1
y
H
iiPi
iii
h
1
J
ttm
lull
1
'II
III
VU
in liiii' 'iiHo
!
I
mil imi""
HDI
ffli
F
15 li
iiiiiiiij
iiwiiiiii!:''.!!;'!
1"
pilJi
Em
■iiiiiif
If
ij|jpi{iiij
iiifi
iiii
m
II,:
liPl
"liil
H
DtJiini
1 .™ipi
m
mifiiynti 1
m
g_
■
m
II
il|i
'''i Hi
illlillLJ|H
i
nip
B
III
-/J
/'
]f
/
;
I
£^3-^^-2^s^—
V
\-
LETTERS TO A KING
BY
ALBION W. TOURGEE, LL. D.,
AUTHOR OF "A FOOI^'S ERRAND,'' "AN APPEAL TO C^SAR," ETC.
Where the word of a king is, there is power.
— ECCL. VIII, 4.
CINCINNATI :
CRANSTON & STONAi^K.
NEW YORK:
PHILLIPS & HUNT.
1888.
Copyrighted, 18S7,
by
E. K. TOURGEE.
* *.
^1
ft
i
«.
4
•■ «
«
a
ft •
I t t
C
4
t
•
•
ft •
• ft ••
1 < i
s
C •
c
4
4
t ,
»
•
■
ft ft
• ft ft •
1 i
4
4 C
4
4
'
4
lit
* 4
4 1
•
•
•
•
•
•
• ft
•
* * * ft
« 4.
t 1
<■
t.
[ *'
_'
,'
4
.4 4
4
4 *
• •
ft
••
• • •
ft
ft
• •
t *
^ *
* 4
t.
4.
1.
4
* 4
4 «
.*
•
ft
•
ft
• •
l *
«
4
^* »
•
ft
• • •
C 1
t.
4 4
4
tit*
1
e
'
4 «
• •
ft ft
ft
ft •
c
4.
4
4
4
*
1 ft
* *•
v."
«
«
«
« C
* ft
•
•
«
•i'
1.
« •
•
CO
CO
>•
EC
C33
CM
I
lit
lljose uv*!-)© JieJ iijai il^e l^epulalic n)i^\)l li^e,
YHTS volurrja is inscribed,
Ir) ll)ei eetpijesi l)ape iljat if rriaj aiJ il^err)
Y® etpppcoierte Jijeip i)epil0ae.
462391
P^EF^^E.
A LETTER of congratulation addressed to the son
of an old comrade, on his twenty-first birthday, has
grown into a volume, the aim of which is twofold.
It is designed in the first place to impress upon young
men that they are the recipients, not only of a
priceless political inheritance, but of a commen-
surate responsibility, bequeathed to them by a
generation which did not hesitate to shed its blood
to perpetuate the idea of " a government of the
people, by the people, and for the people," on the
soil of America. The fact of individual responsi-
bility on the part of the citizen has been very little
considered, even by those who have dwelt upon the
ethical principles of our government.
The doctrine that politics is the broadest, richest,
and most important field of Christian endeavor, will
probably seem to many a startling proposition ; but
it is one on the truth of which the future, not
only of republican government, but of Christian civil-
ization depends. Neither of these can be regarded
5
6 PREFACE.
as secure until it is accepted as a principle of Christian
ethics that a man can no more stand idly by and
see public evils prevail and expect to be held guilt-
less, than if he were a willing witness of his brother's
murder.
From this principle flows the other which this
is work designed to set forth, — to wit: that responsi-
bility for political evils can not be avoided by a mere
perfunctory exercise of the electoral franchise. A
soldier using arms of precision might as well claim
to have discharged his duty by merely pulling the
trigger in the hour of battle as a citizen console him-
self with the idea that nothing more is required of
him than merely to cast a ballot. The soldier who
fails to take aim, and thereby make his shot effective,
is a coward and a traitor to the flag he pretends to
serve. The citizen who casts a ballot at haphazard
is not a whit better. The soldier's eye is trained on
purpose that he may take aim ; the citizen's brain
and conscience are given him that he may use his
power to the best advantage — to secure the greatest
good of the greatest number. This work, therefore,
concerns itself very largely with political instrumen-
talities — the means by which the citizen's power may
be made effective.
There has been of late a curious tendency among
PREFACE. 7
political thinkers to rely too much upon mere
mechanical reforms. Individual responsibility is too
often thought to end with the enactment of laws.
It is very generally assumed that political evils may
be cured by cunningly contrived devices which shall
trip the "heeler" at his finest work, and leave the
"boss" to gnash his teeth in impotent rage at his
inability to cheat the patent "automatic self-register-
ing" ballot-boxes, or evade the rigorous restraints of
the "new, warranted pure because imported" system
of State ballot-supply and ticket adjustment. Such
devices are in the main merely scarecrows, which
serve to lull the husbandman to slumber while the
fowls of the air despoil his crop. Good laws may
arm the citizen for the performance of his duty, but
no device will ever be invented that will permit him
to relax his vigilance or intermit his care. /
This work is not founded upon the idea that a
political millennium is imminent or even possible, but
is the outcome of an irresistible conviction that the
common sense, intelligence, and conscience of the
whole people is a surer guarantee of good govern-
ment than all the speculative wisdom of those who,
falsely claiming to be "the better classes," are not
un frequently the very worst and most dangerous
elements of our society. While partisanship is set
8 PREFACE.
forth as the very foremost duty of the citizen, the
work is not in the least degree intended to subserve
the interests of any party. The principles it enun-
ciates are universal, applying to one party as well as
to another — party itself being regarded only as an
instrumentality by which popular purpose may be
carried into effect.
If this volume shall help to awaken those who
may peruse its pages to the fact that self-government
is not only a glorious privilege but a priceless trust,
which it is the highest duty of to-day to transmit,
not merely unimpaired, but greatly strengthened and
improved to-morrow; and if it shall serve to make
clear to any the fact that to exercise the power of
the citizen is a personal duty in the performance of
which the individual is subject always to the obliga-
tions of Christian morality, the author will count
himself well repaid for the labor of its preparation.
Thorheim, July 4, 1888.
eoi^TEisiTS.
PAGE.
"BE A MAN," 13
II.
" LONG LIVE THE KING," 24
III.
THE ANTECHAMBER TO THE THRONE 35
IV.
SHYING AT A SHADOW, 45
V.
A JOINT AND' SEVERAL LIABILITY, 58
VI.
A PERPETUAL COVENANT, 7°
VII.
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS, 83
VIII.
"KING CAUCUS," 97
9
lO CONTENTS.
IX.
PAGE.
SETTING THE KEY-STONE, iir
X.
A SHEAF OF FIRST-FRUITS, 125
XI.
THE INVISIBLE REPUBLIC i35
XII.
THE RANK AND FILE MS
XIII.
"THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS," 158
XIV.
THE WILL AND THE WAY 172
XV.
PARTY FEALTY, 183
XVI.
THE "INDEPENDENT VOTER," i95
XVII.
THE PERILS OF REVOLT 207
XVIII.
THE TRUSTEE OF AUTHORITY 221
CONTENTS. 1 1
XIX.
PAGE.
THE CAPTIVE KING 233
XX;
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE, 247
XXI.
THE AMENDMENT OF PARTY AGENCIES 263
XXII.
THE PROMULGATION OF THE EDICT, 273
XXIII.
THE PENALTIES OF MALFEASANCE, 284
:cxiv.
"GOOD-BYE, JOHN," 289
IlETTERS TO A I^ING.
"BE A MAN."
MV DEAR JOHN: —
This is your twenty-first birthday. Yesterday
you were an infant ; to-day you are a man. I should
content myself with formal congratulations upon this
most notable event of your life, were it not that the
relations I once sustained to your father may, perhaps,
be thought to entitle me to speak somewhat more
familiarly to a son whom he, alas! may no longer in-
struct save by the influence of a noble example.
We were not only contemporaries — your father
and I — but compatriots as well. Our entrances upon
the stage of life were so nearly simultaneous that we
may almost be said to have responded to the same
cue. In boyhood we were playmates ; in youth
companions. When we crossed the median line be-
tween youth and manhood by which you are stand-
ing to-day, the shadow of impending conflict hung
over the land. Side by side we received "the bap-
tism of fire " on the first great battle-field of the
mightiest struggle that history records. In its lurid
13
14 LETTERS TO A KING.
light we learned how close is the bond that unites
each individual life to the common destiny — how the
great world-life rests evenly on every man's shoul-
ders ; how the atoms make up the mass and the
whole is colored by the life of each. In that hour
our friendship was cemented by the strange intimacy
which community of peril gives — the comradeship
that fuses the hearts of those who stand shoulder to
shoulder amid the red glare of battle — a sentiment
which no diversity of rank or station can ever after-
ward wholly destroy. Hardly a year had passed when
already bronzed and toughened veterans, standing by
his side on the crest of a hill, which that autumn
day made forever memorable, I heard most force-
fully expressed the injunction which I would might
first of all things fall upon the ears and impress itself
upon the soul of every young American as he crosses
the threshold of manhood :
It is no light thing to be a man. "Behold a
man-child is born," is the celestial greeting to those
into whose hands the destinies of unnumbered gen-
erations are committed. Crowns may crumble ; kings
may perish; dynasties may be forgotten; but in the
lives of those who are to come after him, each man
finds an immortality. It is no unusual injunction,
yet the One Divine did not esteem it unworthy of
obedience, and taught us by His example that it is
''BE A man:'
15
the golden door by which humanity may be ap-
proached. He who would faithfully serve, worthily
lead, or pleasantly consort with his fellows, must, first
of all things, be a man. It is strange how this sim-
ple phrase was stamped that day upon my mind.
No doubt the surroundings had much to do with the
vividness with which it stands out in my memory of
a scene which itself was one of those that leave a scar
upon the soul no after life can obliterate.
It was a fair October day. The Indian summer
haze hung on the distant hillsides. The elms were
already bare and brown. The red berries of the
holly showed through the prickly leaves where they
grew in clusters by the road-side. The hickories
made golden gashes in the wooded horizon. The
sumach flamed in the hedge-rows, and the persimmons
were Just changing their dull green for the duller
red that tells of the ripening touch of frost. The
fields were white with dry, feathery sedge-grass, or
dark with the rank growth of sere ragweed that
clothed the stubble lands. The walnut-trees had
strewn their pale leaves and green-coated fruit in
amber circles on the unfrequented roadway along
which we had marched that morning. Our feet had
slipped upon the acrid shells and crushed the nuts
into the dark red soil, filling the air with spicy aroma.
The oaks that crowned the Kentucky "knobs"
were showing russet tints, and the low-branching
chestnuts held up the velvet lining of their burrs in
l6 LETTERS TO A KING.
mute protestation of the faithfulness with which they
had surrendered their treasures, keeping nothing back
to tempt the hand of the ravisher.
We met the dropping irregular fire of the skir-
mishers before the sun had climbed half-way to the
meridian, and pushed them backward over hill and
dale until the noon glared hotly down upon us, and
the angry roar of artillery began to mingle with their
scattering fire. Yet there was no hostile force in
sight. Our light skirmish line easily advanced, al-
most unhindered by the shots which they returned,
no doubt, with like harmlessness. The preparations
for conflict were deliberately, though foolishly, made.
The general in command was a soldier by education,
and a palterer by instinct. He had an overwhelming
dread of his opponent, was without confidence in
those he commanded, and had an invincible dis-
trust of himself. He was a scientific soldier, who
wanted to see all the enemy's powers before making
a move!
Marching through a cornfield, where the maize
stalks stood in serried rows of rankest growth, as the
rifle balls came whistling by, we learned to distinguish
by the sound whether they cut stalk or leaf or scattered
the golden grains from the ripe, drooping ear. Halt-
ing beneath the shadow of a grove of oaks, we
laughed, not altogether joyfully, as we felt the ripe
acorns, rattled down upon our heads by the shells
that came screeching through the heavy-laden
''BE A MAN." ly
branches. At length we reached an unprotected
crest where the stubble showed yellow in the midday
sunshine. Cannon to right and left, in front and
rear, made the earth tremble, and filled the palpi-
tating air with soft, fleecy clouds, that floated away
from the exploding shells. All were hidden from
our sight by the wooded "knobs" around, except
one battery to our left and rear that fired spitefully
into the silent woods, and one that with reckless au-
dacity was pushed forward in our very front. The
fire of the skirmishers had died away, and the stillness
of the hot noonday was only broken by this angry
duel waged over our heads. Not an enemy was to
be seen, and with all the clangor that filled the balmy
air, it was difficult to realize that we were standing
on a battle-field. The blue line halted. The align-
ment was corrected. Those who wore swords fell
back to their respective stations in the rear of the
steel-crowned ranks. We waited only for the order
to advance in line upon the unseen foe.
Just in front of me stood a lad whose great brown
eyes and dark waving locks were like those your
mirror reveals when you look into its silvery depths.
He Avas yet in his teens — the down of coming man-
hood scarce!}'- casting a shadow on his fine lip, which
quivered with excitement as he asked in a tense
whisper as I passed down the line, "Do you think
there will be a battle?"
It was the first time he had witnessed the pre-
1 8 LETTERS TO A KING.
liminaries of such a conflict. Hardly more than a
month before he had left a peaceful home, despite a
brother's remonstrance and a sister's prayer, to un-
dertake a soldier's duty and encounter a soldier's
perils. Almost as he spoke, from a wooded crest
scarce a bowshot away, leaped flashing tongues of
flame that brought the message of death to hundreds
of our ill-fated left wing on that day so fecund of
the angry memories which fill the soldier's heart
when he feels himself balked of triumph, and knows
his comrade's blood to have been vainly shed through
a leader's gross incompetency.
A shudder ran along the line. Men moaned and
sunk into eternal silence. Others spun quickly round,
and with upstretched arms and rigid muscles fell stiff"
and prone to rearward, as if the thought of flight
had flashed in that last instant through the shattered
brain. Still others crept pallid and trembling to the
rear, pressing with bloody hands the pulsing fount-
ains through which their life-blood ebbed away. I
took little heed of those things at the time. They
were only incidents that photographed themselves
upon my memory. At such a moment a subaltern
has time and thought for nothing but the men
composing that part of the line for which he is re-
sponsible. His eyes are upon them ; his ears open
only to the commands that may be transmitted ; his
whole attention concentrated upon those few files
which he must encourage, assist, inspire.
*^ BE A man:' 19
No one waited for orders after that deadly blast.
All knew that we were in the very vortex of battle.
Before any officer's lips could frame the command to
fire, the polished barrels had fallen to the poise; there
was the fateful click of back-drawn hammers; the
gleam of flashing eyes along the leveled steel and the
roar of the answering volley. Then came the inde-
scribable turmoil of battle. The air seemed full of
hissing metal. Men stood or knelt, but kept on
firing steadily. The files grew fewer. I paced back
and forth behind them, proud alike of the living and
the dead. The young lad bit his cartridge and rammed
home the ball, his fair face aglow with excitement,
but his hand as steady as a veteran's. As he fixed
the cap, his eye sought with quick, stolen glances the
flame-lit copse in which the foe lay hid. On either
hand his stricken comrades were falling thick and fast —
dropping where they stood or staggering backward
in that pallid swoon that tells the woeful tale of death
even more terribly than the silent heaps of clay that
fall unmoving at our feet. Ah me ! how swift the
blue line melted ! and still the unseen enemy poured
upon us the pitiless leaden hail, and still we loaded
and fired at the smoking thicket.
Then the weak line wavered, bending backward
here and there where it had grown thinnest in the
breath of the hot tornado. At that moment the
brother of this lad, a veteran to whom battle-scenes
had grown familiar, rushing for an instant from his
20 LETTERS TO A KING.
post of duty, sought along the weakened line for the
boy who was to him as the apple of his ej'e. His
face was h"ghted with the glare of battle ; his lips shut
close and his eyes blazed with the fierce joy that
comes to the hero soul in the hour of supreme peril.
As his glance fell upon the youth he sought, the
half-anxious look faded from his face and a smile of
grim satisfaction took its place. He laid his hand
upon his brother's shoulder, and said in the even tone
that sounds so clear above the roar of battle: " Be a
man, John ! "
There was a look of proud reproachfulness on the
fair, powder-stained face that turned to meet his gaze,
and a smile of yet prouder approval curved the bearded
lip as the veteran's hand rested an instant on the boy's
shoulder, and he repeated tenderly his injunction,
"Be a man, John!"
The tide of battle ebbed and flowed, and when
the moon rose after that tumultuous day, it shone on
John's face, white and cold, lying where he had stood,
with the pallid ranks stretching away on either hand,
his feet the very foremost towards the foe. He sleeps
in peace under the giant oaks which seem to exult
even yet in the valorous fight that was waged in the
shadow of their branches.
You bear the name of that young hero. The
blood that swells your veins is akin to that which
stained the stubble on that fateful field. You, too,
are entering upon a mighty conflict. The battle field
''BE A man:' 21
of life stretches away before your feet. Every point
of vantage is held by an enemy open or concealed.
The world looks on, expectant of valorous deeds.
The country for which your honored namesake died
asks no less of you than it demanded of him. It
may not call you to the field of conflict. Your heart
may never throb with "that stern joy that warriors
feel." You may never know the intoxication of
triumph or the sickening woe of defeat. Yet all the
same, the country expects, and has a right to expect,
that you will protect her interests, conserve her liber-
ties, and devote yourself to her service with a courage,
devotion, self sacrifice, and intelligence not excelled
by him whose name you bear. The battles of liberty
and right are not all fought with the sword, and the
noblest victories are ofttimes peaceful and bloodless
ones ; but the same heroic attributes are required to
win them that sustain the soldier in the hour of
battle. It was the hero poet-king who put to rout
the enemies of Israel, but it was the son whose hands
knew not the stain of blood, who builded the temple
of the Most High.
" Peace hath her victories
No less renowned than war."
It is not for me to prescribe what you should
do. You hold in your hands the weapons of to-
day. You are in the fore-front of the battle. I am
of the past, lingering in the rear, once more a sub-
altern who seeks to inspire rather than direct. You
22 LETTERS TO A KING.
are armed and equipped and on your courage and
skill the outcome of the conflict rests. Presumably,
you have been tauglit to use your weapons and
trained to perform the duties devolving upon you.
You have the right to ask the veteran, who has often
watched the signs of coming conflict, "Do you think
there will be a battle?" though the answer will not
come from his lips but from the foemen who ever
beset the pathway of progress and threaten the temple
of liberty. Yesterday can never fight the battles of
to-day, nor even point out how its victories shall be
won. It can only train the soldiers who shall join
battle with unseen foes, and fight, and fall perhaps,
in the never-ending conflict for the right.
As a part of the past which lays at once its behest
and benison upon the present, and, relying upon its
courage, fortitude, and devotion, bids defiance to the
ills of the future, I can but repeat the injunction your
honored father laid upon his young brother amid the
roar of battle, " Be a man, John!"
You and all those who will come with you into
the birthright of American citizenship in this year
of Grace, have a rich inheritance of example to in-
spire to patriotic endeavor. You were born at the
climax of an heroic epoch. You were the first-fruits
of peace. The cannon's triumphant echoes rocked
the cradles of the rescued nation's new-born sons.
The songs of the camp were your lullaby, and the story
of a father's heroism the food on which your young
''BE A man:\ 23
imagination fed. In all the world's history there has
never been a generation so splendidly equipped, so
proudly sired, and of whom the world has a right to
demand so high an ideal of duty, such complete
devotion to the right, and so grand a tale of noble
achievements. If blood tells, surely men begotten by
heroes in the first moments of peace, after a quadren-
niate of the most glorious warfare, should be braver,
stronger, and truer than the children of care or the
petted offspring of prosperous ease.
There is scarcely one in all the thousands whom
this year will usher into American citizenship, and
who will for the first time exercise the powers of a
citizen, who is not able to point to some spot in our
national domain, sanctified by the very blood that
flows in his veins undiluted by intervening lives.
Whether shed under the "Stars" or beneath the ill-
fated shadow of the "Bars," the lesson of hero-blood
is still the same matchless truth sanctified by the lips
of the noblest spirit of even that climacteric epoch —
"Devotion to the right as God gives us to see the
right ! "
The heroic past looks to its first-born for the per-
formance, not of specific testamentary injunctions, but
for the fulfillment of the one all-comprehending behest
which the heat of battle distilled from your father's
Hps, itself the very essence of liis own heroic life:
II.
"LONG LIVE THE KING."
There is a story of the Tsar Nicholas, which
every American mother ought to tell to her children
when she would teach them " that country's a thing
men should die for at need," or, what is more diffi-
cult, live for, since
" Peace hath higher tests of manhood
Than battle ever knew,"
It is said that when the first section of rail-
way ever built in Russia was completed, the great
Tsar made a tour of inspection over it, attended by
a numerous and brilliant suite. The American en-
gineer, under whose direction it had been constructed,
accompanied the party, and, naturally enough, was
called on by the sovereign to point out the difficulties
which had been overcome, explain how the work had
been accomplished, and unfold the advantages to be
derived by the Muscovite empire from the system of
railways which he had devised, and of which the line
they were testing was only the beginning. It was an
opportunity he had long desired; for he thought, not
without reason, that if he could once get the ear of
24 .
''LONG LIVE THE KING:' 2$
the sagacious monarch he would be able to convince
him that the future strength and glory of the empire
depended on just such an adaptation of the great
force of modern civilization.
In anticipation of this occasion, therefore, the
engineer had prepared a map which showed how,
by lines which would require no protecting forces,
being beyond the reach of hostile attack, and ap-
proaching foreign borders only at what are strate-
gically termed "points of contact," every frontier
of the empire might be made more accessible from
within than by any hostile power from without.
By it he was able to demonstrate that England's
sovereignty of the seas might be set at naught; the
barricades of the Bosphorus be laughed at ; Persia
made a wall of defense rather than an obstacle to the
empire's enlargement; India threatened without ex-
posing Cronstadt ; the Turk's position attacked from
the rear, and Austria and Prussia left powerless to
intervene. The plan has since been carried out in
part, and the fact clearly established that the Amer-
ican engineer fully comprehended the military advan-
tages of the Muscovite empire, and fathomed the
necessity for constant aggression which underlies the
throne of the Tsar — a fate at once terrible and resist-
less, which impels the empire towards its destiny.
Even as these sheets are passing through the press,
the half-completed system he devised is one of the
most important elements of what is known as the
3
26 LETTERS TO A KING.
"European situation." When it is perfected, and
the whole strength of the great empire can be readily
concentrated at any point on its borders, no adjoin-
ing nationahty will be able to resist its power, and
no allied forces able to punish it for aggression,
"Russia has but to wait and watch," said the great
Peter. More truly might it now be said that she
has but to wait, and build railroads diverging from
her great, unassailable center.
So interested did the American become in his
great project that unconsciously he took a seat beside
the emperor, and unfolding the map upon his knee,
began to point out to the autocrat of all the Russias
the capabilities of his vast dominion. Mile after
mile the train sped on, and still the two continued
their conversation. Sometimes it was the engineer-
ing difficulties of the line over which they were pass-
mg, and sometimes the future of the empire that
occupied their attention. In the suite of the autocrat
were cabinet ministers, generals, officers of his body-
guard, and many of the most illustrious nobles of the
realm. All of them remained standing ; only the
Tsar and the American, in his plain frock-coat, were
seated. The engineer was unconscious of this breach
of royal etiquette, and the Tsar had either been too
deeply absorbed to notice, or had chosen to overlook
it. To the courtiers, however, it was a most heinous
offense. Their eyes flashed, the black Muscovite
brows contracted, and their swarthy cheeks burned
" LONG LIVE THE KING." 27
with rage, as they noted the unconscious impudence
of the American. At length their muttered indigna-
tion reached the ear of JSTicholas. He was not one
to allow inferiors to comment on wliat he chose to
permit. Turning towards them with that imperial
dignity which characterized him, he said:
" You are wrong, gentlemen. This man is a king!
You are only subjects. He may be the ruler of his
people to-morrow; you can never be more than the
servants of your sovereign !"
The Tsar was not only right, but in a sense which
he could hardly have understood, the man with whom
he conversed was not only a possible ruler, but an
actual sovereign, and, as such, entitled by royal eti-
quette to sit in the presence of kings.
You have no doubt come to accept the modern
notion which sneers at American political ideas as, in
the main, correct. You have, perhaps, been accus-
tomed to speak of our government as the "republican
experiment," and wagged your head in grave premo-
nition while discoursing of specific ills that seem to
impend. You may even have questioned whether citi-
zenship in the great Republic is a thing to be proud
of; though I trust you have not yet come to profess
yourself ashamed of the birthright hallowed by your
father's blood. Comparing our American life with spe-
cific phases of life in other lands, you may, however;
have become sufficiently " advanced " in your views to
coolly ask yourself whether there is any solid distinc-
28 LETTERS TO A KING.
tion between the terms "citizen" and "subject,"
and whether "republican institutions" really imply
an enlargement of human liberty and individual rights.
It is a curious fact, that among those claiming to rep-
resent the most highly cultivated and intelligent
classes, especially of the Eastern and Middle States,
the general trend of sentiment is in the direction of
admitting the failure of republican institutions, and the
acceptance of modifications and limitations thereof
which will restrict the privileges of the many and
enhance the power of the few. In other words, there
is to be found among those claiming to represent the
most advanced thought, the highest aspiration and
purest purpose, a distinct tendency to restrict the oper-
ation of the distinctive principle of American democ-
racy, — equality of right, privilege, and opportunity.
We are often told that the "experiment" of self-
government and unrestricted privilege has proved a
failure — as if it were a completed experiment, a system,
a form, and not 2l\\ evolution or condition of individual
and collective life.
The fact that kings have become tyrants, and
that misgovernment and revolution resulted, though
it has been repeated over and over again for centuries,
is not regarded as sufficient to establish the conclu-
sion that monarchy as a form of government is a
failure. Yet monarchy is an experiment which has
failed a hundred times for every instance in which
democracy has proved unsuccessful. In such cases,
^<LONG LIVE THE KING." 29
however, the world has very properly attributed the
failure, not so much to defects of the system, as to
the folly of the sovereign. It may be doubted if
there has thus far in the history of mankind been any
great popular movement which was at the outset
aimed specifically against \.\\q form of government, —
d^nanding the overthrow of monarchy and the estab-
Hshment of a republic as its prime object, — unless,
perhaps, it was the French Revolution of 1848. Even
then it was more the folly of the sovereign than the
form of government that provoked the uprising of
the people. Almost invariably the chief aiin of pop-
ular revolution has been the reform of abuses which
a sagacious ruler should have granted without com-
pulsion, and a really wise one would never have
permitted to exist. Good government rather than
selfgovernment has usually been the incentive to
revolution.
Even in the case of the American Colonies, it may
be questioned whether the rebellion was not against
specific acts of Parliament and the traditional policy
of Great Britain, rather than against monarchical
government; or, rather, I might say, it is almost
impossible to doubt that such was the real fact. To
this may be added, no doubt, the personal unpopu-
larity of George III and the non-English character
of the royal family. In Great Britain the choice lay
between the House of Hanover and the Stuarts ; in
the Colonies, antipathy to the representative of sov-
30 LETTERS TO A KING.
ereign authority intensified the feehng against a gov-
ernment which, despite all that may be said in
glorification of our fathers, had become irksome be-
cause of its character rather than its form. The
skill of Jefferson planted the seeds of democracy in
the Declaration of Independence, and made action
under it, of necessit}-, a movement in the direction of
popular government as an well as independent gov-
ernment. Even in this instance, therefore, it can not
be properly predicated of the monarchical form of
government, that it proved itself a failure ; but only
that the Parliamentary and ministerial policy of Great
Britain and the personal unpopularity of a foreign
dynasty drove the colonists to elect between their
hereditary sovereign and the only possible alterna-
tive, — the experiment of popular government.
But if repeated instances of failure and unnum-
bered revolutions are not enough logically to estab-
hsh the insufficiency of the monarchical form of
government, as such, what shall be said of the pes-
simistic inconsistency which, after less than a hundred
years of trial, begins anxiously to inquire whether
"the experiment" of republican government has not
proved a failure? Why in the case of a republic are
we inclined to leap at once to the conclusion that
the "form of government " is at fault, and in the
case of a monarchy attribute the "failure" to the
folly or incapacity of the particular sovereign who at
the time bears sway? If we admit that it was
''LONG LIVE THE KING:' 3 1
the policy of Great Britain and the character of the
Hanoverian dynasty that produced the evils which
resulted in our War of Revolution, why should we
not attribute our present ills and those prospective
ones to which we look forward with such universal
dread, not to the system of government, but to the
character of the sovereign and the policy of the
nation, which has become as fixed as the colonial
theory of England was when we revolted against her
dominion ? It is not alone the republican theory
of government that is on trial in our country, but
the American people — the sovereign power of the
land — as well. Indeed, the most important inquiry
presented for our consideration to-day, is not whether
a republican government is susceptible of success-
ful and permanent application to the affairs of a
great nation, nor even whether the American sys-
tem contains the proper checks and balances, but
whether the American people are fitted for the
successful administration of a democratic form of
government, and if not, why not.
In every experiment two things are tested — the
process and the material. A defect of either may
produce failure, and only a fool' will condemn the
process for lack of strength, purity, or fitness in the
material. The history of every nation is but the
record of an experiment, in which the wisdom and
capacity of the sovereign is the material, and the form
of government the process. As for the governed,
32 LETTERS TO A KING.
they are a constant factor. They may be separated
by the whole distance between the lowest barbarism
and the highest civilization, but their relation to the
governing power remains always the same. That
government is the best for any people which produces
the highest average of happiness — "the greatest good
of the greatest number," as we are accustomed to
phrase it. This it is the function of the sovereign —
the government — to secure, and a failure to effect
this result demonstrates either that the form of gov-
ernment is unsuited to the needs of the people, or
that the sovereign is unfitted to administer it so as to
produce the best results The republican theory is,
that monarchy can never be conducive of "the
greatest good of the greatest number;" and the
American idea is, that a government ' ' by the people "
will always be productive of this result.
Both these statements are fallacies, because both
ignore the most important element of the mighty
problem — the capacity and fitness of the sovereign.
Undoubtedly an absolute monarch, possessing all the
qualities of an ideal sovereign, might advance the
welfare, secure the peace, promote .the prosperity,
and, generally, subserve the highest interests of the
greatest number of his subjects more effectually than
is possible by any other form of government; for
absolute power is able to cut many a Gordian knot
which a sovereignty hampered by conditions must
laboriously untie. In like manner, a people possess-
''LONG LIVE THE KING." 33
ing neither aptitude nor inclination for government
may very easily make a democracy the most corrupt
and debasing political organization the world has ever
known. The trouble in both cases is not so much in
the "form of government " as in the character of the
sovereign power. As tyranny hides forever in the
shadow of the throne, so anarchy lurks always within
the verge of popular government. "A wise ruler
maketh a glad people," is equally true whether the
scepter is wielded by one hand or many, and the
character of the sovereign is always the most impor-
tant element in every governmental experiment,
whether the sovereign be a unit or a multitude.
History gibbets the incapable or unjust king,
holding him up to future ages as an object of ever-
lasting infamy. Responsibility is not lessened by
partition. Even infinite subdivision can not relieve
or excuse the very least of the component factors.
Wisdom, courage, honest)^ and zeal are demanded
of every one on whom the burden of government
rests, whether separately or in conjunction with others.
To fail in either of these requirements is to fail in all.
Wisdom without courage makes the ruler the tool
of the ambitious ; without honesty he becomes an
oppressor ; without zeal, the victim of the unscru-
pulous. Courage without honesty is a consuming
flame; and zeal without wisdom the sure precursor
of destruction
Are YOU fitted to be a king ?
34 LETTERS TO A KING.
This is the question which the country anxiously
propounds to those upon whose brows is placed
the crown of citizenship. Do you know the needs
of your fellows — how the happiness of the great-
est number may be best subserved? Are you brave
enough to stand by your convictions, and main-
tain the right as God gives you to see it, with brain
and with brawn, too, if need be? Can you. face
ridicule as well as power ; resist craft as well as
force ; and submit graciously to the popular will
when fairly outnumbered? Are you honest enough
to prefer the right and frugality, to the wrong and
profusion ; the comfort of the many to the luxury of
the few ; the right of your fellows to your own oppor-
tunity? Have you zeal to undertake whatever task
wisdom may prescribe, courage may demand, or
honesty impose?
This, and more than this, it is to be an American
citizen worthy of the name and of the sovereignty
it confers. The world, as it welcomes you to the
estate of manhood, calls upon you to " be a man!"
Tlie nation, as it places upon your brow the crown
of sovereignty and admits you to the plane of citizen-
ship, solemnly enjoins you to be a king! Religion
sanctions and confirms these behests as fundamental,
both to "the life that now is, and that which is to
come!"
III.
THE ANTECHAMBER TO THE THRONE.
No DOUBT you think, my young friend, that I
am 'inclined to magnify the importance of the legal
transition from youth to manhood which marks the
opening of your twenty-first year. You are }'ourself
unconscious of any change. No fitting ceremonial
marks the momentous event. No toga viiilis en-
cumbers the hitherto untrammeled limbs, and attests
the transformation from infancy to adultness. One
more birthday — that is all! You think you have
passed a mile-post on the path of life, not that you
have entered a new way or become a new creature.
In a sense this is true. Regarding yourself intro-
spectively, it is no wonder that you observe no trans-
formation. In your nature none has taken place, nor
even in your surroundings. The same faces meet
you on the streets ; the same friends greet you in the
same careless tones. John, the man, is nothing more
to them than John, the boy. If you are a king, they
do not see the m}'stic circlet on your brow. To them,
as well as to yourself, the change is imperceptible,
though to both it is of vital importance.
35
36 LETTERS TO A KING.
This will seem less remarkable if we keep in mind
the fact that the change is one of relation purely, and
not of character or condition. What you were yester-
day morally and intellectually, that you are to-day to
yourself and to all the world. Potentially, however,
you are altogether transformed. Yesterday you were
a cipher; to-day you are a significant figure in the
world's notation. Yesterday you were a subject ;
to-day you are a sovereign.
From the window where I sit at my work I some-
times see a pile driver, sending home with mighty
strokes great quivering masts, on which some weighty
structure is to rest. 1 love to watch it and to think
of its similitude to life. The engine groans and puffs;
the great wheels creak as the strained cable is wound
about the drum ; the ponderous weight is slowly
raised to the very top of the supporting stanchions.
Thus labors the past, from whose life to-day is born.
Untold generations travail "and bite back the cry of
their pain in self scorn," to start a new soul in the
journey of life from the height they have slowly and
painfully attained.
One instant's pause ! A ratchet is loosed I A force
is generated ! Then there is silence ! Down the guid-
ing ways slides a dull, inert mass — doing nothing —
only falling without check ! The wind whistles past
it! The by-standers watch it carelessly. If it holds
its course, it will strike the mast beneath. If it es-
cape from the guiding grooves, it will fall useless to
THE ANTECHAMBER TO THE THRONE. 37
the earth, a wasted force ! Nay, it may even so strain
and rend the mechanism by which it was raised, that
it shall be unable to perform its work until repaired.
It falls swiftly, surely, with what accumulation of
power your studies have taught you to estimate. It
strikes ! The dust rises ! The earth shakes ! The
mast quivers and groans and shrinks ! The weight
lies dull and dead! Its force is spent. But it has
done its work !
Such is life. A child is born, and grows to youth
an aimless force — a silent potentiality. It reaches
the verge of manhood, and suddenly it is transformed
into an effective agency, giving out its stored energy,
doing its work, and leaving the mechanism of society
undisturbed — ready to repeat the blow ! The trans-
mutation from latent to effective force is a perfect
type of the change by which the infant becomes an
adult.
I am sorry to be compelled to use these terms,
"infant" and "adult." To you they may be almost
meaningless. You have perhaps at best but a dim
idea of their significance. Your notions of infancy
are probably associated with the cradle, and your idea
of adultness with mustachios. I do not mean by this
to reflect on your intelligence. I am aware that you
have received that approved equipment for life's duties
which the public school gives to every young Ameri-
can, and have besides pursued with creditable success
the ordinary college curriculum. I do not mean to
4G2391
38 LETTERS TO A KING.
imply that you have been unmindful of your oppor-
tunities or neglectful of your privileges, but simply
to call attention to the fact that our American system
of education permits the boy to grow to manhood
without any clear conception of the rights, privileges
and responsibilities of either station. I doubt if one
of a hundred of your fellow-graduates of this year of
grace could give an intelligible statement of the dif-
ference between the legal estate of the " infant" and
of the "adult." In nine cases out often, if required
to do so, they would probably aver that the distinc-
tion lay in the fact that an "adult" can vote and
hold office, while an "infant" can not. This, like
most definitions by negation, is hardly half true, since
these facts are merely results of the distinction, and
not the distinction itself A man must be an "adult"
to become a voter, but does not become a voter
simply because he is an "adult."
You would probably excuse j'ourself and your
fellows for such inaccuracy of definition on the ground
that "infant" and "adult" in the sense I seek to use
them are technical terms, which a general education,
however complete, is not expected to prepare one to
define with the nicety required by the professional
mind. If you had been asked to state the difference
between a "solid" and a "fluid," you would not
have thought of making any such excuse for failure.
Yet the terms "solid" and "fluid" are just as much
technical in character as "infant" and "adult." It
THE ANTECHAMBER TO THE THRONE. 39
is true that "solid" and "fluid" concern the funda-
mentals of physical science; but "infant" and "adult"
sustain a similar relation to the far more important
science of human rights. The only difference is, that
the study of physical science has come to be regarded
as an essential of liberal culture, along with many
other things of doubtful use or unquestionable use-
lessness, while the most important branch of human
knowledge, the relations of humanity as affected by
political convention, finds no place in our educational
system.
In your whole course of study you have only
lightly touched upon two branches of law, which is the
greatest of all sciences — the science of human right
and privilege, the principles of which condition every
man's existence from its inception until the last will
and testament is made and published. These two
branches, which you have cursorily glanced at, are the
most uncertain in their terms and most infrequent and
unsatisfactory in their application ; to wit, interna-
tional and constitutional law. As to all the rest of
the domain of legal right and privilege, wrong and
remedy, the well-educated American is sadly and
profoundly ignorant; and, as a rule, the better his
education the more dense will be found to be his
ignorance of the relations he sustains to his fellows,
collectively if not individually.
This is the more remarkable because our English
law — and by that term is meant the whole body of
40 LETTERS TO A KING. .
Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence — rests, both in civil and
criminal matters, on the irrebuttable presumption
that every inhabitant of an English-speaking country
knows, not only the general principles of the law, but
even its utmost niceties. Yet the English-speaking
peoples are almost the only ones that take no pains
to teach their youth either what the law is or what
it ought to be.
The Jewish law was taught in the synagogue
and in the marketplace. We think of it as moral
philosophy, but it concerned itself far more with
individual relations than with the abstractions which
now constitute the domain of philosophy. The
Romans posted their laws at the cross-roads, and the
schoolmaster was required once a month to take his
pupils for a day to witness the proceedings of the
judicial tribunals. In the Continental countries of
Europe the code is read in every public school once each
year. In France special text-books have been pre-
pared and adopted in the schools, illustrating the
provisions of the law, so as not only to bring them to
the attention, but also to impress them upon the
memory of every learner. Knowledge of the con-
ditions which affect the estate of "infancy" is there
all but universal.
With us the reverse is true, and not a few of the
evils that afflict our political and economic life are
the result of a s}'stem of education which carefully
abstains from teaching what the whole body of our
THE ANTECHAMBER TO THE THRONE. 4 1
people most require to know. So that even you
who have been an "infant" ahnost all your life,
hardly know Avhen that relation ended, whether it
was seriously modified in character during its contin-
uance, what were the limitations it imposed, the
privileges it gave, the responsibilities it implied, or
the magnitude of the change attendant upon your ac-
cession to the estate of manhood.
Yet with all this lack of knowledge of its real
character, you have no doubt, in common with your
fellows, been inclined to consider the fact of legal
"infancy" a hardship. Now and then, it may be,
you have looked upon yourself as something of a
martyr to an effete and worthless system, which holds
its place only in the brains of narrow-minded sticklers
for legal form and antiquated custom. I am not sur-
prised that such should be the general feeling of your
associates. Representing, as it does to their minds,
only the deprivation of political privilege, and a
purely nominal subjection to parental authority, it is
hardly strange that you should conclude that the dis-
tinction might well be greatly restricted, and legal man-
hood be made to begin several years earlier or per-
haps be made dependent, as some have proposed,
upon intelligence and capacity to be ascertained by
specific tests.
