Woodrow Wilson, from The New Freedom (1913)This excerpt is.docx

Woodrow Wilson, from The New Freedom (1913)
This excerpt is from Woodrow Wilson's book, The New
Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous
Energies of a People, published after his successful 1912
campaign for the presidency. In this selection, Wilson
explains the new freedom ideology that he espoused during the
campaign, and he argues that federal power
should be controlled and limited. Wilson makes numerous
references to Theodore Roosevelt's Progressive (or
Bull Moose) Party and its new nationalism platform.
The doctrine that monopoly is inevitable and that the only
course open to the people of the United States is to
submit to and regulate it found a champion during the campaign
of 1912 in the new party or branch of the
Republican party, founded under the leadership of Mr.
Roosevelt, with the conspicuous aid—I mention him with
no satirical intention, but merely to set the facts down
accurately—of Mr. George W. Perkins, organizer of the
Steel Trust and the Harvester Trust, and with the support of
patriotic, conscientious and high-minded men and
women of the land. The fact that its acceptance of monopoly
was a feature of the new party platform from
which the attention of the generous and just was diverted by the
charm of a social program of great
attractiveness to all concerned for the amelioration of the lot of
those who suffer wrong and privation, and the
further fact that, even so, the platform was repudiated by the
majority of the nation, render it no less
necessary to reflect on the party in the country's history. It may
be useful, in order to relive the minds of many

from an error of no small magnitude, to consider now, the heat
of a presidential contest being past, exactly
what it was that Mr. Roosevelt proposed.
Mr. Roosevelt attached to his platform some very splendid
suggestions as to noble enterprises which we ought
to undertake for the uplift of the human race; …If you have read
the trust plank in that platform as often as I
have read it, you have found it very long, but very tolerant. It
did not anywhere condemn monopoly, except in
words; its essential meaning was that the trusts have been bad
and must be made to be good. You know that
Mr. Roosevelt long ago classified trusts for us as good and bad,
and he said that he was afraid only of the bad
ones. Now he does not desire that there should be any more of
the bad ones, but proposes that they should all
be made good by discipline, directly applied by a commission of
executive appointment. All he explicitly
complains of is lack of publicity and lack of fairness; not the
exercise of power, for throughout that plank the
power of the great corporations is accepted as the inevitable
consequence of the modern organization of
industry. All that it is proposed to do is to take them under
control and deregulation.
The fundamental part of such a program is that the trusts shall
be recognized as a permanent part of our
economic order, and that the government shall try to make trusts
the ministers, the instruments, through
which the life of this country shall be justly and happily
developed on its industrial side…
Shall we try to get the grip of monopoly away from our lives, or
shall we not? Shall we withhold our hand and
say monopoly is inevitable, that all we can do is to regulate it?
Shall we say that all we can do is to put

government in competition with monopoly and try its strength
against it? Shall we admit that the creature of
our own hands is stronger that we are? We have been dreading
all along the time when the combined power of
high finance would be greater that the power of government.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Woodrow Wilson, from The New Freedom (1913)
http://media.pearsoncmg.com/ph/hss/SSA_SHARED_MEDIA_1/
his...
1 of 1 9/8/17, 10:56 PM
home | many pasts | evidence | www.history | blackboard |
reference
talking history | syllabi | students | teachers | puzzle | about us
In Defense of Home and Hearth: Mary Lease Raises Hell
Among
the Farmers
Women are not often thought of in association with the
Populists, but the best-known orator of the
movement in the early 1890s was a woman, Mary Elizabeth
Lease. Born in Pennsylvania in 1850 to Irish
parents, Lease became a school teacher in Kansas in 1870. She
and her husband, a pharmacist, spent ten
years trying to make a living farming, but finally gave up in
1883 and settled in Wichita. Lease entered
political life as a speaker for the Irish National League, and
later emerged as a leader of both the Knights
of Labor and the Populists. Lease mesmerized audiences in
Kansas, Missouri, the Far West, and the South

