Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

T

LOBBYISTS

HE Senate Committee that is investigating the activities of lobbyists is not likely to find much evidence of the cruder forms of

influence on legislation. According to

Senator Bristow, of Kansas, there has been less conspicuous activity of lobbyists than at times of former tariff legislation. Certainly previous Congresses, when engaged in framing tariff legislation, have been afflicted with lobbies as insidious if not more industrious than the lobby that the President denounced. At least, this tariff bill was written without the aid of legislative agents of particular manufacturing interests either in or out of Congress. This lobby is not so extraordinary a spectacle

as is the President in his denunciation of it. Lobbies are so common that their essential iniquity has to some extent been lost sight of. As he said:

It is of serious interest to the country that the people at large should have no lobby and be voiceless in these matters, while great bodies of astute men seek to create an artificial opinion and to overcome the interests of the public for their private profit. It is thoroughly worth the while of the people of this country to take knowledge of this matter. Only public opinion can check and destroy it.

Manufacturers have the right to lay the facts of their business before Congress when it is contemplating legislation that affects them; but these facts should be the real facts, and once they are in the hands of Congress it is the duty of Congress to make the decision, and any one who endeavors to bring fear or favor to bear to influence that decision is transgressing the laws of public morality.

It is proper, of course, for constituents to send their views to their Congressmen upon pending legislation. But when the But when the officials of a company order or coerce its workmen to send letters of protest to their Congressmen, those officials show a fundamental ignorance of popular government or a disregard for its ideals.

It was once thought that campaigns could not be carried on without large corporate contributions. It has been demonstrated that it is possible. Per

haps it can be demonstrated just as well that the men who are elected to govern the country, with all their faults, can do it better without the aid of any self-appointed advisers whose point of view is more personal than national.

Before the President issued his statement Senator Kenyon had introduced. a bill requiring all persons who wished to support or oppose any pending legislation to register their names and a statement of their interest before they should be allowed to begin any activities. It also provided that no former members of Congress could accept such employment. manufacturers and their attorneys upon Such a measure would put most of the render more difficult the life of the proa frank and open footing, and it should fessional political hanger-on who sells his knowledge of Washington and a supposed "influence" to any cause that is gullible enough to hire him.

Whether or not any legislation against lobbyists, such as already exists in several states, come from the President's statement and from the Senatorial inquiry, at least the public attention has been focussed on this ancient and evil practice. And under these conditions illegitimate influence or pressure is less potent than in times of public indifference.

TO RESTRICT IMMIGRATION

S

IR GEORGE H. REID, High Commissioner for Australia, at a dinner in New York recently remarked that he thanked God that his country was too far away for the oppressed to get there. It was his good-natured rejoinder to the common boast that America is the home of the oppressed, but underneath it evidently was satisfaction that in working out the problems of present-day industrialism and government Australia would at least be able to go at the problems as a homogeneous whole.

It is certainly open to question whether the stimulated immigration of the Slav, Polack, Sicilian, and Neapolitan peoples that come to our shores is not infinitely complicating our problems.

It is true that they do much of the

manual work of the country. They dig sewers and build railroads; they are in the mines and in the steel works. Greeks Greeks and other southern Europeans are in the northern cotton and woolen mills. In Lawrence and Paterson, the Industrial Workers of the World made their chief appeal to these alien workers. In New York the Russian Jews, like the Italians, live in "quarters."

All these peoples have their good qualities. If the right tests are chosen it can be proved that any one of these races produces better citizens than the native stock or than immigrants of any other race; and if other tests are used, other results may be obtained.

But two facts stand out plainly: These people have not been particularly successful in building up anything approximating American government, or American habits, at home. Whether their ways or ours are better is not the point. The ways are different. The second fact is that, though we have proved that Scotch, English, Irish, German, and Scandinavian immigrants assimilate readily and share the ideals and aspirations of the country, we are not certain what the results of the influx of southern Europeans will be.

Under these circumstances it might be wise to curtail, at least, the human stream that is now flowing to this country.

Senator Dillingham has introduced a bill in Congress to accomplish this purpose. It is prompted by the same forebodings which prompted his former bill (proposed by Congressman Burnett in the House) which passed both Houses of the previous Congress and was vetoed by President Taft because it contained an illiteracy test to which he objected. The new bill does not contain this test. Its main provision is that immigration from any country for any one year shall be limited to 10 per cent. of the natives of that country already domiciled in the United States. At present the English, Irish, German, and Scandinavian peoples do not come to this country in sufficient numbers to be affected by such a law. But it would restrict the numbers of the people from the south of Europe. It

[blocks in formation]

The usual arguments against such restrictive measures as Senator Dillingham's are not very convincing. The fact that these peoples are oppressed or dissatisfied in the lands of their birth is not proof that their migration will be a successful experiment for the country to which they immigrate.