Practically, you have no doubt been lord of your-
self for several years at least. You have deferred to
your parents' wishes in most things, probably, simply
4
42 LETTERS TO A KING.
from a proper sense of duty, and not at all from a
feeling of legal obligation. At all times you have
been at liberty to leave the parental roof, go whither-
soever you might choose, and engage in any busi-
ness or calling you might elect, without apprehension
of any interference with your freedom of action or
the proceeds of your labor. Enjoying such privileges,
you have, perhaps, thought that no serious harm
would have been likely to ensue to the body politic,
if you had also been endowed with the rights usually
attending their exercise. You are accustomed to
think of parental control as a thing of the past. The
reins by which you have been guided have been of
such silken texture that you have hardly noted their
restraining influence. Subjection to parental author-
ity, as it was understood even a generation ago, is
now almost unknown. Obedience is no longer a
matter of compulsion. The child is treated as quite
the equal of his elders long before the estate of legal
subordination is ended.
All things considered, it is perhaps well that it is
so. The relation between parent and child has grown
more intunate and familiar as a consequence, and
reason has very largely usurped the functions of the
rod. Perhaps there is not so much readiness and
literalness of obedience. If Casabianca had been an
American lad of the present day, our language would
probably have lacked one poetic gem.
It is customary to bewail the laxity of parental
THE ANTECHAMBER TO THE THRONE. 43
discipline manifested by the rising generation. For
one, I am inclined to think the apparent lack of obe-
dience quite compensated by the elimination of need-
less brutality from our domestic life, even if it were
not — as I believe it is — attended with a more general
observance of the parent's wishes than was attainable
under the old system. This feature of the legal es-
tate of "infancy" does not depend on force. Sub-
jection to the parent's will was never the object
sought by the law, but the continuance of parental
guidance — not for the parent's sake, but for the in-
fant's advantage. In a certain sense, the young man
of to-day is almost sure to be wiser than his father ;
but there is another sense in which the father's wis-
dom is not likely to be superseded by the acquire-
ments of the son.
You have no doubt compared yourself, also, with
many of those who exercise the elective franchise, per-
haps even with those who are the visible instruments
of collective power, and have sneered at the law which
barred you from the ballot-box, with your quick in-
telligence, your cultured judgment, and your pure
purpose, and admitted to that sanctuary of a people's
sovereignty the ignorant, the debased, and the corrupt.
It seemed to you a farce, and, in one sense, it is.
There can be no doubt that so far as the training
which the schools give is concerned, the great major-
ity of those who will cross the threshold of manhood
this year are much better prepared to perform the
44 LETTERS TO A KING.
functions of citizenship than the majority of those
who have long exercised this crowning civic privilege.
There is one thing, however, which they presumably
and all but universally lack — one form of knowledge
that the law, which, despite all our cavilings, is "the
treasured wisdom of the ages," declares to be of more
importance to the ruler than all other wisdom, to wit:
A PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE OF LIFE.
This is a knowledge akin to the wisdom of God,
since it is dependent upon the study of his noblest
work in its most difificult and abstruse relations, and
is to be learned only in that school over which He
presides, where it is taught always according to Di-
vine method — the school of experience. It is in
order that the child may learn something in this
school that the law has created and defined the estate
and condition of "infancy."
It is a pretty conceit which finds expression in
the ritual of the most numerous and important of
modern secret benevolent organizations, that the
antechamber is the place of preparation for the
right-minded seeker after knowledge. The legal
estate of infancy is the antechamber in which the
citizen is, or ought to be, "duly and truly prepared"
for the duties of life, where the squire waits for the
accolade which is to make him a knight, the prince
for the crown and consecrating oil which is to mark
his accession to kingly privilege and kingly duty.
IV.
SHYING AT A SHADOW.
The sense of humor which is all but universal in
mankind has transferred, with the entire approval of
every one who reads the story of his woes, the title
assumed by Job's fault-finding friends to the physical
ailment with which he was afflicted, as being by all
odds the more comforting of the twain. Such a con-
soler is that "Amicus," who has written to protest
against the course that has been adopted in these
letters, as likely to give the young American too ex-
alted an idea of the dignity, excellence, and power
of the position of the citizen. This protest might very
well be dismissed with the simple statement that no
man was ever yet injured by magnifying the dignity
of any position he might be called to occupy, if a
proper sense of his own responsibility attended such
exalted estimate of its importance. As a rule, it may
be said that the man who most fully appreciates the
dignity of any position is the one most likely to per-
form its duties with exactitude and faithfulness. But
"Amicus" is such a perfect example of that pessi-
mistic piety which esteems fault-finding an unfailing
45
46 LETTERS TO A KING.
evidence of purity, which we shall have occasion to
consider more at length hereafter, that I am glad
indeed, my young friend, to call your attention to his
views, by laying his letter before you in ipsissimis
verbis :
THE WORDS OF A FRIEND.
"I suppose I am one of those for whom your 'Let-
ters to a King' are indited. At least I have 'come of
age,' to use the vernacular, and I suppose I am a 'citizen,'
though it is long since I have exercised any civic privi-
leges. It is true, this momentous event did not occur
yesterday, nor even this year. I presume, however, that
I have none tlie less right to count myself 'a man,' ac-
cording to the flattering injunction of your exordial epistle;
to feel myself 'a king,' according to the plain inference
of your second number; or regard myself as no longer an
'infiint, ' as defined by your third, because I passed the
boundary-line of minority some twenty years ago, have a
business and a home of my own, and some of my own 'in-
fants ' are approaching the age of 'adultness' as you
choose to term it (though why you sliould not use 'ma-
jority,' or 'manhood,' instead, I can not see).
" I do feel myself a man — what is termed a practical
man, too — one who has achieved some measure of suc-
cess in his undertakings, and has consequently very little
regard for what may be termed mere theorizing. I think
I have a right to speak for a section of our life which at
least has done no discredit to the name American, and I
wish to say plainly at the outset, that I believe I express
the real sentiments of a great majority of this class wlien
I declare that after twenty years of experience I do not
SHYING AT A SHADOW. 47
feel myself a king, nor any thing like a king, but rather
a slave, fettered, helpless, hopeless, save for my faith in
God. To my mind American citizenship is a sham.
Our politics have become so corrupt that no decent, self-
respecting man can take any part in public affairs. We
are governed by bribe-takers and bribe-givers, by igno-
rance in unholy alliance with vice.
" I do not believe that any man holds a position of
honor or trust at the hands of the people, from the high-
est to the lowest, who is not the beneficiary, directly or
indirectly, of fraud or violence or some sort of crime
against another's civic rights. If he has not bought votes
himself, others have done it for him; if he has not clieated
the ignorant or deterred the weak, others have done it for
him. These things have been done, too, with his knowl-
edge and consent, for they are a part and parcel of the
common belief. A man may turn his back and shut his
eyes, and so avoid express knowledge of specific acts.
All the same he knows such acts were perpetrated to se-
cure his elevation, and both his lionor and his official
purity are stained thereby. As a consequence, not one in
a hundred, perhaps hardly one in a thousand, of those
holding official st-ations among us, fail to use their power
corruptly and basely to promote their own self-advantage
or the prospects of their party. This may seem a ' hard
saying,' but I sincerely believe it to be the truth, and that
the majority of your readers will avouch its verity.
"It is useless to argue with good men — Christian men,
who esteem the common good above their own gratifica-
tion, I mean — upon -this subject. When we see merit ig-
nored and fraud exalted; when monopoly grinds and
anarchy threatens; when poverty increases and fraud
triumphs; when law is grown too weak to protect the
48 LETTERS TO A KING.
citizen or deter the criminal — at such a time it is folly
to talk about the citizen-king!
"Do you realize, sir, what tribute we pay to the rum
power? Do you know what a tax the Standard Oil
monopoly levies upon poverty? Have you noted how
the poor are multiplying, and how the wealth of the
rich increases while their numbers proportionately de-
crease? Have you noted the 'prisoners of poverty,'
herding and swarming in the great cities where one-
fifth of our population is found ? Have you observed
that even in the very journals where your articles are
published there is a standing advertisement calling upon
Christian men and women to contribute a fund to se-
cure the conviction of the murderer of a Christian
minister wlio dared oppose the rule of rum ?
"In the face of these results of self-government, I
submit that it is time to stop boasting of American citi-
zenship, or magnifying old-fogy notions of government
and life. For my part — and I believe I represent nine-
tenths of the honest, Godfearing men and women in the
land, the fathers and mothers who are really the ones
who will read your letters and feel something of the
vague old aspiration for the common welfare and trust
in the common honesty which so long delayed our pres-
ent sad condition — I say for my part, in view of all
these things, I would be quite willing to surrender my
'kingship' — the glory and dignity of self-government, as
you term it — to any form of government that would cure
these evils or even restrain their growth. The safety of the
future is worth more than the glorification of the past or
the gratification of the present. I would rather think that
my children will be saved from the anarchy and de-
moralization that impends than have my self-pride
SHYING AT A SHADOW. 49
inflated by contemplation of my individual beatitude as
a citizen-king! I know this may seem like political
heresy; but I think that so far as justice, right, public
honor, and private morals are concerned, self-government
has proved a faikire.
"For myself, I have so long lost hope that I have not
even exercised the right of suffrage for many years; and
fur years before that time did not do so without feeling
myself a slave, chained to the chariot of an infamously
corrupt and debauched party system. I felt that though
I might be personally incorrupt, my vote was bought and
sold for another's benefit, and that I was powerless to
prevent such a result.
" Feeling as I do, I do not want to hear any thing more
about politics, political duty, or political privilege. The
Church still remains. God alone is the refuge of those who
have lost faith in human virtue and human devices. I
am willing to give up the task of government into His
hands, satisfied that only by divine direction and control
can it be well performed. I do not know how it will be
effected, but I look for some power to arise that shall do
the will of God — some form of government which shall do
away with the shams and falsehoods of our present polit-
ical system, and put power in the hands of good men and
wise men only, who will use it for the common benefit,
and leave the pure currents of our common life uncor-
rupted and undefiled by the contaminating and degrading
influences and unwholesome fevers of politics.
"The young men of today — ' the uncrowned kings of
to-morrow,' whom you address — understand these things
just as well as you and I. They know that there are but
three courses open before them. They must either be
slaves or dealers in slaves, or neuters who eschew politics.
5
50 LETTERS TO A KING.
Party 'bosses' great and small, and party slaves more or
less abject — these are our political forces. Outside of
these classes are a few men, brave enough and strong
enough to stand alone. Some of them protest against
the shame and infamy of the situation, and some are
too proud or too weak, or perhaps too sorrowful, even
to protest. They only stand and wait — wait for nothing
it may be ; but they at least avoid, by so doing, personal
responsibility for the crime and dishonor that is destroy-
ing our life.
** What is the sense in requiring an educated American
to wait twenty-one years before allowing him to vote,
while a foreigner who can not read or write, secures the
same privileges in five years, even if he is so unfortunate
as not to find his naturalization papers, and the pay for
his first vote, waiting for him when he lands at Castle
Garden ?
"Wherein lies the great advantage in being a citizen
without power rather than an infant without rights ? I con-
fess I can not see that the change from one condition to
the other is so very great. In the one case you are
without rights, and in the other without responsibility.
An infant is legally a slave by virtue of the lawj a citizen
is simply one enslaved without law. That is all the
difference. One is a child to whose crying nobody pays
attention; the other, one that is given a rattle to keep it
still. What is the use of gilding this bauble — theorizing
about this toy?"
So says " Amicus. *' He is very much in earnest.
He esteems himself a good man, and desires every
one to be informed of that fact. He believes that
all who do not agree with him in doctrine are " mere
SHYING AT A SHADOW. 5 I
theorizers," and that all who do not concur with him
in practice are corrupt. The good people are with
him ; the bad people are on the other side. These
good people, he would have us understand, have
already determined that the only thing to be done to
cure the ills he delineates, is to do nothing — just leave
it to the Lord, and let him do as he sees fit. No
doubt the Lord will take his own course, whether
such as ^^ Amicus'' give him leave or not; but most
unfortunately for the consolation which he administers
to himself with such solemn unction, God works His
will in human affairs by human instrumentalities, and
the man who sitnply sits still and cries, " Hands ofif!
leave this matter to the Lord !" is merely the devil's
chosen instrument of evil.
The future " Amicjis" draws is a very dark one.
That it is altogether incorrect, few will care to aver.
If but half of what he implies be true, it establishes
beyond question a very bad state of affairs. Has he
ever paused in his denunciation of others to consider
who is responsible for this condition of affairs and this
state of public sentiment?
He says he is a "practical" man. He has been
successful. He has accumulated tangible assets. He
has little patience with "mere theorizing." He
would have us understand that he is a model, after
whom it would be well if others were patterned. He
is afraid. young men will be injured by being taught
that they are kings. Has he ever thought what must
52 LETTERS TO A KING.
be the natural result of teaching them that they are
"hopeless and irresponsible slaves?"
He wishes to hear nothing more of "politics " and
political duty. Political affairs are so bad that nobody
but God can improve them, and he is almost angry that
any one should be willing to be God's instrument in
a task he apparently thinks almost beyond divine
power. He evidently deems himself a valiant Christian
soldier; and so he may be — on parade. He is a fierce
Ezekiel in his denunciation of political wrongs, and
no doubt thinks himself a faultless citizen. He neither
robs nor murders ; he neither bribes nor accepts a
bribe ; he is responsible neither for monopolj'' nor
anarchy, nor the resulting ills of either. Happy
" Amicus f He and such as he are the only pure
and brave men in the land !
Let me be his Nathan and say to him:
" Thou art the man!"
Because such men as he have lived to scold, and
fume, and failed to do, proclaiming themselves all the
time the best and purest in the land — because such
as he have not earnestly and valoiously contended
for the right — all these evils he has depicted have
come to us. What he so bitterly denounces to day,
he and such as he might have prevented yesterday.
They had the power; the scepter was in their hands;
and the evil of to-day is but the natural fruit of their
negligence and apathy. The king who fails to govern
righteously leaves always an inheritance of woe to
SHYING AT A SHADO W. 53
his successor. It is because such as he Hve and boast
and denounce the evils they will not help to cure,
but declare to be hopeless — it is because these are
so many, that I must strive to awaken and inspire
the rising generation to do rather than scold, to
fight rather than despair. If he had been a king in-
stead of a coward, a doer instead of a shirk, there
would have been no need to urge the young man of
today to devote himself to the cause of good
government, to become an active force in Christian
civilization.
There has never been a day nor an hour in the
history of any State or city of the land when those
claiming to be the especial representatives of its best
forces — its Christian citizens — might not have con-
trolled its politics. Instead of performing their plain
duty, such men as '^Amicus'' stood quietly by and let
evil intrench itself, not only in " high places," but even
in the hearts of the people. Nay, they are not con-
tent to see our social and political life imperiled by
their selfish apathy, but they even desire to destroy
all hope of its amendment. They would kill "not
only the life that now is, but that which is to come!"
Knowing the right, they prefer to see evil abound
rather than labor for its overthrow. Such men are
infinitely the worst of all the dangerous classes of 02ir
population, and shoidd be so held by all zvho believe
the will of God to mean the good of men. They are
cowards who seek to hide their cowardice by boasting
54 LETTERS TO A KING.
of their purity ; the stragglers and shirks, who de-
nounce the battle others are fighting for their ad-
vantage. They constitute the greatest peril of repub-
lican government to-day!
This is how a "mere theorizer" esteems a
"practical" Pharisee like ''Amicus.''
We are indebted to ''Amiens'' for one thing, how-
ever. He shows how well it is to be careful of the
foundations on which we build. He wonders why we
dwell on the transformation from "infant" to "adult,"
and then defines the infant to be a person "without
any rights," and the citizen a being "without power
or responsibility." It is precisely because this view
is a common one that we have taken some pains to
elucidate the truth that the " infant" is 7ioi "without
rights," as we expect to show that the citizen is 7iever
"without responsibility." He wonders why we use
the terms "infant" and "adult," and "infancy"
and "adultness," instead of "minority" and "ma-
jority." Simply because they import the whole,
while those which he prefers define onl}' a part of the
contrasted relations.
If you have noted their Latin roots, my young
friend, you will see how perfectly these terms are
suited to the conditions they are used to describe.
"Infant" (from infari) implies an inability to make
known one's wants by speech, while "adult" (from
adolescere) signifies growth, maturity — the product of
SHYING AT A SHADO W. 55
the state of adolescence. Neither is concerned with
the question of power, but merely describes the con-
ditions of a particular phase of existence. " Citizen-
ship" is but a part of "adultness;" "minority" is
only one of the disabilities of " infancy."
Instead of depriving the "infant" of his rights,
the law is especially careful of them. It is for this
reason that it counts him an infant, and refuses to
hear him speak. Only by the mouth of a "next
friend," one presumably older and wiser, will it listen
to his plea, except when charged with crime. Up
to a certain limit it will not even allow him to be
so charged ; then there follows an interval during
which the evil intent must be affirmatively shown;
after which he finally arrives at full responsibility,
with the law's presumption of malice lying always
against his wrongful acts. So, too, his business
development is gradual. He may be a witness
when he can not be an actor; an agent when he
can not be a principal. He can bind another in
whose employ he is, by his declarations, but the law
will not hear his words intended to bind himself.
The law makes him subordinate to the parent and
the teacher, but allows the parent to release him
from subjection by formal act or reasonable implica-
tion. The law permits him to contract marriage
under certain restrictions, but will only hear his plea
for dissolution of that bond by the mouth of another.
The absurdity which impresses ''Amicus'' as
56 LETTERS TO A KING.
existing between the twenty-one years of infancy and
a lesser period for naturalization, disappears when we
thus see that " infancy " is not a mere condition pre-
cedent of citizenship, but a period of growth, develop-
ment, and preparation for manhood. You may think
such growth unnecessary, and say that "knowledge is
power." So it is, but science is not all of knowl-
edge; and fact is not power. There is a knowledge
which is hard to define. We term it sometimes
knowledge of life, sometimes knowledge of men. It
distinguishes between youth and manhood, between
immaturity and ripeness. It marks even more cer-
tainly than any physical condition the fact of incom-
pleteness. Thus far no method for acquiring this
has been found but by the lapse of time. It is
taught only in the school of experience. And it is
in order that you might not be tempted to forego
this education ; that you might easily and surely
acquire this knowledge ; that you might not be
inclined to undertake life's weightier matters until
the thews of mind and soul are toughened for the
strain ; that you might have full opportunity to learn
your privilege's, comprehend your duties, and under-
stand your powers, — because of these things, the law
mercifully regarded you as one mute to its demands,
irresponsible to your fellows, and powerless to shape
the course of public events.
It was deaf alike to your ambition and your greed.
It demanded of you only growth and preparation.
SHYING AT A SHADOW. 57
When this was ended, or was presumed to have ended,
the door of opportunity swung wide before you.
You became a man. Was the probation any too
long? Curiously enough, you will find upon investi-
gation that almost all of those who have left great
names in history, who have colored the world's
life or flexed the world's thought, are those whose
period of probation, of silent, unnoted preparation,
have extended far beyond this limit. Especially in
this age, when the tendency to overaction and swift
decay is so great, let no young man bemoan the
delay of life's responsibilities.
But if this transition from infant to adult is of
vast importance in the ordinary relations of life, what
shall be said of it in that most responsible and most
comprehensive of all, your relations to the whole
body of your fellow-citizens — that relation on which
all other relations depend ? Yesterday you were
a subject ; to-day you are a king. Can you measure
the distance between?
V.
A JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABIIvlTY.
I SHALL not be surprised to learn that you, in
common with almost the whole body of your well-
educated compeers, are inclined to take issue with
me upon the concluding sentiment of my last letter.
It is a curious fact that of the little we are taught
about our civic relations, the greater portion is false
and misleading. It will be nothing strange, there-
fore, if the views which I shall formulate should be
somewhat at variance with those you have come to
entertain. Prosperity and opportunity are certain to
wean men from the consideration of public duty, and
the past twenty years have been more notable for
the invention of devices to avoid the responsibility
of self-government than the manifestation of a general
willingness to meet it. What the American people
seem now most anxious to discover is not how the
duty of the citizen may be best performed, but how
it may be safely neglected.
Though we have had more than a hundred years
of experience of republican institutions, so far as the
relations, duties, and responsibilities of the citizen
58
A JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY. 59
are concerned, we are still, as Madison phrased it,
"in the twihght of constitutional government." Our
government, in spirit even more than in form, was
just as much a discovery as that which Columbus
made when he first sighted the shores of the new
world. Nations had been called republics before ;
but in the sense which we have impressed upon the
word there had never been a republic of any con-
siderable extent. Indeed, it is clearly apparent to
one who will study with a discriminating mind the
history of the first quarter of a century of our na-
tional life, that our forefathers themselves had no
very clear perceptions of a republic in the modern
sense of the term. In what Randolph so aptly
aptly termed " the infancy of the science of constitu-
tions," it was yet believed that the ancient lines
might be followed in the creation of the new republic.
It was supposed that the column of American liberty'
would be a mere composite. The English plinth
was to be surmounted by a Graeco Roman shaft,
having a capital embracing something of the elements
of all ancient democracies, intermingled with a i^w
indigenous notions which were expected always to
remain subordinate to the imported ideas.
In pursuance of this principle we have, in theory
*at least, and so far as mere sciolists could determine
our tendencies, ever since been trying to import im-
provements of our original plan, instead of encourag-
ing its healthful growth and natural development.
6o LETTERS TO A KING.
We have studiously imparted to each new generation
the notion that all that is of value in our American
system of government is borrowed from some foreign
source. The Anglomaniac in politics has been as
disgusting in his slavish subjection to an imported
ideal as the "dude" in fashion, and infinitely more
harmful than the counterfeit cockney could possibly
be. In truth, we borrowed from our English history
only a few names and forms. Even these we en-
dowed with new significance, just as we established
our government on an absolutely new basis wliile
classing it under the ancient name of a republic.
The fundamental idea of British government is a
careful avoidance of the principle of equal civic
right. It is true there has been a constant progres-
sion toward it, as there must be with all enlightened
peoples; but all the mechanism of the English
government, under every change of policy, has been
designed to hinder rather than to promote this tend-
ency. This very idea which has been the bete noire
of Whig and Tory alike, and is now the "unclean
beast" which even the Liberals are afraid to mount,
is the basis principle of our government. We
builded upon the rights of men rather than the rights
of things — not private rights, but public privileges.
Instead of seeking to avoid the popular will, we
sought to devise machinery for its clear and unmis-
takable expression. The English principle of j^ov-
ernment is based upon a careful adjustment of class
A JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY. 6 1
interests; ours upon the joint and several re-
sponsibility and equal power and privilege of indi-
viduals. The two ideas are utterly inharmonious,
and the nearer we approach the model our mod-
ern political abstractionists have attempted to set
up for us, the farther we are going away from the
true principles which have underlain our century of
progress. The safety of the future does not depend
upon the approximation of our government to foreign
ideals, but in effectual appeal to its fundamental
principles, and in faithful and logical expansion of
its distinctive ideas.
Of this fact those who claim to rank as authorita-
tive expounders of our political philosophy have been
curiously unconscious. It is notable that nearly all
of them have been mere theorists — men who have
looked at our political life from the outside, and
have sought to devise remedies for ills they but
half understood, or to adjust mechanism, the motive
power of which they seem unable to apprehend.
When we fully realize this fact we shall not be sur-
prised to learn that almost every grave political evil
which has confronted us in the past has arisen, not
from the natural and unobstructed working of the
American system, but from foolish attempts to graft
upon it alien ideas. The truth is, that in our polit-
ical history new principles have so completely
dwarfed and overshadowed old theories and borrowed
forms, and so clothed old terms with new signifi-
62 LETTERS TO A KING.
cance, that the whole fabric has become unique ; so
that analogies drawn from the experience of other
countries become for us the most dangerous of all
political speculations.
The first duty of one who would truly compre-
hend our national life, therefore, is to clear away
this mass of false speculation and foolish theory.
Instead of trying to fit our new-world life with the
cast-off clothing of old-world relations, we must begin
to realize the fact that we are teachers, and not
learners, in the science of self-government; that we
are the torch-bearers, and not groping followers along
the path of political progress. It becomes us to de-
velop theories and demonstrate truths, and not to
borrow half developed notions and try to fetter our
new life with their limitations. By so doing we have
already clouded our political thought with assump-
tions based on forms of expression so imperfectly
apprehended as to make the conclusions drawn from
them, in the main, absolutely unreliable. Among
the least understood of political terms is the word
"citizen," in its strictly American signification.
Thus it happens that you no doubt deem both
phases of my statement — that you were yesterday a
subject and are to-day a king — if not actually incor-
rect, at least only metaphorically true.
Yet I had no intention of resorting to verbal sub-
terfuge. I meant deliberately and positively to assert
that your relation to the United States and to the
A JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY. 63
State in which you live was but recently that of a
subject, and is to-day that of a ruler. You will,
perhaps, be inclined to tell me that this is impos-
sible. You have been carefully taught that "the
people of a republic are citizens, and the inhabitants
of a monarchy, subjects." As you have not changed
your residence it is evident, therefore, that you can
not have figured in both rdles. This is the general
view, and one by no means without recognized au-
thority. Yet when we come to investigate the ques-
tion, we shall find that the real distinction between
"subject " and " citizen " does not lie in the fact of
domicile nor depend on allegiance being due to a
monarchy in the one case, and a republic in the other,
but on the relation which the individual sustains to
the sovereign power.
There is a singular defect in the definition of
these terms by authorities, both legal and etymo-
logical. This is probably due, in part, to the fact
that the specific difference between "citizen" and
"subject" has never yet been made a matter of
sharp contention in any national or international
tribunal, and in part to the generally unrecogtu'zed
fact that our political history has impressed upon one
at least of these terms a new and peculiar signifi-
cance. "Subject" is defined as "one brought
under authority," "one owing allegiance." or "one
owing permanent allegiance." This latter definition
Great Britain insisted upon as the basis of her right
64 LETTERS TO A KING.
to search American vessels for British subjects, which
gave rise to the War of 1812, It has been practically
abandoned. It will be observed, however, that
neither of these fully defines the relation of the sub-
ject to the sovereign, which is a mutual one. The
"subject" is one not only owing allegiance to a
sovereign, but one entitled to protection by the sov-
ereign. This is the entire relation — obedience and
allegiance on the part of the individual, and protec-
tion on the part of the sovereign. This is exactly
identical with the relation which women and infants
sustain to the government of the United States and
its constituent commonwealths. They owe obedience
and allegiance, and are entitled to protection in their
private rights — that is all. They have none of the
public rights which go to make what we call citizen-
ship in the strictly American sense. Some would
perhaps include in this category " Indians not taxed,"
but it is a matter of grave doubt whether tliey are
even "subjects." To a certain extent we claim the
right to exercise restrictive power over them, but have
never recognized any right to protection on their part.
Unnaturalized foreigners — resident aliens, as they
are legally termed — owe obedience, but not alle-
giance. They are neither citizens nor subjects.
They can claim the protection of our laws only while
within the national limits, and then only in a re-
stricted sense. They must obey the law, but are not
required to enforce or maintain its authority. As to
A JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY. 65
native-born women and infants, however, and the
wives and children of naturalized foreigners, they
sustain precisely the same relations to our govern-
ment, whether at home or abroad, that the subjects
of a monarchical government sustain to the throne.
So you will see that it was neither in jest nor meta-
phor that I declared you, although a native of the
great republic, to have been but recently a "sub-
ject" — an American subject, if you will.
It may be a matter of interest — perhaps of sur-
prise — to you to know, also, that our American
"subjects" greatly outnumber our American "citi-
zens." In 1880, out of 50,150,000 people, the
males of all classes, twenty-one years old and up-
ward, numbered 12,830,000. Of these it would prob-
ably not be an overestimate to regard the 830,000 as
representing the unnaturalized adult males of the
7,000,000 of foreign-born and Indians included in
the enumeration. So that we may safely say that
three-fourths of the population of the United States
are simply "subjects," owing obedience to its laws
and allegiance to its power and entitled to the pro-
tection of its authority, but having no more right or
power to shape or modify its character or control
the exercise of its authority than if dwellers on
another planet. They are not "citizens" in the
more restricted sense of the term, having no particle
of civic power or privilege beyond that pertaining to
the subjects of every civilized monarchy.
66 LETTERS TO A KING.
But what of the other one-fourth of our popula-
tion ? Was it a flattering metaphor to term them
kings? Let us see. The term citizen has been used
with a great variety of meaning. It originally in-
dicated the possessor of peculiar municipal privilege
or power. On account of this, having no distinctive
term to represent the specific status of tliat fourth
part of our population who exercise political power,
we call them, in contradistinction to the others,
citizens. The broadest use of this term that is sanc-
tioned by our law is the definition found in the first
section of the fourteenth article of the Constitution
of the United States. It is as follows:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citi-
zens of the United States and of the States wherein
they reside."
In this sense it is precisely equivalent to the
term "subject," the term "jurisdiction" being used
in international law in the sense of owing alle-
giance to and being entitled to protection from a par-
ticular nationality. It has a like significance in the
second section of the fourth article of the same in-
strument. The term was no doubt first used in this
sense in order to emphasize the separation from the
mother country. It was intended to differentiate be-
tween the "subjects of Great Britain," which was
the previous condition of the people of the Colonies,
and the equivalent relation they had assumed to the
A JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY. 6y
new nationality. From this sprang the ordinary dis-
tinction that the people of a republic are "citizens"
and those of a monarchy "subjects," on which is
based the idea that there is of necessity some spe-
cific difference in the two relations. The continued
use of the term with this significance became a polit-
ical necessity, because we had among us a class who
were denied even the ordinary rights of subjects.
The very purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment
was to secure to the negro the rights of a subject.
Tins is at once apparent when we note the fact
that it especially provides for his exclusion from the
rights and privileges of "citizenship" in the more
restricted sense of that term.
In this restricted and peculiarly American sense,
the word citizen has been very tersely and exactly
defined in the Supreme Court of the United States,
to be
" One of the sovereign people, a constituent member of
THE SOVEREIGNTY."*
Every young American should impress these two
definitions of a term so apt to be used in different
senses upon his memory with the utmost care. In
the one sense it is used to distinguish the American
people from the allegiants of a foreign power; in the
other to distinguish the class in which sovereignty
inheres from the rest of the American people.
*i9th Howard, 404.
68 LETTERS TO A KING.
This is the basic distinction of our American
political system. It is not, therefore, by any figure
of speech, nor from any desire to appeal to your
vanity, that I have addressed you as a king ; but
simply because you are, in serious truth, one of those
in whom the sovet'eignty of the nation resides ! The
very thing that distinguishes the monarch from his
subjects distinguishes you from three-fourths of the
American people — the power to make and unmake,
to bind and loose, without review or modification by
any other power ! In you resides one aliquot part of
the supreme will of the nation, from whose decision
there is no appeal ! The fate of sixty millions of
people and the destiny of their descendants are in your
hands! As an individual, even now you are a "sub-
ject of the law." You labor, enjoy, hold, possess,
and exist, as a ^'subject." As a ''citizen,'' you rule,
govern, and decree. The emblem of sovereignty is
upon your brow ! The scepter is in your hands,
the responsibility upon your soul! The American
citizen is not merely a potential, but an actual king.
He is the ruler and controller of a people's destiny.
Your responsibility as such is not in any degree
lessened by the fact that the sovereign is not a single
individual, but twelve millions. Your thought, your
will, your conviction, and your honesty constitute an
essential increment of the aggregated sovereignty.
" We, the People," is the royal style by which your
acts are affirmed ! They who legislate speak with
A JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY. 6g
your voice ! Those who execute the law, perform
your will. " By the grace of God," the wisdom of
the fathers, and, above all, by that gradual and un-
noted growth by which the American nation has been
unconsciously shaped into a singular distinctiveness
of political character, you have become jointly and
severally liable, with every other of the class to which
you belong, not for a specific part, but for the char-
acter of the whole indivisible sovereign power.
There is, however, one great difference between you
and the hereditary monarch — the Citizen-king can
NOT ABDICATE,
VI.
A PERPETUAL COVENANT.
I FANCY that I hear you ask, with some asperity
of manner, if by the statement, "The citi7en-king can
not abdicate," I mean that you are required to "go
into pohtics" whether you desire to do so or not.
You wish to know whether I mean to intimate that,
if you do not care to undertake the task of govern-
ment, you can not step aside and leave it to others
who have a taste for it. You may even assert with
some heat that, if this be true, instead of being a free
government, our American RepubUc is the most
atrocious tyranny ever invented.
Softly, softly, my young friend. Liberty is not
the mere indulgence of inclination. In a certain
sense a man is free to do or not to do the duty of
the citizen as he pleases; just as he is free to do or
not to do any other duty — ^just as he may be said to
be at liberty to be a good or a bad man. He can no
more neglect his political duties and be a good citi-
zen, however, than he can live a life of crime and
be a good Christian. One of the evil inheritances
we have received from the Old World is this idea,
70
A PERPETUAL COVENANT. 7 1
that political responsibility is like a coat that may be
put on or taken off at will. And this evil has been
intensified, rather than lessened, by the zeal with
which some of our Anglomaniac theorists, especially
at the East, have lately urged upon educated young
Americans the duty of "going into politics" — using
that phrase in the Anglican sense, and meaning
thereby offering themselves as candidates for office.
That merciless satirist of Boston life, who paints its
pettiness and self-sufficiency so deftly that his victims
take his ridicule for praise — that universal pessimist,
Mr. Howells — has no finer bit of satire than when he
puts into the mouth of the typical Boston matron the
delicious bit of taffy she addresses to the Harvard
undergraduate :
" How splendid to- have them going into politics
the way they are !"
Adding, in justification of her exultant approval:
"So many of the young university men do — in
England."
It is this idea that politics is a trade, a profession,
or a calling inseparably connected with office holding,
and not a part of the every-day business of every
American life, which in one form or another has
wrought such serious ills as to make it questionable
whether self-government has not more difficult prob-
lems and more serious obstacles yet to overcome
than those it has already encountered. From this
point of view, the revival of interest in political
72 LETTERS TO A KING.
thought which has recently characterized the college
life and general culture of the East has been, in many
instances, exceedingly harmful. It has strengthened
two false impressions; the first, that politics is a dis-
tinct calling, instead of a universal duty ; and the
second, that the educated man, so called, is by that
very fact entitled to leadership. It is of the utmost
importance that the very opposite of both these ideas
should be inculcated in the minds of the young men
of to-day. It is the duty of every citizen, no matter
what his station, rank, intelligence, or calling, to "go
into politics." It is the duty of the "educated
man " to lead or to follow — just as he may be able —
just as the will of his co-ordinate sovereigns may
determine.
In a republic the political leader is rarely formed
by education, especially such false and faulty educa-
tion as is given in our schools and colleges to-day.
In fact, it is a curious truth, but one which you will
find abundantly sustained by the course of history,
that progress in government very rarely, if ever,
springs from the upper classes, or those known as
the best people. It is not the rich, the wise, the
refined and cultured elements of the world's life who
have pushed forward the cause of humanity and right,
and established the principles of justice and equality.
The governmental shoe has always pinched the poor
man's foot worse than that of the rich, and it has
been the hopeless agony of the weak, or the despera-
A PERPETUAL COVENANT. 73
tion it inspired, that has loosened tlie clutch of
tyranny and opened the door of opportunity. It is
the need of the common people that calls forth leaders
and prepares men to become exponents of political
thought, not the study of specific theories. It is
the man who feels the popular want, understands the
aspiration and voices the demands of the popular
heart, who becomes the political leader in a republic.
He may do it rudely and ungracefully. He may not
be absolutely faultless in the use of the auxiliary
verbs, nor addicted to classical quotations ; but he
has an instinctive knowledge of the most pressing
evil of his time, and a more or less practicable remedy
therefor ; and these things make him the true expo-
nent of the sovereign will.
It is this fact that has made the common life of
the world the matrix in which its great leaders have
been shaped, and constituted instinctive sympathy
with the people the prime pj-erequisite of political
preferment in a republic. That culture which teaches
us to wisely note the general need, and adapt the
forms, conditions, and character of our institutions
thereto — that is true political education, and its very
fundamental principle is the universality of the duty
and the unavoidable character of the responsibility
that rests on the citizen king.
As I have said, you can not abdicate. You can
not cease to govern, either for good or ill. Self gov-
ernment — a republic in our modern sense of the word,
7
74 LETTERS TO A KING.
which is most properly defined "a government by
the people " — is based upon certain distinct postulates,
to wit :
1. The equal power of each one of the governing
class — the citizen, in the restricted sense of that term.
2. That a majority of the citizenship will always
be wise enough to understand what is for the general
good — the greatest good of the greatest number.
3. That a majority will always be honest and patri-
otic enough to demand what is for the general good.
4. That a majority will always be vigilant and
brave enough to prevent any material subversion of
the popular will.
These are the four great principles on which the
fabric of our government rests — the mudsills of
the Republic. Whenever any one of them .shall prove
for any considerable period to be an incorrect hy-
pothesis, the experiment of self-government in the
United States will have proved a failure. Our fore-
fathers built upon this rock. Our fathers extended
and deepened the foundation. It is perhaps, as much
the result of unconscious development as design,
but it has been a development working logically
and naturally along the lines our forefathers doubt-
full)' and hesitantly marked out in the new field of
governmental science in which they were the first
explorers.
What do these principles demand of the individual
citizen ?
A PERPETUAL COVENANT. 75
'.'Equality of right." This, fortunately, is already
theoretically attained. It is the result of almost a cent-
ury of sharp conflict. In but two of the States of the
Union is there now any legal distinction in the power
or the privilege of the citizen. In some the legal
limitations are somewhat more restricted than in
others. In one or two the right to v^ote depends on
ability to read and write ; in several the privileges
of citizenship are conditioned upon the payment
of taxes ; and in one there is a requirement, long
since obsolete, that the individual be of good char-
acter. The absurdity of making the right to rule
depend on such fortuitous conditions is now so gen-
erally recognized, and the legalized exceptions are so
insignificant in number that it ma}^ be said that every
native-born or naturalized male of twenty-one years
old and upward has legally an equal right with every
other in the direction and control of the government,
both State and national. To the decision of a ma-
jority of these legal sovereigns all political questions
are ultimately referred. If, by any means, a portion
of this constituent sovereignty is debarred from the
free expression of its will, the result becomes, to that
extent, not the popular will nor a government by the
people, but by some force or power which thwarts
or corrupts the popular will. It is needful, there-
fore, that every man should steadily and actively
assert his equal right, in order to secure the equal
rights of every other.
"^e LETTERS TO A KING.
It is also necessary for the success of republican
institutions that the majority should be generally, and
in the long run, right in their decision of public
questions. This can only be secured by the careful
anxiety of each individual to be himself right. There
is no luck nor necromancy about it. Ignorance or
passion or greed or negligence may corrupt the ver-
dict of the masses, just as well as the judgment of
the individual. It is only when men honestly seek
to know the right, to understand their individual
political duty, that there is any reason to suppose
that the majority will be wise enough to determine
what constitutes the highest good of the greatest
number, and so be fitted to promote the public weal
by their political action. Individual action becomes,
therefore, the sole guarantee of the second funda-
mental postulate on which our government is based.
But even equal opportunity and abundant knowl-
edge are not enough, of themselves, to secure the
public welfare. Right ?s valueless if not exercised, and
knowledge useless if it does not crystallize into action.
It is not enough, therefore, that every citizen should
be legally entitled to equal privilege with every other ;
but he must faithfully exercise the same, or the
popular verdict, made up without his assent, will be
to that extent defective, and for that very reason may
be wrong. It is his duty to see to it, not only that
he is qualified and prepared for the intelligent exercise
of his kingly prerogative, but that no harm befall the
A PERPETUAL COVENANT. yy
commonwealth from his neglect of duty. It is better
that he should be wrong than fail to act, as an error
of judgment is always less heinous than gross and
inexcusable neglect. Apathy is the worst of all evils.
A torrent may be easily turned, but a mere dripping
rill offers no opportunity for guidance.
But equality, right, knowledge, and zeal in the
performance of individual duty, all combined, are not
enough to secure the popular will from error and
guarantee the safety of the republic. A iiiajority of
the people, at least, must be vigilant and brave
enough to prevent any extended or continued sup-
pression, distortion, or corruption of the popular will.
It is just here that the crowning duty and responsi-
bility of the citizen arises. He is responsible not
only for his own action, but also for his fellow's
opportunity. He must not only stubbornly assert and
maintain his own privilege, earnestly strive to know
his own duty, and faithfully endeavor to give effect to
his own conviction, but he must see to it that neither
fraud, violence, bribery, terror, nor any other malign
influence, shall be allowed to neutralize the con-
viction, bias the judgment, or thwart the will of
his fellows.
