their letter to the Mexican - Communist party they declare that it is the duty of the party there to knnounce its slogan with all revolutionary fervor to the oppressed masses of Central Amer- ica” In conjunction with the Com- munist party of Central America and the Communist group in Cuba, it is asserted, a program of work and ac- tion must be prepared. While Mexico appears to be the American country in which the Com- munist International has been con- centrating its strongest endeavors, there are Communist groups in a number of the other American na- tions; and the Communist parties of all the Americas are urged to keep in constant touch with each other. Cuba and Guatemala are two of the countries which are named as having organized movements. The Interna- tional declares that it expects the workers of all American countries to contribute to the victory of the pro- letariat in all countries against the bouregoisie and capitalism. ‘The de- struction of the last stronghold of capitalistic imperialism, the over- throw of the North American boure- goisie,” it asserts, “is the task of the workers and peasants of all the Amer- ican countries.” Although nothing apparently is known of it here, Moscow claims that there is a “Communist party” in Guatemala; and it states that “in Cuba the revolutionary union move- ment is again raising its head after the defeat it suffered in 1921 at the hands of reaction.” “Reds” Filtering Into U. S. Owing to the strict watch which the United States maintains against the direct admission through its ports of entry of any “Reds” from Russia or other European countries, it is doubtless true that some mem- bers of this dangerous class have been “filtering” into the United States across the Mexican border, while some others may have been smuggled in from Cuba or arrived on false passports from some other Latin American country. Recent reports from Argen- tina showing that certain European immigrants were coming to the United States via Buenos Aires on fraudulent possports indicate that there were probably some “Reds” among that number. Such a close watch is belng kept, how- ever, on all suspicions characters who attempt to gain admission into the United States that it is not believed many revolutionaries succeed ip getting past the barriers. Thousands of tempo- rary workers come from Mexico into this country each year. They are sup- posed to return after the tasks for which they came have been completed, but it is possible that among these seasonal workers are some “Reds” who manage to_remain in the United States. But even if-they are not discovered immedi- ately they are likely to be caught and deported before they have been in this country many months. Charge of American Imperialism, The communists charge that Ameri- can imperalism has reached out into the ‘West Indies, Central I.IIII,M'.‘IEAIMP- ica, and that “it is subjugating coun- tries of these parts of the Western Hemisphere in the interest of Wall street.” They assert that “the capitalis. Air to Exclusion of Other Broadcast- ing Events—Will BY WILL P. KENNEDY. E are about to enter upon the first radio political campaign in history, but it Is not going to be any- thing like as general as politicians and political managers have an- nounced—for the very simple and sufficient .reason that it will be Physically impossible to do so. The coming campaign is revolu- tlonary not only in that radio will be used in annihilating distance and making all listeners-in an audience of one, but that it will demand brief, Dpithy speeches and forces the politi-" clan to mend his wind-jamming style, else his audience will cut him off by a simple twist of the wrist. Managers of national, State, con- gressional and senatorial and even local political campaigns have an- nounced grandiloquently and with aplomb that they are going to make a “radio campaign.” Some of these are now waking up to the fact that they said too much too soon. They all seem to have been swept off their feet by the very satisfactory manner in which the Republican and Demo- cratic national conventions ~were broadcast while people all over the countgy listened in. All Seek Air. But during the campaign period this Fall the conditions are going to be far different. There will be not only the Democratic National Committee and its' candidates, the Republican National Committee and its candi- dates. the La Follette organization tic development of North America and the backward economic and social de- velopment of the countries of Latin America determine the political attitude of the United States toward the coun- tries of the South.” They boldly declare that “in Cube," Haiti, San Domingo; in Guatemala, Costa Rica, Honduras and Panama, the American ‘system’'—the most ruthless exploitation of the pro- letariat—reigns supreme. Revolutionary ‘workers are persecuted and thrown into prison. Such organizations as oppose Gompers are disrupted, betrayed and violently crushed by the agents of the local and American governments. The peamants, who are held under conditions of medieval slavery, are stripped to the bone and controled by cudgel and whip The America which advocated Wilson's 14 point, has been violating for years