That they are in demand in certain large industries, chiefly because they are relatively cheap laborers, is not proof of their economic benefit to the country as a whole. The importation of Negroes from Africa had the support of this same argument.

The fact that the population of the United States is all the result of past immigration is not conclusive evidence that all further immigration is desirable. Because one kind of people succeeds in an undeveloped land is no reason why another kind of people should necessarily succeed in a partially developed country, especially when this partial development is the work of men of different aims, ideals, and institutions from those of the immigrants that Senator Dillingham wishes to limit somewhat.

His bill will not be acted upon at the special session of Congress, but it, or some similar provision of Democratic authorship, is likely to come up in the regular session next winter.

Underlying it is the philosophy that it is perhaps wiser to build up the country a little more slowly if by so doing we can minimize somewhat our chances of building badly. It is better to let some of our natural resources wait a while for exploitation than to bring in people to help the development of our material things who will themselves not develop successfully on the "American plan."

SELLING OUR GOODS ABROAD

D

it is expected that at least 30,000 American cars will have gone abroad. That is nearly a tenth of all the cars built here. With an improving consular service and with the restrictions of a high tariff

URING the last year there has been an increase of about $15,000,000 a month in the value of the manufactured articles exported largely removed, this new spirit of trade

from the United States. That is the most significant detail of a record export year. In the ten months from July 1, 1912, to April 1, 1913, we sent more goods abroad

than ever before in a whole year. We seem to have made a real beginning in a campaign of trade extension that ten years ago was heralded but which did not materialize in any large degree.

But the present growth of our export trade is a particularly happy phenomenon at this time, for it seems to show that, even if our foreign rivals can soon compete with us in the newly opened markets here, we are more and more able to push our goods successfully abroad.

In manufactured foodstuffs we have exported somewhat less than last year. We have shipped more crude foodstuffs and food animals than last year, but not nearly so much as in other years. Our exports of cattle, for example, have practically ceased, and most of the American beef sold in England is from the Argentine.

Crude materials to be used in manufacturing such things as cotton, lumber, etc.— made up less of our foreign business than in 1912. The great gain came in our exports of goods manufactured, wholly or in part, in the very kind of business in which the price of labor and the "cost of production" count most and in which the United States was supposed to be least able to compete. In these products we did more business than ever before. The comparative record between the corresponding ten months this year and last is as follows:

[blocks in formation]

conquest in the wide markets of the world should continue uninterruptedly until as a nation we have lost the provincial

ignorance that has so hampered us in our dealings with foreign peoples. And the opening of the Panama Canal, too, ought to have a stimulating effect on our trade.

In spite of our handicaps, of our ignorance of foreign markets and our carelessness of their requirements, of our lack of a merchant marine and of American banks in foreign ports-in spite of all these things, it seems that a new era in American manufacturing has set in, a period of export to the markets of the world.

FOR CORDIALITY AS WELL AS

T

PEACE

HE delegates to the international conference to formulate plans for the celebration of a century of unbroken peace between all Englishspeaking peoples proposed that arches be erected where the international highways from Quebec and Vancouver cross the American border, that a tunnel should be built between Detroit and Windsor, a bridge from Belle Isle to the mainland, and that various other arches and monuments be erected.

These will all be fitting testimony of a good record in the past and an inspiration for the future.

There is something beyond this, however, that could be done, in this country. at least, to insure not only peace for happily we may take that for grantedbut a better understanding. Our school histories make much of the stories of the English officer who wanted Andrew Jackson to black his boots, of the supercilious stupidity of Braddock, of the arrogance of British officers at Lexington and Concord. Most Americans do not go to England. Many of them do not know any Englishmen. A good many carry a prejudice gained in childhood from these

stories all through life. There are many Americans who now harbor feelings against "the red coats" less friendly than Washington held toward the English even after he had been fighting them for seven years. It is time for a saner interpretation of history, and especially of the part that the United States has played in relation to other countries, to succeed this oldfashioned, prejudiced version, even if it lose to our school histories some picturesque stories. A removal of these ancient sources of prejudice would give the arches and monuments a more fertile field over which to shed their inspiration for continued peace, to which might well be added a greater cordiality and understanding than has existed in the past.

MR. BRYAN'S PEACE PLANS

T

HE Secretary of State and the new British Ambassador, Sir Cecil Arthur Spring-Rice, have signed a convention that renews for five years the arbitration treaty between the United States and Great Britain. With France, With France, Italy, and Spain the treaties have already been renewed.