If all this is required of every citizen in order to
secure good government in a republic, you will prob-
ably declare such a result to be hopeless. Do not
be over-hasty in your conclusions, my young friend.
All this is indeed necessary to insure good govern-
78 LETTERS TO A KING.
ment "by the people." Yet what is it? Not so
very much after all. Only equal opportunity, vigi-
lance, and zeal — the very things of which we boast
as the chiefest glory of our land. Where else does
the gate of opportunity stand open to all ? Who so
intelligent, so alert, so keen as the American ? What
does it demand oi you ? Only that you should know
your own duty, assert your own privilege, use your
own judgment, and see that / am permitted to do
likewise. It is only what is required under every
form of government — of every constituent unit of the
sovereignty. Whether the king be one or a million,
he is responsible for the. same attributes. Justice,
wisdom, and honesty ; courage, zeal, and vigilance,
are required, not only of every one who aspires to
rule his fellows, but of every one on whom rests the
right and privilege of rulership. A king may abdi-
cate his throne ; but there is no method by which
the citizen can relieve himself from responsibility for
the character of the government he has it in his
power to control or modify.
Our government is but a partnership in which
there are twelve millions of co-partners, each having
equal privilege, equal power, and equal responsibility.
Of each is demanded intelligence, honesty, faithful-
ness, and courage. If any fail in either respect, it
endangers the rights, liberties, and prosperity, not
only of himself, but of each and every one of his fel-
lows, and of all who may come after them. "Gov-
A PERPETUAL COVENANT. Jg
ernment by the people " is a universal pact, a perpetual
covenant, by which every citizen is bound to every
other citizen for the faithful performance of his
part of the common duty. No one can invalidate
this covenant or avoid its penalty. He can not ab-
dicate his right, alienate his privilege, shift his bur-
den to other shoulders, or evade the penalty of this
joint and several bond. You are in duty bound not
only to see to it that the republic receives no detri-
ment from your own inability or neglect, but also to
prevent its being imperiled by the activity of any
one else.
I may be a bad man and you a very good one ;
I may be a weak man and you a very strong one ; I
may be a foolish man and you a very wise one ; I
may be a timid man and you a brave one. If, now,
you take away your courage, your wisdom, your
strength, and your integrity, and leave the burden
of government — the weight of sovereignty, the act
of legislation, the task of administration, and the
duty of protecting and maintaining the national life —
to my weakness, my folly, my cowardice, or my
greed, and evil result, as of course it must, on whom
will the responsibility rest?
Who will be called to answer in the last great
day for the injustice, oppression, anarchy, and woe
that may ensue ? Surely not I alone who did the
^vrong, but you who weakly permitted. It is your
duty to save me from myself — my children from my
So LETTERS TO A KING.
harmful assault. If you fail to do so, your rights must
suffer, and your children will feel the scath of my
wrong-doing as well as mine.
" But," you ask, "how shall I perform this task?
How shall I learn my duty ? How discharge my re-
sponsibility ? Are there not some millions of my fel-
low-sovereigns who are ignorant of their duties? Are
there not many thousands who are neglectful of them?
Are not votes bought and sold, like meat in the
shambles ? Do not bribery and intimidation vitiate
the public verdict, and paralyze individual effort? Do
not * practical politics ' and party spirit and the ' ma-
chine ' render it impossible for an honest and patriotic
man to act up to his convictions, and exercise the
power vested in him for the public welfare? Surely,"
you say, "I can not be held responsible for failing
to do what so many of our wisest and best men de-
clare it is impossible to effect."
In public affairs as in private morals, there falls
to each one a modicum of duty. One can not do all,
and is not required or expected to do all, that is to
be done. Neither will all that needs to be done be
accomplished at once. But it is only by the unre-
mitting performance of individual duty that any pub-
lic evil will be remedied, or any public good accom-
plished. It is true there are many obstacles to be
overcome. They are, however, by no means insuper-
able. Ignorance and vice are enemies that must be
met and vanquished. "The machine" is a gnome
A PERPETUAL COVENANT. 8l
which serves many good people as an excuse for
inaction. Party spirit is, perhaps, as often a whole-
some as a harmful force. The greatest of all
obstacles you will have to encounter is that public
sentiment which depreciates the citizen's privileges,
makes light of individual responsibility, winks at
the employment of evil methods, and generally
seeks to divorce political conduct from moral re-
sponsibility. "Practical politics" may be either
of a good or a bad sort. The most "practical"
of all is that which carries Christian principle into
political action, and drives out evil methods and
evil influences. Practical politics is not that which
snivels and sneaks, and seeks foi- some specific by
which ignorance may be temporarily disarmed and
fraud for a time circumvented. Practical politics is
that which achieves practical results. If directed to
a good purpose and controlled by wise men, it con-
fronts ignorance with intelligence, fraud with honest
vigilance, crime with courage, zeal with zeal.
The struggle for good government is not an easy
nor an intermittent one. You must not expect, my
young friend, that the duties of the citizen will be
always light and pleasant. The head that wears a
crown must be always burdened with anxiety. The
political "machine" is not one that can be set right
and then left to run itself Your duties are not many
nor of especial difficulty, but they require close, care-
ful, and unremitting attention. You can not hire a
82 , LETTERS TO A KING.
substitute to do service for you in the conflict for
liberty, nor leave what should be done to-day until
to-morrow. In the performance of the duties of the
citizen the first and most important step is to deter-
mine your relations to party, and your rights, privi-
leges, and responsibilities as a partisan. This subject
will, therefore, next claim our attention.
VII.
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS.
It is customary to speak of party as a political
evil, and to bewail the fact that such a thing as party
spirit exists. No little ingenuity has been wasted by
closet politicians in devising some sort of mechanical
substitute whereby the advantages of party organiza-
tion may be retained, and the evils of party manage-
ment avoided. Thus far no successful substitute has
been found, and the paper reformers who seek for
one have proved themselves of no more value to the
country than the mourners who pathetically whine
about the "good old days " when party was unknown.
The truth is, that like every other mere instru-
mentality, party is potent either for good or ill. It
may not be the best agency that can be devised for
the control of popular government, but it is the only
one that has ever proved itself effective ; and we may
be sure that if a better is ever found it will still be
liable to abuse, and only better because of increased
potency. The country is ruled by party government,
and is likely to be so ruled for many generations.
The part of the wise man and good citizen, therefore,
83
84 LETTERS TO A KING.
is not to stand off and scold about what he is power-
less to remedy simply because he fancies it is not
absolutely perfect. One might as well attempt to
batter down the rock of Gibraltar with green peas as
to cure a political evil by mere fault-finding. Power
yields only to force, and the true reformer is not he
who merely points out a hypothetically better plan,
but he who also develops a practical means for its
accomplishment. The part of the patriotic citizen is
not merely to bewail the ills that beset him, but
stoutly to face them, and to study earnestl}- how to
amend them. Especially is this true of men who are
the first-born of heroes, like the thousands who will
this year step for the first time into the arena of
American citizenship. The prime duty of such is to
study the nature of party government, and ascertain
its true relation to the citizen, to the government, and
to Christian civilization.
Party, in our American sense of the term, is the
most remarkable governmental agency ever devised.
It is not the invention of any man, or set of men, but
a natural outgrowth of our free institutions, or rather
of the spirit from which they sprung. The term is
.said to mean "a number of persons united in opinion
as opposed to the rest of the community ;" and this
has been generally accepted as a sufficient definition.
It fails, however, to draw the line between party and
faction, to which it equally well applies, but from
which party is clearly distinguished by American
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS. 85
usage. The truth is, that the marked distinctiveness
of the American people — a distinctiveness stoutly
denied by Anglomaniacs and other superficial ob-
servers of our life, and by nothing more clearly proved
than by the frequent need of new definitions for old
words — has impressed upon the term party a meaning
not merely new, but thus far apparently impossible
of comprehension by the political thinkers of the Old
World. This distinction, so far as I am aware, has
never been fairly set forth, so that even by ourselves
the idea of party is rather instinctively apprehended
than clearly understood. We shall, perhaps, best
arrive at a just comprehension of this singular insti-
tution by a brief consideration of its history.
At the organization of our government, the only
parties of which its founders had any conception, the
only voluntary organizations which they supposed
would ever develop into political forces, were what
we would now term factions. It was believed that
men prominent in public affairs would have adherents
who would perhaps band themselves together to
secure the advancement of their respective favorites.
This was the view on which the electoral s}'stem of
the Federal Constitution was based, and which it
was designed to utilize and regulate It was sup-
posed that men of prominence in the several States
would be competitors for the honor of determining
the choice of President and Vice-President, and that
the followers of these local celebrities would be pitted
86 LETTERS TO A KING.
against each other in each State, not as mere repre-
sentatives of some general interest, but as individuals
whose action would be a matter of personal discre-
tion with each. It was believed, also, that the same
theory of a personal following and individual popu-
larity would prevail in the action of the several
" Electoral Colleges," as the people soon named the
undefined bodies provided for by the Constitution,
the members of which it was supposed would act
according to their individual preferences, and being
men of eminent character, would look more closely
and discriminatingly to the personal qualities of the
men they might name than the body of the voters
were believed to be capable of doing. In other
words, it was intended to interpose between the
popular will and the national Executive, the wisdom
and discretion of a specially selected body, who
should determine, not who was the popular choice,
but whom they deemed best fitted for the place.
This idyllic theory was doomed to early and com-
plete eradication. The pre eminent regard in which
Washington was held by all. and the apparent neces-
sit)' that the man of most commanding influence
in the newly organized republic should be at the
head of its affairs, at least until the governmental
machinery was in running order, made the successful
application of a principle, which would now be re-
garded as absurd, for a time, not only possible, but
almost unavoidable. The Electors chosen at the first
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS. 87
election in the various States were men of the highest
distinction, and the result was undoubtedly a fair
expression of the first and second choice of a vast
majority of the individual voters. You will recollect
that at that time, and until 1804, the Electors did
not vote for President and Vice-President, but each
Elector voted for two persons, the one having the
highest number of votes being declared President,
and the next highest Vice-President, making those
selected really the first and second choice of a
majority of the Electors, for President.
At the first election, in 1788, there was no trace
of a national party. Before the second election, in
1792, however, the seed had been sown and the
transformation from faction to party had begun.
The re-election of Washington and Adams partook
in a great degree of the character of a party victory.
The abstract theories of the framers of the Constitu-
tion had come in collision with the instincts of the
people. They did not rebel against the forms im-
posed, but simply nullified them by making them
mere empty forms. From that hour the Elector
began to lose the character of a discretionary official,
and became more and more the mouth piece of pop-
ular preference, until he has at length ceased to be
an official of anj^ importance whatever — the place
being now accounted merely a training-school for
the unpracticed politician, or a solace for the super-
annuated one. The work of the various Electoral
88 LETTERS TO A KING.
Colleges to-day is simply a puerile farce, of no more
real importance than the payment of a barley-corn
rental.
The seed of our present party system was, how-
ever, hidden in the Constitution itself With its
adoption, and even before its adoption, there sprang-
up a wonderful difference of opinion as to the re-
lation of the new government to the constituent
States, those advocating enlarged powers for the
national government being termed Federalists, and
those insisting upon the most extended view of
the sovereignty of the respective States, Republicans.
These terms from time to time varied somewhat in
their respective significations until 1816, when the
former disappeared from our political annals and has
never been revived. The term Democrat was pop-
ularly applied almost interchangeably with Repub-
lican to the opponents of Federalism, until 1824,
when the Republican party divided, the Jackson
wing taking the name of Democrat, while the
anti-Jackson Republicans merged with the remnant
of the Federalists under the name National Republi-
cans. It was a shrewd attempt by a dissatisfied mi-
nority to deprive the party they were deserting of
the prestige of the part}' name. The stroke was
promptly met by those at which it was aimed, by
the renunciation of the old name and the adoption
of a more radical and popular designation. The at-
tempt has more than once been made to repeat this
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS. 89
strategy, and capture a favorite party name for a
seceding faction, but it has never been successful.
Prefixes and suffixes have never proved attractive
lures to the American voter.
In 1836 the Whig party first appeared in our
national politics, and continued the chief opponent
of the Democratic party until 1852. In 1840 the
Liberty party first offered a national candidate, and
under various aliases, such as Free-soil and Free-
Democrat, continued until after the election of 1852.
United with the great body of the Whig party, and
a considerable contingent of Northern Democratic
leaders, they formed in 1856 the Republican party,
which has been the chief opponent of the Demo-
cratic party ever since. There have been Anti-
mason, American, Temperance, Greenback, and
other so-called parties from time to time, but those
we have considered are the only ones that have
ever controlled the national Administration.
It will be well for you to keep in mind this brief
resume of party names and their succession, not that
the names themselves are of much significance,
but they will enable you to fix with certainty the
various steps in the development of the American
idea of party. It may be interesting, however, to
note one or two facts in relation to them. The
Federal party, to which Washington belonged, be-
came at an early day so odious to the people that
no party has dared to assume its name since its final
8
go LETTERS TO A KING.
collapse in 1796. Republican, which succeeded it in
popular favor after twenty years of undisputed sway,
was adopted by a faction, with the prefix ' ' Na-
tional," and thereafter abandoned by the most ultra
branch, who adopted the term Democrat, which had
been derisively applied to the Republicans by their
opponents, the Federalists, for many years. The
name Whig was borrowed from English politics,
both because of its association with our Revolu-
tionary da)s and the triumphs which just at that
time were being won by English Whigs, as well as
the fact that it impUed opposition to autocratic
power, being aimed in this sense at the personal
government inaugurated by Jackson. The Liberty,
Free-soil, and Free Democrat appellations of the
anti-slavery party are each expressive of some
peculiar phase of the struggle out of which it sprung.
Throughout the entire century of constitutional
government of which this year marks the close, how-
ever, there has been a general harmony of relation
between the two leading parties that is very striking,
and which it is essential for him who would under-
stand American politics to keep steadily in view.
From first to last, the chief difference has been in
regard to the extension or limitation of federal
power. The distinction has not always been appar-
ent, frequently seeming to have been supplanted by
some more obvious issue; but careful analysis will
show that in some form it has constantly underlain
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS. 9 1
the issue which, for the time being, seemed to be
the sole cause of difference. The RepubHcans at
the first, and since 1824 the Democrats, have been
the avowed champions of the rights and privileges of
the individual States as sovereign communities, in
contradistinction to the national or confederated
power of the whole. Not only the exclusive control
of their internal affairs, but also the absolute au-
tonomy of the States — the right to withdraw from
the Union, into which they had entered as sovereign
States by federal compact, a mere formal treaty
which ex vi termini might be rescinded by the power
that made it — was for three-quarters of a century a
distinctive principle of this party.
Its opponent, under various appellations, has more
or less rigorously upheld the theory of national pre-
dominance, the insolubility and individual rather than
statal character of the federal pact. They have in-
sisted that the Constitution was a pact between " we,
the people," as constituent atoms, rather than be-
tween the States as political corporations. This
contest has been varied in name and form by spe-
cific tendencies at various epochs. Under the im-
pulse derived in no small degree from the term
Whig, it advocated the employment of national
power for the collective economic advantage of the
people, and was characterized by the advocacy of
internal improvements and the taxation of imports,
with the view of increasing domestic manufacture.
92
LETTERS TO A KING.
These questions were not then dependent merely
upon conflicting views as to the policy or impolicy
of free trade or internal improvement, but, to a
far greater extent than your training and experience
will enable you to realize, upon the right of the fed-
eral government to exercise its power in such direc-
tions and for such purposes. The federalistic idea
underlying the economic doctrines of the Whig party
inclined it to uphold almost any exercise of the na-
tional authority that would, promote the prosperity
of the people — whatever seemed to make for the gen-
eral aggregate advantage.
This idea, instead of being merged, as so many
have supposed, in the new questions raised by the
anti-slavery agitation at the time of the organization
of the present Republican party, was in fact empha-
sized and extended by it. The real issue between
the parties at that time was not, as you may have
supposed, my young friend, so much a difference of
opinion as to the right or wrong, policy or impolicy,
of slavery as a social institution or an economic
agency, but almost entirely a disagreement as to the
power of the federal government to restrain its
extension. The Democrats, in brief, held that
this question, being within the domain of statal
authority, and subject entirely to State regulation
and control, the general government could not
limit or restrict the privileges of a citizen of any
particular State in regard to any specific form of
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS. 93
property, nor permit it to be. done by any other
State. Tills was the philosophic basis on which
rested the Fugitive-Slave Law, the repeal of the Mis-
souri Compromise, and the opposition to the prohi-
bition of slavery in the District of Columbia. This,
too, was the theoretical basis of the Rebellion, among
the most important results of which has been the de-
velopment of issues apparently new, yet based, in
fact, upon the old familiar controversy as to the
character of the federal compact, and the limitation
of federal power. These questions involve chiefly
the definition of federal citizenship, and must ulti-
mately lead to further consideration and determina-
tion of the limits of State control over the exercise
of civic privilege by citizens of the United States.
You will perceive, therefore, that for a hundred
years the great fundamental distinction between the
parties which have controlled the national destiny
has been a difference, not merely as to the correct
construction of the Federal Constitution, but as to
the true principles which should control the exercise
of the federal power. The one has held with more
or less latitude that the national power can only be
exercised to sustain the national authority, provide
for the national defense, and raise money for the cur-
rent expenses of the government. The other has
maintained, under various names and with various
immediate purposes in view, that the real scope of
national power is the general good of the whole
94 LETTERS TO A KING.
people, limited only by the express restrictions of the
Constitution. They have consequently advocated
the use of the public lands and the public credit in
promoting works of internal improvement ; have
opened the public lands to the actual settler without
purchase, or at a nominal value ; defined the limits
of national citizenship, and maintained the principle
of a restrictive and discriminating tax on imports,
not only as a means of obtaining revenue, but also
as a method of encouraging domestic manufacture,
and promoting the general welfare of the people.
The real question at issue between the two parties
which in turn dominate our destiny has changed in
this hundred years of experience and under uncon-
scious modifying influences, chiefly in one aspect.
At first, it was almost solely a matter of construction.
What did the Constitution mean — what was the pur-
pose of the fathers? This was the question upper-
most in political discussion during the first half cen-
tury of our national life. Gradually it became com-
plicated with questions of policy — of necessity even.
Yet still it entered into and colored all political con-
troversy. It drew from Webster the argument, made
necessary by the strength of his opponent's position,
that the federal Union was a permanent pact between
individuals, rather than a terminable treaty between
sovereign communities, giving thereby of necessity
the right to consider and promote the general
A CHOICE OF WEAPONS. 95
advantage in all methods not expressly prohibited by
the fundamental law.
From the enunciation of this doctrine until the
present time the color of our political discussion has
been constantly changing. The question of intent on
the part of the framers of the Constitution has grad-
ually given way to the question of public policy and
general interest. This is not only true of political
theories and legislative action, but the tendency of
judicial construction has also been in the same direc-
tion. Rivers and harbors, national highways, educa-
tion and the agricultural interests of the country,
have been subjects of especial national care, while
the courts have asserted its power not only to control
and regulate citizenship and the exercise of its privi-
leges, but also to see that the power of the State is
not exercised to the detriment of individual interests,
the impairment of domestic commerce, or to imperil
the general prosperity. So that national policy,
rather than constitutional power, has at length be-
come the chief ingredient of political disquisition ;
and the question now is, not so much how far the na-
tional prerogative may be extended, but rather how
far it ought to be carried.
This fundamental difference between the leading
parties of the country will no doubt continue. It
takes the place, to a considerable degree, of the dis-
tinction between the government and the opposition
96 LETTERS TO A KING.
which prevails in other parliamentary governments,
and is the key to the peculiar significance of the
term party in our political thought. Of course a
thousand considerations, aside from the two great
tendencies we have considered, may incline the indi-
vidual to affiliate with the one or the other of these
great parties. Indeed, it is quite possible that the
mass of adherents of both are unconscious of the
great underlying principles that divide them, and
but dimly know why they incHne to the one and
not to the other.
While it is important that you should make no
mistake in determining what shall be your party
affiliations, it is of infinitely more importance that you
should clearly understand what are your rights, privi-
leges, and responsibilities as a member of any party.
We are accustomed to speak of the ballot as the
great instrument of political power. It is a mistake.
The ballot-box only registers the triumph of one
party over another. It is as a partisan alone that
the citizen exercises power, and the party organiza-
tion is the only weapon by which political good may
be accomplished or political evil averted. This wea-
pon you must learn to test, to shape, to temper,
and to wield, if you would wisely rule or effectually
serve your country.
VIII.
"KING CAUCUS."
I DO not doubt that if you have carefully followed
the preceding papers of this series, you will note with
especial pleasure the caption of the present number.
We have been so accustomed to attribute all our polit-
ical ills to malign'abstractions rather than to individual
deficiencies, that it is not at all strange that you
should be somewhat tired of being addressed in the
second person singular and held accountable for
public evils just the same as for other personal sins
of omission and commission. You will no doubt
rejoice, therefore, in the thought that instead of
applying the rod still farther to the back of the in-
dividual citizen, I am about to turn my attention to
the much belabored abstraction whose name appears
at the head of this article. I am aware that "party"
and the "caucus" are regarded as the twin devils of
our political life, on whose devoted heads the profes-
sional reformer — the man to whom whatever is, is
always wrong — bestows his most vigorous whacks
and choicest maledictions. You will perceive that I
have inclosed the caption in quotation marks. This
9 97
98 LETTERS TO A KING.
is not done for the purpose of implying doubt as to
its existence or the propriety of the cognomen, but
as you will perceive before you reach the close of this
letter, to suggest whether the evil thing we so lustily
curse is really entitled to bear the name we use to
barb our anathemas. Having already briefly sketched
the succession of parties, the various changes of name
and curious identity of character which have charac-
terized our leading political agencies from the foun-
dation of our government until the present time, the
purpose of this letter is to trace the evolution of the
organic form and note the distinctive elements of the
modern party. We must perforce go over much of
the same ground, and pass the same political events in
a like hasty review, but we shall regard them now in
an entirely different aspect. Our inquiry is no longer
under what name, or for what purpose, but in what
form and bj' what methods, political results have been
achieved.
In considering this question, we should keep
steadily in mind the fact that party is otily an agency.
The American party organization is simply the in-
strumentality, by which the American people have
chosen to govern themselves. As an instrument, it
is not to be held accountable for the results of its
use, any more than any piece of mechanism for the
consequences of its application. The workman, not
the chisel, is to be judged by the chips. The question
is whether a party, as at present organized and
''KING caucus:'
99
administered in this country, is an effective method
for accompHshing the ends which those who move the
springs and levers have in view ; whether it is an effi-
cient instrument for accomplishing good in the hands
of good men, and bad in the hands of bad men ; and
whether it lends itself with equal facility to the aims
of each. If so, it is a good political agency ; if not,
it is a bad one. There has not yet been invented any
substitute for honesty, patriotism, and intelligence,
on the part of the ruler; nor is any political mechan-
ism likely to be devised that in the hands of bad men
will yield good results, or enable good men to cir-
cumvent evil without exertion.
For forty years after the organization of the fed-
eral government, parties partook very largely of the
character of parties and factions in other countries.
Especially did they resemble in constitution and
operation the political forces bearing the same desig-
nation, which had grown up under that curiously
indefinite force known us the British Constitution.
The English party has always closely resembled the
fundamental law of which it is a result. Certainty
and uncertainty are strangely combined in its char-
acter. Of late, it has taken something of form from
our political system. At that time, however, it was
too vague to deserve the name of part)'. Harmony
of action was curiously blended with freedom of
opinion in its ranks. The line that separated the con-
flicting forces was so vague as to be almost indefinable.
lOO LETTERS TO A KING.
The bond that united allied factions was very often
one of contrast rather than of accord. Each individual
leader formulated his own dogmas and negotiated his
own alliances. The English party of that day was
merely a confederation of cliques — a group of mobs
rather than an organization. There was nothing rep-
resentative, fixed, or determinate in its form or char-
acter. It had a head but no body, and even its
head was of indeterminate form and uncertain com-
position. It might be a club or only a cabal. It
might be constituted, destroyed, or recreated, without
reference to, or consent of, the electors — the suffra-
gans on whom its strength depended. Its leaders
were merely allies, who fought together under a com-
mon flag as long as they saw fit, or as long as they
could command the support of their constituencies
by so doing, and no longer.
Except in the choice of members of the House
of Commons, the English constituencies had, until
very recently no voice in the constitution of the
party, or the formulation of its distinctive ideas. The
mass-meeting and the self-constituted cabal were its
only organic features, if these can be called organic.
A few men, representing no one, and accountable to
no one, met and agreed vaguely upon a certain line
of conduct. It was rarely if ever formulated into
abstract propositions binding upon all. Tliere was
none of the careful study of phraseology and delicate
balancing of words, which characterize the American
*'KiNG caucus:' ioi
platform. ' ' Certainty to a common intent in general, "
was all that was required even of the parties to the
conference themselves. Smith might state the com-
mon purpose with emphatic precision, and Jones
clothe it in the most dubious hypothesis; while
another might cover the whole ground of variance
from doubt to certainty, and add to the same an
infinite variety of individual notions, without being
thought to exceed the privilege of the partisan.
This was precisely the character of the Federal and
Republican parties in the early period of our history;
and such our statesmen of that day, no doubt, ex-
pected them to continue. Indeed, it is not unusual
to find political teachers at the present time who have
quite overlooked the fact of organic changes in our
political agencies, as well as the causes from which
they have arisen.
No doubt one of the chief influences in effecting
such changes was the adoption of written constitu-
tions, together with the judicial rule of strict con-
struction of the same, except in regard to indi-
vidual rights. The grant of powers was viewed
with the utmost jealousy ; the guarantee of rights
construed with the utmost liberality. This cultivated
a habit of certaint)'^ and precision in the statement
of political questions, which is quite unknown in
other countries, except those whose political habit
has been largely molded by our experience. The
conventions which framed these constitutions were,
102 LETTERS TO A KING.
in a sense, representative, though by no means
strictly and impartially so. The doctrine of equal
power and privilege in the control of government
had made but little progress at that time, and it is a
curious fact that representative government preceded
by nearly half a century the institution of repre-
sentative party organizations. Little groups of
prominent men in each State were, at first, the shap-
ing forces of the respective parties. They devised
and formulated the party policy, and performed the
functions of the English party club or conference of
leaders. The only method in which the rank and
file of the party could give expression to their views
was by public meetings and the adoption of pre-
pared resolutions. These mass conventions con-
tinued to grow in importance, and the voluntary
cabals to be looked upon with increasing suspicion
and distrust, as the new government came to be
more fully apprehended by the people.
Before the second decade of our constitutional
history had elapsed, such mass conventions in the
several States had become the real law makers of the
respective parties. They formulated with the utmost
precision the tenets to which their adherents were
required to accede as a condition of party recogni-
tion and support. They rarely touched, however,
the field of party administration and control and it
was nearly half a century before the two functions
were united in the same body.
*'KING CAUCUS." 103
From the voluntary or mass convention, marked
by State limits, to the delegated convention with
prescribed constituencies, seems to us now but a
step, yet it was at least a quarter of a century before
it was fully taken. Like almost all the successive
steps in the evolution of our governmental forms
and agencies, this was not the result of the political
sagacity or philosophical foresight of any man or set
of men, but of the popular jealousy of self-consti-
tuted leaders. It would seem that in a few of the
States the delegate part}- convention had been es-
tablished as early as 1820. Its powers and functions,
however, were very loosely defined. The representa-
tion, except in some of the New England States, was
by counties, and in them by towns. The delegates
were chosen b)- public mass conventions. Even this
skeleton part\- organization was only half com-
plete, in most of the States, and as }'et there had
been no attempt to extend its operation to the do-
main of national politics.
The exercise of delegated authority in party
councils had, however, become familiar to the pop-
ular mind through the action of congressional and
legislative caucuses. These were the first successors
of the vicious system of voluntary cabals. Their
right to act for their respective parties was based
solely on the fact that they had been chosen by them
to perform other political functions. The hostility
to I'ederalism which dex'eloped even during Wash-
I04
LETTERS TO A KING.
ington's first term, was no doubt a popular rebellion
against the idea of a central controlling power, in the
party as well as in the nation. The self-constituted
Federal caucuses of Virginia, New York, and Mas-
sachusetts were exact equivalents of their English
model. They were composed of the ablest, most
patriotic and cultivated of the supporters of the
Presidential policy. They represented, however, an
idea inherently obnoxious to the American spirit;
they assumed to rule rather than to serve; they dic-
tated the party policy without having been author-
ized by the voters of the party to speak for them.
The first formal rebellion against the authority
of these unauthorized cabals was the legislative cau-
cus. When or where the first of these remarkable
gatherings was held it is impossible now to deter-
mine ; nor, indeed, is it important. The association
of members of a legislative body having a general
political affinity, to secure harmony of action in
matters of general interest, is not only natural but
absolutely essential. It was, perhaps, equally nat-
ural that these chosen representatives of the people
should look with jealousy upon the self-constituted
cliques which assumed to direct the course of na-
tional affairs. Almost from the first, therefore, we
find the legislative caucuses performing the organic
functions of the State conventions of the present
time, and assuming to speak for their constituents,
not only in regard to State, but also upon national
''KING CAUCUS." 105
affairs. Of these, the legislative caucuses of Virginia
and New York became especially notable.
The congressional caucus was the natural out-
growth of the legislative organizations already exist-
ing. It was instituted under the direct supervision
of Mr. Jefferson, who was the discoverer of most of
the popular forces of the new government. He
alone seems to have understood something of the
meaning of government by the people, while the
bulk of his compeers thought only of a government
for tlie people, by their leaders. The first congres-
sional caucus — that is, the first organized meeting of
the members of a political party who were also
members of the two houses of Congress, assuming to
act on behalf of their party, in the selection of a
Presidential candidate — was held toward the close
of Mr. Jefferson's second term, in 1808. It will be
well for you to note the character of this caucus with
some care, in order to distinguish it from the joint
caucus of each party in the two houses of Congress,
which still exists, but confines its attention to mat-
ters of legislation. The two bodies are entirely dis-
similar in function, though designated by the same
terms.
From this time until 1824 the congressional cau-
cuses assumed to nominate the national candidates,
and their action was in every instance confirmed by the
popular acquiescence and approval of their respective
parties. This result was not secured, however, with-
I06 LETTERS TO A KING.
out certain indications of ultimate revolt. The jeal-
ousy of the various legislative caucuses, whose action
was really open to the very same objection, fostered
the idea already prevalent among the people, that
such course on tiie part of members of Congress was
a dangerous usurpation — an unauthorized extension
of the powers delegated to them by their constitu-
ents. The term which became the slogan of the
famous scrub race of 1824 showed how ineradicable
is the antipathy of the American people to the exer-
cise of any political power which is not clearly and
unmistakably conferred by express popular authoriza-
tion. It was, in fact, a rebellion against the action
of the congressional caucus, which was stigmatized
as " King Caucus!"
The attempt has been made to perpetuate the
odium attaching to this name by an indiscriminate
application of the term to all forms of voluntary
political organization. Even yet the English polit-
ical writers, and some careless observers among our
own political theorists, labor under the impression
that the "caucus" is the most reprehensible feature
of our party organization. Within a very brief
period a distinguished novelist, whose ideas of
American politics, when not purely fanciful, are de-
rived by infiltration from English authorities, has
represented the United States as still under the do-
minion and control of that terrible tyrant, old " King
Caucus!"
"KJNG caucus:' 107
The truth is, that the "caucus" in the sense in
which the word had been used up to that time,
received its death-blow in 1824. Almost, if not the
sole instances of its survival, are to be found in the
political organizations of the city of New York,
which despite its arrogant claim to teach political
purity, remains, as it always has been, the Gibraltar
of political depravity. At that time the legislative
caucuses of the several States, as if by mutual under-
standing, attempted to revive their lapsed privilege
of nominating the national candidates, and four aspir-
ants, all belonging to the same party, were thus
brought into the field, with the result that there was
no choice of President or Vice-President by the elec-
toral colleges of that year.
This fact and the controversies resulting therefrom
made a profound impression on the public mind, and
prepared the way for the institution, in 1830, of the
delegate national convention, which is the keystone
of the American theory of party government. The
result has been the establishment of a system of
voluntary republics within the boundaries, and adapt-
ing themselves to the civil divisions, of the federal
Union. These voluntary republics we call parties.
They are composed of (i) primaries, or voluntary
meetings of the members of the party in the smallest
subdivisions of the various States, and (2) delegate
conventions, composed of representatives from the
primaries or subordinate delegate conventions. Thus
I08 LETTERS TO A KING.
the city, district, county, State, and national conven-
tions are duly constituted, all dependent on the will
of the individual members of the party as expressed
at the primaries, or, as they are sometimes termed,
caucuses.
This magnificent system is a gradual but nat-
outgrowth of the geniuS of the American people
for self government. It is the natural enemy of
the "caucus" and all forms of individual usurpa-
tion or assumption. It is the freeman's chosen
weapon for the achievemertt of individual equality,
which only fails to accomplish its purpose when the
hand of the citizen relaxes its grasp and the free-
man yields its control to the hireling. In detail and
organization it is by no means perfect. It is fair to
presume that neither its merits nor its imperfections
are yet fully apprehended. Fifty years of trial can
hardly be expected to develop more than the most
apparent excellencies, or reveal the most evident
defects of a system at once so pliant, so potent, and
so unique.
Thus far the evils which have developed under
it have generally, if not always, been the result, not
of the system itself, but of the s'urvival of some of
the vicious and undemocratic dements of the systems
it superseded.
These in many cases have distorted its character
and greatly impaired its efficiency ; but reviewing its
entire history, judging its efficiency by its aggregated
"KING CAUCUS." 109
results, it is not too much to say that the American
party system is the simplest, surest, and, all things
considered, the most effectual method of ascertaining
the popular will and carrying into effect the common
purpose, that has ever been devised. Being a natural
evolution, it adapts itself with readiness to the most
diverse conditions, not serving to render the bad
good, nor the good bad, but registering with the
utmost exactitude the intelligence, virtue, strength,
and manhood of every community to which it is
applied. If it points to "deals" in New York and
"bull-dozing" in the South, it is not the fault of the
system, but only a natural result of the predominance
of corruptibility and weakness in the respective local-
ities. A reliable barometer will not point to "fair"
in the face of a storm, nor has any plan been yet
devised that will enable a people to gather the grapes
of good government from the thorns of neglect,
venality, and ignorance. Our party system does not
guarantee protection against usurpative intelligence ;
it affords no safeguard against intimidation or cor-
ruption; it only provides, and only professes to pro-
vide, a way by which virtue and intelligence, united
with courage and zeal, may secure prosperity and
good government in a republic.
The creation of this magnificent instrumentality is
due to the instinct of self-control that characterizes
our people. It is this which especially distinguishes
the American Republic^from all other attempts in the
no LETTERS TO A KING.
direction of self-government, and is the most unique
and valuable of all our political institutions. In-
stead of regarding it with apprehension or contempt,
every good citizen should look upon it with peculiar
reverence. You can not possibly, my young friend,
devote your time to a more profitable study than the
constitution and character, the capabilities and defects,
of this most remarkable political agency which the
history of the world has developed.
IX.
SETTING THE KEY-STONE.
I HAD intended in this number to call your atten-
tion to the organic character and distinctive elements
of our party system as it at present exists, pointing
out some of its excellencies and considering its
proved defects. Upon carefully reviewing the ground
already covered, however, it has seemed to me desir-
able that you should first consider with some care
the events immediately leading to the adoption — per-
haps I ought to say the discovery — by the people of
the United States of the national convention, com-
posed of a specific number of delegates from the
various political subdivisions apportioned according to
a fixed rule, chosen by a regularly ascertained ma-
jority in the party primaries, representing the collec-
tive will, and constituting the supreme legislative,
judicial, and administrative head of a voluntary polit-
ical organization, which every member has — or is
supposed to have — equal power and privilege in
shaping and controlling. This body is the key-stone
of the American party system, and you can not
properly appreciate its character and importance
III
112 LETTERS TO A KING.
without giving special attention to the circumstances
attending its adoption. If our political history up to
that point showed a tendency to popularize party
management, the setting of this key-stone was so
unmistakable an assertion of the public will as to
leave no doubt that our party system, instead of
being a carefully planned instrumentality for depriving
the citizen of his equal share in the government, as
some would have us believe, is in reality the very
weapon which the people forged to secure parity of
power and privilege to all.
We have already seen that the history of party
organization in the United States reveals four succes-
sive stages, each marked by its own distinctive method
of ascertaining and directing popular sentiment, in
order to secure effective co operation among those
of similar political views. To each of these may be
assigned the following respective periods: (i) That
of the individual faction, or irresponsible voluntary
cabal, from the foundation of the government until
1796; (2) The State Legislative Caucus period, from
1792 until 1812; (3) The Congressional Caucus era,
from 1808 until 1824; (4) The Delegate Convention
period, from 1830 until the present time. We have
seen that each one of these successive changes was
a natural outgrowth of the irrepressible tendency of
the American people towards self government, acting
through existing agencies, and moved by specific
SETTING THE KEY-STONE. 113
popular impulses. You will note that the periods
assigned to each are not exclusive. Like all popular
movements, it can not be said that these changes of
form were instantaneous, or that the one at a precise
moment superseded the other. Each may be said
to have been the prevailing or dominant force during
the period assigned to it. Each marked a revolution
more or less distinct in public thought, by which it
was brought about, and, like all such changes, was
more or less gradual in character. The Legislative
Caucus continued, even after the organization of the
Congressional Caucus, as the determinative body,
only losing something of its independent and conclu-
sive character ; while between the downfall of the
Congressional Caucus and the adoption of the Rep-
resentative Convention, a considerable period elapsed,
during which parties were without any recognized or
authoritative headship. This was the germinal period
of the present system.
It is most essential that you keep the facts of the
growth and evolution of our party forms constantly
in mind. As a result of popular progress, party be-
comes not only an interesting study, but a govern-
mental agency worthy of serious and even reverent
consideration. It has been too much the custom to
regard all party organizations as necessarily malign
and dangerous influences. The philosophic ideal of
the perfect citizen is no doubt builded on the model
of a political Cincinnatus, following peacefully the
10
314 LETTERS TO A KING,
plow until a public exigency arises; then going quietly
to the ballot-box, and, without previous consultation
or any concert of action with others, expressing by
his simple ballot, his judgment as to the fittest man
to be assigned to any specific duty. Perhaps, to
make it entirely harmonious with our latest Anglo-
American ideal, this modern Cincinnatus ought to be
endowed with a vigorous Catonian inclination to find
fault, and thoroughly convinced that he is one of the
few honest and patriotic citizens of the Republic, if
not, indeed, the only one, on whose integrity and
disinterestedness absolute reliance can always be
placed.
Very fortunately this ideal is no longer capable
of realization. The changes of party form have al-
ways been indicative of far more important changes
in public thought — a constant emphasizing of the
tendency towards popular government. At first it
was supposed that the people would be content
merel}' to choose those whom they preferred, in
whose probity and wisdom they had the highest con-
fidence, and that these men would be, for the time
being, their rulers. Under these earlier conditions
the persons chosen to executive or legislative ofifices
were regarded as having been vested with discretion-
ary power, rather than charged with specific obliga-
tions by the popular preference. The fact that they
were the candidates of any particular party carried
with it little, if any, restriction of this discretion.
SETTING THE KEY-STONE. II5
While party lines — that is, the sentiment which
separates one party from another — were, no doubt,
drawn as sharply then as now, the limits of party
doctrine were very indistinct. There existed no such
clear and positive guides to the specific principles
which the different factions of those early days
professed, as the party platforms of the past fifty
years. Not that these are always intended to speak
the truth, or meant wholly to reveal the party
preference, but read with the gloss of current
events, they constitute an infallible index to the party
purpose.
As party forms developed, popular government
became a more and more distinct and tangible fact.
The candidate of a party to-day, within the limits
of his part)''s principles and declarations, is bound
as firmly as if sworn upon the altar. His claim to
support is based solely upon a pledge of loyalty to
the instructions of his party followers. So far as
their declared will and purpose extends he is the
servant, the agent of the party which nominates him.
Every vote that is cast for him is given under the
express or implied pledge on his part, that in the
position he is chosen to fill, he will act according
to their instructions and preferences, so far as the
same shall have been expressed previous to his election.