the national freedom of the West In- dian and Central American republics.” No credit is given in the communistic literature to the United States for the work of aiding through investment in the development of natural resources in the Latin American countries and in the giving of employment thersby to mil- lions of workera. T ; 2 Be Innovation. and its candidates, other parties and groups—not to mention thousands of individual candidates for national, state and local offices— but they will all want to be heard at the same time or to be given oppor- tunity to reply to each other. It simply cannot be done. It is very casy for a candidate or a party man- agement to say “We are going to make a radio campaign"—that slips fluently from the tongue and catches the fancy, but the broadcasting com- Panigs are the ones who must deliver the goods, and when the ambitious campaigners start to make arrange- ments they find that the 1924 broad- casting campaign must be within strict limitations and many of the candidates face disappointment in consequence. The great engineers of the big radio corporations have for months been studying the problem and are ar- ranging to give the largest possible service—but it must be within the limits they decree. The principal obstacle to the gen- eral free-for-all radio battle royal of candidates is that the main depend- ence for long-distance transmission has to be placed on the wires of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, and this company has a regular service to maintain that can- not be abandoned or interrupted to afford a new plaything or new adver- tising agency for the politician. The possibilities of radio campaign- ing are large and enticing. It cuts away the old barriers of distance, time, inertia and mob psychology. The isolated voter can get first-hand information. The presidential candi- date can get his message complete, ungarbled, to the individual voter emphasized by the quality of his own voice, mannerisms or tricks of elo- quence. It will be an individual and Ppersonal appeal. The listener can form his own opinion for himself, uninfluenced by interpretation of party press. The lazy, the illiterate and the unfriend- ly voter can be appealed to as well as the enthusiastic supporters that have heretofore thronged public halls or parks. | The radio campaigner car- ries his message to his audience in- stead of his audience being forced to come to him. The voter informs him- self on campaign issues withoug dis- closing his particular interest to his neighbor. Heckling is Barred. political Each listener is an individual au- dience, receiving his impressions di- rect from the speaker, unswayed by the feelings of those in the crowd about him, and with heckling barred by the fact that the radio campaigner 2 on ) BY BEN McKELWAY. NCE every four years the peo- ple of the United States are solemnly warned that the country is approaching—ave, that it is hanging on the brink of that abyss of innocuous desuetude, commonly described as the bow wows. As the same time they ‘are told that the crissis is at hand. In their hands rests the deci- slon of whether the Government of this fair land will be administered along the lines so gloriously laid down by Washington, Jefferson and Madison or perish under the admin- istration of the grafting. scandalous, erjured thicves who have made the last four epochal in the Na- tion's history for sordid knavery, cor- ruption and high treason. Still shaking in hie shoes the harraesed voter turns elsewhere for wisdom, comfort and hope. He re- ceives it in large and generous doses. He is congratulated upon the prog- ress of his native land during the last feur years. He is felicitated upon the fact that the wishes of the founders are being eligiously served; that the ideals of Washing- ton, Jefferson and Madison still hive. ""v is assured of the sanctity of the | Constitution and of “its continued | safe keeping. He is told that n- omy and frugality are the watch- words in’ the capital and that a glorious future, with lower or may- be no taxes, easy work and migh wages beckon to the man who votes the right ticket. Third Party Approaches. And when this same voter, Repub- lican or Democrat, wonders what to do he glances toward the horizon and sees approaching what his newspaper tells him Is the “gfim specter of a third party,” which shrieks that the Democrats and Republicans are both wrong, that they have gotten the country in a hopeless stew between it alone. | TUpon learding which the voter | votes the way his father and grand- father voted before him. the country | for four yvears more and everybody lives happily ever atterward. Party platforms have been threat- ening ~dire consequences, with justifiable pride to accomplish- ments, renewing their pledges to guard the constitution against all comers, praising the brave defenders of our Nation on land and on sea and hinting at a bonus or pension or something some time mavbe, and winding up with a general mud- slinging at the opposition for the last hundred vears. Yet the amazing {thing is the interest with which the | country, theoretically, at least, awaits | the announcement of the next plat- | at what it