with her powerful voice and charismatic speaking style. In
hundreds of speeches, she apparently never
said the one phrase most often associated with her name—the
injunction that farmers should “raise less
corn and more hell.” Regardless of who called explicitly for
more hell-raising, Lease was a powerful
voice of the agrarian crusade.
This is a nation of inconsistencies. The Puritans fleeing from
oppression became oppressors. We fought
England for our liberty and put chains on four million of blacks.
We wiped out slavery and our tariff laws
and national banks began a system of white wage slavery worse
than the first.
Wall Street owns the country. It is no longer a government of
the people, by the people, and for the
people, but a government of Wall Street, by Wall Street, and for
Wall Street.
The great common people of this country are slaves, and
monopoly is the master. The West and South are
bound and prostrate before the manufacturing East.
Money rules, and our Vice-President is a London banker. Our
laws are the output of a system which
clothes rascals in robes and honesty in rags.
The [political] parties lie to us and the political speakers
mislead us. . . . The politicians said we suffered
from overproduction. Overproduction, when 10,000 little
children, so statistics tell us, starve to death
every year in the United States, and over 100,000 shopgirls in
New York are forced to sell their virtue for
the bread their niggardly wages deny them. . . .

We will stand by our homes and stay by our fireside by force if
necessary, and we will not pay our debts
to the loan-shark companies until the government pays its debts
to us. The people are at bay; let the
bloodhounds of money who dogged us thus far beware.
Among th... http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5304
1 of 2 9/8/17, 10:48 PM
Source: W.E. Connelley, ed., History of Kansas, State and
People 2, (1928), 1167.
See Also:A Woman's Work: Mary Lease Celebrates Women
Populists
Among th... http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5304
2 of 2 9/8/17, 10:48 PM
reference
Broken Spirits: Letters on the Pullman Strike
The American Railway Union’s unsuccessful strike against the
Pullman Palace Car Company in 1894 left
many workers without jobs. Not only did the company take on
hundreds of new workers in place of the

strikers, but total employment in the shops dropped. On August
17, 1894, the desperate and destitute
strikers appealed to Illinois Governor John P. Altgeld. The
sympathetic governor wrote George Pullman a
total of three times, asking him to do something about the
“great distress” among his former workers.
Typically, Pullman blamed the workers for their problems,
arguing that if they had not struck they would
not be suffering. He rejected the solutions proposed by Altgeld.
The strikers’ appeal to Altgeld and the
governor’s three letters to Pullman are included here. The
public was more sympathetic with the plight of
the Pullman workers. Contributions of food eased the distress
and many Pullman residents eventually
moved to find work elsewhere.
Kensington, Ill.,
August 17, 1894.
To His Excellency, the Governor of the State of Illinois:
We, the people of Pullman, who, by the greed and oppression of
George M. Pullman, have been brought
to a condition where starvation stares us in the face, do hereby
appeal to you for aid in this our hour of
need. We have been refused employment and have no means of
leaving this vicinity, and our families are
starving. Our places have been filled with workmen from all
over the United States, brought here by the
Pullman Company, and the surplus were turned away to walk
the streets and starve also. There are over
1600 families here in destitution and want, and their condition
is pitiful. We have exhausted all the means
at our command to feed them, and we now make this appeal to
you as a last resource. Trusting that God

will influence you in our behalf and that you will give this your
prompt attention, we remain,
Yours in distress,
THE STARVING CITIZENS OF PULLMAN
F. E. POLLANS,
L. J. NEWELL,
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5363/
1 of 4 9/8/17, 10:38 PM
THEO. RODHE,
Committee.
August 19, 1894.
To George M. Pullman, President Pullman Palace Car Co.,
Chicago:
Sir:—I have received numerous reports to the effect that there is
great distress at Pullman. To-day I
received a formal appeal as Governor from a committee of the
Pullman people for aid. They state that
sixteen hundred families including women and children, are
starving; that they cannot get work and have
not the means to go elsewhere; that your company has brought
men from all over the United States to fill
their places. Now these people live in your town and were your