In other words, the official of to-day is the legis-
lative or executive representative of the will of his
party, and takes the office to which he is chosen
Il6 LETTERS TO A KING.
under the most solemn pledges to act according to
the known, established, and formulated principles of
those by whom he is chosen. He is their attorney,
governing in their name, by their authority, and ac-
cording to their direction. Outside of their pre-
expressed will, however, he is not bound to consider
or consult their preferences. Upon a new question he
may properly and honorably take his own course, even
though it should be in direct hostility to the will of
those by whom he is chosen, expressed subsequently to
his election.
This is government hy the people. It is the en-
forcement of the express will of a majority, by their
pledged and chosen representatives — the exponents
of their beliefs and the agents of their predetermined
purposes. This may not be so good a plan of gov-
ernment as that which simply selects the wisest and
best — or those whom the majority may deem the
wisest and best — leaving them to act as they may
judge the public good to require. It is the result,
however, of an irresistible tendency of our people
toward self-government — to the determination of all
important questions, not by arbitrators chosen to de-
cide the same, but by the people themselves acting
individually and directly upon the subject. Our
party organization of the present is calculated and
intended to give expression to this impulse, and is
impregnably intrenched in the popular preference
because of its actual or supposed efficiency in secur-
SETTING THE KEY-STONE. WJ
ing that result. It was this tendency on the part of
the American people that thrust aside first the indi-
vidual cabals, then the separate State Legislative Cau-
cus, and finally the Congressional Caucus itself — each
because it was not sufficiently representative of the
popular will — substituting each time a broader, more
perfect and harmonious system in place of the one
thus discarded ; making these successive changes,
not instantaneously and simultaneously in all parts
of the country, but gradually and at different times
in different States, as the necessity for them forced
itself upon the public conviction. It was this same
impulse, too, that finally threw them all aside and
adopted the present party organization in order to
secure a better expression of the popular will and
more certain accomplishment of its purposes.
The history of the first national delegate conven-
tion and the circumstances out of which it grew,
affords a singular confirmation of the view we have
taken. As we have seen, there v.as but one party
in the nation from 1816 until 1824. Even then, the
so-called National Republican party did not formu-
late any express declaration of principles, but merely
separated from the other wing of the party, claiming
to be its true exponent instead of the more radical
faction which they opposed. Practically, the same
conditions, slightly emphasized, continued in 1828.
That contest was purely factional. It was a fight
between the personal followers of men who did not
Il8 LETTERS TO A KING.
even claim any material difference of political faith.
At this time, however, one of the most remarkable
and instructive movements of our poHtical history-
was begun, which eventually became one of the most
romantic episodes in the progress of self-government.
It is doubtful if such important results ever before
sprung from apparently so insignificant a cause, as
those which followed the disappearance of William
Morgan, of Batavia, N. Y., in 1826. Indeed, the
political history of that time reads to-day like a page
out of some highly colored romance. It is almost
impossible to believe that the actors in that curious
extravaganza were our fathers, sober, earnest, God-
fearing men. Yet your own grandfather was snatched
from obscurity and raised to fame by the intensity
of his patriotic anger at the crime done to one citi-
zen, and the peril which he thought it indicated to
the rights of all. Even after her eightieth year I re-
member to have heard my grandmother tell, in tones
tremulous with excitement, the story of what she
still believed to be a conspiracy of unparalleled atro-
city against the liberty of the citizen and the safety
of the Republic. She only represented the senti-
ment of hundreds of thousands to whose minds even
the fame of Washington was, for a time, clouded
with doubt because of his relations with a mystic,
oath-bound body, whom they believed" to be inim-
ical to a government based on equality of right.
What was the cause of this popular ferment? It
SETTING THE KEY-STONE. II9
has almost been forgotten. Perhaps you will hardly
find the name I have cited in your encyclopedia.
There is more than one such work that does not
deem it worthy of preservation even for the student
of American politics. I doubt if you have ever given
the movement inseparably connected with it an
hour's thought. Yet I have seen your grandfather's
eyes flash under his white knotted brows, and heard
his voice tremble with emotion, as, even amid the ex-
citement of our great Civil War, he told the story of
that wonderful popular uprising. Even your father,
until the last hour of his life, acknowledged its in-
fluence upon his own political preferences.
William Morgan was a Freemason. He was re-
ported to have written an exposition of the mysteries
of that ancient fraternity for publication. This report
awakened great consternation among the members of
that organization throughout the country. Pending
its publication, Morgan was imprisoned at Canandai-
gua, New York, on a charge of debt; taken out
of the jail at night, placed in a carriage, and driven
away in the direction of Niagara Falls. He was
never seen afterwards. The popular belief was that
he was murdered and his body thrown into the river,
and that this was done by Freemasons to prevent the
revelation he was about to make. It is probable that
both suppositions were correct. Yet why should
such a crime be of special moment to the people of
the United States ? What was William Morgan that
120 LETTERS TO A KING.
they should take any interest in his death ? Nothing.
As a man he was utterly insignificant, and, by his
own confession, dishonored and forsworn. The dis-
closures he professed to be about to make seem to
have been intended simply to raise money. It is more
than probable that instead of desiring to reveal the
secrets of Freemasonry, his purpose was merely to
blackmail its initiates through fear of exposure. He
does not seem to have had any valid claim to the name
of patriot or reformer, and certainly was in no sense a
man fit to be made a popular idol in his life, or likely
to be revered as a martyr after his death.
Nor was he so revered. The people cared noth'
ing for William Morgan as a man, alive or dead. It
was only the idea that a society, extending through-
out the whole country, and embracing among its
members a vast majority of the most wealthy, cul-
tured, and refined citizens, including nearly all the
prominent political leaders, had a hold upon its
members which they regarded as paramount to the
sanction of the law of the land, that made his death a
matter of general concern. It was the apprehension
of peril to popular liberty, free government, and equal
rights, that roused the masses of the people to a frenzy
of fanaticism that has never been equaled in our his-
tory. It was not so much the apprehension of crime,
or the fear that justice would be corrupted, but th5i
idea that there existed in the Republic an oath bound
body of men, who were pledged to aid and favor
SETTING THE KEY-STONE. 121
each other in all things. It was against them as a
privileged class — as unduly favored citizens — that the
.public wrath burned hot.
The fiercest of popular frenzies was that Anti-
masonic movement which followed hard upon the dis-
appearance of Morgan in 1826. I wish I could
' give you some idea of its lurid intensity as I have
gathered it from the study of the public prints of
that day, as well as from the lips of ancient crafts-
men and their most active opponents. It was a
political difference that impugned the personal char-
acter of every man who ventured to uphold one side
of the controversy. To the Antimason every Mason
was, of necessity, a criminal. If not actually a
murderer, he was solemnly pledged to commit mur-
der, should the interests of the craft or the peril of a
fellow-craftsman demand it. He was unfit to be a
freeman, because he was a member of a great con-
spiracy to destroy equality of right and privilege. The
Churches took cognizance of membership of the lodge
as an act of immorality, and expelled all who did not
publicly renounce their obligations. To be a Mason
was everywhere held an act requiring excuse. Thou-
sands of members publicly withdrew, or rather, as
withdrawal from the order is a thing unknown and
impossible, formally renounced Masonry. Lodges
were disbanded and charters surrendered, until there,
remained in some States hardl}' a skeleton of the
organization. Members were often afraid to ackiiowl-
II
122 LETTERS TO A KING.
edge themselves such from actual fear of per-
sonal violence. Men even refused to recognize
the hailing signs of the craft from fear of betrayal.
A century before — perhaps at any previous time —
such fierce fanaticism could only have been allayed
by the shedding of blood.
Thanks to the freedom and flexibility of our
political system, it found a peaceful outlet. In 1828
four States elected Antimasonic governors. In every
State the charge of Masonic affiliation was a serious
imputation against any public man. At least two
candidates for the Presidency publicly disavowed all
active relation with the institution, or personal recog-
nition of its obligations. Whether another had or
had not been initiated is perhaps hardly yet deter-
mined. Few men were chosen to any office for a
decade who did not openly declare their non-affilia-
tion or publicly renounce their vows, such was the
fierceness of the popular clamor.
Aside from its peculiar character and purpose,
this was a notable uprising of the people — an asser-
tion of the public will that took no account of
party lines, trampled popular leaders in the dust, and
mocked at existing political methods. It was a re-
volt afjainst self-constituted leaders and self-declared
representation. It may have been right or it may
have been wrong in its estimate of the peril that
threatened. That is a matter of little moment now.
Probably it was not entirely right nor altogether
SETTING THE KEY-STONE. 1 23
wrong. Certainly very few believe that there is any
danger now to be apprehended from the institution
then so greatly dreaded. What remains to us of
value from this lurid conflict of half a century ago
is the fact that it marks the first institution of a
plan of organization expressly designed to im-
press upon the government the convictions, of a
distinct body of the American people. Out of
Antimasonry was born our present party system.
Throwing aside as insufficient the existing political
agencies, the Antimasons held the first national dele-
gate convention, formulated a platform, prescribed a
ratio of representation, and subordinated every part
of the new organization, from the lovvest to the
highest, to popular control. From this first delegate
national convention in 1830, until the present time,
no party has dared take any important step except
in the name of, and with the claim of express author-
ity from, the individuals of which it is composed.
Thus it will be seen that every step in the evolu-
tion of our party system has been but a natural re-
sult of the impulse of self-government which is
inherent in the American people. At first non-
representative control was discarded ; then pseudo-
representation was set aside ; and, finally, the simple
yet effective system which has now become so familiar
to us, that we find it hard to realize that it has not
always existed, was inaugurated. From first to last,
the movement has been a persistent, at times even a
124 LETTERS TO A KING.
passionate, revolt against what we should now term
"ring-rule" and "bossism."
To say that it has not always served the purpose
for which it was designed, is simply to assert its
human origin. That it has more nearly accomplished
this purpose than any other known instrumentality
is an incontestable fact. It is only when organized
ambition coexists with general and culpable neglect,
on the part of its members, however, that the Amer-
ican system of party organization can be made to lend
itself to any other purpose than the due enforcement
of the popular will. How this is sometimes done, and
how it may be prevented, we shall presently inquire.
X.
A SHEAF OF FIRST-FRUITS.
We have seen that our present part}' sj-stem is
an outgrowth of the popular tendency towards the
direct control of public affairs by the people them-
selves. It may be interesting to note the fact that
simultaneous with this movement there has been a
remarkable popularization of our government itself,
showing a constant and irresistible tendency of power
to the hands of the people, and a growing disap-
proval of those methods which interpose an inter-
mediary between the source of power and its appli-
cation. Of this tendency there are two very notable
evidences.
We have already seen how the Presidential Elec-
tors were transformed from independent self-directing
entities into mere passive instruments of the majority
by which they are chosen. The framers of the Con-
stitution no doubt intended that the Electors should
choose a President and a Vice-President in the man-
ner prescribed, and according to their own convic-
tions of fitness and capacity. Before the third Presi-
dential election, however, the Electors had become
125
126 LETTERS TO A KING.
mere agents of the popular will ; that is, they were
expected to vote only for those whom the popular
majority preferred. This was at first accomplished
without changing the method of choosing these
officials. The Federal Constitution directs that
"each State shall appoint'' Electors "in such manner
as the Legislatures thereof shall direct." It was no
doubt intended that the several Legislatures ///««-
.y^/z^^5 should "appoint" the Electors, the qualifying
phrase, "in such manner as they shall direct," being
designed to apply merely to the method of proce-
dure, whether viva voce, by joint ballot, or the two
houses acting separately. In accordance with this
idea, the Electors were appointed by the Legislatures
of all the States until 1812, by all but two in 1 8 16,
and even in 1824 the)^ were still chosen by the Leg-
islatures of Delaware, Georgia, Louisiana, New York,
South Carolina, and Vermont.
As the people began to break away from the
idea of personal leadership and individual followings
and learn the real significance of popular power, they
begfan to clamor for a more direct control of what
had already been popularly named the "Electoral
College." It is a curious fact that for nearly a score
of )'ears, this meeting of the official Electors had no
name or specified form of organization under our
laws, but was popularly known almost from the first
as the "Electoral College." It was insisted when
the popular demand for specific control of this
A SHEAF OF FIRST-FRUITS. 1 2/
peculiar feature of our national government began to
assume positive shape, that, as the Legislature had
the power to "direct" how the "State" should
"appoint " Electors, they had the discretion to remit
that duty to the people. Another view of the sub-
ject was that since the people constituted the
"State," the power to appoint Electors inhered in
them, and the Legislature were only clothed with
power to regulate the method of appointment. This
was no doubt a strained construction of the constitu-
tional intent ; but the people so willed it, and it was
done — done, too, in many instances, without serious
opposition, so natural and almost insensible was the
transition of power from the few to the many, from
the center to the circumference. Almost contempo-
raneously with the birth of the modern party, there-
fore, the people assumed direct control of the choice
of Electors in all the States except South Carohna,
where they continued to be appointed by the Legisla-
ture until 1868.
Another notable indication of the popularization
of our government, attendant upon or resulting from,
the evolution of our present party system, is the in-
crease in the number of elective offices — especially at
the North. Previous to 1820, by far the greater part
of the administrative and judicial officers of the States
were appointed, either by the executive alone or by
the executive acting in conjunction with one or both
branches of the Legislature. Coincident with the
128 LETTERS TO A KING.
assertion of popular power in the direction and control
of the party came the demand for popular control of
these offices. So that at the present time the county
offices in all the Northern States, all township officers
except justices of the peace in three of them, munici-
pal officers in all except one, all judges of courts of
record, except the judges of the Supreme Court in two,
and of the inferior courts in one, are elective. In short,
it may be said that all the legislative, executive, judi-
cial, and administrative functionaries of the Northern
States are now chosen directly by the people. The
.same system of complete local self-government was
generally introduced into the States of the South by
the constitutions of 1868, which were formed on North-
ern models and represented Northern ideas. With the
overthrow of these governments in 1876, there came,
however, a return to the appointive system that had
prevailed before the War of Rebellion. So that the
governor of a single Southern State now appoints
more officials than those of half a dozen of the more
populous States of the North. Thus it will be seen
that the popular control of the party — the voluntary
republic wliich exists within the national organism —
has always been indicative of a tendency to direct
popular control of the functions of government.
Another indication of the tendency which has
grown up under the present party system is the in-
clination to what IS termed "centralization" in our
national government. Curiou-sly enough, in an indi-
A SHEAF OF FIRST-FRUITS. 1 29
vidual sense, it is not centralization at all, but simply
an inclination to transfer power from the States, acting
as such, to the people of all the States, acting indi-
vidually. This has manifested itself in the assertion of
the rights of citizens of the United States to equality
before the law in all the States; the national super-
vision of elections for members of Congress and
Presidential Electors ; the extension of the jurisdiction
of the United States courts ; the regulation of inter-
state commerce ; the assertion of congressional control
over the electoral count and in many other ways,
which, though they may not seem significant to the
casual observer, to the student of our political history
are indicative of a most remarkable change in the
character and tendency of our institutions. It is a
singular fact, and one that should not be lost sight
of, ill estimating the value of our present party
system, that every modification of our governmental
organism which has resulted from its adoption, has
been an extension of individual right — an enhance-
ment of individual power as contradistinguished from
the claim of power by artificial groups. Tlie domain
of national citizenship has been greatly enlarged and
that of statal citizenship correspondingly restricted by
its operation.
This change to direct from indirect control of affairs,
is looked upon with apprehension by many who
regard as peculiarly sacred the ideas of those who
are reverently referred to as "the founders of our
I30 LETTERS TO A KING.
government;" meaning, by that phrase, the men who
devised our constitutional system. Such are apt to
consider what are often termed the "safeguards" of
the Federal Constitution with peculiar veneration.
They look upon our national prosperity in all its
phases, as chiefly the result of constitutional restric-
tions, forgetful of the fact that its greatest peril,
the "War of Rebellion," was a direct and unmis-
takable result of the existence of two of these vaunted
"safeguards." To such, the "intention of the
fathers " and the wisdom ' ' of the founders of our gov-
ernment " are far more important than the popular
tendencies which inspired their conduct or have since
so greatly modified its results. They regard the glory
of the American republic as due rather to the ' ' checks
and balances of the Constitution" than to the inherent
character of our people.
On the other hand, there are those who look upon
the restriction of State authority to local and muni-
cipal affairs alone, and the extension of direct popular
control of the national government, as a healthful and
desirable tendency. These regard our government
as not so much an invention as a growth, an evolu-
tion — the result of antecedent conditions and continu-
ing forces. The American RcpubHc seems to their
apprehension indebted for strength, prosperit)-, and
freedom, less to the form of its written Constitution
than to the instinct for self government, the intelli-
gence, the moderation, and self-control of its people.
A SHEAF OF FIRST-FRUITS. 131
It is not the wise devices of the fathers, but the inborn
kingliness of her sons, making them always ready to
accept responsibiUty and ever cautious in the exercise
of power, which has saved the nation from the ills
that have overborne other democracies. The fathers
were fearful of the extension of individual power.
They dreaded the popular will. Even the Capital City,
named after the "Father of his Country," was laid
out under his immediate supervision with the express
purpose of being easily defensible in the event of
popular uprisings which he feared. With little clamor,
and almost without stain of blood, the people whom
the fathers of the Republic distrusted, have seized the
power that was so carefully guarded against their
expected assaults, and have made the restrictive forms
that were intended to baffle their dangerous inclina-
tions, mere instruments for carrying into effect their
imperial will. To the voluntary instrumentalities
devised and shaped to enable the popular will to be
more readily, clearly, and certainly ascertained and
enforced, we no doubt owe our national integrity and
the sense of imperial grandeur that is beginning to
attach to our national renown.
Our party system has lifted the will of the majority
to a place of more than royal dignity. The sovereign
will of the Republic has become something more than
a mere fanciful hypothesis. The right to rule depends
no longer on exploded theories or dubious specula-
tion. The will of the majority fully expressed, care-
132 LETTERS TO A KING.
fully ascertained, and faithfully recorded, — this is the
sovereign power of the Republic, Every life is pledged
to the maintenance of its supremacy, not merely by
the formal obligation of allegiance, but by the instinct
of justice and the impulse of self-interest. The people
are kings, and the concurrent will of the majority is
"the lord paramount" of the realm. Party is simply
a method which the people have devised and elabo-
rated for ascertaining what this concurrent will may
be, and for carrying it into effect when ascertained.
With this instrumentality the civic triumphs of our
past have been won, and to it more than to any other
influence, the peace, prosperity, and glory of the
Republic are due. It has not always worked without
friction, nor have its results been always of an un-
objectionable character. It is sometimes foolishly
claimed to have been the cause of war, while it is
unquestionably entitled to credit for inculcating that
reverence for the popular will which enabled the
nation to surmount every obstacle and defend the
citadel of liberty from every assault.
It is very well, my young friend, that you
should be always awake to perils that may impend
from a too blind devotion to party, but do not ever
forget that to this wonderful outgrowth of the pop-
ular instinct for self direction, which the conditions
of our American life alone seem able to have gen-
erated, we owe our deliverance from the perils of
that half-chaotic epoch when factional strife - and
A SHEAF OF THE FIRST-FRUITS. 1 33
individual ambition had not yet been wholly sub-
ordinated to the popular will. Other republics have
been overthrown by the conflict of leaders and the
clash of personal ambitions. Thanks to our American
party system, we have thoroughly learned two great
lessons, — that no man is so wise, so great, or so re-
liable as a party, and that no party has any claim to
supremacy save by the express will and approval of a
majority of its members. By the invention of this sim-
ple yet mighty mechanism, the people of the United
States have shown themselves wiser than those wise
and patriotic men who sought to control their action
and protect them even from themselves. They have
dethroned and disarmed the popular leader, and taken
from the struggle for supremacy the supremely dan-
gerous factor of personal ambition. The political
leader has become the mere agent and creature of his
party. He can be an aspirant for favor only by its
permission ; he triumphs only through its indorse-
ment, and is cast aside at its pleasure. It pulls down
the proudest and lifts up the lowliest. It is only when
its power is weakened that rebellion occurs; and only
when it shall be destroyed that usurpation will be-
come possible. Thus far it remains the most valuable
element of America's contribution to the science of
human government.
Whatever may be the tendency of power in the
future, whether towards the extension of federal con-
trol and the enhancement of the privilege of national
134
LETTERS TO A KING.
citizenship or not, you will readily perceive how
essential it becomes to the future safety of the Re-
public that this strange agency which has grown up
Avilhin its linnits should be fully apprehended and
wisely administered by the people, whose chosen
weapon it is. As it has been designed and forged
by the popular will of the past, so it must be pol-
ished and tempered by the patience, steadfastness,
and patriotism of the present and the future.
XI.
THE INVISIBLE REPUBLIC.
I HAVE called our modern party a voluntary re-
public. Did you ever think how perfect and com-
plete a democracy it is in theory, and how simple
and effective in its unrestricted operation? Let us
resolve it into its elements, and see what they are.
Let us examine the laws by which its action is reg-
ulated, and see how little machinery is necessary to
control such mighty combinations. Let us consider
its legislative methods, its administrative mechanism,
and determine, if we can, where and how and why
it has proved itself deficient or harmful, how the
various evils may be remedied, and what duty is in-
cumbent upon you as a citizen of the Republic, in
connection with its operation and amendment.
First, then, you Avill keep in mind that each of
the great parties of to-day is composed of more than
twenty thousand primitive democracies, which are
properly termed primaries. They are sometimes, but
improperly, designated caucuses. As we have already
seen, the term caucus is properly applied onlj' to a
self-constituted and unauthorized body. The term,
135
136 LETTERS TO A KING.
probably, had its origin in the clandestine meetings
of patriots just before the outbreak of the Revolu-
tionary War, So far as known, the word is of Boston
origin, and meant, at the outset, a secret meeting for
the purpose of determining upon a common course
of action in regard to some public matter. After-
wards it was applied to any sort of secret political
consultation. As we have alread)' seen, the Legis-
lative Caucus was a secret consultation of all the
members of a specific party in the State Legisla-
ture as the self-constituted organ of that party. At
one time it assumed to prescribe rules and make
nominations for the party. The same was true, as
we have seen, of the Congressional Caucus. Both
of these were secret, or rather exclusive, meetings of
members of a party belonging to such legislative
bodies.
Such organizations as these still remain, and bear
the same designation ; but they no longer assume to
perform anj' such function. The Legislative or Con-
gressional Caucus of to-day is simply a meeting of
the members of a party, who are also members of a
legislative body, to determine what action shall be
taken in regard to measures pending or to be intro-
duced before the body to which they belong. The
careless use of this term is probably responsible for
more political nonsense than any other one thing con-
nected with our politics. The voluntary cabal, the
legislative party council, and the party primary, — all
THE INVISIBLE REPUBLIC. 1 37
these are bunched together and held up to public
opprobrium as "caucuses," and we are then treated
to long and labored disquisitions on the terrible
enormities of that mysteriously compounded monster
" King Caucus!"
The truth is, that there never was a political
movement among the people of any country in which
there were not secret consultations among the leaders.
Concert of action is a necessity, and effective concert
demands secrecy. Before a public meeting can be
held, there must always be private consultation.
This is a "caucus," in its primary sense — nothing
more and nothing less. In every legislative body, of
whatever sort or character since the world began, there
has always been the legislative caucus or some equiv-
alent of it. In the British Parliament the ' ' whip " and
the "conference of leaders" take the place of the
vote of the caucus. These forms, or their equiva-
lents, are essential to popular government and par-
liamentary legislation. But the primary — so often
misnamed the "caucus" — is peculiar to the Amer-
ican party system, and is the first distinctive feature
that demands your attention. It consists — except in
the case of a few great cities, which exception will
be considered at length hereafter — of a public meet-
ing, open to all who are in effective sympathy with
the party it represents, regularly organized with a
duly elected president and secretaries, governed by
regular parliamentary rules, in which all the voters
12
138 LETTERS TO A ICING.
of the township or precinct in which it is held, who
belong to a specific political party, have an equal
right to participate — to speak and to vote.
This miniature republic has three specific func-
tions: I. To legislate for itself; that is, to prescribe
rules for the government of the party within that
precinct, which, however, must not be inconsistent
with the general laws governing the party at large
and prescribed by its higher tribunals. 2. To choose
its own leaders ; that is, to elect its own officers, to
nominate candidates for local offices and to appoint
an executive committee to organize and direct party
action in the precinct. 3. To exercise its due share
of influence in the government and control of the
whole party; that is, to elect delegates to represent
it in the next higher council of the party, according
to a previously prescribed ratio of representation,
which is usually determined by the number of votes
cast for the party's candidate at the last preceding
general election.
The county convention, which is the second step
in the nice gradation of party government, exercises
in like manner legislative, executive, and judicial
power. Composed entirely of regularly elected dele-
gates from the various primaries within its jurisdiction,
it determines the ratio of representation by which the
number from each is to be ascertained ; prescribes
rules for the government of the party in the county ;
nominates county candidates; names a county execu-
THE INVISIBLE REPUBLIC. \ 39
tive committee, and chooses delegates to the State
and congressional district conventions.
The congressional district convention prescribes
the ratio of representation from the various counties
of which the district is composed, and the time and
manner of their selection; nominates the congres-
sional candidate of the party for that district, and
quadrennially selects delegates to the national con-
vention and names a candidate for Presidential elector.
The State convention, made up of delegates from
the various counties, legislates for the party in the
State ; prescribes the ratio of representation from the
counties; nominates candidates for State offices;
names a State executive committee ; selects delegates
from the State at large to the national convention ;
names candidates for Presidential electors for the
State at large, and defines the party policy as regards
State affairs.
The national convention is made up of delegates
(i) from the various congressional districts of the
country, and (2) from the several States, the whole
being based upon, and following very closely, the
model of the federal government, the delegates from
the districts being the equivalent of the members of
the House of Representatives, and the delegates at
large representing the senatorial power of the State.
It prescribes the ratio of representation ; decides
contests from the different States and districts ; nom
inates candidates for President and Vice President ;
I40 LETTERS TO A KING.
names a National Executive Committee; formulates
the party policy on national questions, and authori-
tatively defines its purpose and traditions.
I have not recapitulated these things, my young
friend, because of any doubt that you are already
familiar with each of them as independent facts, but
lest you might not have noted their mutual interde-
pendence, and the chain of relation that extends
from the lowest to the highest, and so have failed to
appreciate the harmony between the various parts of
the voluntary republics that have grown up Avithin
the nation, and are at constant warfare with each
other for its political control — a warfare that is in
itself the evidence of peace and stability, as well as
the guarantee of liberty and progress.
No doubt it would seem to an observer not fa-
miliar with the spirit of our institutions that this vol-
untary republic was but a servile imitation of the
political forms and institutions with which it is con-
nected. A glance will assure you that it is a far
simpler system than that embodied in the Federal
Constitution. The reason of this is, no doubt, that
the government was framed by speculative statesmen,
versed in the accepted tenets of political philosophy,
while the party is the product of popular instinct,
and is yet almost entirely unmodified by legal en-
actment.
The first difference you will note between these
voluntary republics and the conventional ones to
THE INVISIBLE REPUBLIC. 141
whose subdivisions and convolutions they have so
readily adapted themselves, is the absence of restrict-
ive or corrective agencies. If the individual member
of a party is denied his right, or debarred of his
privilege as a citizen of the voluntary republic, he has
before him two remedies, exile or retaliation ; that
is, he may either abandon his party and deprive it
of his support, or actively seek to compass its defeat
and overthrow. Which of these courses it is his
duty to adopt depends on circumstances we shall
consider hereafter.
It will be noted, also, that the balance between
national and statal power — or rather between popular
and statal control — which is so carefully maintained
in the Federal Constitution, is almost discarded in
the voluntary republic or party. Though there is a
double representation in the national convention —
from the States as well as from the districts — this is
always a joint, instead of a separate representation.
The delegates from the States and districts sit to-
gether in the same body, voting and acting conjointly,
so that the one can hardly be termed a check upon
the other. By this means the State representation
becomes merely an added increment of the popular
power. The analogy of two houses constituting one
legislative body, which prevails not only in the fed-
eral government, but in each one of the States, is
discarded in the party.
This has been regarded by some of the most careful
142 LETTERS TO A KING.
students of our political history as a serious defect.
There is no doubt but the tendency of all popular
assemblies is to be carried away by the feeling of the
moment. Whether this is a defect in an organiza-
tion of this character, however, may well be ques-
tioned. '
One thing is certain, that the tendency has been
from the first decidedly against restriction. This has
been especially notable in the Republican party,
which, as we have seen, is in a modified sense the
representative of the federalistic idea ; that is, it rep-
resents and maintains the idea of the supremacy of
the nation as against the paramount sovereignty of
the individual States. This view is, however, modi-
fied by an express inclination to the popularization
of the federal government itself, which has been
manifested not less in its party organization than in
the legislation it has inspired. Previous to the con-
vention of 1880, State representation was secured in
that party by allowing a majority of delegates from
each State to control the entire number of its votes.
This rule was at that time discarded, and the major-
ity required to control its action is now made up by
the votes of delegates irrespective of State major-
ities. The two-thirds rule which obtains in Dem-
ocratic national conventions is a notable instance of
a self-restricting provision, enforced with the most
rigorous and inflexible faithfulness. Its results in
1844 and i860, however, have led many to doubt
THE INVISIBLE REPUBLIC. 1 43
its wisdom. A shrewd political observer has said
that the War of Rebellion was the direct result of its
enforcement.
Another difference that will strike the thoughtful
observer is, that in the voluntary republic all the
functions of government are united in one body.
You may, perhaps, think that this attribution of leg-
islative, judicial, and executive functions to these
bodies is somewhat fanciful, but you will soon learn
that the control of a party requires not less, but
rather more, skill and sagacity than the government
of a nation. You will no doubt be surprised on your
first admission to the councils of a party to learn how
largely the judicial function is developed, and what a
mass of common law peculiar to each party has grown
up in our fifty years of government under this system.
In one of our late national conventions a delegate
cited in support of a position he had assumed the
action of a national convention of 1844, of whose
proceedings there is no detailed record, he having
received his information from his father, who was a
prominent member of that body. No one thought
of questioning it, and there is no doubt but the
action of the convention was sensibly influenced by
this precedent. So, too, the legislative function —
the formulation of new principles and effective enun-
ciation of accepted doctrines and traditions — is a
work requiring the very highest statesmanship, the
ripest experience, and broadest knowledge both of
144 LETTERS TO A KING.-
political history and the popular tendency, as well as
the highest literary skill.
To these voluntary republics of ours, you Avill see
that the individual may sustain four distinct relations,
to wit: (i) That of the private citizen — the simple
voter in the primary ; (2) that of the delegate — the
representative exponent of the collective will and
purpose of a group of citizens in an assembly made
up of representatives from constituent bodies; (3)
that of a candidate or leader selected to represent
the principles and carry the standard of his party;
and (4) that of the executive agent or committee,
having in charge its financial matters and generally
vested with the judicial and executive functions nec-
essary to the administration of its affairs.
The duties of the citizen in a government by
parties in the American sense come, therefore,
naturally to be considered under these heads: (i)
The primary — its organization, conduct, and the
rights, privileges, and duties of its members ; (2) the
delegate — his duties and obligations ; (3) the candi-
date — his duties and relations ; and (4) the executive
committee — their functions and privileges. You will
find the discussion of these, I trust, not only inter-
esting and profitable, but touching perhaps some
questions more vital to our liberties than j^ou have
hitherto supposed to be dependent on this phase of
our political life.
XII.
THE RANK AND FILE.
It has been been demonstrated over and over
again, in the history of warfare, that success de-
pends not so much upon a knowledge of grand strat-
egy, tactical skill, excellence of organization or per-
fectness of equipment, as on the personal qualities
of the individuals of whom an army is composed.
While leadership and strategy can by no means be
dispensed with, it is the fortitude, courage, and reso-
lution of the individual soldier on which the hope
of victory must ultimately rest. The raw levies
which your father led to victory in the early days
of our great conflict were, no doubt, inspired to the
performance of immortal deeds by the force of his
heroic example; but of far more consequence, as
affecting the grand result, than the skill or even
the example of their leaders, was the earnest convic-
tion shared by every one of the rank and file of
the importance of the conflict in which they were
engaged, and the sacredness of the cause for which
they fought.
A soldier, after all that has been said about the
13 145
146 LETTERS TO A KING.
value of subordination in an army, is not a mere
machine. Simple obedience to the command of a
superior does not make a man a hero. The German
battalion who set their backs against the wall of a
cemetery in the Franco-Prussian war and held their
position until every man had fallen, were kept in
place not so much by the habit of obedience as by
the sentiment of "Fatherland" that animated them.
It was not the discipline on board of Nelson's ships,
nor the gallantry and skill of the stern old sea-dogs
who commanded under him, that made the French
admiral exclaim to those who stood about him
on his quarter-deck, "Now all is lost;" but the
shouts that went up from the lips of the British
sailors when they saw flying from the flag-ship
that stern challenge to individual patriotism and
devotion, "England expects every man to do his
duty." Discipline may, indeed, do much to secure
the soldier's efficiency. A thorough knowledge of
all that may be required of him, and an established
habit of prompt obedience to the directing will of
his superior, are unquestionably essential to his very
highest effectiveness, but these are comparatively
valueless without that readiness to do and dare which
springs only from an intelligent conviction — a press-
ing individual sense of duty or necessity.
In a party — which is only an army by which the
bloodless, but very often more important, victories
of peace are won in a republic — the same principle
THE RANK AND FILE. 147
holds good and even applies with far greater force, be-
cause to the rank and file of a party is intrusted, not
merely the task of maintaining a united front against
the assaults of the enemy, but also, the duty of
naming the leaders who must direct the conflict, and
of marking out the strategical lines on which the bat-
tle must be fought. In fact, the American citizen
serving in the ranks of a party, instead of being a
mere insignificant atom, whose only duty is to stand
up and be counted at each November Ides, is like
the Greek soldier of the olden time, leader at once
and servitor, since, as was eloquently said of his
prototype, "In one day he may be called upon to
stand in the council of the chiefs and serve in the
front rank of the squadron." As a citizen, he rules
through the ascendency of the party he helps both
to shape and direct ; as a partisan, he> serves with
ready but intelligent subordination under the leaders
he has helped to name, and who control and direct
only by virtue of his authorization. What are the
duties, rights, and privileges attaching to a citizen as a
member of a political party ? This is among the most
important questions which one standing on the verge
of active manhood can possibly ask himself, and one
which he should by all means seek intelligently and
properly to answer.
The relations which the citizen may sustain to
the party to which he belongs are of a threefold
character, each of which brings with it peculiar obli-
148 LETTERS TO A KING.
gations and entails peculiar duties. Each confers
certain rights and is affected by specific limitations.
These three relations may be defined as follows:
1. That of a voter who believes in the party's
principles, accepts its polic}', and votes for its can-
didates — the simple private in the ranks of the great
army which fights for the supremacy of a specific
principle, policy, or purpose.
2. That of a delegate — the representative of the
will and power of a subordinate body of the party
by virtue of which he becomes a member of another
body of higher power or more extended jurisdiction.
3. That of a candidate seeking the favor of his
party in the form of a nomination, and its support
in order to secure his election.
In these several relations the obligations resting
on the party and the individual are mutual, perform-
ance on the part of the one constituting the sole
basis of obligation on the part of the other.
The rights attaching to mere individual member-
ship in a party are based, not on the favor of other
individuals, but on the fact of mutual interest. They
rest upon the common obligation which devolves
upon every member of such a body to treat with
equal consideration and to offer equal opportunity
to each and every one who supports its policy,
maintains its power, and promotes its aims. It is a
basis of mutual, voluntary, and natural obligation.
The party, as a whole, is indebted to the individual
THE RANK AND FILE. 149
for maintaining its policy ; the individual is beholden
to the party for carrying into effect the views he en-,
tertains. The relations of the individual to his party
are, therefore, those naturally growing out of an
equal partnership among many, intended to secure a
common purpose for the equal advantage of all.
The ngJits of the individual thus become obligations
of the party, and the duties of the individual rights
of the party. The rights of the individual member
of any party may be classed as follows :
1. Every voter who supports a party's policy and
votes for its nominees, is of right entitled to a voice
and vote in the part}' primary of the precinct in
which he resides.
2. He is entitled to receive due and ample notice
of each and every meeting of the same.
3. He is entitled to an equal voice with every
other member, in the organization and control of the
primary ; and also,
4. To demand that there shall always be a fair
vote, fairly counted and rnade effectual in the election
of its officers, the choice of delegates, and the selec-
tion of candidates.
These rights, though of the utmost importance
to the country as a whole and to the citizen as an
individual, are none of them guaranteed by law,
except in some States, or parts of States, a specific
statutory notice of the holding of a caucus or primary
is required, and in a very few there are statutory
I50 LETTERS TO A KING.
provisions regulating the election of delegates. Tlie
definition and protection of these rights is as yet a
fresh field for legislation, but one in which the neces-
sity for intelligent regulation has become apparent and
which requires only a more general appreciation of
its feasibility and advantage in order to secure the
attention it deserves. Just as long as our people
regard "practical politics" as synonymous with
fraud and trickery, and Christian men who would
scorn to lie or steal or bribe for profit, insist that the
good of the country demands that men should lie
and steal and bribe in order to secure political su-
premacy — so long as it is deemed respectable to buy
votes or buy delegates, it will not be thought neces-
sary or desirable to define or protect the rights of a
citizen as a member of a party. Until that time
arrives, these rights can only be secured by unre-
mitting vigilance and rugged determination on the
part of every one entitled to the benefits thereby
secured.
The duties which the individual member owes to
his party are :
1. A faithful attendance upon the meetings of
the primary.
2. An earnest and candid consideration of all
subjects coming before it for determination.
3. The faithful and upright performance of all
duties imposed upon him by it.
If these duties were faithfully performed by the
THE RANK AND FILE. I5I
honest and reliable members of all parties, the need
of statutory regulation of the primary would be very
greatly reduced ; for, after all, the neglect of political
duty by good men is the chief source of all suffering
from misgovernment by bad men !
The duties of a delegate, chosen to represent the
power of a constituent body, are those of an ordinary
aeent vested with more or less of discretion, accord-
ing to the peculiar circumstances attending his selec-
tion. He is bound in honor to act for those he
represents, and not for himself, and to act as his judg-
ment may decide would be for the interest of those
he represents, or of the associated body of which
they are a part. These duties are simple and easily
defined. They are :
1. Faithfully and honestly to use the authority
vested in him for the purposes for which it was in-
tended, according to the best of his ability.
2. Faithfully to perform the duties of any position
to which he may be chosen in the convention of
which he is a member by virtue of the authority
delegated to him.
Bribery and "log-rolling" are the besetting sins
of delegates. It has become customary for men to
seek these positions for the sake of direct or indirect
advantage to themselves, and to use the power con-
ferred upon them, not with any regard for the wishes
of their constituents, but for their own personal emol-
ument or advancement. It is a form of dishonesty
152 LETTERS TO A KING.
that is neither punished by law nor frowned upon
by good society. A man who would not dream of
committing a crime will betray the trust reposed in
him by his neighbors, "swap" a vote which he
holds by reason of their confidence, for his own ad-
vantage, and go home and address the Sunday-
school on the duty of honesty, without a blush.
You will help to form public opinion on this subject,
especially in your own party. If you wish to be
esteemed an honest man, and be fairly dealt with
by your fellows, you will see to it that your in-
fluence and example are given always in favor of
honest delegates. To betray such a trust ought to
be a sin so infamous as forever to exclude the man
committing it from respectable society.
It may seem to you absurd to speak of the rights
and duties of a candidate seeking nomination at the
hands of his party, especially in view of two con-
flicting theories in regard to this relation, one or the
other of which may be said to prevail almost univer-
sally. One of these theories is, that a man has no
right to make a canvass or seek preferment at all;
the other, that he may do any thing not expressly
interdicted by the law, in furtherance of such a de-
sign. The former doctrine is utterly untenable as a
proposition of political ethics; because, however
commendable it may be thought as a rule of indi-
vidual action to refrain from seeking preferment,
THE RANK AND FILE. 1 53
it can not be regarded as at all improper to seek
political support, since the maintenance of important
political principles may render such a course absolutely
necessary. If done in a proper manner, the canvass
for a nomination or an election must be considered
an honorable thing to be done, however repugnant
to the feelings of the individual it may sometimes be.
The rights and duties reciprocally attaching to this
relation are :
1. Such aspirant has a right to receive due notice
of the meeting of the nominating body and of all
bodies sending delegates thereto ; that the same shall
be fairly organized, and due opportunity be given for
all to be heard ; that the vote be honestly taken and
truly canvassed.
2. His duty is to refrain from the use of dishonest
methods to advance his own interests, such as appeals
to the self interest of delegates rather than the general
interest they were chosen to represent.