contains. All that is neces- sary to convince one that there is nothing new under the sun is to go back a century or so and examine the various platforms of the different parties. Platforms Strangely Alike. Aside from the various issues of the day there is a strange similarity from 1800, when a convention of Re- opposition to new treaties with the quarrels of Eu- rope, entering their fields of slaugh- ter to preserve their balance or join- ing in the confederation of Kings to war against the principles of lib- erty” to 1900, when the infant Peo- ples’ party was calling on the coun- try to defeat both Democrats and Republicans. neither of whose plat- forms promised the salvation held out by proponents of the third party. Party platforms came into use gradually. In the early days the par- ties evidently were able to dispense with them altogether. Their influence in getting the vote after they became a fixed part of the political campaign is doubtful, but it is interesting to recall some of them. A convention of Republican congressmen met in Philadelphia in 1500 and drafted what was probably the first party platform. Their opponents, the Federalists, adopted no platform. The Repub- licans were successful in electing Jef- ferson. Neither party adopted plat- forms in 1804 or 1508, but in 1812 the Federalists held a convention in New York, nominated De Witt Clinton for President and adopted a platform censuring the Republican adminis- tration for unpreparedness for the war of 1812, and concluding with a plea for the election of Clinton for protection of “those interests ® ¢ © flag- ging under the weakness and im- becility of the administration.” The Republicans failed to adopt any plat- form, but were successful at the polls and Madison was re-elected. JFirst Democratic Platform. Platforms fell into disuse entirely from 1812 until 1832. During this latter campaign the newly organized Democratic party adopted a shors platform, dealing in generalities, and the Republicans had none. The Dem- ocrats elected Jackson. Four years later the Democrats decided to o without a_ platform, but the radical clement of that party adopted what was known as the “Loco-Foco” plat- form, opposing paper currency, mo- nopolies by legislation and “The dan- gerous and unconstitutional creation of vested rights or prerogatives by legislation.” The Republicans, now turned Whigs, also adopted a plat- form calling on the people to oppose Van Buren, Democratic candidate, and charging him with intrigue and “cor- rution of our free institutions.” Van Buren, without a platform, was elected. In 1840 the situation was reversed. The Democrats decided to try a platform, framing a very nice one which said nothing in particular. while the Whigs decided to get along without a platform. This campaign saw grim specter of a third party sure enough. It took the form of the newly formed Abolitionists, who adopted a platform opposing slavery in the District of Columbia and in the territories. But W. H. Harrison, without a platform, was elected. Platform Comes to Stay. The platform came to stay, how- ever, in 1844, with the Abolitionists the first in the field, with a platform consistent with their beliefs. The Democrats adopted a strict construc- tionist platform, the Whigs a loose constructionist, and the Democrats won, electing Polk, defeating Clay, the Whig candidate, and Birney, the Abolitionist. In 1848 party platforms apparently meant little either way, for Gen. Zachary Taylor, selected by the Whigs as their candidate, was about the most popular man in the United States because of his victories in the Mexi- can War, while the Democratic party was split three ways between the Regulars, the Free Sollers, who suc- | declaring that Ame: | a platform against exten PLATFORMS HAVE MINO INFLUENCE WITH VOTERS History of Presidential Campaigns Do Not Show That People Take Them Seriously ceeded the Abolitionists, and the Barn Burners, who were Van Buren's fol- lowers. Gen. Taylor was elecetd by a large majority. Slavery was becoming the burning issue now, and in 1852 the Democrats were swept to victory on a platform which came out strongly for States’ rights. The Whigs were swallowed up and lost forever by adopting a platform which was virtually iden- tical with that of the Democrats. The Free Soilers were gaining ground at every election. The Democratic party made its stand for slavery in 1836, and won against a divided field, consisting of the Northern Whigs, now called Re- publicans; the “Know-Nothing” party, icans should rule Southern Whigs, the Know-Nothing The Republicans came out in n of sla- last America, and the who “sided with party. ob- | them, that salvation lies with it and : | somehow manages to struggle along | pointing | | form and rejoices or dismally howls| publicans in Philadelphia declared its | “linking ourselves by | very into the free States. All the parties united in bitter attacks on the Democratic administration, but the Democrats won, electing James Buchanan. Country Busy Fighting. Through the Civil War and the reconstruction years from 1860 to 1876 political platforms and campaigns amounted to little. The country was too busy fighting and recov from a devastating war