Moreover, Mr. Bryan's proposals for international investigations and conferences of a certain duration before any war can be declared have met a friendly response from England, France, Russia, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Brazil, and Peru. The Secretary's plan has underlying it the same idea that Canada has put into practice in labor troubles. When a dispute arises between employers and employed, both are required to make public all the facts in the case. This gives time for angry feelings to subside, and for the contending parties to decide with sober judgment whether the issue is worth fighting for, and if possible to arrange a basis of settlement. In the meanwhile, in the labor disputes the public will have decided what it thinks about the merits of the case. This is likely to lead to some kind of compromise, because. neither laborers nor employers like to enter a contest with the disadvantage of public disapproval. This public influence has been very potent in the labor situation.

To bring this principle to bear upon the maintenance of peace between the nations is a rather different matter. The only public there is to judge between two nations which are in danger of war consists of the other nations, and there would be great difficulty in getting any pressure from them which would not be entirely prejudiced by such combinations as the Triple Alliance or the Triple Entente.

The other phases of the plan, however, ought to have a strong influence for peace. If a nation has to file a bill of particulars against its neighbor before it goes to war and then to discuss the merits of its claims for a month or more while public clamor has a chance to calm down, out of such a situation it ought to be easier to find a basis for peace than a real excuse for war.

Every plan which makes the declaration of hostilities more difficult is a step in the right direction, but all these arbitration treaties and peace proposals refer chiefly to the relations between governments of responsible nations with well established institutions and great property values. There are unsettled spots scattered all around the world whose inhabitants could not be even reasonably sure that such peaceful pledges would be kept if they were made. In Mexico, in Thibet, in the Near East, the seeds of war may at any time fall on fertile ground.

In spite of the grip which the propaganda of peace has upon the popular imagination in this country and in Europe, universal peace is still a long way off, and for many years the great nations will need soldiers and sailors as guarantors against the very emergency which they are trained to meet.

But even if universal peace is not immediately attainable, the United States may add to its prestige and do a service to humanity by using its active influence toward that high ideal.

[blocks in formation]

"What can you expect from the policy of conservation?" is an implied explanation of the trouble that is voiced by many enemies of the conservation doctrines. The inference is that conservation means reservation, prohibition; that it is a kind of "keep off the grass" sign applied to all natural resources.

This is not true, nor can the blame for "bottling up" Alaska be fairly laid upon conservation. The laws that govern the territory — which were mostly enacted before the policy of conservation existed - if enforced, effectually prevent the proper development of the territory. The conservationists believe that until these laws are repealed and better ones substituted they should be observed, and it is largely owing to the conservationists that the laws have been observed. To this degree the policy of conservation may be held responsible for the "bottling up" of Alaska.

There are two ways of remedying the situation. The first is to disregard the present laws as the land laws in the West were disregarded. This is not likely to happen, for the public is too well informed to allow it. The second way out of the dilemma is for Congress to pass new legislation which will allow proper development. The new Secretary of the Interior (as will be described in an article by Mr. Burton J. Hendrick in next month's issue of this magazine) has concrete suggestions of what should be done. His plans and investigations will be helpful, but in the last analysis the responsibility rests upon Congress. It alone can open the way for the proper utilization of the natural wealth with which Alaska is endowed.

[blocks in formation]

tion is only temporarily parasitic, and what proportion is always and altogether a public nuisance and expense no one knows accurately. Even the estimates of the numbers of the tramp army vary from 180,000, for which Josiah Flynt was responsible, to 430,000, which Major Pangborn, studying the question from the railroad point of view, estimates is the minimum number.

But, whether there are 200,000 tramps or 400,000, it is certain that most of them are "beating" the railroads for transportation, and Society in general for a living. As tramps they are a drain on the country. As criminals - which they easily become they are not only a charge but a menace to Society. The tramp army is one of the recruiting grounds of crime.

There are three ways to make tramp life so unattractive that it will cease to be a problem: to cut off the tramp's transportation, to cut off his food supply, and to catch him and make him work. The railroads are doing their best to make his journeys difficult, though their efforts not particularly successful. The country housewife is gradually learning that one "hand-out" merely leads to another, but there is still a plentiful supply of free food forthcoming in response to a plausible story of hard luck.

are

The states and cities, however, are beginning to apply the work cure. As summarized by Mr. Arthur James Todd, of the University of Illinois:

Iowa proposes state workhouses instead of "sleep-ups" (county jails). New York has purchased a state farm colony for tramps. Cleveland has a whole system of such farms. San Diego has its municipal forest for this purpose. Switzerland's model colonies, Witzwyl and Nusshof, are held up as our models. Altogether the trend of public opinion and action seems toward the workhouse in its modern form of a work-farm-colony. This is the recommendation of most of the experts at the last international prison congress and of the recent English departmental committee on vagrancy.

Check beating railroads, abstain from feeding at the back door, establish state or district work colonies, and the tramp will disappear. With him will vanish, also, a considerable part of our annual bill for charity and correction.

« PředchozíPokračovat »