I do not wish to weary you with unnecessar}'^ detail,
my young friend, nor ask you to speculate in regard
to a state of affairs not likely to be realized or even
approximated while human nature remains what it is.
A glance at the category of rights and duties above
given will enable you to perceive at once the defects
in our present party system, where it is liable to abuse
and how its deficiencies may be remedied You will
observe that it is possible for the will of the majority
154 LETTERS TO A KING.
to be subverted and the party machinery employed
to defeat rather than to express the will of the party
by any of the following acts:
1. By failure to admit and recognize all members
of the party as members of the primaries or caucuses,
or by wrongfully admitting those not entitled, so as
to overwhelm the honest majority, thereby giving
effect to the will of a minority instead.
2. By failing to give due and sufficient notice of
the time and place of meeting of primaries or other
constituent bodies.
3. By the neglect of individual members to attend
the party primaries, assert their rights, and make
effective their convictions.
4. By the bribery of persons entitled to vote at
the primaries.
5. By false canvass or return of the votes cast.
6. By the betraj'al of the trust reposed in them
by delegates to representative conventions.
It is believed that this classification embraces all
the methods by which the legitimate functions of party
organizations have hitherto been perverted to the
detriment of the public welfare. It will be seen that
all but three of them imply actual, intended, and delib-
erate fraud on the part of the perpetrators. No man
can take part in or be privy to one of them and claim
thereafter to be an honest or an honorable man.
One of them is the result of a negligence hardly
less criminal than premeditated fraud, and one only
THE RANK AND FILE. I 5 5
may sometimes be accounted the result of faulty
organization.
This latter is the case alluded to in a former letter
in which the original plan and idea of our system of
party organization had been departed from in some
great cities — notably in New York. This departure
briefly stated, consists in packing the primaries by
excluding from them all who are not regularly elected
and approved by certain organizations existing in each
ward and precinct, and claiming to be the party,
within the limits to which their organization extends.
By this means one-half and in some instances three-
fourths of the rightful members of a party have been
not only disfranchised in the party councils, but their
votes and strength have been used to give weight to
the plans of the usurpers in delegate conventions,
affecting the action of a party in State, and sometimes
even in national affairs.
This is a fault of organization for which the
parties in the States, where it exists, are directly
and unmistakably responsible. That it justifies open
and effective revolt there is no question, and that
It will be amended just so soon as that revolt is
made persistent and effectual, there can be no doubt.
Such a system is in itself a suggestion of evil, and
a standing temptation to the perpetration of fraud.
It destroys confidence in all political agencies, and
is a fruitful cause of that state of society in which
the citizen ceases to be a governing factor, and
156 LETTERS TO A KING.
becomes the mere tool of the "boss." Except in
these instances, the fundamental right of the voter
to a voice and a vote in the primary of the party to
wliich he belongs has never been openly denied in
theory, however often it may have been defeated
in fact.
The power of the individual voter as a member
of a party — which is really the key-stone of all
political power in the Republic — has often been
rendered nugatory by the neglect of the voter to
assert and exercise this right, and by the use of
fraudulent methods to control the action of the pri-
m,f».ries. The former evil is curable only by increased
diligence and faithfulness on the part of the voters
themselves. The others, too, while they may be
restricted somewhat by statute, must look for a per-
manent cure to the forum of public opinion and the
vigilance of awakened political conscience.
The prevalence of neglect in political duties of
this sort is usually as little realized as its danger is
rarely understood. A careful comparison of the
opinions of a large number of men having the best
of opportunities to make reliable estimates upon the
subject, shows that in the States of the North at least,
no*: more tJian one fifth of the voters of ajiy party habit-
ually attend its primaries ! This neglect not only
affords opportunity for fraud, but is in itself an actual
fraud of the gravest character upon every other voter,
who has an express right to demand that such mem-
THE RANK AND FILE. 1 57
ber of the voluntary republic to which he belongs
shall do his full duty.
Another branch of this subject, the prevalence
and extent of intended fraud in party councils, or in
other words, dishonesty as an element of party
politics — its extent, causes, and curability, will be the
subject of our next letter.
XIII.
"THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS!"
I APPROACH the subject of personal dishonesty as
an element of political action with a peculiar feeling^
of diffidence, almost I may say, of irritation. It
is a subject in regard to which more has been said
and less has been done than any other phase of polit-
ical life. Perhaps I may also say that its relation
to the individual citizen seems to be less clearly un-
derstood than almost any other phase of his duty.
To suggest such a thing as honor or honesty in the
exercise of the kingly power devolved upon the citi-
zen, is generally deemed an absurdity so great as to
insure the man who ventures to do so, the opprobri-
ous epithet of "crank." Upon no other subject has
there been so much impractical, absurd, and conse-
quently useless speculation and so little practical
effort for amendment or reform. Let us see, even
at the risk of being termed a "crank," if a little
sharp anah'sis will not help us to a clearer under-
standing of the subject — whether it is really essential
that the citizen king should be a liar and a rogue, in
order to be a patriot.
158
''THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS?" 1 59
In the first place it may be well to inquire what
constitutes personal dishonesty in politics. In order
to institute such an inquiry upon a fair and compre-
hensive basis, let us consider first what would consti-
tute an absolute, fair, and honest political status.
Reverting to the analysis already given of our poHt-
ical system, we shall see that the following specific
elements are indispensably necessary to such a con-
dition of affairs :
1. That every member of each party should have
due and ample notice of the meeting of the party
primaries.
2. That he should have an indefeasible right to
an equal voice in the management and control of
the same.
3. That he should act freely and without the bias
of corrupt intent, compulsion, or deception in all his
party relations.
4. That he have ample opportunity to give ex-
pression to his wishes at the ballot-box ; that neither
deception, force, nor the desire for personal advan-
tage be allowed to overpower his conviction as to the
public interest ; and that the result of his action be
in all cases rendered effectual by due and proper
returns.
5. That the agents selected to represent the will
of the majority, both in the constituent councils of
the party and at the polls, shall honestly and faith-
fully perform their duties as such.
l6o LETTERS TO A KING.
Whatever is done, directly or indirectly, for the
purpose of preventing an}' of these results is an act
of personal dishonesty in politics.
If you will turn back a few pages, my young
friend, and read again the category of individual rights
and duties, you may find it to include acts you never
dreamed of reprobating. You will see that whoever,
by force or fraud, by false representation, or by cor-
rupt procurement, obstructs, hinders, or misleads a
voter in the exercise of his rights or privileges as a
member of a party or as a part of the collective
sovereignty, or renders such action inoperative by
the corrupt exercise of power conferred on him by
the favor of others, is guilty of an act of personal
dishonesty, and is an enem)' of good government.
This may seem to you a very sweeping accusa-
tion , yet it is true in all its parts. The man who
corrupts, diverts, or renders inoperative any portion
of the collective intelligence, which we call the will
of the majority, and which constitutes the sovereign
power of the nation, is better only in degree than the
foulest traitor that ever organized rebellion, and is
morally on the level of the thief and the liar, it mat-
ters not how good a motive he may profess, or how
exalted a sense of patriotism he may claim to have
inspired his action. The man who buys votes at a
primary is no whit better than the man who corrupts
a judge of election or falsifies a return. The man
who knowingl)' deceives a voter is precisely on a par
•« THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS r l6l
with the man who deters one from the performance
of his duty by threats of bodily harm. The briber
and the "bull-dozer" are precisely equal in moral
delinquency. The former is somewhat more despi-
cable because his act has not even the semblance of
boldness, or the flavor of courage about it. The
man who, by any sort of trick, by any form of force
or fraud, by bribery or "bull-whacking," by mis-
direction of the ignorant or by the proscription of
the timid — any man who, by any of these acts, de-
bases the ballotorial power of a single citizen, en-
dangers the fabric of free government and adds just
so much to the mass of personal dishonesty in our
politics. Morally he is just as nefarious, and per-
sonally he ought to become just as infamous, be-
cause of such an act, as if he had stolen your money,
assailed your life, or conspired to overthrow the Re-
public by force of arms.
"Well," I hear you say, with the air of one
whose wisdom settles in a breath the whole question,
"the time will never come when these things will be
unknown in politics."
In this you are undoubtedly correct, my young
friend ; yet upon no other subject would you ever
think of advancing an argument so absurd as an ex-
cuse for inaction or a reason for failure to condemn an
admitted wrong. It is, however, the stock argument,
the excuse apparently deemed unanswerable by many *
who treat of this evil. One might say with equal
14
1 62 LETTERS TO A KING.
verity, that the time will not come, at least in any cal-
culable period, when murder and rape and robbeiy and
larceny will be unknown in any community; but you
would never think of alleging that fact as an excuse
for failure to reprobate or even a failure to punish
these crimes. Why the distinction ? Simply because
the time has already come when such crimes are
accounted despicable, opprobrious, and dangerous to
community. A murderer is regarded with horror ;
a thief is branded with infamy; even a liar, whom
the law can not touch, is looked upon with aversion
and shut out of society by his offense. But to He
and steal and bribe at a primary ; to corrupt the bal-
lot ; to falsif}- the popular verdict ; to mislead the
ignorant or deter the timid, — these things are not
regarded, even by the respectable and moral element
of our society, as in any appreciable sense derogatory
to the character or standing of the person engaged
in them.
These very things it is believed and expected that
every candidate and every party manager will do
or furnish the means for doing; and the fact that
one has openly confessed or is universally believed
to have done so, does not injuriously affect his
standing in his party, in society, or even to any
considerable extent, in the Church. If politics be,
as has been said, "a traffic in putrid things," it is
simply because the public shows itself not offended
by the stench. The politician is an exact index of
' ' THE HONOR OF TH Y L ORDLINESS! " 1 63
the moral sentiment and sense of public duty of his
constituents. If you take the moral average of any
community, throwing in the idlers and evaders of
political duty, who are the greatest of all political
offenders, you will find that it exactly reaches the
moral altitude of the local "boss."
An indubitable proof of this is found in the fact
that men boast of such exploits in good society, and
people laugh at the shrewdness displayed but never
dream of showing anger or disgust at the wrong
committed. Men may commit murder, burglary,
or rape; but they do not go into refined Christian
society to boast of it ! We cultivate and encourage
the political trickster, and then scold at his exploits !
"How did I make the riffle?" said a congress-
man, referring to his election in a district confessedly
opposed to him in political sentiment. ' ' Weil, I
found out just what sort of paper and type were
being used for printing my opponent's tickets, and
got a few thousand out with my own name on them,
and had them put in the hands of voters who could
not read, or did not stop to see what they were
doing. Before the thing was found out, there were
enough of them in the boxes to .settle the matter. "
"What was said when it was discovered?"
"Every body thought it was a pretty sharp
trick. Of course the fellow who got left tore around
some, and cut up a good deal of turf; but what could
1 64 LETTERS TO A KING.
he do ? I had a right to print my tickets just as I
chose, and they could not show that the voters did
not mean to vote them."
The man who made this declaration stands higrh
in the councils of his party, is well received in
society, is an eminent member of a Christian Church,
and was recently cited by name in a leading Church
paper as a notable example of political morality!
/ "Our opponents sent about three hundred coal-
burners into my district three months before the
election, and we hired five hundred wood-choppers
to help them !" said another in explanation of a like
^ success.
" I was offered ten thousand dollars to help A
in that contest," said a man who prides himself on
representing a high ideal of political purity; "but
being a personal friend of B , of course I could
not take it!"
Both the matter-of fact tone and the reason given
were very suggestive. The inference was unavoid-
able, that he would have taken the bribe if he had not
been a personal friend of the other candidate. This
conversation was held in the public sitting-room of
a hotel, and was a part of a reminiscent soliloquy
addressed to the delegates to a State convention.
"That was a lively time," said a party worker in
a country county, referring to a recent election.
^^THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS!" 165
"Our candidate was a little squeamish about such
things, but he gave me a thousand dollars and said :
'/ do n't want to know zvhat you do with it/' Of
course," said the narrator, with a suave accent of
unneeded explanation — ''of course, I put every cent
of it where it would do the most good.'' Just where
that was he did not explain.
"Do you know how A was defeated for
senator?" asked one public man of another in the
smoking compartment of a railway-train. "You
see we knew a messenger was on the way from the
governor, announcing a vacancy. If a vote was
taken then, we knew A would be elected. The
presiding officer was on our side, but timid, you
know — had n't nerve. We wanted him to declare
an adjournment before the messenger arrived. He
said he would if a majority voted for it. We knew
they wouldn't, but Senator B said: 'Just put
me in the chair and I will adjourn the thing, no
matter how they vote.' No sooner said than done.
B took the chair ; I made the motion, and in
two minutes we were adjourned. That 's what saved
us. B received a great deal of praise from the
'reform' papers for his promptness and courage."
So blunted has become our public sense that
this was done in the much-abused name of " reform,"
and commended by recognized professional "re-
formers," because it rid them of a man they feared.
1 66 LETTERS TO A KING.
The end may have been good ; but alas for the path
\>y whicli it was reached, and the sentiment that jus-
tifies wrong. doing for the sake of a desired result!
" I paid more for the votes of the delegates from
the town of N , for three years in succession,
than the whole State and county tax of the town
during that time," said a local politician, boastfully,
to a group of his admirers. The town he referred
to is one of the most moral and intelligent communi-
ties in the State of New York, and the delegates
Avho systematically sold themselves and their fellows
were among its most honored and respected citizens.
" I find it the best plan to do my own work, and
do it between midnight and morning, too. A man
will take money when you see him alone after mid-
night who would not touch it before that time; and
every man Avill take from thirty to fifty per cent less
then than earlier in the day." Such was the candid
confession of an active country politician to a group
who were giving similar experiences on the crowded
porch of a hotel at one of our great summer resorts.
It is a well-known and universally admitted fact
that many men who claim to be too high-minded to
corrupt voters or buy delegates, do not hesitate to
employ strikers or middlemen — brokers in political
dishonor and corruption — to do their work for them.
The result of this state of affairs and its open
'*THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS!" 1 6/
indorsement or covert approval, is an almost univer-
sal belief in the corrupt character of all political
transactions.
"Tell you what," said an enthusiastic supporter
of a candidate for one of the highest offices in a State,
"F ve been in politics a long time, and seen a deal
of sharp management, but B (his favorite) will
make a httle money go further, and do more good,
than any man I ever saw."
"I will tell you what I think," said an intelligent,
moral young man at a town primary not long since,
as he scrutinized the printed ticket for delegates to
a county convention, "this thing isn't fair. There
are A and B and C," pointing to names on the ticket;
"they go to the convention every year and make
from one hundred to three hundred dollars apiece out
of it! Now, I think there ought to be a change.
They ought to stand aside — and give some of the rest
of 7is a chance I ' '
He may have been mistaken in the amount of the
profits, but there can be no doubt that he wanted
a change.
A few years ago I rode from the depot into a
country village with an omnibus load of delegates to
a party convention. They talked freely, and made
hardly any concealment of their intention to dispose
of their votes for their individual advantage.
1 68 LETTERS TO A KING.
"I don't care what they say about it," said one
of them. "I think that the men who get good fat
offices ought to share with us who give them such
places, and, so far as I am concerned, / am in favor
of a divvy!'*
I learned afterwards that this man was not only
politically prominent, but was a business man of high
standing, and an active member of the Church in his
town. It is a common rumor in the county where he
lives, that no man has been nominated to an office by
the dominant party in a score of years without paying
the "bosses" and their henchmen.
An intelligent farmer, worth several thousand
dollars, said to a candidate, in my hearing, a few
years since on election-day:
"Of course, I and my sons calculate to vote
right, but we think we ought to be paid for our day's
work!''
Three dollars was raised and three votes secured.
This man would feel seriously affronted to learn that
any one regarded his action as at all reprehensible.
He simply has the general impression that it is
perfectly legitimate to make money by politics.
Two years ago a man sent a communication to
a reputable newspaper in one of our Eastern cities,
asserting that he had sold his vote at a recent elect
''THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS!" 1 69
tion for a certain sum, showing what he had done
with the money, and advocating the right and duty
of every poor man to do hkewise. I was impressed
with the tone of the letter, and, getting the man's ad-
dress, took occasion soon afterwards to hunt him up,
and ascertain his condition and character. I found
him to be a shoemaker, earning fair wages, of tem-
perate habits, having a good common-school educa-
tion, and of exemplary life. The right to vote he
considered simply a man's stock in trade — a privilege
that it was entirely proper to make the subject of
traffic.
Such things are not unusual enough to require
verification, though day and place can be given for
every one of the incidents above related. The belief
that poHtical success is a mere matter of bargain and
sale, trickery and corruption, is all but universal
among all classes throughout the North. At the
South, this form of corruption of the popular will is
probably less frequent. The debasement of the ballot
is there more generally effected by other methods
more obnoxious to Northern ideas, but not by any
means more obnoxious to morality or hardly more
dangerous to popular government. It is no worse
to corrupt a voter through his fear than through his
greed ; with a pistol than with a pocket-book.
What is the reason of this prevalence of corrupt
practices of politicians of all parties?
15
y
\
170 LETTERS TO A KING.
Simply the fact that it is 7tot cotisidered immoral or
repreliensible to lie or cheats to steal a ballot, buy a
vote, or corrupt a delegate, in order to secure political
success !
We have so thoroughly divorced religion from
politics that we do not regard ethical principles as
applying to political action. The very bulwark of
political jobbery and corruption is this public senti-
ment that holds such conduct excusable, and in a
majority of cases honorable. Now and then we hold
officials responsible for maladministration. In the
city of New York, men are sometimes tried for
official corruption. Yet the nominations to the
offices of the city are put up for sale almost as openly
as grain or stocks, and the very judges who are to try
men for official malfeasance are as candidates required
to furnish enormous sums for the express purpose
of corrupting party agencies or electoral power. It
is because men believe it to be necessary to buy the
favor of others in order to insure success; because re-
spectable men are willing to buy, and respectable men
are willing to sell, the political power they hold, either
by virtue of their inherent kingship, or by the favor
of their fellows, that we hear so often the excuse that
"in politics it is necessary to fight the devil with
fire." As a moral principle this assertion is on a
par with the idea that trickery is business, and that
fraud is essential to financial success. If honest men
''THE HONOR OF THY LORDLINESS!" 171
will carry their honor into politics, and Christian men
will carry their religion into their partisan relations,
and both will hold personal dishonesty as reprehen-
sible in politics as in private business, the charge
will soon cease to be made, because it will soon
cease to be true.
XIV.
THE WILL AND THE WAY.
The remedy for the universal distrust of political
methods and aims, discussed in our last, consists of
two elements, each of which is dependent to some
extent upon the other for its own efficacy.
The one is that general sense of responsibility
and rectitude of purpose on the part of the majority
of voters which has already been so frequently al-
luded to in these letters. A willingness to perform
the voluntary duties of the citizen, and a determina-
tion to do their duty thoroughly and efficiently, on the
part of all right-minded citizens, is the prime pre-
requisite and the only solid basis of any real reform
in political methods.
The man of education, means, culture, and Chris-
tian character must, first of all things, care enough
about his duty as a citizen, esteem sufficiently his
own privileges, the rights of his fellows, and the per-
petuity of republican institutions, to take the trouble
to learn when the caucus of his party meets, where it
meets, and arrange his business so as to attend its
meeting ; and when there he must be brave enough
172
THE WILL AND THE WAY. 1 73
to take an active and interested part in its proceed-
ings. Until this is done no real reform is possible.
If the Christian sentiment and Christian conscience of
the land are awake to this duty, any needful reform
is not only feasible but certain to be achieved. It is
the units that must first be vivified, however, and
individual minds and consciences that must first be
stirred up to the performance of duty. You must
act for yourself — for me — for all whose rights, privi-
leges, prosperity, every form of temporal good and
no small chance of eternal salvation, are dependent
in a greater or less degree on your conduct as a
citizen.
The Church itself is feeling the need of this very
awakening of personal conscience. You can not
draw the temper from one edge of the sword and
leave the other as keen and true as before. If you
dull one side of a man's conscience the rest is easily
broken down. If individual Christians adopt, ap-
prove, or even tolerate, political methods based on
falsehood, corruption, the violation of private right
and perversion of public trusts, they must of neces-
sity lose, to some extent, the power to distinguish
between right and wrong in other respects, and the
Church suffers contamination thereby. Bad politics
tend to make weak Churches. The disregard of
public rights leads to laxity of private morals. As
the sense of individual responsibility for the public
welfare is relaxed, care for the welfare of common
174 LETTERS TO A KING.
souls grows dull. The contribution-box takes the
place of the prayer-meeting; the Churches go up-
town, and missionaries and the devil go down-
town. A few learn the way to heaven in gorgeous
temples; the many travel the road to hell, the de-
scent to which is made easy by misgovernment and
oppression, until the editor of a great religious jour-
nal was recently able to say with bitter verity:
"Protestantism is the rehgion of respectable people,
and rather glories in it. In all civilized lands it is
getting further and further from the poorest and
worst classes every year. It courts the rich and
powerful, and does little for the rabble. We are led
to believe, indeed, that it has little pity for those
whose possessions are only rags and grime, and that
its feeling towards them is rather one of scorn or cen-
sure than of commiseration."
A man can not be a good Christian in a republic
unless he performs faithfully his public duties, for
these, even more than his private acts, may be made
effectual for the fulfillment of the Christian idea of
universal beneficence.
The poorest Christian is able to do more good to
humanity by faithfully performing the duties of the
citizen than the alms of the richest can accomplish.
One who neglects such opportunities for doing good
is a most unprofitable servant of the Master whose
livery he wears. In a republic, bad government is
the unfailing index of a low moral development — a
THE WILL AND THE WAY. 1 75
rotten State points to a debased Christian sentiment.
When the Church courts the rich and shuns the
poor, the State becomes debauched, the poor de-
spised, and the rich "consume the land." First of
all things, therefore, if we would remedy these evils
and cure the public demoralization which has resulted
from them, we must magnify the duty of the citizen-
king, and cultivate a sentiment which will regard the
neglect of public duty as a disgrace, and corrupt po-
litical methods not as mere venial offenses against an
impracticable code of ethics, but as crimes of the
most dangerous character. As long as political of-
fenses are respectable, they will be frequent ; when
they become infamous, they will be rare. When
Christians cease to wink at them, scoundrels will be
careful how they commit them.
Whenever the necessity of personal attention to
the duties of the citizen is recognized, the day of
"strikers" and "heelers" will be at an end. Then,
instead of the caucus or primary being a den of pol-
lution, and the ballot-box a nest of infamy, the for-
mer will become a dignified and reputable assembly,
and the latter, watched by keen eyes and guarded by
honest hearts and strong hands, will be indeed the
sacred ark in which the fiat of the people, which is
to us the will of God, shall be reverently deposited
and safely kept. It is not enough to boast of this
institution as the palladium of our liberties while we
leave the approaches to it unguarded, and invite
176 LETTERS TO A KING.
thieves to break in and steal the kingly power it
represents.
The State of New York has an unfinished capital
building which has cost nearly a score of millions of
dollars. It exceeds in tawdry inconvenience, and
magnificent unfitness for its professed purposes, any
building ever erected. It is an architectural deform-
ity of incredible weakness and unimpressive ugliness.
Already it is tottering, crumbling, threatening to fall,
as if some blinded Samson in his wrath at the enor-
mous depravity it represents, had "bowed himself
between the pillars." One of the grandest works of
American genius — about the only honest thing about
the whole structure — is cracked and seamed and
blurred by the dripping, shrinking insincerity of its sur-
roundings. It is a fit temple for the orgies of political
depravity — a fair type of what is done within its confines
in ' ' the much-abused name of liberty. " It is an index
of the tendency which has become almost universal in
our land. What is the cause ? The honest, reputable,
moral people of the State, either believe in political
dishonesty and corruption as an essential prerequi-
site of partisan success or regard it as an unavoida-
ble concomitant of free government. They not only
excuse the corruption of the popular will and misuse
of sovereign power, but count it a thing altogether
necessary, if not commendable. While this senti-
ment exists, what change is possible ?
But you say we must have laws to prevent such
THE WILL AND THE WAY. 1/7
things ! It is one of the fallacies of our day that
every thing may be done by law; that a bare "thus
it is written" is enough to cure any evil. Whatever
Avrong is called to our attention, we say at once, "Let
us have a law to cure it!" We are constantly setting
traps for the devil, then going to sleep and wondering
why he is not caught in them. We shirk in every
conceivable way individual responsibility and the
personal performance of public duty. A man will
howl himself hoarse by the year at a time, to secure
the enactment of a statute, and then sit down and see
it violated every day without making complaint. It
is not his business, he says. He declares that he
helps to pay men to enforce the law, and by that
means has shifted responsibility from his own shoul-
ders to theirs. The very best citizens will gleefully
relate the shrewd devices by which they have evaded
the performance of public duty. They avoid the jury-
box as studiously as they neglect the caucus and
ignore the ballot-box. They leave to unoccupied
loungers and irresponsible officials the performance
of the most important corrective functions of govern-
ment, and then wonder that crime grows so enor-
mously, that the prison population of the country is
equal to the entire population of the thirtieth city in
the land, Avhile our actual criminal population is esti-
mated to be equal to that of the city which stands
fifth in rank. A sovereign without law is bad enough,
but infinitely better than mere law without a sovereign.
178 LETTERS TO A KING.
The lesson that meets us at every step is, that the
work of government in a republic can not safely be
done by proxy. The citizen may be a king if he
will ; he is a king de jure ; and the moment he ceases
to be a king de facto, he ceases to be a good citizen —
becomes in very truth a criminal.
That "the hireling fleeth because he is a hireling,"
has never been more forcibly illustrated than by the
results of our attempts to shift the responsibility of
government upon our officials, or pack the burdens
of our neglect upon the shoulders of political buc-
caneers. Side by side with the general belief in
universal political corruptibility has grown up a want
of confidence in the administration of the law until
justice is as often spoken of as an article of mer-
chandise as otherwise. It is no doubt a fact that
the courts of the United States have been freer
from venality than those of any other nation known
to history. After more than a hundred years, hardly
a single case of provable corruption has been found
in the hundred and forty odd judges of the various
State courts of final jurisdiction, not one in the
Supreme Court of the United States, and but one in
the inferior national tribunals. Actual crime of this
sort has attached in very few instances to the judges
of the higher State courts, and the instances of
probable venality are hardly more numerous. Un-
fortunately, the same can not be said of municipal and
inferior tribunals. Though there have been few cases
THE WILL AND THE WAY. 1 79
of Impeachment for malfeasance, the general estimate
of the integrity of such officers of the law is very low
indeed. But however low the general opinion of even
the most suspected class of judicial officers may be,
it is infinitely above the popular estimate of the
average juror. It is not so much the idea that he is
purchasable — though in some of our cities it is claimed
that jury-fixing has become not only an art, but a
profession, and in very many there is a popular idea
that jury duty is only a somewhat "shady" method
of obtaining a rather precarious livelihood — as it is
belief in a general lack of moral fiber in the perform-
ance of public duty, that destroys confidence in the
jury, and has resulted, during the last few years, in
an astonishing increase of mob violence. Lynching,
which was formerly confined to the States of the South
and the unsettled society of the frontier, is now almost
as frequent at the North and East. But very few of
these States have of late been free from mob violence,
springing from a conviction, well or ill founded, of
the unreliablility of the popular branch of our judicial
system. Indeed, it is not seldom true that men who
would assiduously seek to avoid the performance of
the duty of the juror, at the demand of the State, are
the readiest to assume the r61e of Judge Lynch, and,
under cover of night and disguise, administer a justice
they would not trust themselves to mete out in open
day, and under the sanction of an oath in the jurj'-box.
These facts, taken in connection with a hundred
l80 LETTERS TO A KING.
others equally significant, show that in our country
it is not enough to have laws to protect the ballot-
box and the primary. A statute without an earnest,
active, vital public sentiment behind it, is worse than
a dead letter. Law, indeed, is but the weapon with
which the faithful and earnest citizen is armed, not
merely for the enforcement of his own rights, but for
the security of the public. The remedy you suggest,
therefore, is a good and effectual one, only when you
have courage and manliness and zeal enough to
stand behind the law, and render its behests effective.
Will the American citizen-king stand this test ? That
is the question.
Legal enactments, it is true, would be very help-
ful. Indeed, they are in some instances absolutely
necessary, to enable the citizen fully and certainly to
perform his political duty, and guard against the per-
version of the public will. In most of the States the
ballot-box is alreadj' guarded by adequate enactments,
and the national government has provided machinery
of a very clear and practical character for the regu-
lation of elections for members of Congress and
Presidential Electors. It has but one serious defect,
but that is well nigh fatal — it is not compulsory nor
universal in its application. The party primary — which
is the key to the ballot-box — the decisions of which
the election merely affirms or denies, is practically
unregulated by statute. In a few cities an attempt
has been made to do so, but not always with success;
THE WILL AND THE WAY. i8l
and never has such legislation been of a thorough or
exhaustive character. The time has come when such
legal regulation can not be long delayed. The
elements of such legislation are not many, and its
provisions need not be intricate or difficult of appli-
cation. It should contain the following provisions:
1. It should define party membership and make
participation in the caucus or primary a recognized
and enforceable legal right.
2. It should regulate the method by which meet-
ings of the primary should be called, and provide for
due advertisement of time and place. It would be
in the interests of honest methods if the time itself
was fixed by statute, and was made the same through-
out the State.
3. The officers of the primary should be made
public officials, charged with defined functions, and
made amenable to punishment in case of malfeasance.
4. Provision should be made for the organization
of new parties, whose officials should be liable to the
same penalties.
This is not the place to discuss the details of such
legislation; but the citizen-king who desires to per-
form his duty as such will see how simple are the
elements of such legislation, and will not fail to give
his influence in favor of such enactments. Armed
with such laws, backed by a healthy public opinion,
political jobbery and corruption become just as man-
ageable offenses as highway robber)^ The question
1 82 LETTERS TO A KING.
comes home, then, to every one of our twelve mill-
ions of CO ordinate sovereigns, Do you want honest
politics?
This question, my young friend, you will have to
answer for yourself. It is the general belief that you
do not ; and on this opinion of your patriotism,
morality, and manhood, the "boss" and the poHtical
manipulator expressly base their chances of future
domination and control. By the success or failure
of their designs the world will learn the nature of
your decision.
XV.
PARTY FEALTY.
A WELL-KNOWN politician, who is courteously
designated "an eminent political manager," though
he ought more properly to be termed a notorious
political trickster, whose name is associated with
many a notable "deal" by which unexpected mir-
acles have been wrought at the ballot-box — a man
who regards the voter as a subject of legitimate mer-
chandise, the legislator as simply an instrument on
which the lobbyist may display his skill, and the
party as a mere agency by which this sort of traffic
may be more easily carried on — such a man said to
me the other day, alluding to the letters I have
addressed to you:
"It is all bosh ! When a man goes into politics
he must leave his religion at home! A politician's
business is to win, and if he stops to look too care-
fully at the means employed he never will win ;
that is all there is of it. Your letters will have just
this effect: they will weaken party discipline, promote
strife in the ranks, and complicate party organization.
In short," he added, with a tone of supreme disgust,
183
1 84 LETTERS TO A KING.
" they will encourage bolts, multiply 'independents,'
and swell the ranks of the 'mugwumps!'"
You may well imagine that my blood ran cold at
this terrible arraignment. My friend — for he has
proved himself my friend on more than one occa-
sion — is a man whose opinion upon any political
matter is not lightly to be called in question. He
has devoted the major part of a life, now verging to
the shady slope, in winning political conflicts. In
detecting the plans of the enemy, and in "laying
pipes" to forestall them, he is almost unequaled in a
State notable for the boldness and success of its polit-
ical buccaneers. More than once he has snatched
victory from the jaws of defeat by some scheme, fair
or questionable, by which the results of an election
have been determined. Every one knows that he is
not at all scrupulous about the means he employs;
in fact, he does not claim to be. If he has ever gone
beyond the limits of legal right in these contests, he
has never been detected; or, at least, the fact has
never been ascertained by a jury charged to inquire
into such violations, beyond a reasonable doubt. * In
private life he is regarded as reputable and trust-
worthy. He is a man of ample fortune, of which he
is the undoubted architect, though his professional
income has never been enough to meet his apparent
expenses. He does not deny that he has "taken
advantage of his opportunities," and he counts every
man a fool who does not. It is well known that he
PARTY FEALTY. 185
would not hesitate to buy a voter, a delegate, or a
legislator, if he could not get him otherwise. It is
universally believed that he has done all these things
over and over again ; yet he is deemed an honorable
man. His standing in the Church and society is not
at all affected by this prevailing belief. He is merely
a successful politician, and in the popular eye is ex-
:used for all the sins which he may have deemed
necessary to insure success.
This man intended that his words should fall upon
me with crushing effect. There is none who under-
stands quite as well as one of this class the value of
contempt. More than once we have been associated
in momentous conflicts, and I have often noted his
tact and subtlety with no little admiration. No one
knows better than he the power of skillfully applied
epithets, and he no doubt supposed my heart would
quail before the scornful emphasis he threw into the
terms "independents" and " mugwumps ;" for he
knows full well that to my mind the one is the un-
failing symptom of "structural weakness," and the
other an evidence of unconscious arrogance. He "~
knows that I believe as strongly as he, that party —
party organization, party discipline, and party suc-
cess — are absolutely essential to good government
and healthy progress in a republic, and that, as a
rule, I do not believe any more than he in the right,
duty, or manliness of alliance with an enemy because
one can not altogether agree with the course adopted-^
16
1 86 LETTERS TO A KING.
by his friends. But with this our concord ends.
Thenceforth we differ radically as to every phase of
party relations.
To the one, a party is a means for the accom-
plishment of worthy ends. When it fails to attempt
that, it is worthy neither of allegiance nor honor. It
is fit only to be cast aside like a broken tool. To
the other, party is merely a means of power. Its
policy, methods, and the character of the men whom
it intrusts with power — all these are nothing in the
game of politics which he plays with the votes, the
interests, the moral sentiments, and the dearest rights
of the masses, as the pawns by which the more im-
portant pieces on the board are to be supported and
advanced. To the one, party is an instrument of
public good — a means by which popular opinion
may be more easily and certainly expressed. To
the other, party is only a means by which certain
individuals are to be foisted into positions of power
and emolument for the joint personal benefit of
themselves and their most active supporters. To
the one, party is an instrument to be used by the
people for the good of the people ; to the other, an
instrument by which the people are made to con-
tribute to the personal interests of a few active,
zealous, and able manipulators, who manage the game
of politics for the careless and neglectful masses.
Standing on such different planes, agreement was
impossible, because words meant different things to
PARTY FEAL TV: I %>J
each. So I could only say to him that if such as he
had not left their scruples at home when they went
into politics, as he averred that all men must, " inde-
pendents" would be rare and "mugwumps" un-
heard of. Without disregarding the opinions of such
men, without being deterred by their assumed con-
tempt or troubled about the epithets they may
bestow, let us proceed, my young friend, to examine
the much mooted question of party allegiance in the
light of what has already been ascertained as regards
our party system and individual obligation.
And first let me assure you that party allegiance
is no myth ; neither is it merely a shrewd device of
the party leader intended to secure the fealty of luke-
warm followers. On the contrary, it is a very worthy
sentiment, based on the most scrupulous regard for
individual conviction, and controlled by the most
delicate sense of personal honor. As we have seen,
a party is a voluntary association — an equal partner-
ship of individuals — banded together to attain a com-
mon political end, to establish certain specific prin-
ciples, or maintain a particular form or method of
administration. It may differ from another in gen-
eral spirit and intent, in prevailing tone and under-
lying tendency, or only in matters of detail and in
regard to specific questions. Such is the nature of
humanity that there must always be at least two great
parties in a republic organized as ours is, with a
constitution of definite and restricted powers. The
1 88 ' LETTERS TO A KING.
one will always be composed of strict or limited con-
structionists, while the other will be composed of
broad or liberal interpreters of the constitutional
limitations. Underlying all other distinctions, these
two fundamental ideas will ever remain in our gov-
ernment, and parties will divide along the line that
separates them as long as the Constitution remains and
the nation is made up of constituent but independent
States.
Of course the germ of party allegiance lies in the
duty one owes to himself and his fellows faithfully to
voice his own convictions as to public policy, and do
all that he reasonably may to secure the adoption
and maintenance of the principles he believes to be
essential to the general good. As it is the bounden
duty of the citizen to affiliate with that party organ-
ization which in spirit, in principles, and in practice,
most nearly approaches his own personal view of
what constitutes sound policy, so it is likewise his
duty actively and loyally to support that party in
the promulgation of such views and the carrying into
effect of such policy.
Loyalty to party rests also on the basis of personal
honor. A party being an equal voluntary associa-
tion or partnership intended to effect a common
purpose, it is the plain duty of every one interested
in such common aim to support and maintain the
measures that may be decided upon by a majority
of the members as likely to promote the common
PARTY FEAL TV. 1 89
purpose, so far as it is possible to do so tvithout the
sacrifice of convictions, wJiicJi he deems of para^noiint
importance to those his party represents.
This obligation, however, is subject to certain
important modifications. The relation between the
individual citizen and the party to which he belongs,
©ut of which the obligation of party allegiance arises,
though not expressly formulated in all cases, is by
necessary implication both a mutual and a condi-
tional one. The party and the individual are both
pledged to active and faithful exertion for a common
end. In becoming a member of such organization
the individual tacitly engages to forego his private
judgment as to the best method of effecting the
common purpose, and accept instead the decision
of the majority, in order that unity of aim and har-
mony of method may unite for the promotion of the
common design ; and the party in like manner con-
tracts that the will of the majority shall be fairly
ascertained. This reciprocal obligation, like the re-
public itself, is based on the presumption that the
will of the majority represents the highest good of
the greatest number; that the common purpose is
more likely to be obtained by submission to the
general will than by stubborn insistence on individual
judgment as to men and methods. As in all recip-
rocal obligations, however, a strict performance of the
duty assumed by the one is an essential prerequi-
site to any claim of default on the part of the other.
1 90 LETTERS TO A KING.
Pn becoming a member of a political party, a
citizen does not surrender his right of private judg-
ment, except to a certain degree and under plain
conditions. To claim that he does otherwise is to
make him an enforced conspirator, who, by reason
of the relations he has assumed in order to promote
a certain end, may be compelled to remain an un-
willing instrument of the overthrow of the very pur-
pose he sought to accomplish thereby.
The reciprocal obligation from which the bond of
party allegiance derives its force, if fairly analyzed,
will be found to be a contract which imposes these
conditions on the respective parties thereto:
1. The party, collectively considered, tacitly en-
gages with each individual that the will of a majority
of its members upon all questions affecting the com-
mon purpose, shall be fairly taken and honestly car-
ried into effect.
2. The party, in like manner, engages to promote
the common purpose which constitutes the moving
cause or consideration that induced the individual to
give it his support, and not give preference to any
other aim to the prejudice of this dominant design.
A change of purpose, therefore, without his express
assent thereto, releases the citizen from any implied
claim of support.
3. The party also tacitly engages that the meas-
ures it adopts to secure success shall be lawful and
proper ones.
PARTY FEALTY. I9I
4. It is also implied in this mutual contract that
the individuals chosen to represent the party as can-
didates shall be (i) capable of filling worthily the po-
sitions for which they are named, (2) of good char-
acter, and (3) loyal to the principles of the party.
These conditions being complied with, the party
has a right to require of every individual member
that his personal preference be subordinated, and the
will of the majority be heartily accepted and loyally
maintained.
Upon these grounds alone can the claim of any
thing worthy the name of party allegiance be main-
tained without debasement of the voter's manhood
and demoralization of the public conscience. Un-
lawful or unfair methods of organization or procedure,
incapable or unworthy nominees — either of these
things releases the individual from any claim based
upon his previous support or affiliation. By either
of these acts a party loses the right to demand the
support of its followers, and of those professedly fa-
vorable to its organic principles. To acknowledge
any party allegiance not based on these grounds is
to give up the right of private judgment, and surren-
der the kingship of the citizen for the subserviency
of the slave — to bid for the domination of the "boss"
and invite the demoralization of corrupt methods.
It is just here that we encounter the fallacy which
underlies the most specious claim of the professional
party manipulator. "The man who enters a party
192 LETTERS TO A KING.
caucus or convention," he says, "engages in its dis-
cussions, and seeks to influence its actions, is in
honor bound by its decisions." So far as personal
preferences or the mere comparative merits of candi-
dates are concerned, this is true. If the methods
are fair, so as to make the decision a real expression
of the will of the majority, and the candidates se-
lected are worthy and capable, no personal preference
for another aspirant, no conviction of his superior fit-
ness, should stand in the way of a hearty support of
a nominee of the party to which you belong. The
party has fulfilled its obligations, and has a right to
require you in all honor and sincerity to indorse and
maintain its action. Your judgment as to which of
two aspirants it is best for the party to name as a
candidate out of several of admitted worth and ability
should always yield to the voice of the majority.