to much time in politic: The Demo- crats were gradually gaining soms strength after the sectional strife which had_split the party asunder. A Labor Reform party had made its appearance in the last campaign, and the newly organized Prohibition party was attracting some attention with strange-sounding doctrines con- cerning alcoholic liquors. But 1876 ushered in a red-hot campaign. There was the American National convention, which adopted a plat- form which reads like & psalm. The Prohibition party wa in the field with a_characteristic platform. The Independent, or “Greenback.” party came into the fight with a platiorm which stated it had been called intd existence “by the nece s of the people whose industriés are pros- trated, whose labor is deprived of its just reward by a ruinous policy Which the Republican and Demo- | cratic parties refusc to change ‘The Republican party was praising God from whom all mercies flow, con- gratulating the people on the leader- ship of the party, and pointing with pride to its record of achievement under Lincoln and Grant. The Demo- crats viewed with alarm the general havoe wrought by the Republican party and very solemnly declared that the time had come when the people must save the count through the ballot, cast the Republicans into outer darkn. and elect the Democratic ticket. They came near doing it at that, for while Samuel B. Tilden re- |ceived the greatest popular vote, | Rutherford Hayes was elected. Both Old Parties Sound. Four years later the Republicans turned back the pages of time to the successful conclusion of the Civil War and the safe conduct of the country through the perilous times that fol- lowed. The Democrats devoted the majority of their platform to a vitri- olic attack upon the Republicans. while the National Liberals in their platform said, in effect, that neither { the Democrats nor the Republicans had done anvthing and that it was up to them to revive paralyzed in- dustry and trade and increase the wages of the workingmen. In addition there were the Independent Repub- licans, the Prohibitionists, the Green- backs. Despite all this the Republi- cans again were victorious and Gar- field entered the White House. Eighteen eighty-four saw the Re- publicans, who had gotten away with it so often, again harping on the Civil War and pointing with pardonable pride to the fact that as the country had made such commendable progress amder six consecutive Republican ad- ministrations. it behooved the country to make it seven straight. The Democrats, however, soft-ped- aled on the_ failure of the Republi- can administration, and took up a new song. With the greatest so- lemnity their party platform declared that it was indispensable for the practical application of and the en- forcement of the correct principles of government for the Government to be controlled always by one political party. Frequent change of adminis- tration, the platform set forth, is as necessary as the recurrence of the popular will. The Greenback-Labor party came out with a well modulated platform, the Prohibitionists stayed in the field and the country took the Democrats’ word for it and brought about a change in administration by electing Grover Cleveland. Eight Parties in the Field. Four years later there were eight parties in the field, each calling on the people to save the country. The Industrial Reformers wanted the gov- ernment to provide “full legal tender money sufficient in volumn to meet the requirements of the people.” The suf- fragists had come along with an equal-rights platform. There was an American platform, coming out for what the folks call “100 per cent Americanism” these days, and irrev- erently declaring that the issues of free trade and protection were a “fraud and a snare.” The Union Labor platform denounced the Repub- licans and Democrats for “creating and perpetuating the monstrous evils of usury, monopolies and trusts.” The Prohibitionists were still present. The Democrats took up the song of the “ins” and congratulated the country that the ideals of Jefferson, etc., etc., cte. The Republicans paused on the threshold to honor Lincoln, Grant, Garfield, Arthur, Logan and Conkling, mildly rebuked the Democrats for their “weak and unpatriotic treat- ment of fisheries, outlined their well known principles, and won the election by sending Gen. Harrison to the White House, although Cleveland obtained the popular majorit In 1892 the Republicans continued to thank the Lord for their successfal administration. The Democrats view- ed with alarm, said it was time f8f the people to return to the funda- mentals of a free and popular Gov- ernment, the need of which was never more urgent than now. People’s Party Boom. But this campaign was interesting for the birth of the People’s Party, which pictured the unhappy situation as follows: “We meet in the midst of a nation brought to the verge of moral, political and material ruin. Corruption dominates the ballot box, the legislatures, the Congress and even the ermine of the bench. The people are demoralized. The news- papers are largely subsidized or muz- zled; public opinion is silenced; busi- ness is prostrated,” and so on for e ~(Continued on Third Page.)