A chief purpose of party organization is to take
beforehand the judgment of a majority upon such
questions of policy. No man can have any nght to
an office or a nomination. The interest of the coun-
try and the advancement of the common purpose of
the organization should always control the action of
any party in the selection of candidates, and it is the
duty of the individual to bow to the decision of the
majority upon such questions when fairly made. The
fact that the so-called "claims" of a favorite have
been ignored, can never give an honorable man rea-
sonable excuse for withholding the support tacitly
PAR T V FEAL TY. 1 93
pledged to the party's nominee, if the decision is
honestly made, and the nominee a man of fair moral
character and reasonable capacity. Thus far the claim
of party allegiance may fairly extend. Beyond that
li-mit it can never rightfully go. The fact that a
man fights within a party against improper methods
or improper men, does not bind him in reason and
honor to their support, even though a majority may
decide in their favor. The party, by its own action,
has released him from obedience to its behests. It
has abrogated one of the fundamental and essential con.
ditions on which his allegiance was originally based.
Of what constitutes improper methods, or inca-
pacity, or unworthiness on the part of a candidate,
every man must of necessity be his own judge. He
can not, as a good citizen, depute another, or many
others, to determine these questions for him. Neither
can he smother his own convictions, or act contrary
to them, and be held blameless of resulting evil. The
king must judge; the king must rule; and the king
must bear the blame of his own weakness and error,
as well as expect commendation for his justice and
wisdom.
That this is not the ordinary view of the relations
of the individual to the party is freely admitted. It
is the only one, however, consistent with the honor,
intelligence, and integrity of the citizen-king. It is
the only theory of party allegiance consistent with
either morality or patriotism, and when the Christian
17
194 LETTERS TO A KING.
citizen ceases to "leave his religion at home when he
goes into politics," it will be accounted neither
strained nor unusual. To say that its practical adop-
tion is a matter of difficulty is merely to assert that
the performance of duty is not always easy. That
such freedom of individual action is entirely consist-
ent with party loyalty, we shall see hereafter.
XVI.
THE "INDEPENDENT VOTER."
The one hundred and eleventh anniversary of our
national birth has occurred since I last addressed you.
This fact of itself makes it peculiarly fitting that the
subject of independent political action should occupy
our attention at this time. Government, as the act
and duty of the many rather than the privilege of
the few, is so new a thing in the world's history that
no incident connected with its development can
properly be passed over without notice. Our Decla-
ration of Independence, to which I hope you listened
reverently on the anniversary of its promulgation, is
remarkable, not so much for the nationality of which
it was the index and precursor, as for the epoch of
individualism which it inaugurated. It is the gospel
of equality of right, founded on that other gospel in
whose ideal the great apostle tells us " there is neither
barbarian, Scythian, bond, nor free."
Self-government, which was then an experiment,
has been growing constantly in the direction of
greater independence of individual action. Then a
few leaders shaped and controlled all political action.
195
196 LETTERS TO A KING.
They were independent of each other, it is true, but
their adherents followed their individual lead with al-
most servile faithfulness. What were termed parties
were little more than factions — mere personal follow-
ings. Men were for or against a particular man, or a
particular idea which some man or set of men had
enunciated. Now the people make the platforms and
name the leaders. Our history shows that a fuller
knowledge of the principles of self-government, has
been especially favorable to independence of thought
and freedom of political action. Under the early sys-
tem the individual was compelled to elect between op-
posing factions. Rival chiefs drummed the country
for recruits.
Under the banner of some one of these the
patriot was required to serve, or become himself a
leader and undertake the task of overthrowing all
competitors, in order to attain a desired result.
Under the party system the individual is not only
enabled, but is constantly invited, to impress his
thought upon the policy of the party to which he
belongs. An idea that promises success is always
welcomed. It may be difficult to demonstrate its
importance and effectiveness or availability; but as
soon as they are clearly shown, the new thought
has at once the aid of all the established agencies of
party organization to promote its triumph. To the
political thinker, the advocate of new ideas and
champion of untried measures, this system offers
THE ^'INDEPENDENT VOTER:' 1 9/
opportunities which he would rarely be able to create
for himself.
The result is that political recreancy is becoming
a familiar thing. A few years ago it was a serious
matter for a public man to disagree with his party
upon any question of policy. Few dared to defy
the power of those tyrannic organizations which the
half-developed party system permitted and encour-
aged. For more than a decade Jackson wielded as
absolute and despotic power within the Democratic
party as a sultan exercises in his harem. To doubt
was death. He was the last and greatest of our poHt-
ical despots. Greater men than he have often tried
to enact the role of party dictator since that time,
but none have so successfully wielded the scepter of
absolute authority, because the enginery which the
party leader then controlled has since become avail-
able to all. The man who attempts to control its
action now is morally sure of being "hoist with his
own petard." Such is the fate that has overtaken
every imitator of "Old Hickory" who has forgotten
that the conditions of successful leadership have rad-
ically changed since his day. The question is not
now who can most effectually coerce popular endur-
ance and approval, but who can most readily note
the trend of public sentiment, and most certainly
foretell the course it is likely to assume.
When Buchanan, in 1858, told Stephen A. Doug-
las that "no Democrat had differed from an adminis-
1^8 LETTERS TO A KING.
tration of his own choice without being crushed," the
"Little Giant" was only half right in his sneering
reply: "I wish you to remember, Mr. President,
that General Jackson is dead!" His great rival, the
shadow of whose destiny already overhung his fame,
understood much better the tendency of his time
when he laid the foundations of his own success broad
and deep in the convictions of the people. He
realized the fact to which all his contemporaries
were blind, and which to-day so many are trying to
ignore, that the recently perfected enginery of our
party system had taken the ultimate power from the
leader and the caucus and placed it in the hands of
the rank and file. Thenceforward he perceived that
the popular chief would not be the man who could
most successfully rule, but he who should most faith-
fully serve.
"Do not do it," said the venerable Thad Stevens,
in his last days, to an enthusiastic young man who
talked of rebelling against his party's behest. "No
man can afford to put himself outside the pale of the
party with which he is in substantial accord on most
questions, because of difference with it in one."
"Yet you once did it," was the reply.
"Yes — once; and it took me ten years to regain
the position I lost thereby, and the power to be use-
ful to the country which it gave."
"But that was forty years ago," persisted the re-
bellious spirit.
THE ^'INDEPENDENT VOTERS 1 99
"So it was — so it was," assented the veteran pol-
itician, thoughtfully; "and the conditions of party
service have materially changed since then. The
force which moves a party now is centripetal; then
it was centrifugal. Then a party was judged by its
leaders; now the leaders are to be judged by the
party. The politician of to-day is an exponent rather
than a force. He is an exact reflex of the morality
and patriotism of those he represents."
It was a bold and notable statement, which no
man could better afford to make, and to which no
name could give greater weight. The system of
party politics has magnified the rank and file — the
individual — and relatively reduced in the same pro-
portion the leader's consequence.
The general observance of the national birthday
this year, being as it is in striking contrast in this
respect with the years that have recently elapsed,
shows that a new epoch of national sentiment is at
hand. The sons of those who saved the nation from
dissolution are awakening to the fact that all that
is to be achieved by the Republic — her ultimate des-
tiny — was not accomplished when the national domain
was preserved intact, and the stain of slavery wiped
from her soil. The glory of the past has ceased to
overpower the activities of the present, while year by
year its achievements shine the brighter as the nation-
ality it redeemed grows more and more distinctive and
pronounced in character. Hitherto our political
200 LETTERS TO A KING.
thouglit has been chiefly concerned with the legal
definition of the rights of man in relation to the sov-
ereign power. Hereafter it will, for a season at
least, be largely occupied with the problems arising
out of the relations of the individual to the mass — of
the unit to the segregation of units which we call so-
ciety. We have ceased to invite the world to unload
its failures, its poverty, and its crime upon our shores,
and have begun to ask ourselves in all seriousness,
even upon the Fourth of July, what is needful to be
done to render our civilization all that it should be —
in what way the general betterment of the American
citizen may be best accomplished. The question is a
myriad-sided one, which is likely to develop many
new and startling phases; but its feet are at the
threshold, and because of this, our American life is
waking to an interest in political questions and meth-
ods altogether unprecedented. On the eve of such
an awakening it is well to pause and consider what
the true theory of independent political action is.
In order that we may make no mistake through
the use of terms that mean one thing to one mind and
quite a different thing to another, it will be neces.sary
to define the phrase "independent political action "
with some care. In its broadest sense it means, of
course, that the individual acts according to his own
inclination in political affairs, without coercion or
compulsion on the part of any man or set of men.
In this sense, the strongest partisan in the land may
THE ^'INDEPENDENT VOTER." 201
well claim to be an "independent voter." Indeed,
he unquestionably is such, in a vast majority of cases.
He does the very thing he most earnestly wishes to
do. He is entirely free from any conscious bias or
unwelcome restraint. His action is a deliberate exer-
cise of the power vested in him as a part of the mul-
titudinous sovereignty. He is independent, although
he obeys the behest of a party, because he has confi-
dence in the collective wisdom and patriotism of the
organization to which he belongs. To speak of one
who thus freely exercises his own volition as any
thing else than an "independent voter" is thoroughly
absurd; yet, as the phrase has come to be used in
our politics, this class of active, earnest political
thinkers and workers is excluded, and those only de-
nominated "independents" who, to a greater or less
extent, ignore the duty of the partisan, and content
themselves with drifting back and forth in the eddies
of the great political current.
The form of political action which is ordinarily
intended by the term "independent," is that of the
man who recognizes no political affiliation or party
obligation whatever ; who votes first with this party,
and then with that, as the whim of the moment may
incline. This class is the great uncertain element in
politics. In all its forms it is purchasable, and always
in the market — waiting to be bid for. It is usually
known as the "floating vote" — an unstable element,
the support of which is to be secured by one party
202 LETTERS TO A KING.
or another, either through favor or subserviency.
Sometimes a mere notion, sometimes a preference for
a particular candidate, sometimes an indefinite yearn-
ing wiiich is mistaken for patriotism, and not unfre-
quently the most base and mercenary motives, con-
trol the movements of the shifting tide of so-called
"independent voters."
It is customary for self styled "independents"
to arrogate to themselves and others unaffiliated with
any party, and consequently ready to coquette with all,
a virtue not to be found in the simple citizen who seeks
to do his duty as a sovereign by faithfully performing
his duty as a partisan. As a whole, however, they are
distinguished neither for courage, sincerity, devotion
to principle, fidelity to pledges, nor worthy achieve-
ment of any sort. Malcontents, intractables, weak
and vacillating natures, form a large portion of this
class. They are most frequently useful as a spur to
partisan activity. Of themselves they accomphsh
nothing and mean nothing, save as the dust of the
balance which barely inclines the wavering scale this
way or that when it is trembling on the poise. They
represent collectively the element of luck in the game
of politics.
Do not be deceived, my young friend, by any
clamorous pretense of fairness and virtue which may
be made for this state of political incertitude. It is
merely the coward's plea to escape the responsibility
a man is always willing to share. The man who
**THE INDEPENDENT VOTER." 203
has not positiveiiess of character enough to have
party affiliations, strong and earnest — who is half the
time on one side of the political fence and half on the
otlier — may be a good enough man in some respects,
and may think himself the very climax of perfection
in all, but he will never be of much value to the
Republic, and is likely to do it positive injury. Even
the good he does will be so nearly a matter of chance
that he will deserve little credit for it. It is better to
be wrong with earnest men who do not shrink from
the dust and heat of conflict, than be right with such
happy-go-lucky weaklings, whose ideal of supreme
Avisdom is an inexhaustible capacity for finding fault.
But, you will say, Is my political action to be always
controlled and directed by the will of my fellows — the
decision of my party? By no means. There is a
political independence not of the tepid sort we have
been considering, but having its basis in the most
positive and manly conviction. The very sense of
duty to the country which requires the citizen-king
to use his influence to prevent the adoption of false
doctrine, the indorsement of unwise policy, the prac-
tice of dishonest methods, or the putting forward of
unfit candidates by his party, — this same sense of
patriotic duty requires him to oppose more or less
vigorously, any such action of the party with which he
is otherwise in substantial accord. This is real polit-
ical independe)ice. It is the assertion of the funda-
mental truth that party is merely an agency designed
204 LETTERS TO A KING.
for the use and advantage of the citizen, and that the
citizen is not a mere appanage of the party. In a
sense, the political axiom that "no man is as wise
or as strong as the party to which he belongs," is
true ; in another false. But it is never true when the
party is in the wrong and the individual in the right ;
for every man's right is worth more than any party's
success.
This conflict between the action of a party and
the individual conscience most frequently arises
under some of the following conditions: (i) When a
party puts forward an unfit candidate, or (2) a de-
serving candidate is nominated by improper means.
This is in express violation of the contract between
the citizen and the party. By such course he is in
honor and morals released from all obligation to sup-
port its candidates or defend its policy. Of course
this may involve the defeat of the party, to the prin-
ciples, policy, and traditions of which he may be
devotedly attached ; but if he has done his duty be-
forehand, and warned his associates of the result of
their conduct, the responsibility will not rest with
him. It is better that any party should suffer defeat
than that any man should smother his scruples or
drown the voice of his conscience. The king may
delegate his power, but he can not evade responsi-
bility; and the man \\\\o supports a candidate he
believes to have been nominated by fraud, or whom
he deems morally or intellectually unfit for the place
THE ''INDEPENDENT VOTERS 205
for which he is named, commits a crime against the
sovereignty of which he is a part, which is infinitely
more injurious to the nation than the defeat of his
party can possibly be.
This is genuine political independence ; not the
weak, unmanly, sniveling thing that passes by that
name. It is entirely consistent with the duty of the
citizen and a proper allegiance to party. It may not
always be a pleasant task to assert such independence;
but if it were the rule of personal conduct and not
the exception, there would be little need for its exer-
cise. The lesson that is taught by this branch of
our subject is tiie same to which every other phase
has steadily pointed — the absolute necessity that
every man should do his duty as a partisan in order
that his duty as a citizen may be the more easily
and certainly performed. In a republic all ethical
disquisition but emphasizes the injunction to indi-
vidual duty on the part of the citizen, just as in a
monarchy policy and philosophy enjoin virtue and
assiduity upon the ruler.
The right and duty of the citizen to protest against
unwise or improper action of his party does not admit
of question, and can not be met by any argument
worthy of the consideration of an honest man or con-
scientious citizen. Only the code of honor which
prevails among thieves makes it the duty of a man
to defend what he believes to be wrong because it is
done by those to whom he is bound by the tie of a
206 LETTERS TO A KING.
common purpose. Honor hinds no one to uphold dis-
honor. This is the prime distinction between lawful
and commendable association and unlawful conspir-
acy. How this protest shall be made, and to what
limit dissent from your party's action shall be carried,
you will find among the most difficult questions you
will be called upon, as a citizen and a patriot, to de-
cide. Whether you shall merely protest against a
specific action of your party, withhold your support
entirely from it because of the one fault, engage in
organizing a specific opposition, or join with its tradi-
tional opponents to compass its defeat, — these are
questions depending in a great degree upon the cir-
cumstances of each particular case, yet affected by
certain fundamental principles, which will be the sub-
ject of further consideration.
XVII.
THE PERILS OF REVOLT.
Twenty-three years ago an army lay encamped
among the hills of Northern Georgia. A year before,
it had seized the gateway of the Confederacy, and now
the Queen City of the South was in its hands. It
only waited for another conflict to be decided, to start
upon that "march to the sea" which was to result
in finally bringing the combined power of the nation
to bear upon the forces of the Rebellion, who had
thus far been indebted for escape from overthrow, not
less to the mountains in their rear than to their own
splendid courage and amazing fortitude. All through
the sultry summer months, while Sherman had fought
his way from Chattanooga to Atlanta, and Grant had
held the wily commander of the Army of Virginia
within his works in front of Petersburg, awaiting the
blow he was powerless to avert, and probably did not
fully foresee, a conflict not less important to the
destiny of the Republic had been going on in the cities
and towns, the fields and factories of the North.
The question to be decided by that conflict em-
braced all that was at issue between the contending
207
208 LETTERS TO A KING.
forces. Whether there should be peace or war, one
country or two, slavery or freedom, — all these things
were to be determined by the tenor of a people's in-
structions to their executive head, as gathered from
the ballot-boxes on the Ides of November, then near at
hand. These questions were all embraced in the one
simple inquiry, which, thanks to our intelligible and
effective American party system, every voter was
called upon to answer by his ballot — whether Abraham
Lincoln and the party under whose auspices the war
had thus far been carried on, should be re-elected, or
the administration of the government be intrusted to
the weakness and indecision of that young soldier
whose inability to forget himself had already prevented
him from writing his name in the highest place upon
the roll of fame, backed by a party whose battle-cry
declared that the war was already a failure. It was
an anxious moment. The Confederates consoled
themselves for the misfortunes of the battle-field by
predicting the success of their allies at the polls. They
recognized the fact that the election of General McClel-
lan as President was worth more to them than the defeat
of General Sherman. Just as great interests are no
doubt really at stake in every Presidential contest,
but they are rarely so sharply defined and clearly
perceptible to all.
The anxiety which was felt by those who were
in the army was much greater than that of those at
home. The soldiers saw and felt the importance of the
THE PERILS OF REVOLT. 20g
decision which was to be made, and naturally feared
that the absence of some hundreds of thousands of
voters who had volunteered to fight the country's
battles might be a greater drain upon the patriotism
of the North than it would be able to bear. It is true
that provision was made by most of the States for
holding an election in the army, but it was appre-
hended that many would be unable to comply with
the requirements of the acts passed for the occasion,
and they knew that hopelessness and discontent pre-
vailed to a greater or less extent throughout the
North. This was the subject of conversation be-
tween two officers, whose quarters overlooked the
captured city.
One of them was a grave, earnest man, who did
not need the emblems of authority to mark the habit
and the right to command. The other, younger and
slighter, was yet a bronzed veteran, and his flashing
eye and quivering nostril showed the intensity of his
feelings.
"So you wish to be assigned to out post duty on
election-day instead of acting as a commissioner to
hold the election for the troops from your State ?"
said the superior, evidently in response to a request
of the subordinate.
"Yes, sir," was the reply,
"May I ask why you wish to avoid this duty,
Colonel?" asked the other, gravely.
The younger man hesitated a moment, and then
i8
2IO LETTERS TO A KING.
said : "The fact is, General, I do not wish to vote, and
would like to take some one's place who is not scru-
pulous about such things."
" What do you mean by not being scrupulous?"
"Well," said the younger, with some signs of
confusion, "I have adopted it as an inflexible rule,
that I will never vote for a man for any position whom
I have reason to believe to be addicted to the excess-
ive use of spirituous liquors."
"And in this case?" asked the other, inquiringly,
"I spent the winter of 1862-3 in Nashville, you
know, and saw the candidate for Vice-President on
the Republican ticket very often."
"Yes," said the elder man thoughtfully; "and
because Mr. Johnson is sometimes intoxicated, you
will not vote for Mr. Lincoln and the prosecution of
the war. I am not much of a politician, as you know,
but this seems to me a curious sort of reasoning."
" Perhaps it may be," said the younger man, and
his lips shut close as he spoke, "but I am not going
to be a party, directly or indirectly, to making a
drunken man a possible President."
" I do not like that idea any more than you do,"
responded the other, "but I can not help looking at
the alternative. If I do not vote for Abraham
Lincoln, I give at least half a vote for George B.
McClcllan. Now I think that the most important
question ever asked of an American citizen is, ' Shall
this war continue ?' I believe the only way to insure
THE PERILS OF RE VOL T. 211
its continuance and success is to vote for Mr. Lincoln,
and the best way to secure its failure is to vote for
General McClellan. I have the same objection to the
nominee for Vice-President that you urge, and I am
very sorry the nomination was made; but, being
made, I do not see how I can better serve the country
than by accepting it."
" If a party wants my support," interjected the
younger man hotly, "it must nominate men whose
moral tone and character I can approve — men, in
short, whom I can trust."
"That is no doubt the duty of a party, but will
a failure of duty on its part also excuse a like failure
on the part of the voter? This is not a question
between you and your party, but between you and
your country. You and I had a right to have pre-
vented the nomination. It was perhaps our duty to
have done so. I said nothing — probably you did not.
In that we, no doubt, failed of doing our duty. The
nomination having been made, the question is not what
ought to have been done at the convention, but what
ought to be done at the ballot-box. You would not
think of voting for the other candidate, I suppose?"
"No, indeed," said the younger man with em-
phasis.
"You believe, no doubt, that General McClellan's
success would be detrimental to the country."
"Not merely to the country," was the reply,
"but to the world."
212 LETTERS TO A KING.
"If that is your opinion, can you afford to neglect
any thing you can honestly and lawfully do to prevent
such a result?"
"That is a hard way to put it, General," said the
subordinate with a shrug; "but it is only one vote,
which is not likely to make any difference with the
result, and I would like to tell my children, if I ever
have any, that I never helped to elevate a drunkard
to office."
"I am only a soldier, as you know," said the
elder man gravely, "and have never been accused
of what is termed 'meddling in politics;' but, as I
understand it, the country gives one aliquot part of
the power of choosing our rulers and legislators — in
other words, of governing — to every citizen, and
requires him to use that power, not for his own grati-
fication, for any man's advantage, or any party's
success, considered as an end, but for the common
good of the whole people of the country, according
to his best judgment. While it may be a bad thing
to have an intemperate nominee for Vice-President,
which is the better, a possibly drunken official, or the
certain failure of this war? The fact that it is but
one vote makes no difference with the question of
duty. I have heard the story told among politicians
of the one vote which elected a governor, a member
of the Legislature, and a congressman ; I have heard
how the Legislature, at that session, had a majority
of one only on joint ballot, and that there was a tie
THE PERILS OF REVOLT. 21 3
in the House of Representatives at the next session
of Congress ; so that this one vote also chose a United
States senator, and at least prevented the election of a
party favorite as the speaker of the House. That was
of course an accident; but if others thought as little of
the right of suffrage as )'ou seem to, it might happen
very often. To my mind, sir, it is an act of cowardice
to refuse to exercise the discretion vested in you as a
citizen for the public good. Because you can not do
all that you wish, in the precise way that you prefer,
you have no right to refuse to do all the good you can,
in any way that is open to you. You might just as
reasonably refuse to bring your command into action
because you did not approve the plan of battle adopted
by the general commanding. After the battle is joined,
there is no chance for protest. When one of two
things is certain to occur, the part of prudence and
discretion always is to make sure that the least harm-
ful happens. I shall not modify the order, Colonel,
because I will not be a party to any avoidance of duty
by so good a soldier. Good-night."
He rose and gave his hand to the younger man,
Avho thought very seriously of what he had heard
from the wise and patriotic leader, whose name is
among the brightest of our hero-dead, 'as he rode off
in the twilight. On the day of election he voted for
the Republican candidates. Afterwards, when the
assassin's bullet had taken from us all but the fame
of the greatest of Americans, casting the burthen of
214 LETTERS TO A KING.
responsibility on the Vice President, whereby his
worst fears were reahzed, he told me of this conver-
sation, and added:
' ' I have never regretted the vote I gave, because
it was the best I could do for the country under the
circumstances in ivhicJi I ivas placed.
Your father was a conscientious citizen, as well
as a Christian soldier, my young friend, and the rea-
son he gave for refusing to act upon one of his most
cherished convictions contains the true philosophy of
all political action. The question to be answered by
the individual is always, "What is the best that I
can do for the country, urider the circumstances in
which I am placed V
You will find that independent political action —
that is, refusal to act with your party — is always a
matter for serious consideration. Your conduct can
not safely be determined upon beforehand, but must
always be decided according to the exigencies of the
occasion — the circumstances by which you are sur-
rounded.
Such independent political action may be classi-
fied under three heads:
I. A mere refusal to support the candidates of
the party with which you are in substantial accord,
because of the unfitness of the candidates themselves
or improper methods used in their selection.
This is the mildest form of protest — the simplest
form of revolt. It has one advantage over the others
THE PERILS OF REVOLT. 21$
which we shall consider, in that it is not usually held
to debar the individual adopting it from future co-
operation with the party. This is of material conse-
quence, since, as we have seen, party is the instru-
mentality which the citizen must use in order to
impress his thought or conviction upon the commu-
nity, or, in other words, in order to be of service
to the country as a factor in its government. Of
course a partisan loses somewhat of influence even
by non-conformity. Activity and zeal are essential
elements of success, and a party naturally prefers the
man who is always zealous in its behalf, to the one
who chooses to exercise his right of non-compliance
with its behests when its action does not in all re-
spects meet his approval. This fact should restrain
you from mere factional or whimsical revolt, since
every prudent patriot should always carefully con-
serve his influence, in order that be may accomplish
the greatest possible modicum of good. In testify-
ing disapproval in this manner, you in effect simply
withdraw one vote from the number which your
party normally ought to poll, and the extent of dis-
satisfaction is measured by the number of votes thus
withdrawn. This form of protest against wrongful
party action is no less positive and decided in char-
acter, though less obnoxious to those with whom
you are forced to disagree, than the methods we
have yet to consider.
2. The second form of independent political action
2l6 LETTERS TO A KING.
is the organization of a specific opposition — the
establishment of another party, or the setting up of
a candidate in opposition to one whose nomination
or character is deemed objectionable.
This course becomes an unavoidable one to the con-
scientious voter, who finds himself irreconcilably at
variance with his party upon a question of paramount
importance. In that case, supposing always that no
organization especially advocating his views exists, it
becomes the duty of the voter to join with others
in organizing a new party whenever there is a reason-
able hope of thereby advancing the canse he has at
heart. The question of organizing a new party or
remaining with the old one is always one of policy
only. The real question for the voter to decide is
still, How can I best serve the country ? If satisfied
that the best interests of the country demand the
adoption of a specific idea as the basis of public
policy, the question becomes, How can I best pro-
mote the general adoption of this idea? Of course
this line of action presupposes an intense conviction
of the paramount importance of the specific idea, and
a clear belief that its adoption can best be promoted
thereby.
It sometimes becomes desirable, also, to organize
a specific opposition out of the elements of the party
itself, in order definitely to measure the extent of
the dissatisfaction with the course adopted by a ma-
jority. This is a bold and manly method of protest
THE PERILS OF REVOLT. 21/
against improper methods, which, in most cases,
where it has been well-founded, has proved success-
ful. It is a drastic measure, which requires courage
and vigor on the part of its promoters, is perilous in
the extreme to the party standing of those engaging
in it, and, in case of failure, usually leaves its origi-
nators stranded high and dry, without prospect or in-
fluence in any party. If successful, it brings the
party up to the ground occupied by the protesting
party or faction. Because of its bold and defiant
character, this form of protest has received the spe-
cific name of "bolt." It is a two-edged sword, but
one which a brave man need not fear to take, and by
which it is no dishonor to be slain.
3. The third form of what is termed "independ-
ent " political action, consists in going over to the
opposition in order to secure the defeat of the party,
with which the voter still claims to be in substantial
harmony in principle.
In England, where parties are of a more personal
nature and not self-organizing and self-controlling,
deliberative as well as administrative in character, a
frequent change from one extreme of political asso-
ciation to another is far more frequent than with us.
It is there looked upon as hardly reprehensible ; and
a leader of one party to day is not unfrequently a
leader of the other to morrow. In our country this
has rarely been the case. The actual severance of
relations with one of the great established represent-
19
2l8 LETTERS TO A KING.
atives of public thought and active alliance with its
traditional opponent is rarely followed, either by
leadership in the latter or recognized and unimpugned
restoration to the former. Of course this does not
apply to the formative period of a new party, and
exceptional epochs like that of the War of Rebellion
give exceptional results. Outside of these limits
there are very few instances in our political history
of such changes unattended with loss of prestige and
influence.
When there is a change of political belief on the
part of a voter, an abandonment of accepted doctrine
by the party, or a new departure by the traditional
opponent, practically changing their relations, such
change is in no sense reprehensible. When, however,
the established relations between two great parties
are undisturbed, while the traditional characteristics
and tendencies of each remain, a man can not swing
back and forth between them without incurring the
opprobrious name of "turncoat." Politics is, and
ought to be, a matter of conviction, and a man who
believes in the principles of one party — its traditional
polic)' and tendency as exemplified in its history and
constitution — can not give his support to one antip-
odally opposed to it without doing violence to all
accepted notions of consistency. A man rnay change
his convictions and go to the hostile camp with the
full respect of his former associates, but he can not
go over to tlie enemy on the day of battle and
THE PERILS OF REVOLT. 2lg
expect to return afterwards and be recognized and
treated as a friend. The American intellect is not
subtle enough to recognize the "Democratic voter
with Republican principles," or the converse — if such
a thing should ever be developed — as a consistent
fact. One who attempts this role must naturally ex-
pect to lose whatever influence he has acquired with
his party associates. He may possibly regain it, but
the struggle will be a long one, and in most instances
the individual who attempts it becomes a mere shut-
tlecock, vibrating between the two extremes of polit-
ical thought, of little moment or significance to either,
and of doubtful value to the country. Of course, if
a man's political views are chameleonic in character,
if he is by nature a mere pohtical "bummer," this
is a matter of no consequence. If, however, he
regards the exercise of the power vested in him as a
citizen, not as a mere personal privilege, but a duty
of the highest and most sacred character, it behooves
him to use such discretion as will enable him to re-
tain the confidence of his associates, in order that his
influence for good in the councils of the government
may not be needlessly destroyed.
In considering these various forms of independent
political activity, my young friend, you will perceive
that, while the ties of party should not, and never
need, restrict the conscientious action of the voter,
yet no one who desires to do his whole duty as a
citizen-king should take a course calculated to weaken
220 LETTERS TO A KING,
or destroy his own influence as a recognized member
of an established party, without the most serious
consideration, and under the unavoidable compulsion
of an honest reply to this inquiry: "How can I
best serve the cause of good government under the
conditions in which I am placed?"
Of course there must be martyrs, political and
otherwise ; but the demand for them is not half as
great as some chronic malcontents would have us
believe ; and many a self-applauding patriot, who
advertises by political defection for an immortalizing
crown of thorns, obtains instead only the shreds and
tatters of general contempt, or a self-conviction of
his own folly that afterwards clings and stings like
the shirt of Nessus. When all is said, the fact remains,
that those who have accomplished most for the country
have done it by faithful, patient, earnest service in
the ranks of that party most nearly in accord with
their personal convictions; and what is so clearly
true of our past is most likely to be true of our
future.
XVIII.
THE TRUSTEE OF AUTHORITY.
"The position of a delegate to a party conven-
tion is the most difficult and important that an
American citizen can hold, and no honest man will
undertake to discharge its duties with a fettered
discretion."
These words fell from the lips of a venerable man
who had long been prominent in the councils of his
party and the nation, and against whose patriotism
and integrity no word of detraction had ever been
uttered. He was at once a partisan leader and a pa-
triotic citizen. Living in a period of the fiercest po-
litical conflict, a man of the most pronounced and
unfaltering convictions, he had the respect even of his
bitterest opponents. When he uttered these words he
had just been selected as a delegate to a national con-
vention by the State convention of his party to whom
they were addressed, and it was proposed to instruct
these delegates to support a certain aspirant, "first,
last, and all the time." This the veteran politician re-
fused to submit to, declaring that if the resolution
was adopted he would decline to serve as a delegate,
221
222 LETTERS TO A KING.
This seemed at first incomprehensible to many of his
Hsteners, all the more so as the candidate named was
his especial choice — the one for whom he had been
earnestly at work from the very opening of the can-
vass. He proceeded, however, with such a lucid
explanation of the responsibilities and duties of the
delegate that the resolution was withdrawn and the
delegates sent unhampered to exercise the power of
the constituent body in the supreme council of the
party. His words made such an impression upon
my mind that, though he has long since passed from
sight, I have chosen them for the text on which to
base some reflections upon the position and duties
of the delegate.
The delegate to a political convention is a trustee
who gives no bond for the faithful performance of
the trust imposed, except his personal honor. Usu-
ally he is chosen to express the preference of his
associates, who thereby become his constituents, for
some particular candidate. His preference is gener-
ally well known, and he is selected because of it.
Sometimes, however, it is deemed advisable, in order
to secure his adhesion to the favorite, to adopt more
or less vigorously phrased instructions as to the exer-
cise of the power vested in him. The relation of the
delegate to the body he represents, and the obliga-
tion created by the instructions given, are matters
of such grave import as to demand tiie serious atten-
THE TRUSTEE OF AUTHORITY. 223
tion of every citizen who would faithfully discharge
his political duty.
The delegate is the creature of one deliberative
assembly and a member of another. To the former
he owes consideration and respect; to the latter,
allegiance and sincerity of purpose. It is no light
thing to have your fellow-citizens put in your hands,
without any guarantee save confidence in your honor
and integrity, their collective civic power, and ask
you to act for them in rendering effective their polit-
ical predilections. If it were a trust of almost any
other sort — if it affected the disbursement or control
of a single cent — the law would take notice of its
existence and enforce its execution. As, however,
it concerns only human rights, the law is silent as to
its scope, and appends no sanction to its non-per-
formance or penalty to its betrayal, being far more
anxious about purses than prerogatives. Any right-
minded man will see, however, that the principles of
equity which govern the administration of a pecun-
iary trust, apply in morals with tenfold stringency to
the discharge of the delegate's duty.
The most important and self-evident of these
principles is that the trust shall be diligently and
faithfully performed, according to the sound discre-
tion of the trustee, and with an eye single to the
interests of the cestui que trust. It is not to be exer-
cised for the benefit or advantage of the trustee, nor
neglected to enhance a stranger's interest. It is a
224 LETTERS TO A KING.
debt of honor laid upon one clothed with the confi-
dence of his fellows. By their selection he is charged
to speak for them as to the interests of the party,
which, to their apprehension, means also the interest
of the country. So far as their preferences are
known he is bound by them as the express will of
his trustor, unless he finds them at variance with his
conviction of policy and duty for the party at large.
Not unfrequently it becomes a most troublesome
question to determine when he shall act according to
instructions, and when upon his own discretion.
If the delegate were a mere agent this question
would be easily decided. The will of his principal
would be always supreme. The trouble is, that he is
vested with a discretion which underlies and some-
times overrides even explicit instructions. It not un-
frequently happens that the very thing he is directed
to do becomes futile and absurd. By a strict con-
struction of his orders he is forbidden to do any thing
else. But he owes a duty to the country and the
party as well as to the constituency whose power he
exercises. These obligations he must reconcile accord-
ing to the circumstances of each particular case. Hav-
ing accepted the trust, he must carry out the wishes
of the trustor, unless satisfied that the interest of the
beneficiary is likely to be impaired thereby. He is
not required to imperil the success of the party by
stubborn and unreasonable observance of the instruc-
tions of a section of it. The whole is more important
THE TRUSTEE OF AUTHORITY. 225
than a part, and the welfare of the whole should
properly override the will of the part.
It is not with the honest and capable delegate,
however, that the trouble usually arises. It is with
the weak, infirm of purpose, dull of intellect, and
corrupt of heart, that the professional manipulator
works. For it is with the delegate that most of the
so-called "fine work" of the political "striker" is
done. The first effort of the professional politician, as
we have seen, is to get men chosen as delegates who
are pledged to do the work required of them, by
controlling the action of the primaries. Should this
be impossible, the next move is to secure men who
will be likely to leave the matter to well-disposed
alternates or proxies ; and, in case this also should
fail, to secure the selection of delegates who are sus-
ceptible of being influenced, either by flattery, favor,
or direct purchase. Such delegates constitute a very
considerable proportion of almost all conventions,
those who are not actually purchasable often regard-
ing their trust as a personal or factional perquisite,
rather than a public obligation, and seeking it rather
to gain advantage for themselves or their friends
than in order to serve the interests of the party to
which they belong, or the constituency by which
they are chosen.
Because of this fact, the delegate feature undoubt-
edly constitutes the weakest point in the American
party system. The objection to it is of the same
226 LETTERS TO A KING.
character with that which obtains against the jury ;
to wit, the difficulty of making proper selections, and
of impressing upon the people the importance and
gravity of this peculiar civic function. English criti-
cism of the American party is almost always directed
to this element as one of very objectionable character,
and a defect which it seems almost impossible to rec-
tify. A recent writer points out very forcibly the analo-
gies between the delegated organization and those
peculiar associations which became such potent factors
in hastening the downfall of the Roman republic, and
there can be no doubt that his strictures are in a
sense just. It is the one link in our system that
seems incapable of protection by legal enactment.
The evils of the primaries are in the main curable by
statute, and it is possible to conceive that laws pro-
viding for the regulation of conventions may yet be
found feasible and necessary, but the only possible-
remedy for the choice of improper and untrustworthy
delegates is the cultivation of a sense of individual
responsibility and general diligence in the discharge
of political duty by the masses of the respective
parties.
It is difficult to realize the extent of this evil.
Men of the keenest honor in other respects readily
consent to become the recipients of doubtful favors
in the capacity of delegates. Candidates, or their or-
ganized adherents, pay the expenses of delegates and
provide them with necessaries and luxuries until
THE TRUSTEE OF ATUHORITY. 22/
political conventions have come to be looked upon as
periods of almost unlimited indul<^ence on the part
of delegates, at the expense of aspirants or their
friends. As a rule, perhaps, sucli 'favors do not con-
sciously affect the action of the recipients, but their uni-
versal acceptance tends to inculcate the idea that the
delegate has some sort of right to mulct the aspirant
and make the test of fitness, not unfrequently, not the
capacity to discharge the duties of the position to
which a candidate aspires, but his ability and w illing-
ness to meet the pecuniary demands of his support-
ers. In the case of the highest offices of the nation,
this has rarely constituted an ingredient of the choice
of nominees. Usually the candidates for President
and Vice-President have been men of moderate
means. Since Washington, not one of our Presidents
could properly be called a wealthy man according to
the standards of his time. With two exceptions, no
man of unusual means, so far as I can recall, has
been nominated for either place. In one case it was
openly charged, and almost universally believed, that
"the bar'l" — a term that will long be associated
with his memory — was relied upon to secure both
the nomination and election of a candidate. In some
instances the ability to control the support of great
corporations and immense moneyed combinations
has been counted as an element in favor of even a
Presidential nominee.
In the case of inferior national officials, senators
228 LETTERS TO A KING.
and representatives in Congress, and the higher of-
ficers of the various States, it is the rule rather than
the exception, that the aspirant must be able and
willing to furnish a liberal allowance for such expend-
itures. It has lately been publicly asserted that no
man can receive a nomination for any important
office in the city of New York without paying a sum
which would constitute a fortune to most of his con-
stituents. The result of this system is that the Sen-
ate of the United States is probably a richer body
of men than that of patrician Rome. It is not sus-
ceptible of reasonable claim that this may be the re-
sult of accident. It is not possible that the two
men best fitted to legislate should, in almost every
State of the North, happen to be among the wealth-
iest of her citizens. In fact the presumption is, that
a man who has devoted his energies to the acquisi-
tion of a great estate must have been so absorbed in
the pursuit of wealth as to unfit him to a certain ex-
tent for the deliberative duties and representative
functions of the legislator. So, too, with the guber-
natorial office. No one supposes that the man in
any party best fitted for the place is always, or even
generally, a man of great wealth. Yet in four cases
out of five throughout the North the man selected as
a gubernatorial candidate is pretty sure to be of
large fortune. It is tacitly conceded that he must be,
and openly declared that it is very desirable that he
should be.
THE TRUSTEE OF AUTHORITY.
229
At the South this evil is far less generally preva-
lent than at the North. It is greatly to the credit
of that section that it still sends poor men to our na-
tional legislature. One of the reasons why it has
always exercised a predominating influence in national
affairs is that its people have preferred that their serv-
ants should be endowed with brains rather than pos-
sessed of unlimited bank accounts. Only a small
proportion of its present representatives can be ac-
counted wealthy men. It has been laughingly said
of the senators from one of these States that nothing
could make the note of either less valuable, unless it
were the indorsement of the other. Yet both have
the firmest hold upon the people of their State, and
no amount of wealth would be of any considerable
advantage to a competitor seeking to oust either from
his place.
Throughout the North, however, the ability and
the inclination to purchase favor, directly or indirectly,
by the use of money, has become an almost universal
element in the choice of candidates. Public office,
in the general apprehension, has become a sort of
perquisite of wealth — a luxury in which the rich man
indulges as naturally and properly, it would almost
seem, as he does in a yacht or a racing-stable. Of
course, there are exceptions, but they prove the rule
to be otherwise by their rarity. It is a fact beyond
question that no man can reasonably look forward to
a successful political career in the North who has not
230 LETTERS TO A KING.
at the outset an ample fortune, or the inclination to
acquire it by questionable methods while in the
public service.
One of the most specious forms of this evil is
denominated "log-rolling," or "trading," which con-
sists in exchanging votes or influence in a nominating
convention, by which the nomination of one man to
a certain office is yielded, in order to secure the
nomination of another man to another office or at
another time. This species of bargaining so generally
prevails that it will no doubt affect you with some
surprise to learn that it is, or could by any one be,
considered at all reprehensible. In some States it is
even customary to allow a candidate for a specific
office to name the delegates from his township or
precinct to several conventions — as a candidate for a
county office is allowed to name delegates to a dis-
trict convention — in order to facilitate transactions
of this character. The inevitable result is to encour-
age the belief that the power which the delegate
exercises is a legitimate matter of bargain and sale —
a stock in trade, which he is expected profitably to
invest on his own account or another's. It induces
men to become professional candidates, standing dele-
gates, and political brokers, with the specific purpose
of making gain thereby. Men are encouraged to
secure the control of delegates in order to hold the
balance of power so as to command a price for their
support.
THE TRUSTEE OF AUTHORITY. 23 1
"The delegates from Concord are alwaj's pur-
chasable," said a veteran politician recently, looking
over the list of members of a convention. "See
Jones," he continued, mentioning one whose name
was not on the list of delegates; "he always has the
delegation from that town in his pocket; find out
what he wants, and if we can not get along without
Concord, we shall have to trade with him. The in-
fernal scoundrel," he continued with hot indignation,
"has made his living for twenty years by buying and
selling votes and voters. The Republicans of his
township, and very frequently of the whole county,
are just as much his slaves as if he had bought them
in market overt. He has an organized clique of
strikers, with whom he divides the profits of his ven-
tures. Men stand in awe of his influence, and pay
him for his silence as well as for his support. He
levies blackmail upon friends and foes alike. For
years there has not been a man elected to office m the
county who has not paid tribute to this infamous buc-
caneer. There was Smith, the clerk, who paid him a
regular commission on all the receipts of his office, and
settled with him regularly once a quarter. There was
Haynes, the sheriff, who gave him the appointment
of every one of his deputies in return for his influence
to secure the nomination, and he sold the appoint-
ments at from one to three thousand dollars apiece!
Probably he divided one-third of this with his strikers
and pocketed the rest himself! The people of the
232 LETTERS TO A KING.
county are just as much his property as if he held
bills of sale for their bodies and souls. He Hterally
sells to them the privilege of going through the form
of an election. While the rest of us were fighting to
free the slave he was forging fetters for us ; so that to
this day there is not a free man in the county. I
have fought for years to overthrow his power, but
there is no use in kicking so long as the people
are willing to be bought and sold, and are proud of
the facilities they offer for such transactions !"
The man thus referred to is a notorious " Boss,"
whose unblushing infamies have made the name of
the county in which he lives synonymous with polit-
ical corruption and ballotorial debasement throughout
the whole country. For such evil there is absolutely
no remedy but active, unremitting effort on the part
of the individual voter, until a public sentiment shall
be created that will esteem the barter of delegated
power just as reprehensible as the breach of a pecun-
iary trust — until the citizen king realizes that the
right to rule is even more sacred than the right to
possess.
XTX
THE CAPTIVE KING.
The declaration that the voters of the country are
the slaves of "bosses" and "rings" is so often made
with little comprehension of the grounds on which
it rests, and such faulty analysis of the causes from
which it proceeds, that it has come to be regarded
as a sort of poetic license, — a figure of speech not
literally consistent with fact, but especially designed
to express chagrin or dissatisfaction. Yet the first
lesson you will learn upon entering political life will
probably be the utter helplessness of the individual
citizen. He is like the untrained child, cast into the
water which he has not yet learned to make the in-
strument of safety and delight. The element which
should be a servant to buoy him safely up, becomes,
instead, an enemy to strangle and overwhelm.
The citizen king is not an autocrat. He can not
rule alone. Though the sovereignty vested in him
is absolute, it must be exercised jointly with that in-
hering in his fellows ; though the right is several, the
possession is joint. One aliquot part of the aggre-
gated sovereignty is )'ours, to be exercised and
20 233
234 LETTERS TO A KING.
enjoyed as you may see fit ; but you can not make
it effective so as to sliape the common destiny except
by co-operation with your fellow-citizens. Whatever
hinders, restricts, or prevents this mutual co-opera-
tion, and therefore in effect deprives you of your
inherent right to rule, takes away from you what
really distinguishes the freeman from the slave.
You will soon learn, perhaps you have already
learned, that though by right a king, you were prac-
tically born to an estate of slavery. It matters not
how wise, how brave, how strong, how noble, and
patriotic you may be, unless enough of your fellows
act with you to make your thought effective, you
will be as helpless as a babe, as powerless as a slave.
This is sometimes mistakenly termed the tyranny of
the majority. Men of intense and imperious char-
acter, finding themselves unable to make effective
their patriotic desires, are apt to assume that the
right is of necessity with them, and that popular
power and party spirit are at fault for thwarting their
good intentions.
Because of this misconception of the true relation,
you will find a considerable proportion of the most
intelligent and patriotic of our people bitterly hostile
to that universal suffrage which has become the rule
of our government. They assert that it fosters po-
litical corruption ; that ignorance and vice are the
natural enemies of good government ; that parties
and States are controlled by manipulation of the
THE CAPTIVE KING. 235
ignorant and debased, who run party caucuses, and
compel the well-disposed citizen to accept the results
of their action. We have already given some con-
sideration to this question ; but as it concerns the
fundamental principle of republican government, and
is the invariable excuse for negligence, and the basis
of all morbid denunciation of our party system, it
may not be amiss to recur to it again. As an ex-
cuse for political inaction, the claim that the "igno-
rant and the depraved masses " neutralize the power,
paralyze the beneficent energies, and thwart the pa-
triotic purposes of the wise and virtuous among our
people, and that they ought not therefore to be al-
lowed to exercise the power of the ballot, is not only
absurd, but cowardly and unjust in the extreme.
Vice and ignorance are in the minority with us.
In the States of the North the average of illiteracy is
less than five in a hundred, and in any one of them
the proportion of ignorance is so small that even a
coward should be ashamed to make it an excuse for
evil, being at the worst less than twelve in a hun-
dred. In the South the proportion is much greater,
averaging thirty-six per cent, and in South Carolina
climbing up to fifty five per cent. This, however, is
of little moment, as in several of those States only
about one in ten of the population, or about half of
the usual percentage of voters, wield the elective
franchise, even in a Presidential year, and an inspec-
tion of the vote shows that it is the more ignorant
236 LETTERS TO A KING.
portion of the population who thus neglect the exer-
cise of their ballotorial right. This, therefore, elimi-
nates ignorance as a political factor in those States.
They are all controlled by the class which boasts of
its "wealth and intelligence," which is, consequently,
directly and admittedly responsible for their political
condition.
To include the illiteracy of the South in estimates
designed to justify the growing sentiment in favor of
the disfranchisement of ignorance, lest it should over-
whelm the power of intelligence, is a proposition too
absurd to be soberly considered. A people of seven
millions, who in two States greatly outnumber the
whites, and in two others are at least equal to them
in number, yet are able to choose in all hardly sev-
enty of their fellows to any office whatever, and not
one to a position of any impoiiance, however great the
proportion of ignorance among them, can not reason-
ably be held to exert any appreciable influence upon
the political situation.
It is folly, therefore, to speak of the detrimental
power of the ignorant masses in the United States,
or in any State of the Union. In fact, there are no
"ignorant masses." The ruling masses are intelli-
gent. Even if it were otherwise, intelligence ought
to be ashamed to prate about the power of ignorance.
If "knowledge is power," intelligence should be
stronger, man for man, than ignorance ; and if it does
not strengthen, we ought at least to stop boasting of
THE CAPTIVE KING. 237
its possession. It is not the strength of the "igno-
rant masses," nor the viciousness of an ignorant
minority, that shrouds the future of the Republic
with apprehension, and makes the citizen-king a
helpless captive from the first, but the general neglect
of the more important political functions by the intel-
ligent masses, and an almost universally debauched
conscience in regard to political affairs. We talk and
act as if there were no such thing as an obligation to
do right, nor any reason why we should not do
wrong, in matters affecting the public welfare.
But even if this bugbear of "the ignorant and
vicious masses" were a veritable fact, their exclusion
from the rights of the citizen would be an act of
such gross injustice as to be unfit to be considered
as a remedy. The whole theory of republican gov-
ernment is based on the idea that the distribution of
the sovereign power enables every man to do some-
thing toward securing his own rights and remedying
his own wrongs, or what he conceives to be his
rights or believes to be his wrongs. It is a piece of
protective armor, intended to equalize the weak with
the strong. It is always the poor, the weak, and
the ignorant who are the victims of oppression. To
such the ballot is at once a sword and a shield. The
untrained soldier may injure his friend as often as
his foe, or even hurt himself oftener still, with this
weapon of celestial temper, but he will at least be
able to defend himself from attack therewith, ' ' She
238 LETTERS TO A KING.
hath given more than they all " was said of the
widow's mite, and the ballot is the only weapon with
which poverty and ignorance may even blindly defend
themselves. It is their only hope. Unfortunately,
intelligence does not always imply righteousness or
justice ; and even against the best, the lowest and
meanest of every land need always to stand upon
their guard.
In avoidance of the self evident absurdity of this
claim that ignorance and poverty are responsible for
misgovernment, it is usually alleged that our political
ills are chiefly confined to the great centers of popu-
lation, where ignorance, vice, and an unassimilated
foreign element chiefly abound. Even here the rea-
son does not hold good. In our greatest commercial
metropolis the proportion of native to foreign is as
three to two, and the ratio of illiteracy is less than
prevails among the whites of the most intelligent
Southern States. If her best citizens were as active
in the support of good government and the right, as
her bad ones are in promoting evil, the city of New
York would be well enough governed. Ignorance
and vice are weak before intelligence and virtue in a
republic, if intelligence and virtue are awake and will
do the work that confrcjiits them instead of intrusting
it to hired proxies.
It is true that the results of the corruption of the
sovereign power are usually most notable in the great
cities. This is simply because in them is found the
THE CAPTIVE KING. 239
best opportunity for peculation ; and the wrong
which touches the purse is always felt much more
keenly than that which affects only the person. The
"boss" may be more notorious in the city and his
achievements more startling, but political demoraliza-
tion is by no means confined to the haunts of trade.
The "boss," who is only a leader wielding the
power of a greater or less body of subservient citi-
zens for personal advantage, and the "ring," which
is only a body of subordinate leaders who co-operate
with him in the exercise of this power, flourish
equally well in rural or suburban regions. It re-
quires neither poverty nor vice for their support,
since intelligence and morality are not unfrequently
their most subservient instruments.
An incident which has come under my observa-
tion since my last letter was written, most forcibly
illustrates this fact. The following paragraph in a
newspaper, the other day, attracted no attention and
provoked no comment, being a mere record of an
event not at all extraordinary or unusual:
"At the Republican caucus in the town of J ,
it was voted that Mr. L should be allowed to
name all the delegates to all the conventions in which the
town is entitled to representation. "
The italics are mine. I was interested in this
item, because the town referred to is situated in a
county noted for its prosperity and the high average
of intelligence and morality among its people. Its
240 LETTERS TO A KING.
population is almost solidly American, there being
no city of ten thousand inhabitants within its limits,
and no special segregation of what is sometimes
called "the laboring classes " among its people. In
all respects it must be ranked very high as a repre-
sentative agricultural American community. Yet for
a score of years its name has been synon)'mous with
political corruption. It has had its "bosses" and
its "rings." It is usually referred to, even in the
councils of the party, to which it gives a remarkably
steady and reliable majority, with a sneer. The
party orator, when he boasts of purity and reform,
not only passes by it on the other side, but holds
his nose with a knowing leer as he does so. It has not
many very rich men, and few that are very poor.
There the "boss" flourishes; the office-seeker
plies his trade successfully, and the professional dele-
gate pieces out an honest income by the favor of
anxious candidates, or a thrifty sharing of the profits
of the "boss." The- " boss " himself is sometimes
an office-broker, and sometimes an aspirant for office.
It is said that he makes politics his "profession."
It ought to be said that he makes office-mongering a
business. Between times he turns an honest penny
in the lobby. He is not lavish with his money, but
pays the good men who serve him as pawns in his
various games, precisely what he agrees, if it be cash,
and as little as he can, if it be favor. He is a kindly
man who knows exactly when to "stand treat," and
THE CAPTIVE KING. 24 1
has been known to give something to public enter-
prises. He is not a member of the Church, but
gives Hberally to the support of the preached Word,
and is esteemed as a generous patron by the congre-
gation. As an aspirant for office, he has not always
been successful; but as an "office-broker" it is be-
lieved that he seldom "gets left."
It is said that in a score of years there has never
been a contest for a nomination in the county or dis-
trict in which this man lives, that one aspirant or
another has not paid roundly for his support. A
hundred times he has thwarted the will and defied
the wrath of a majority of his party. Indeed, the
majority have reached a point where they no longer
expect to control. Politics has become to them a
game which they are interested in watching, but in
which they do not feel that they really have any im-
portant part to play. In every town there is a little
group of experienced manipulators, who call them-
selves "the boys." They are usually past middle
age, and embrace a large proportion of successful
professional loafers. They meet and fix up the
"slate," arrange who shall be chosen as delegates,
and prepare the tickets for the caucus or primary.
The people come together at the appointed time
Avithout previous consultation or preparation, unaccus-
tomed, it may be, to parliamentary forms and pro-
cedure. There are a few motions; some quick tactical
maneuvers, and what seemed likely to be a drawn
21
242 LETTERS TO A KING.
battle is decided. There were perhaps a dozen con-
testants ; two or three withdrew ; there was a motion
to make unanimous, and perhaps that set of dele-
gates who had the least support — the preference of
hardly a respectable minority — are declared chosen
by acclamation ; or, perhaps a few really good men —
honest, honorable, and true — are put on the ticket,
with others to neutralize their action. Whatever
the result, it has been done decently and in order.
The people have delegated their authority and chosen
men to choose or "trade " for them, as the case maybe.
To understand how little significance is attached
to such forms of barter, let us return for a moment
to the excerpt already given. What does it mean ?
The Republicans of the town of J authorize Mr.
L to name delegates to represent them in the
county, senatorial, and Assembly district conventions.
These delegates will constitute one eleventh of a ma-
jority in the county convention, one-twentieth of a
majority in the senatorial district, and one-seventh of
a majority in the Assembly district convention.
Truly Mr. L must be a very good man, that he
thus is given by his neighbors carte blanclie to exer-
cise the governing function vested by the law in more
than a thousand voters ! If he manages well he will
be able to make 07ie-scventh of an assemblyman, one-
twentieth of a senator, and one-elcventli of a judge and
other county officers! Even the "boss" himself,
notorious as are his moral infirmities, has more than
THE CAPTIVE KING. 243
once been nominated by just such methods, and may
choose to be again. In that case he will be triumph-
antly returned, though not one out of five in his
party would openly favor his selection for any office !
What makes such debasement of our party system
possible ? Simply the fact that there are too many
cases in which men abrogate their rights in a similar
manner, and for the same purpose as the Republicans
of the town of J gave to Mr. L the power to
name delegates who would wield their authority.
Why did they give Mr. L this power? He
is a rising young politician, and his neighbors sym-
pathize with his aspiration, and desire to promote his
success. So they give him their power as a sort of
capital to set him up in business. He thinks he would
like to go to the Assembly, but hardly expects the
nomination. He stands ready, however, to trade one-
eleventh of a county judge, one-eleventh of a treasurer,
and one-twentieth of a senator, for six-sevenths of a
majority in the Assembly district convention. Should
he succeed, he may nominate each of these officers
and himself too. If so, you and I will confirm these
trades at the ballot-box next November ; not because
the candidates are our choice ; not because a majority
of the party prefer them ; but simply because we are
slaves — the slaves of a shrewd, unscrupulous trickster,
who makes even our sincerity and honesty of purpose
an element of his success !
There is no more intelligent, earnest, or patriotic
244 LETTERS TO A KING.
community in the land than the town of J , or
the county of which it is a part. The people are pas-
sionate lovers of liberty, and their political convictions
are a sort of religion. They believe in their party as
the chosen agency for the amelioration of evil and
the elevation of humanity. They are patriots of a
most fervid and noble character. Out of this very
town went forth a larger proportion of its sons to do
battle for the country and for liberty than from any
other community in the State — perhaps any in the
entire country. While they struck the shackles from
the slave's limbs, the fetters were forged for their
own, which they have worn ever since. Their very
devotion to principle has constituted the chief instru-
ment of their enslavement. They do not neglect
what they deem their political duty. They attend the
primaries of their party with religious faithfulness.
Tiiey are enslaved in the sacred name of liberty, and
serve all the more submissively, because they believe
that by ignoring themselves and surrendering their
own preferences they are serving the cause of
humanity and promoting the general welfare. They
have a kindly feeling for their young townsman, and
do not at all realize that, by putting up their prerog-
atives for sale for his benefit, they are selling them-
selves into bondage and furnishing the price with
which their liberties are to be bought.
This is the saddest of all our political ills, and one
against which individual protest is powerless except
THE CAPTIVE KING. 245
through co-operation of the very ones whose misguided
zeal has produced this result. To offer opposition to
what is thus done is to lay unhallowed hands upon
the sacred ark — the principles and traditions they so
devoutly revere, and which, indeed, are altogether
worthy of their reverence. What has thus been done,
if not well done, has at least been with their consent
and approval; and they unquestionably acted from
the best of motives.
What is the remedy? There is but one — the
conscience and intelligence of the universal king must
be so awakened and informed that he will not him-
self make merchandise of his prerogatives, nor permit
others to do so. Do not furnish opportunity or
temptation to the office-monger. Your party organi-
zation is the sword and scepter of liberty, only so
long as the king wields it hhnself. He can not give
it to another and remain unharmed by its edge. Like
Excalibar, only the master's hand can safely hold it.
Select always the best men as delegates; change them
often ; never send one man to two conventions the same
year ; and if there is even a hint of bargain and sale
about the result of his work, put on him the brand
of Cain, and never trust him again. But above all
things, the simplest and most effective remedies are :
I. Let every primary and every convention which
sends a delegate to another, express a preference for
some aspirant for every office for which the constituent
body is to name a candidate ; and let this preference
246 LETTERS TO A KING.
be certified in the credentials of every delegate to
that body.
2. Insist always upon the election of delegates, not
as a group or upon a ticket, but man for man, and
let nominations be openly made for the place of first
delegate, second delegate, and so on, each being
chosen separately.
3. Insist upon the ballot in the primary, and the
viva voce vote upon a call of the roll in all delegated
conventions. This method takes rather more time,
but makes it difficult for the "boss" to "get in his
work," and for the purchasable delegate to "deliver
the goods."
Of course, there will always be fraud and chicane
in government of any kind, because government is a
human institution ; but if you and I are to be made its
victims — if our liberties are to be bought and sold —
let us at least make the transaction as difficult and
undesirable as possible. So shall we save ourselves
from ignominy, and the cause of human liberty from
disaster ; so shall the citizen-king wisely rule.
XX
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE.
I AM reminded that our pleasant intercourse is
drawing to a close. I have not touched upon many
of those public duties which you no doubt deem most
important, for the reason that, although they are by
no means to be neglected, they shrink into comparative
insignificance beside the political functions we have
considered. It is true that the king is an administrator
as well as a lawgiver, and the citizen-king can by no
means be excused from the discharge of this func-
tion of government. Before administration, however,
comes law-making ; and it happens, under our system,
that the office of the citizen-king as law-maker and ad-
ministrator are in the main united. When you have
done your duty in the making of law, you have
usually provided also for its enforcement. In other
words, we choose our law making agents and our
administrative officials by the same method, and
usually at the same time. Both are selected through
the operation of party mechanism ; and faithfulness
in the selection of the one implies faithfulness in
the choice of the other. You will perceive, therefore,
247
248 LEISTERS TO A KING.
that the subjects discussed embrace the fundamental
principles of the safe and effectual exercise of sover-
eign power by the vast body of co-ordinate rulers.
In these letters I have purposely avoided the
consideration of what are termed political questions.
Free trade, State rights, the limitation or extension
of national authority, — all these have had no place in
our discussion, because their determination one way
or the other is a mere result of the exercise of the
power we have been considering. There are, how-
ever, two matters outside the field of political action
which I wish to call to your attention before closing
this series. The first of these is the fact that the
prime object of government is not economj^ nor is
cheapness of administration its highest excellence.
Money is not the mainspring of national life, and the
citizen-king, whether acting in an individual or official
capacity, is not fulfilling his highest function when
he acts as a mere accumulator of treasure.
Economy or acquisition, as the adjunct of a noble
purpose, is a most worthy attribute ; as an end,
either in individuals or nations, it is most despicable.
The so-called science of political economy is respon-
sible for not a little foolish and criminal neglect of
duty on the part of our people. I say so-called
science, because political economy can never become
a science in the ordinary and true sense of the
term ; that is, it can never offer specific formulae by
which particular results may be invariably attained.
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE. 249
It is at best merely a collection of analogies more
or less perfect — studies in the lives of nations — ex-
periments, only part of the conditions of which are
known, and only a few of which can ever be repro-
duced. Self-confident sciolists have sought to advance
this most interesting and useful study of ever-vary-
ing conditions, to the rank of a positive science, — the
science of government. Such a science is manifestly
impossible. It would be like a science of life ; for
government is, after all, only the regulation of segre-
gated lives. The conditions of such segregated life
vary as infinitely as the conditions of individual suc-
cess. In the first place, peoples differ in their
motives, characters, and sentiments just as greatly
as individuals. What might be a sound and effective
method of organization, administration, or revenue
with one people would be absolutely ruinous to
another ; just as in private life one man acts upon
one principle, and another upon its converse, and
yet both succeed.
"I owe my success," says one man, "to the
fact that I never borrowed a dollar." Another de-
clares, "I should never have been worth a pinch of
salt had I not begun by getting hopelessly in debt."
"No man succeeds," said one of the richest of
Americans, "who does not take chances which
would wipe him out if his calculation should happen
to fail." "I should have been cleaned out a dozen
times," said a great speculator, " if those who were
250 LETTERS TO A KING.
playing against me had known the weakness of my
hand."
So, one political economist arrives at the con-
clusion that a nation should never emit bills of credit ;
another, that it should lev)- duties on imports in
order to encourage domestic manufacture ; another,
that the collective good demands that the individual
be allowed to buy his wares in the cheapest market.
One instances England with her five millions of
paupers, and the Irish land question impending, as an
example of unquestionable prosperity. Another
cites France, with her infinite subdivision of land as
exemplifying the true philosophy of national wealth.
One proceeds upon one hypothesis, and another upon
its converse.
"It is an undeniable fact," says a great author-
ity on political economy, "that the richest portions
of all new countries are first settled." This asser-
tion he makes an important postulate in his specu-
lations in regard to land, on which his economic theory
is mainly based. The simple fact is, that the "assump-
tion is not true. The land which is first settled may
be either that which is most easily tilled ; that which
is most easily defended ; that which is supposed to be
the most healthful ; that which is most easily ac-
cessible from the sea, or even that which has no
merit at all except mere contiguity to the land of
origin. A similar uncertainty pervades all the de-
ductions of political economists, and, indeed, of all
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE. 25 I
scientists whose theories are dependent on the action
of men or masses for their exempHfication.
The identity of human nature is a principle so
little understood and of so subtle a character, that its
application almost as often leads to error as to correct
results. Theoretically, it may be true that human
nature is always the same — that is, that under like
conditions every one would do the same thing — but
in order to make this assertion true, the antecedent
conditions, and even the heritable attributes of the
individual or communities we desire to compare,
must be identical. The course that one man or peo-
ple would adopt, another, under like conditions,
merely because of inherited differences, would spurn.
What would impel one to fight to the bitter end,
would induce another to surrender unconditionally.
What would inspire one people to superhuman exer-
tion would overwhelm another with hopeless despair.
The same is true of all sciences or pretended sciences
in which human attributes constitute a chief element
on which deductions are based.
It is evident to every one that there can be no
such thing as a science of trade ; that is, a system of
fixed and invariable rules, the observance of which
will insure financial success, and the violation of which
will insure failure. So, too, there can never be a
science of war. The curious attempts that have been
made to prescribe rules to control the movements of
armies and the conduct of warfare, which compose
252 LETTERS TO A KING.
the science of strategy, are simply obvious truths,
applying only to specific conditions known to both
contestants. If its assumptions were ever true, war
would be merely a game of chess, instead of being,
as it always is, a game of chance, in which one man's
audacity and genius, or one army's confidence or
fortitude, may change defeat into victory, and reverse
the most imperative rules. The movement of Jack-
son to the rear of the Federal right at Chancellors-
ville was in defiance of the most positive precepts of
strategic science ; but he knew his men, guessed the
morale of his army, and, but for the misfortune of
death, would no doubt have destroyed the army he
so effectually repulsed. So, too, with Grant's mar-
velous campaign below Vicksburg. Take Sheridan
out of Winchester, and you have a Federal rout.
The battles of the world, in short, have rarely been
won by science, but generally by a correct estimate
of the quahties of masses and individuals. Some-
times the general wins by brilliant combinations, but
more frequently by an instinctive appreciation of the
spirit and capacity of his soldiery. When Fabius had
accustomed his men to success he could afford to
fight, and not till then.
It is this principle that makes the spirit, charac-
ter, and sentiment of a people, the most important
element of all political movements and economic
theories. That economic system which is the best
for one people may be ruinous to another, and that
, THE NATIONAL IMPULSE. 253
administrative method which the experience of one
people approves, may be destructive to the pros-
perity of another. Institutions must be adapted to
the genius of the people who are to be affected by
them, and the sentiment of national pride — the esprit
of a distinctive nationality — is, especially in a repub-
lic, by far the most important of all the attributes of
the citizen. This sentiment is sometimes ludicrous
in its manifestations, but the lack of it is of all things
most dangerous to national harmony and strength.
The glory of France was the chief element of Napo-
leon's military success. His genius consisted not
merely in the power to make brilliant and successful
military combinations, but in the ability to intoxicate
the soldiers and people of the republic and the em-
pire with a self forgetful frenzy for the glory of la
belle France. The power and prosperity of England
depend more than all things else upon the unaltera-
ble conviction in the mind of every Englishman of
the superior excellence of her laws, her institutions,
and her people. The idea of the Vaterland lies at
the root of German power, and the patriots of Italy
effected nothing until they had created a universal
longing among her people for an Italy redeemed and
free. This principle has found a curious exemplifica-
tion in China, ancient and modern. The impregnable
belief in the super-excellence of all things Chinese
has kept a weak people from dissolution and absorp-
tion. The Tartar could- overcome their armies, but
254 LETTERS TO A KING.
was in turn subjugated by their institutions. Modern
civilization, with all its insidious agencies, has never
been able to get a secure foothold in the Celestial
Empire. Yet, in all things except the supreme sat-
isfaction with which they regard their own institu-
tions, they are perhaps the weakest people on the globe.
The root of national strength, therefore, is to be
found in the sentiment of devotion and regard for
the national idea. With this spirit strongly devel-
oped, a nation small in numbers and insignificant in
material resources may be enduring and invincible;
while without it a people of unlimited resources and
numbering many millions will necessarily be weak.
Of this last proposition, India is the most perfect ex-
ample that could be desired. From the earliest
dawn of history she has been the victim of lesser but
compacted nationalities. The barbarous khans of
Central Asia, for ages ravaged her plains; Greece
sent compact little phalanxes to plunder her temples;
. France and Portugal conquered with a few hundred
soldiers realms more populous and extensive than
the entire empires who.se power their captains repre-
sented; and now a handful of Englishmen — less than
threescore thousand — hold in check the aspiration
and power of two hundred and twenty millions!
Why is it? Simply because India has never had a
central thought — an Indian nationality.
" Our country, right or wrong," may be, as it has
been often declared, a despicable sentiment ; but the
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE. 255
belief that one country, however wrong, is better than
any other, however right, united with a determina-
tion to make her better still, not on borrowed models,
but along her own lines, and in harmony with her
own precedents, lies at the foundation of all govern-
mental stability and excellence. A government that
looks abroad for its models, and seeks to conform its
civilization to the lines of other developments, is, and
of necessity must always be, weak. A soldier can
never fight successfully in another man's armor.
David was wise when he refused the king's armament,
and used his own sling and the smooth pebbles from
the brook. The American people never manifested
such incontrovertible evidence of "structural weak-
ness " as when their secretary of the navy advertised
abroad for designs for our ships of war. God grant
that the borrowed bastards may never leave the ways
of our navy-yards ! Better a thousand times that we
should fight on rafts and canal boats than rely upon
another people's brain for the models of our ships of
war! It was not such subserviency to foreign na-
tions, nor even the excellence of her ships, that made
England "the mistress of the sea," but the spirit
that underlay Nelson's famous order, "England ex-
pects every man to do his duty."
As a people, especially at the North, we are
sadly deficient in this spirit. Selfdepreciation is
our forte, shrewdness our especial pride, and money
our chief reliance. In the War of the Rebellion we
256 LETTERS TO A KING.
imported Belgian muskets for our soldiers, and it
was not until the summer of 1863 that the Ameri-
can repeating rifle was used in battle. E\en at the
close of the war many of our troops were using the
worst arms in the world, while our factories were sup-
plying other nations with the best. Instead of evolv-
ing a system of civil service adapted to our institu-
tions, and suited to the genius of our people, we
borrowed one from England, which England herself
had but recently borrowed from China. Our modern
literature consists chiefly in deprecatory comparison
of American life with the "sweetness and light " that
surrounds the beatitudes of English social and polit-
ical existence. Our clothes, our intonations, and our
aspirations we seek to form on English models as well
as our ships of war!
If we boast of our nation at all, it is almost cer-
tain to be of its wealth. Our Goulds, our Vander-
bilts, and the aggregates of the columns of exports
and production in the census, — these are the chief
things in which we presume to compare ourselves
proudly and exultantly with other nations. As a
concomitant, if not a result of this spirit, we have
little, if any, pride in personally serving the country.
We incline to regard politics as a game ; and our in-
terest in it is too often of the same sort we have in
a boat-race or a game of base-ball. Our children
are not consecrated to the service of the country,
nor taught to do and dare — to attempt and achieve
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE. ^ 25/
for her sake. Nothing is sacred to our eyes
because it is American, except our aggregated
dividends and "the surplus in the treasury." Pub-
lic office is neither "a public trust," to be adnain-
istered for the public good, nor a privilege which is
prized as a public honor or an opportunity to serve
the nation. On the contrary, we generally look
upon official position as merely an opportunity for
personal advancement or enrichment, and a public
duty is regarded as desirable only when it offers op-
portunity for display or emolument.
It is for this reason that the duties of official
positions which do not pay well are seldom well
performed among us. I need but instance in this
connection the duty of the juror. No one who will
sit in a court in any Northern State and listen to the
miserable subterfuges that are offered to enable the
best citizens to evade this important but unpleasant
duty will wonder at the demoralization of our jury
system, and the scorn of law and inclination to un-
lawful forms of public violence which are coming to
degrade our civilization. No man is glad to perform
such a public service, but, on the contrary, seeks to
evade it, or at the least hire a substitute. The same
is true of all unpleasant public duties, and the act of
evading them, even by falsehood or substitution, is
considered honorable. Twenty-five years ago the
country called her sons to its defense. It was a
service honorable but difficult, and could not, in the
22
258 LETTERS TO A KING.
majority of cases, bring advantage or preferment.
When they did not respond readily, the country ap-
pealed to conscription, and the conscript was allowed
to put in a substitute or go himself. So creditable was
it deemed to avoid personal service, that twenty
years afterwards (in 1884), two out of the four can-
didates for the Presidency were men who refused
to serve the country when drafted, one of whom was
elected I
In this respect it must be admitted that the people
of the South are greatly our superiors. They are
first of all things Soiitheni men, proud of the fact,
and believing in the excellence and superiority of all
things Southern. They are, consequentlj^ anxious
to serve the public, by whose confidence they are
honored. After fifteen years' residence at the South,
six of which were spent in judicial duty, offering
unusual opportunity for observation, I feel justified
in saying that the Southern man rarely seeks release
from civic duty on the plea of personal advantage.
Public duty is, in his eyes, always the most important
that can devolve upon him. As a result, hardly an
instance can be found of the preferment by the people
of that section of one who refused or neglected to
support with might and main the Confederate cause —
the cause which they regarded as their cause, to up-
hold which was in itself an unmatched honor. It is
this attribute which has made the people of the South
revere their soldiers as heroes, and the lack of it
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE. 259
which has made the people of the North contemn
their defenders as paupers.
No more striking illustration of this could be con-
ceived than a series of articles which have appeared
in one of the journals in which these letters have
been printed, simultaneously with them. They have
been an unexampled laudation of the motives, char-
acter, and attributes of the Confederate soldier and
a constant glorification of the Confederate cause.
The comparison which is instituted with the Federal
soldier is always, and in every respect, one of sweep-
ing and contemptuous disparagement. The Southern
soldiers, we are shown, were altogether the grandest,
bravest, holiest men that ever rallied to the support
of a glorious idea. They were "champions of lib-
erty," "Christian heroes," "the most devoted and
accomphshed of knights." On the other hand, the
Federals — the people of the North — were "mer-
cenaries," "cruel," "barbarous," the "instigators
of an unholy war," "fanatics," and "dupes of am-
bitious and unscrupulous politicians!"
I do not refer to these papers to refute their ideas
or deprecate their publication. Personally, I dissent
from their conclusions and question their premises.
I do not believe the Southern soldier was any more
addicted to piety than his Northern compeer; that
the Southern general was any better gentleman or
any purer Christian than the Northern leader ; that
there was any more profanity or vice of any sort in
26o LETTERS TO A KING.
the Northern than in the Southern camps; or that
intemperance was any less frequent among men or
officers, unless the difficulty of obtaining intoxicants
may have produced such result ; though any one
who ever tasted the "persimmon whisky," to be
found in that region in those days, may well wonder
that it did not prove an effective antidote for intem-
perance. The muster-rolls of the two armies show
that the average of intelligence, as attested by the
power to sign their names, was many times greater
with the Northern than with the Southern soldier,
and the spectacle of a ghastly slaughter of men ex-
ecuted for adhesion to the Government of the United
Stales, brings to mind the fact that notwithstanding
the Southern soldiers were such paragons, there were
at least a hundred times more desertions to the enemy
and many times as many executed for cowardice and
desertion, as of the abandoned and depraved creatures
found in the Northern camps. I remember, too —
and there are many who were my companions in a
Southern military prison of ill-repute, who will recall
the fact — that the most brutal and cruel among the
subordinate keepers was the devoted leader of a
notable revival that took place among the guards !
I think that the soldiers of both armies averaged
better than the people they represented, "each after
his kind;" and I merely cite these papers to show
the difference in national or collective esprit of the
two sections. I suppose the circulation of the journal
THE NATIONAL IMPULSE. 26 1
in which the papers referred to appear, is at least
three-fourths at the North ; I should not be surprised
if even a greater proportion of its readers were found
there. Now, if any Southern paper should publish a
series of articles contrasting in a like manner the
Northern and Southern soldier, it would have to go
out of business in less than a month. Its subscribers
would put it in the fire with the tongs. What is the
reason ? Because, on one side of the line, public
spirit means an exalted ideal of Southern worth and
excellence. On the other — well, we court deprecia-
tion and invite contemptuous disregard. We happen
to be Americans ; but seemingly we would almost as
soon, if not a little rather, have been anything else.
I do not blame, but rather honor, the Southern man
for his devotion to the Confederate hero. I only
regret that a similar regard for the public welfare
does not inspire the Northern man to count the per-
formance of public duty, whether civil or military,
pleasant or unpleasant, profitable or unprofitable, an
honor ; and I sincerely trust that the time may soon
come when he who performs such duty faithfully, will
be honored as the true American ideal.
When that time shall come, the contrast between
the Northern and the Southern city upon election
day will not be so striking as it now is. At present,
to their honor be it said, you will meet at the South
the most prominent citizens at the polls, using their
influence for the cause and party they believe to be
262 LETTERS TO A KING.
right. In a Northern city you will find the voter's
booth surrounded with paid "strikers" and hired
" manipulaiors ;" but the "good citizens" are too
busy to more than put in a" substitute " to do their
duty for them. Southern sentiment is in many re-
spects reprehensible and dangerous, but in public
spirit and that faithfulness to an ideal which corn-
mands respect, even from one who disapproves, they
may well give a needed lesson to the American who
desires to see his country prosperous, peaceable, and
strong.
"For the sake of France," murmured the hero,
who had fought her battles, as he gave the signal for
his own death which the usurper had decreed. " For
the sake of my country," should be the watchword
of the citizen king as he does his dut)% whether
pleasant or unpleasant, profitable or unprofitable, as
one of the myriad controlling atoms of the Republic,
" without fear, favor, or affection, reward or the hope
of reward," as the ancient law defines his duty, in
the most thankless post it ever calls him to occupy.
XXI.
THE AMENDMENT OF PARTY AGENCIES.
There remain to be considered some of the sub-
stitutes which have been devised for the party agen-
cies which we have discussed. One of the most
singular of these, and one which is the most delusive
in its specious pretense of fairness, is what is known
as tlie cumulative method of voting. It was intended
primarily to secure to a minority a "talking repre-
sentation" in legislative bodies. It has generally been
accepted as especially favoring individual action, and
giving expression to individual preference without
the intervention of party agencies. There could not
be a greater mistake. Without party agencies and
systemized co-operation among the electors, the cu-
mulative method would merely magnify the power
of the working politician. It might possibly limit
the power of the individual "bosses," but it would
materially increase their number, and almost certainly
preclude the assertion of the will of the majority,
except in cases where there was a practical una-
nimity of sentiment. Under its operation the cabal
263
264 LETTERS TO A KING.
would become the real and almost impregnable
source of power.
This method consists merely in dividing the con-
stituency into groups, which elect a certain number
of representatives each, the system being especially
adapted for the choice of members of legislative
bodies. Every elector is allowed as many votes as
there are representatives to be chosen by the group
of which he is a part; and he may cast them all for
one, or one each for the whole number. As, if there
are three representatives to be chosen from a district,
the voter may cast one vote for three candidates, two
votes for one, and one for another, or three for one ;
so that a minority numbering one-third of the elect-
ors can always secure one representative. This is
the theory. In practice it yields no such results. By
splitting up the vote, individual aspirants may suc-
ceed in securing their own election with only an in-
significant minority of the votes cast; as, if there be
twelve candidates in the district referred to, and those
having the highest number of votes are chosen, it is
quite possible that none of those chosen may repre-
sent more than a tenth of the votes. This is neither
popular representation, nor independent action. It
is simply a bid for trickery.
This method may also be taken advantage of
where organized parties exist, to give the whole power
of a legislative body into the hands of a minority.
This is well illustrated by a plan which was recently
THE AMENDMENT OF PARTY AGENCIES. 265
proposed by a minority, to obtain control of a con-
stitutional convention in the State of New York. A
bill which was before the Legislature to authorize
such a convention, provided for cumulative voting,
was warmly supported by the organized "reformers"
of the State, and was expected to become a law.
A party so small as not to have a majority in any
county of the State, proposed under this system to
control the action of the convention. The plan was
this : in every Republican district they were to ally
themselves with the Democrats, and secure a ma-
jority of the delegates chosen by the combination.
This would be no loss to the Democrats, and in some
cases a gain, besides weakening their strongest oppo-
nent. In Democratic districts this was to be re-
versed by alliance with the Republicans. Had the
bill become a law and this programme been carried
out, it seems probable that a minority, comprising
less than one fifth of the voters of the State would
have had a clear majority in a convention having
power to revise the fundamental law.
Another plan which has met with a good deal of
favor from political reformers is one intended to do
away with delegate conventions, by having nomina-
tions made directly by the constituents. This idea
has two forms: the one known as the "subscription-
paper" plan, and the other the "primary-election"
plan. Both are open to serious objections.
The plan of nomination by "subscription papers,"
23
266 LETTERS TO A KING.
has not been very widely adopted in this country.
It has the merit of an English flavor, and beyond this
has absolutely nothing to commend it, as a substitute
for the party convention. Whenever it becomes nec-
essary to run an independent candidate, as a rebuke
to improper methods or to prevent the election of an
unfit candidate, however, this method is not only a
very proper one, but is almost the only one that can
safely be adopted. When a reasonable number of
his fellow-citizens in this maimer call upon a man to
assume the burdens and responsibilities of candidacy,
it becomes not only an honorable thing, but well-
nigh an imperative duty for him to comply.
As a substitute for party nomination, however,
this plan is open to the most serious objection. If
generally adopted, it would result not only in an in-
finite multiplication of candidates, but would also
afford one of the most convenient and effective
methods for self promotion and improper manipula-
tion. There is nothing easier than to get a man to
sign a paper, unless it be to sign it for him. The
nomination by "subscription-paper" is open to both
these methods of abuse. Men would be induced to
sign such papers thoughtlessl)', in ignorance of their
character or by corrupt procurement; and in case of
failure of these methods, wholesale counterfeiting of
signatures would be, and often is, resorted to. As a
method of nomination it is not only faulty, but is
the most unreliable and unsatisfactory ever devised.
THE AMENDMENT OF PARTY AGENCIES. 267
The method of nomination by ' ' primary election, "
which at first sight seems to be entirely fair, and
certain if properly conducted to give satisfaction, is
nevertheless open to serious objection. It has come
to be common knowledge in American politics that
a man may be the prime favorite of a majority
of his party, and yet be the worst candidate it can
nominate. While ninety per cent of a party micrht
prefer a candidate, the hostility of the remaining ten
per cent might be so bitter as to make his defeat a
certainty in case he should be nominated. The work
of a convention is not merely to ascertain the party
preference, but to determine the force of any hostile
feeling which might secure his defeat, despite the fact
that a majority heartily approved his candidacy. The
first element of a fit nomination is that it shall not
only meet the approval of a portion of a party, but
shall also be not unacceptable to the rest of them.
In nominations by primary election, this combination
of essential qualities is dropped from sight : the fa-
vorite of a majority is named, and the party not unfre-
quently suffers defeat thereby. This fact is so appar-
ent, that despite the seeming fairness and desirability
of this method it has never been generally adopted.
This has often been attributed by the class known as
"professional reformers" to the machinations of
politicians. It might much more reasonably be cred-
ited to the instinctive sagacity of the American peo-
ple. The masses may not be able to give reasons for
268 LETTERS TO A KING.
their conduct, but as a rule the popular manage-
ment of parties as political instrumentalities has been
marked by the most sagacious regard for success. It
is usually when the power of the politician has
usurped the functions of the people that a party has
met with disaster.
Nothing, indeed, proves the fitness of our popula-
tion for self government, more clearly than the fact
that we have so generally avoided the cumbrous,
impracticable methods which mere sciolists have ad-
vanced, and which the great class who are always on
the lookout for a specific remedy for all political ills
have so generally approved and advocated. It is said
that the love of quackery is inherent in human nature.
Every one would rather be cured by a sort of mira-
cle than in the good, old fashioned, everyday method
by which others are healed. Whether this be true
or not, it is absolutely certain that in the political
world there is always a demand for quack nostrums —
specifics for all political diseases. In no other branch
of human thought, perhaps, do we meet with so
many "crank notions," and in none, certainly, is the
tendency to their adoption so strong, especially with
what are known as cultivated and intelligent people.
As a rule, it would seem that our so-called political
philosophers are the most ignorant of what govern-
ment is, and what changes are practicable as well
as desirable. That our government has been pe-
culiarly free from absurd experiments, but has steadily
THE AMENDMENT OF PARTY AGENCIES. 269
and faithfully adhered to the old ways, adopting only
those simple and approved changes, which have led
towards stability and prosperity, is the strongest ar-
gument the world has ever known, in favor of popu-
lar institutions. The fact which our history abun-
dantly proves, that the popular heart is much less
liable to go astray in such matters than the trained
and aristocratic judgment, shows conclusively that the
citizen-king — the whole body of the people — is the
safest depository of national power.
This truth is especially demonstrated in the result
of a popular attempt to combine the advantages of
the delegate convention with the certainty of popular
preference secured by the system of primar)' elec-
tion. This plan seems not to have been the in-
vention of any mere theorist in government, but a
practical attempt to combine the advantages of two
methods. It has been adopted as a part of the
organic law of one party at least, in parts of several
States, and an attempt to make it statutory has been
made in Illinois. Who is entitled to the credit of
its invention I am unable to learn, but it is usually
known by the name of the county in Pennsylvania
where it was first applied, as the "Crawford County
Plan."
This "Plan" has several features; but the really
valuable one, and the one in which the invention
really consists, is the combination of the delegate
and elective methods of nomination. Briefly stated,
2/0 LETTERS TO A KING.
this is its essential feature : At ever)' primary or
caucus called for the election of delegates to nom-
inate a candidate for an office, or to select delegates
a part of whose duty shall be to name delegates to
another convention, a poll is opened, under charge
of the officers of the primary, at which every one
voting for delegates names also, if he desires, his
own personal preference for a nominee for each office
for which one is to be chosen.
Thus when primaries choose delegates to a State
convention or district convention, which is to name
delegates to a national convention, a poll is opened
at each primary, showing the popular preference of
the party in the various towns for Presidential nom-
inee. The ballot may indicate a first and second
choice, if desired. By this means the delegates are
informed with exactitude of the preference of their
own particular constituents. If there is good reason
for declining to act in accordance with this instruc-
tion, on account of violent opposition to the one
preferred on the part of others, or if for any other
reason he becomes unavailable as a candidate, the
delegate is still at liberty to act upon his indi-
vidual judgment. With some amplification as to
certifying the result of the poll, this system would
seem to offer the only practicable method of making
the voice of the majority of a party effective without
fatally crippling that elastic discretion which has
made the delegate party convention the most admi-
THE AMENDMENT OF PARTY AGENCIES. 2^1
rable instrumentality ever devised by a free people
for the assertion of their political views.
There are other more intricate and apparently
more scientific methods for limiting or abolishing
either the caucus or the delegate elements of our
party system. They compare with this simple device
very much as the constitution prepared for one of
our American colonies, by the philosopher Locke,
did with the simple plans of political organization
adopted by the various States after the separation
from Great Britain. The one looked well on paper ;
the others have worked splendidly in practice. The
one was the invention of a man ; the others were the
outcome of many men's experience and sagacity.
So far as my knowledge of these devices goes, the
" Crawford County Plan " is the only one that seems
easil)' adaptable to our present system, accomplishes
a most desirable result, and puts a truss upon the
delegate at the very point at which he most needs
trussing, without interfering with a due, proper, and
necessary discretion vested in him for the benefit
of the whole party. It commends itself to every
thoughtful mind and is opposed only by those who
desire to make use of party organization for per-
sonal rather than public ends. That it will event-
ually become a universal attachment of our party
system, no one who studies the indications of the
present and the needs of the future can for a moment
doubt. To that end, especially, the influence of
272 LETTERS TO A KING.
young men who are desirous of maintaining good
government through the extension of popular power
should be steadily directed. The "Crawford County
Plan," or its equivalent, should become a part of the
organic law of every party, and be regulated and
made enforcible by statute in every State.
XXII.
THE PROMULGATION OF THE EDICT.
It will naturally be expected that a work of this
kind should say something about the ballot, and the
safeguards of this palladium of our liberty. Indeed,
it is probable that you have been surprised that it
has not been given a more prominent place in these
monitory letters. Without any desire to detract
from the reverence in Avhich I trust you hold this
visible instrument of the citizen's power, you will per-
mit me to say, that in comparison with the subjects
we have treated, it is not of first importance. If
the citizen has learned to do his duty, has been
heedful of his privileges, jealous of his rights, and
earnest in his desire to promote good government as
a member of a party, there is little danger of his
going astray at the ballot-box, or permitting the
enginery of an election to be used to thwart the will
of the majority. To the citizen-king the ballot-box
is merely the means of promulgating the edict of
which the mechanism of party is the shaping of the
substance. It compares in importance and difficulty
with the duties we have been considering as the
273
2^4 LETTERS TO A KING.
fo'"iTi of expression does witli the eliinination of an
idea — as the phrasin^i; of the kind's command does
with tlie dcterminaliou of its import.
Yet the formal expression of )'our will as a citi-
zen is a matter worth)' of most caicfiil considera-
tion. In this, as in the matters alrcad}' considered,
the supreme aptitude of the American citizen for
self-government is readily discernible. In the
Grecian republics, in whose citizenship something of
the same inborn talent for government appears, the
ballot seems to have prevailed as the only reliable
method of takin;^ the will of a majority, which, you
must keep clearl\- in mind, is the one immutable
safeguard of popular government. As a political
instrumentality, however, the ballot had well-nigh
disappeared from the earth until it was revived by
the American Colonies. The mother country, to
which we are apt to give credit for every thing that is
good in our political institutions, can claim no merit
in this instance. The ballot is not a British institu-
tion. Indeed, Great Britain and her colonies have
been very slow in adopting that instrumentality which
was the shield and cover of national aspiration in her
American possessions.
In most of the American Colonies the ballot had
been adopted before the Revolution. It is probable
that the instinct of safety impelled those who were
already planning resistance to the oppressive acts of
Great Britian to adopt this as a means of individual
THE PROMULGATION OF THE EDICT. 2JS
self-protection. On the organization of the Union
the use of the ballot became universal except in
certain States of the South, and in all but one of
these the viva voce method was long since discarded.
The experience of more than a himdred }ears has
fully justified the wisdom of the fathers in selecting
tlie secret ballot as the means by which the freeman
should exercise his power. The question has long
ceased to be debatable whether this instrumentality
is better than another ; and the experience of the
world has confirmed the sagacity of the American
people. England herself, after a hundred years of
struggle, yielded to the irresistible demand of her
suffragans, and in 1872 placed in their hands the
same instrument which secured our liberties. It was
a tardy but undeniable recognition of the political
capacity of the American people.
The questions which are at the present time at-
tracting public attention in connection with this sub-
ject are those looking to the improvement of the
ballotorial system, and the means by which its exer-
cise shall be protected from debasement and corrup-
tion. The greater portion of these are mechanical,
and pertain either to the form and character of the
ticket used, or to the method of identif}'ing the
elector and preventing unauthorized voting. Of the
latter character is the now very general method re-
quiring an antecedent registration of the voter, by
which opportunity is given to inquire into his resi-
276 LETTERS TO A KING.
dence and antecedents. This power, intended for the
purification of tlie ballot-box, in some instances, how-
ever, has been made tributary to its debasement. In
some of the Southern States an almost unlimited
discretion has been vested in the registrar of voters,
for the express purpose, it would seem, of being
used to debar dul}' qualified voters from the exercise
of the elective franchise. It is a power that needs
to be carefully guarded. Publicity is the great cure
for crimes of this sort, and the publication of full
hsts of voters in each ward and precinct a sufficient
time before the election would be the most effective
means that could be devised for preventing this kind
of fraud.
As regards the ballot itself the change has been
chiefly in form, with some recent movements in the
direction of supplying the same at public expense
and in a particular manner. The ballot as originally
adopted among us was of the most primitive character.
It might be of any form or size, written or printed
on any kind of paper, and needed only to contain
enough to express the voter's purpose. Little by
little all this has has been changed. Almost every
State now prescribes the form of the ballot and the
precise words that must be printed or written on
it. If printed, the character of the ink and paper
also is made obligatory. These changes have in the
main been healthful. Legislative bodies, and even
courts, have sometimes made mere technical non-
THE PROMULGATION OF THE EDICT. 2/7
compliance the means of defeating the evident pur-
pose of the voter ; but, on the \Yhole, there can be no
doubt that fraud has been greatly checked thereby.
Some of the proposed reforms have not, however,
commanded public approval, and have either fallen
into disuse or remained altogether local in applica-
tion; such as the laws enacted in some States re-
quiring the ballot to be inclosed in an envelope.
Somehow it has never become popular, though it
would seem to be a most effective method of pre-
venting ballot-box stuffing and other kindred abuses.
Of late an attempt has been made in several
States to introduce what is known as the English or
Australian method. Despite the fact that the Brit-
ish government only adopted the ballot in the elec-
tion of members of Parliament as late as 1872, that
they have experience with it only in connection
with an untrained class of suffragans, instead of
electors who have been accustomed for generations
to the conduct of elections, such is the force of the
Anglican craze among the self-styled "better ele-
ments " of our life, that a perfect furor has been
created among the class of " professional reformers"
for the adoption of the English improvements on the
ballotorial system. Aside from the fact that the
very brief experience of the English government
with the ballot is not favorable to the hypothesis
that they have greatly improved upon methods
founded on an experience of more than a hundred
278 LETTERS TO A KING.
years, there is also the fact that the ballot in Eng-
land is applied under vastly different conditions.
In the first place it should be noted that the hold-
ing of an election in England is the act of the govern-
ment ; with us it is the act of the people. In all
but a few great cities in this country the people
really administer the election laws. The poll-holders
are officers of their own choice ; the clerks, chal-
lengers, and all the machinery of the election are
designated by the voters, are sworn and installed in
their presence, and at no time are allowed to forget
that they are their servants. In the great cities,
perhaps from necessity, this principle has been
somewhat relaxed, but all election officials must still
be residents and electors in the precinct in which
they are to act. It is not the abstraction known as
"the government" that takes a poll of the electors
here, but the citizens who hold a poll themselves.
In fact, in most States there is either an express
provision, or else it is held as an unavoidable infer-
ence, that in case any or all of the designated of-
ficials fail to appear or refuse to qnalif)', the as-
sembled electors may designate some of their own
number, who, having been duly qualified, may pro-
ceed to hold the election and certify the results.
Thus far in our history, departure from this sim-
ple and efficient plan does not seem to have been
generally attended with markedly beneficial results.
Almost all the glaring frauds upon the ballot, in
THE PROMULGATION OF THE EDICT. 279
the States of the North at least, have occurred in the
great cities, where the so-called election machinery is
supposed to be most perfect, and the means for pre-
venting fraud most complete. It is, in fact, another
proof that self-government can not be effectually car-
ried on by paid substitutes and a centrally organized
municipal power so far removed from the people as
to constitute it, in seeming at least, a foreign control.
The voluntary co-operation of citizens in the admin-
istration and enforcement of the lavV is the highest
and most efficient protection of the ballot-box, the
only real security for the freedom and purity of elec-
tions in this country.
Again, it should be remembered that not only
are a far greater proportion of the English suffiagans
dependent and illiterate than of our own electors, but
they are also demoralized by the long-established
methods of intimidation and corruption which flour-
ished under the viva voce system. The English re-
strictions upon the ballot are, of course, designed to
meet these conditions and relieve the voter from the
restraint of either intimidation or corruption. After
a careful inspection of elections in many States and
a thorough study of the facts established by con-
tested elections and other reliable data, I am fully
satisfied that these two forms of debasement of
ballotorial power are very greatly magnified in
the general apprehension. Very few people at the
North vote knowingly against their own desires. I
28o LETTERS TO A KING.
presAime this statement will seem a startling one to
)'ou, but it is the result of careful examination and
deliberate conviction. I do not doubt that a very
considerable number, in the aggregate, receive money
or favor of some sort, in connection with the exercise
of this right; but they are generally men who would
either have voted just as they did, or have refrained
from voting at all but for the gratuity received. So
too, there are some instances in which the employer
may coerce his dependents; but, in my opinion, these
are fully counterbalanced by the cases of emplo}'es
who are coerced or intimidated by their associates.
On the whole, I think there are few men at. the
North who do not know how they wish to vote, and
who do not vote according to their wishes.
At the South the conditions, so far as the iUit-
eracy and dependency of the voter are concerned,
are far more nearly analogous with those of the En-
glish suffragan. There, however, certain other con-
ditions prevail which affect the exercise of the right
of suffrage unfavorably. These are entirely local and
peculiar. If the fact of color were obliterated, the
problem of a free ballot at the South would soon be
solved. It is intelligence rather than ignorance,
wealth rather than poverty, that falsifies the popular
verdict in those States, distorting the forms of law
to the suppression of the popular will, and giving the
power of the whole people into the hands of a
minority.
THE PROMULGATION OF THE EDICT. 28 1
The so-called English system consists of the fol-
lowing elements : {a) The printing and distribution
of the ballots at the public expense; {p) Printing the
names of all candidates upon one ticket and requiring
the voter to check those for whom he desires to
vote ; {c) Giving the voter a ticket only on his ar-
rival at the polls and isolating him from observation
while preparing the same ; {d) Preventing him from
receiving advice or dictation from any except the
officers of election, who may assist him in preparing
his ballot.
The first of these provisions is undoubtedly wise;
so, too, some of the others may be. The isolation
of the voter from observation while casting his ballot,
it may be well to remember, was borrowed by the
Australians from a California law, adopted in Eng-
land, and reimported here with a great flourish of
trumpets as the last result of British political wisdom.
It is a matter of grave doubt whether the other pro-
visions are adapted to our American methods and
necessities. The experiment now being tried in
Massachusetts will be watched with anxiety by the
friends of good government, who will ask more than
one trial before accepting the verdict of its promoters
as conclusive. There is no testimony more unrelia-
ble than that of the "reformer" who thinks he has
invented or adapted a method for outwitting the
political tactician without requiring the citizen to con-
cern himself about the conduct of the election.
24
282 LETTERS TO A KING.
The apparent objections to the remaining provis-
ions so far as their general appHcation to our condi-
tions is concerned, are :
I. Their cumbrous character. The American in-
tellect is the great simplifier. In mechanics, in edu-
cation, and in politics, we have attained pre-eminence
chiefly by simplifying the methods of other peoples.
Simplicity is the key-note of adaptedness in our po-
litical methods. Our American system is the per-
fection of simplicity. A voter secures his ticket;
goes to the poll; makes known his identity; deposits
his ballot. Except in case of a challenge, it is all
over in thirty seconds. In England, where there
are never more than three or four candidates, from
which one or two must be selected, and only a small
number of suffragans, as well as a profound venera-
tion for "the government," as represented by the
officials, this objection may not be a serious one.
But where, as in a Presidential election in this coun-
try, every voter may have to select and mark his
choice for a dozen offices, among a hundred, or, as
in New York there would be, two hundred candi-
dates, the imported system would seem to be alto-
gether impracticable. It is doubtful if a man of or-
dinary intelligence could correctly check off those he
desired to vote for on such a ticket and compare it
with one he knew to be correct, in less than ten
minutes. This would limit the capacity of a polling-
THE PROMULGATION OF THE EDICT. 283
place to less than one hundred voters and treble the
cost of an election.
2. The most frequent form of fraud with us is
falsification of the returns. The English system of-
fers peculiar opportunities for this. A pencil and
an eraser would very soon make the ballots corre-
spond with the return, be it what it might. Next to
the immediate destruction of the ballot provided for
by law in some of the Southern States, this would
seem to be the best method yet d.evised for covering
up a false return.
There are other less important objections which
we have not time now to consider. So far as an a
priori estimate of the character of the system can be
relied on, however, it would seem altogether certain
that this so-called "improvement" would prove to
be almost any thing rather than a genuine reform.
Mechanical devices to relieve the citizen from obli-
gation and duty have proved, and are likely to
prove, no more satisfactory in connection with the
election than with the party. The interested, volun-
tary zvatchf Illness of the citizen is the best and cJieapest,
if not indeed the only, reliable safeguard of the ballot-box ;
and as in the party, so at the polls, ive shall find that
the neglect of the intelligent, refined, and self approving
citizen, is far more dangerous than the zveakness of the
ignorant or the viciousness of the depraved.
XXIII.
THE PENALTIES OF MALFEASANCE.
It would seem unnecessarj'' to dwell upon this
subject after what has been written already, but there
are some details of a punitory character which it is
well, my youn^ friend, that you should consider.
Of course, the great universal penalty for political sin
of every kind is bad government ; but the law attaches
specific punishments to particular acts. These laws,
so far as they extend, are sufficiently severe to pre-
vent most of the acts so prohibited, were it not for
the fact that they are very rarely enforced. This is
chiefly due to two causes: (r.) The disinclination
of the average citizen to investigate such frauds and
carry on prosecutions for such offenses — in other
words, the lack of a public sentiment which condemns
such acts and demands their punishment; (2.) The
difficulty, in some cases, of securing convictions,
both on account of the prevailing sentiment and
sometimes on account of the character of the laws
themselves.
Of these we need consider here but few instances :
The laws as^aitist the making of false returns are
284
THE PENALTIES OF MALFEASANCE. 285
usually severe enough ; but the proof is sometimes
difficult and convictions rare. One of the most
fruitful causes of this is the counting of the ballots
in private. Each party should have a right to a
representative, who should be allowed to object
to the counting of any defective ballot ; a record
should be required to be kept of all proceedings
during the count, and these representatives should
be entitled to a copy of the same as well as have
a right to be present until the ballots are all
counted and the returns made up. They should also
have a right to put their own seals on both ballots
and returns.
The bribery of electors has usually a sufficient pen-
alty attached, generally the same for the briber and
the voter who accepts a bribe. The same penalty
should be extended to bribery at a primary or at a
convention. The person bribed should also be
relieved from punishment, if within three months he
gives full and complete information of the matter to
the proper officers of the law so as to secure the
prosecution of the briber.
The English plan of voiding the election and
making the candidate in whose favor bribery is done
ineligible for public office for a specified time, whether
he has actual knowledge of the briberv or not, is no
doubt the wisest and most effective method of pre-
venting the corruption of voters ever devised. It
makes both candidates and parties alert to prevent the
286 LETTERS TO A KING.
very offense which the same self-interest now inclines
them to allow, if they do not commit. It is a drastic
measure, however, and for fear of unforeseen results
should first be applied to limited constituencies, mu
nicipal and township officers, and members of State
Legislatures. After experience with these it might
be extended, should there be need, in such form as
experience might dictate, to other offices. There
is no doubt that the decrease iti corrupt practices in
England is due moir to this provision than to all the
other features of their election laws.
The punishment for illegal voting is usually too
severe, its very rigor tending to prevent both prose-
cution and conviction. In this case, as in some
others, a disagreeable publicity is perhaps one of the
most effective corrective instrumentalities. It has
been suggested that a fine, with limited disfranchise-
ment and publication in an authorized black-list,
would prove most efficient in preventing this class
of crimes. In all such cases, large discretion as to
the punishment should be vested in the judge who
tries the case. The same penalties should be ex-
tended to illegal voting at the primary.
There is in no State any poialty for nonfeasance
of political duty. In many, a man is liable to punish-
ment who neglects other civil duties. In some, a
failure to list propert}' for taxation, a refusal to serve
in the militia, a neglect to work on the public roads,
and in a few instances the refusal or neglect to qualify
THE PENALTIES OF MALFEASANCE. 28/
and act in certain cases as public officers, after election
or appointment, is punishable as an offense against
the law. Yet the most important and harmful act
of non-feasance of public duty of which the citizen
can be guilty — the failure to exercise the governing
power vested in him as one of the co-ordinate kings
who are responsible for tlie good government, safety,
and prosperity of the country — is nowhere regarded
as an offense against the State.
It has recently been suggested — and the sugges-
tion is well worthy of consideration, though I am now
unable to give the credit that is due to its author —
that the registration of voters should be made uni-
versal and that the poll-holders in each precinct be
required, within a specified time after any election, to
compare the tally-sheet with the list of legal voters
in the precinct, and certify to the county clerk a list
of all those who failed to vote at said election ; that
the clerk be required to mail notices to said delin-
quents, and if within a specified time they fail to pre-
sent a sufficient excuse, their names, be published
subject to a statutory fine of one dollar, and they be
disfranchised until such fine is paid. The plan is
simple, cheap, and would no doubt prove effectual.
One thing is certain, some means must be found to
protect the country from the neglect, as well as the
malfeasance, of the elector. The evilly disposed are
sure to exercise this privilege, and make their power
felt in the government. It is only the mtelligcnt and
288 LETTERS TO A KING.
highly moral citizen ivho stabs his country by treasonable
neglect. It is far more reasonable and important that
a man be punished for neglect to exercise his civil
power than for avoiding service as a juror, exercise
in the militia, or the payment of any tax.
XXIV.
"GOOD-BYE, JOHN."
With this letter our pleasant intercourse reaches
its end. To me it has been especially agreeable.
The spirit of the past has been about me as I have
written — fragrant memories of the days of your
father's prime — and I have urged you to emulate,
not his achievements, but the spirit that prompted
him to do and dare. War is the theater where brave
men suffer for the acts of fools. In a republic, if
the citizen is wise enough and brave enough and
true enough to do his duty, there will never be any
need for civil war. Do not flatter yourself that
such a thing as physical strife will never come again,
simply because slavery is extinct, or because we
are Americans. The fact that we live in a new
world, under new forms and untried conditions, in-
stead of being a guarantee against internecine strife,
is in truth a most significant admonition of its prob-
ability. It is because Americans are what they are
that in your father's day two hostile forces stood ar-
rayed again.st each other, hundreds of thousands were
slain, millions of lives shattered, the choicest spirits
25 289
290 LETTERS TO A KING.
of a generation wrecked, and billions of treasure de-
stroyed. There were fools then who declared war to
be impossible, even while the smoke of battle was
darkening the horizon ; and there are fools yet alive
who think that it was merely a political trick, and the
soldiers only the dupes of wily politicians. This
much-abused term has had to answer for many sins
that really rest upon the shoulders of the people.
If the citizen were oftener a king, and always a pol-
itician, there would be fewer "bosses," and never
such costly mistakes as that of our great war. If
the citizen-king does his duty, the citizen-soldier will
have to fight few battles.
What was the war, which we call Rebellion, and
for which our brethren of the South have half a
dozen milder names? Simply a conflict of opinion
between two great peoples, occupying distinct por-
tions of our territory. In a true and literal sense,
it was not a civil war at all. North of a definite
line, the Confederate cause had few outspoken allies
or real friends. There were some — alas ! too many —
who were willing to have the South triumph rather
than see their old political opponents succeed, but
there were very few who believed in the righteousness
of the Southern cause, or desired that the end it
sought should be accomplished. South of that line
there were even fewer — very many times fewer in pro-
portion — who believed that the nation had the right to
compel the States to remain in the Federal Union. For
''GOOD-BYE, JOHN." 29 1
seventy years American thought had divided along
that line. At each election the battle of words and
wits had been renewed. Thirty years before — just
the life of a generation, you will observe — tins very
question had reached the verge of bloody arbitra-
ment. Why, when we had so narrowly escaped from
war, did we allow the peril to continue? Simply be-
cause the American people lacked wisdom. Had the
generation to which your father's life belonged been
as wise as it was brave, both at the North and at the
South, the need of conflict and the sin of slaughter
would have been unknown to them.
But these facts existed; both sides thought they
were right; each believed with a passionate earnest-
ness in the rights their flags represented. Each be-
lieved so strenuously that they could not think it
possible that the other was equally sincere. Each,
in his own mind, fought, not for right merely, but
against intentional and deliberate injustice on the
part of the other. When these things coexist, and
any considerable body of American people divide on
a given question, with the idea firmly fixed in their
minds that they are being wronged by another class
or section, then there is likely to be civil war; and
this is all the more likely because we have already
had one great domestic strife.
It is a foolish notion that the fact that there has
been a war precludes the probability of another, even
between the same parties. The law of human nature
292
LETTERS TO A KING.
is, that a feud grows more and more bitter until one
party or the other becomes practically extinct or
shows itself possessed of overwhelming strength,
coupled with apparent readiness to fight. This is
true of nations and factions as well as of families
and tribes.
We are wont to say that slavery was the cause,
and slavery is dead. Ergo, there can never be civil
war again in America. Slavery was not the cause,
but the opportunity. The cause was a contrast of
beliefs as to the rights of the people in the two
parts of the Republic. Slavery was merely the thing
which these contrasted beliefs affected. The golden
apple was not the real cause of discord between the
rival goddesses, but the claim of superior beauty,
which each preferred, and which was decided by the
dazzled shepherd's award. So slavery was only the
thing about which the difference of opinion arose,
and war followed, simply because the American will
fight for what he deems himself entitled to possess,
if he thinks it willfully and arrogantly withheld by
another. Then the difference was sectional — along a
dividing line; to-morrow it may be truly civil, and
run through every city in the land.
The War of Rebellion came because the citizen-
kings of a generation ago did not know, or, knowing,
did not wisely perform their duties. The holocaust
which was then offered to the folly of the American
ruler, and which the blood and courage of such men
''GOOD-BYE, JOHN:' 293
as your father was, alone redeemed us from, and
under God "preserved us a nation," should teach
the new-born citizen whom today greets with acclaim,
not to vaunt himself of the absence of peril, but to
prepare himself to avoid it wisely if he may, and
meet it bravely if he must. This is the message
which yesterday brings, and which I have sought
faithfully to interpret to your understanding.
We have examined the character of the weapon
the citizen-king of the past not only used, but forged
for the work he had to perform. We have tried its
temper, noted the causes which led to its adoption
and modification, called attention to its excellencies,
and have not spared its defects. Government, like
all human institutions, is affected very largely by the
character of the instrumentalities it employs. A good
king may be the victim of bad agencies, and the first
work — the most important work, indeed — of the citi-
zen-king is to see to it that the machinery by which
his governing power is to be exerted is of the most
perfect character.
You would never think of throwing away, or de-
nouncing as worthless, the chronometer that hangs
at your fob, if you found that by your neglect its
bearings had become rusty and its pinions clogged
with dust. Neither would you refuse to carry a stem-
winder because your grandfather used a key. On the
contrary you would at once declare that it was your
duty to see that the machinery was kept clean, and
294
LETTERS TO A KING.
that whatever would make your time-piece more
complete and reliable should be added to it. The
great, distinctive feature of this age is its wonderful
improvement of tiie agencies by which its labors are
accomplished — the instrumentalities by which results
are more easily, cheaply, and surely effected. This is
true in mechanics, in art, in commerce, in war, in
science, in morals, and in politics. Peaceful measures
are taking the place of the sword. Brain and elec-
tricity are doing what only physical force was once
relied upon to accomplish. Compare Ireland under
the leadership of Parnell with the same country in its
great struggle of ninety years ago, if you would
learn what progress has been made in political
methods and the exercise of popular power.
Shall Americans, then, insist upon destroying
the great instrument our fathers' hearts conceived,
which their wisdom shaped, and their hands wielded
in so many notable conflicts, and with which they
won so many triumphs for liberty — shall we discard
our present party system as not only useless, but
harmful? Would it not be better to remedy its
defects, fit it to serve our present purposes and
express more perfectly the will of our people, on
the general correctness and wisdom of which our
government is founded? It is possible that some
more perfect mechanism than the American party
system — one less liable to get out of repair, more
easily amended, and more certain in its results — may
'^ GOOD-BYE, JOHNr 2g$
some time be devised as the instrumentality by
which popular government may be carried on ; but it
is certain that hitherto no such system has been
discovered.
Let us recapitulate, then, in this last letter, what
may be done to make this agency more effectual, and
what must be done to render any form of popular
government in which party organization is possible,
safe and effective.
We have seen that the caucus or primary meeting
of the members of the party, from which the power
and authority of its conventions are derived, is liable
to be corrupted, (a) by the exclusion of members en-
titled to participate therein; (d) by the admission of
those not qualified so to act ; (c) by improper exer-
cise of power by its officers in presiding over its de-
liberations; (d) by falsification of its records; (e) by
calling it at an obscure place ; (/) by insufficient no-
tice to the electors; (g-) by choosing delegates by
groups, instead of one at a time; {/i) by allowing a
contested vote to be decided by general acclaim.
No doubt there are many others, but these have been
clearly developed.
All of tliese defects may in a great degree be
remedied by statute. The time for holding caucuses
or primaries should be fixed either like an election,
on a specific day or within specific Hmits, previous to
the holding of the convention to which it is to send
delegates, or to the election for which it is to name
296 LETTERS TO A KING.
candidates. In the same way, the time for holding
conventions to make nominations should be fixed
within narrow limits.
The right to act as members of a party primary
or caucus should be clearly defined by law. The
officers should be made public officials, with pre-
scribed duties, and a specific punishment for malfea-
sance. They should be required to keep tally-sheets
of all voters, be empowered to administer oaths like
judges of election, and required to make proper
returns. Bribery, intimidation, and disturbance of
such meetings should be made punishable, as at an
election. The right to challenge a vote at the pri-
mary should be secured, and false swearing to secure
a ballot should be punishable as perjury. In all re-
spects this meeting should be protected with as much
care as the election which follows, being in fact a
far more important governmental agency. What is
the use of guarding the front approaches to the
ballot-box and leaving open the side door?
We have seen that the will of the people is liable
to be thwarted by the failure of delegates to perform
faithfully and honestly their duty; in other words,
to do the will of their constituents. This may be
guarded against, partially at least, in three ways :
I. By making bribery of a delegate a crime, as
well as bribery of an elector. Where is the sense of
punishing an officer for receiving a bribe, who has
" GOOD-BYE, JOHN." 297
openly obtained his place by bribing the delegates of
a convention, or the members of a caucus?
2. By making any candidate who offers bribe of
money or favor for a vote in caucus or convention,
ineligible for office upon conviction.
3. By abolishing the secret ballot in all delegated
nominating conventions. Observe here the distinc-
tion between a delegate convention and a pri-
mary caucus. In the latter it is essential that the
secret ballot be preserved, in order to secure the indi-
vidual in the free exercise of his right ; while in the
delegate convention it is equally important that it
should be di.-xarded, in order that the constituencies
may have full opportunity to note how their agents
discharge the trust reposed in them.
The officers of all political conventions should also
be made qtiasi public officials, be required, under
specific penalty, to preserve full records of the pro-
ceedings, with tally-sheets showing the votes of all
the delegates, open to inspection, and compelled
to furnish copies thereof on demand and tender of
reasonable fees.
That greatest of all witty proverbialists, "Josh
Billings," aptly said: " Sech is the frailty of human
natur, that it '11 bear watchin'."
There is no place where human nature will bear
more watching, or gets less of it, than in a political
convention. As a people we have simply invited
298 LETTERS TO A KING.
our agents to become venal, and our aspiring leaders
to become corrupt and corrupting "bosses." It is a
principle in mechanics, especially in bridge-building,
that a truss placed at a point of special strain greatly
increases the strength of the material. No matter
how good the material may be, therefore, it is a mat-
ter of common prudence that it be trussed at proper
intervals. In our political life, the strain upon hon-
esty, integrity, and patriotism occurs especially at
two points. The places specified are the weakest
points in our party system. They are the places,
therefore, at which trusses should be applied, and
these trusses are of two sorts, moral and legal.
The moral truss is that wise stay and strong sup-
port of good intentions that arises from unavoidable
publicity and an imperishable record. It is the
watching which human nature always needs and
common prudence dictates. The legal truss is that
which attaches the shame of conviction and the peril
of punishment to the man who betrays his trust or
tempts another to misuse his power. This will not
only reduce the power of the "boss" and the "ring"
to a minimum, by making their trade nefarious and
perilous rather than honorable and profitable, but
will promote honesty and faithfulness in public of-
ficers by discouraging di.shonesty and corruption in
aspirants. Who can expect honesty or impartiality
in a judge who buys his nomination to the bench?
of a legislator, who pays for the votes of the constit-
"GO OD-B YE, JOHN. " 2gg
uency he represents? of a rpeaker, who secures his
election by promising chairmanships and patronage?
of any man, indeed, who is permitted or required to
bu\- place with gold or favor?
" What have the people of S got to do with
my conduct?" said an irate legislator, who had been
charged with improper use of the power he held.
" They should have nothing to say; I bought their
votes and paid for them, and I guess I' ve a right to do
what I choose with my own property."
The newspapers printed this as a keen retort, the
people of S took it as a good joke, and the man's
political stock gained a decided!}' upward tendency
by this bold defiance of public decency. Such men —
the men who bu)\ the men who sell, the men who
boast, and the men who laugh at such displays of
corrupting craft — all these need trussing, trussing
with the fear of punishment, trussing with the cer-
tainty of a speedy public indignation, scorn, and
dishonor.
Under these circumstances, my young friend,
what is the duty of the citizen-king who has just re-
ceived his crown ?
First of all things, it is your duty neither to de-
spise your father's example, depreciate his work,
nor under-estimate your responsibility or opportu-
nity. What he was yesterdaj', you must be to-
morrow, or the near future will record retrogression
rather than progress, and the far future incurable
300
LETTERS TO A KING.
and unavoidable decay. Remember that the char-
acter of a government, especially a popular govern-
ment, never rises above the level of the people, and
never falls very far below it. When cowards and
tricksters and thieves abound, it is always because
the people are cowardly, weak, or corrupt. In a
democracy the politician is always the exact and
infallible measure of the morality, courage, and patriot-
ism of the people. If he is tricky and corrupt,
they are either ignorant and weak, or base, cow-
ardly, and mercenary. Not more surely does seed
or .spore reproduce its kind, than do the people
reproduce their own character in their public
representatives.
"To my mind," said the greatest general of our
day, "Thermopylae was the most wonderful battle
in the virorld's history. There was no strategy about
it that a child would not be sure to perceive ; nor
any tactics save what were instinctive with the in-
dividual soldiers. The wonderful thing about it is
that a country about as large as one of our counties,
and hardly half as populous, should have had in it at
one time three hundred such men as stood there to
meet certain death with Leonidas. It is not alone
the leader and the soldiers who are on trial when the
battle is joined, but the people who have made them
what they ane."
But if you are brave and strong and willing ; if
you believe that the things I have indicated should
" GOODS YE, JOHN:' 3OI
be done, and ask how you shall do your part, I
can only answer that the soldier marches instinct-
ively towards the sound of the guns. There is and
always must be in the battle of liberty — the conflict
of self government — a never-ending struggle, a con-
stant advance along the whole line. One wing may
carry with a shout the seemingly impregnable works
upon the mountain-side ; the other may be routed
in the open plain, while injustice or corruption holds
the doubly intrenched works in the center against
many an assault ; but at all events and under all cir-
cumstances, the duty of the citizen-king is to fight
the battle nearest him. Let his hand and helm be
always seen in the thickest of the fight. Let no
defeat dishearten or discourage ! Be at every caucus,
if you have to hire a detective to find where it is
held. Suffer no wrong to be done to yourself or
another without protest. Insist on the ballot in the
caucus and the viva voce vote in the convention of
delegates. Make the way of the transgressor hard
and the bed of the "boss " thorny. One determined
man can make a deal of trouble to the shrewdest
"gang" that ever lied or stole. A hundred brave
men fighting prudently for the right are equal to a
thousand determined rascals who have to cover up
their tracks and fight in the dark. Above all things,
organize for opposition and protest.
"I will never vote for A. B.," said a brave man
in a State senatorial district, ' ' whoever may nomi-
302 LETTERS TO A KING.
nate him, because I believe him to be unworthy and
corrupt."
He signed his name to the statement ; presented
it to one of his neighbors, and then to another,
until one hundred and seventy-six good men and
true of his party had signed it. Then he sent a
copy of it to every delegate to the convention that
was to nominate. The majority in the district was
more than a thousand ; the proposed candidate was
an all powerful "boss" of his party and had two-
thirds of the delegates pledged to his support; but
neither he nor they had the nerve to face a hundred
and seventy-six common men brave enough to sign
such a protest.
Insist always on putting a moral and legal truss
on every weak joint in your party, and keep on in-
sisting until it is done. The American party is not
only founded on, but .shaped and ruled from, the
hearthstone. If the good men and true, who claim
to be Christian patriots, as well as law-abiding citi-
zens, will but do their duty, they will be actual as
well as potential kings. They will not be content
with the shadow of power but will insist upon having
the substance also. They will control and perfect
the machinery of their respective parties, and shape
with certainty the destiny of the country. They
will not, indeed, make either party or government
faultless, because they will not be themselves without
fault ; but they will assuredly keep both steadily
THE LIBRARY
UNlVERSiT/ Oi* CALIFOJIMA
LOS AJNO£-UiS
''GOOD-BYE, JOHN:' 303
moving toward that perfection which is the con-
stant aim of manly aspiration and the noblest Chris-
tian endeavor. Do your duty, O newly crowned cit-
izen-king, as it comes to your hand and reveals itself
to your heart and brain, and you will thereby honor
the past and serve the present, and make the future
your debtor forever.
Yesterday is putting off its armor; today is put-
ting on its crown. "The king is dead ! Long live
the king!" The history of liberty is not one of
battles and sieges, of victories and defeats alone, but
one of men wise enough to do, brave enough to die,
and patient enough to wait. Trusting that }'ou may
ever be worthy to be counted one of her chosen sons,
I bid you " Hail and farewell!"
THE END.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below
tami FEB2 11367
MAR27
I'oifii 1,-0
2.-,m-2,'43<520;j)
t967
M
AA 000 565 692
llMI!llf'''IJiHilliH^^