employees. Some of them worked for
your company for many years. They must be people of industry
and character or you would not have kept
them. Many of them have practically given their lives to you. It
is claimed they struck because after years
of toil their loaves were so reduced that their children went
hungry. Assuming that they were wrong and
foolish, they had yet served you long and well and you must
feel some interest in them. They do not stand
on the same footing with you, so that much must be overlooked.
The State of Illinois has not the least
desire to meddle in the affairs of your company, but it cannot
allow a whole community within its borders
to perish of hunger. The local overseer of the poor has been
appealed to, but there is a limit to what he can
do. I cannot help them very much at present. So unless relief
comes from some other source I shall either
have to call an extra session of the Legislature to make special
appropriations, or else issue an appeal to
the humane people of the State to give bread to your recent
employees. It seems to me that you would
prefer to relieve the situation yourself, especially as it has just
cost the State upwards of fifty thousand
dollars to protect your property, and both the State and the
public have suffered enormous loss and
expense on account of disturbances that grew out of trouble
between your company and its workmen. I
am going to Chicago to-night to make a personal investigation
before taking any official action. I will be
at my office in the Unity block at 10 a.m. to-morrow, and shall
be glad to hear from you if you care to
make any reply.
JOHN P. ALTGELD, Governor.
August 21st 1894.

Mr. George M. Pullman, President Pullman Car Company,
Chicago, Ill.:
Sir:—I have examined the conditions at Pullman yesterday,
visited even the kitchens and bedrooms of
many of the people. Two representatives of your company were
with me and we found the distress as
great as it was represented. The men are hungry and the women
and children are actually suffering. They
have been living on charity for a number of months and it is
exhausted. Men who had worked for your
company for more than ten years had to apply to the relief
society in two weeks after the work stopped.
I learn from your manager that last spring there were 3,260
people on the pay roll; yesterday there were
2,200 at work, but over 600 of these are new men, so that only
about 1,600 of the old employees have
been taken back, thus leaving over 1600 of the old employees
who have not been taken back, a few
hundred have left, the remainder have nearly all applied for
work, but were told that they were not
needed. These are utterly destitute. The relief committee on last
Saturday gave out two pounds of oat
meal and two pounds of corn meal to each family. But even the
relief committee has exhausted its
resources.
2 of 4 9/8/17, 10:38 PM

Something must be done at once. The case differs from
instances of destitution found elsewhere, for
generally there is somebody in the neighborhood able to give
relief; this is not the case at Pullman. Even
those who have gone to work are so exhausted that they cannot
help their neighbors if they would. I
repeat now that it seems to me your company cannot afford to
have me appeal to the charity and
humanity of the State to save the lives of your old employes.
Four-fifths of those people are women and
children. No matter what caused this distress, it must be met.
If you will allow me, I will make this suggestion: If you had
shut down your works last fall when you say
business was poor, you would not have expected to get any rent
for your tenements. Now, while a dollar
is a large sum to each of these people, all the rent now due you
is a comparatively small matter to you. If
you would cancel all rent to October 1st, you would be as well
off as if you had shut down. This would
enable those who are at work to meet their most pressing wants.
Then if you cannot give work to all why
work some half-time so that all can at least get something to eat
for their families. This will give
immediate relief to the whole situation. And then by degrees
assist as many to go elsewhere as desire to
do so, and all to whom you cannot give work. In this way
something like a normal condition could be re-
established at Pullman before winter and you would not be out
any more than you would have been had
you shut down a year ago.
I will be at the Unity block for several hours and will be glad to
see you if you care to make any reply.
Yours, respectfully,

JOHN P. ALTGELD.
Chicago, August 21st, 1894.
George M. Pullman, Esq., President Pullman Palace Car
Company, City.
Sir:—I have your answer to my communication of this morning.
I see by it that your company refuses to
do anything toward relieving the situation at Pullman. It is true
that Mr. Wickes offered to take me to
Pullman and show me around. I told him that I had no
objections to his going, but that I doubted the
wisdom of my going under anybody’s wing. I was, however, met
at the depot by two of your
representatives, both able men, who accompanied me
everywhere. I took pains to have them present in
each case. I also called at your office and got what information
they could give me there, so that your
company was represented and heard, and no man there
questioned either the condition of the extent of the
suffering. If you will make the round I made, go into the houses
of the people, meet them face to face and
talk with them, you will be convinced that none of them had
$1,300, or any other some of money only a
few weeks ago.
I cannot enter into a discussion with you as to the merits of the
controversy between you and your former
workmen.
It is not my business to fix the moral responsibility in this case.
There are nearly six thousand people
suffering for the want of food—they were your employees—
four-fifths of them women and children—

some of these people have worked for you for more than twelve
years. I assumed that even if they were
wrong and had been foolish, you would not be willing to see
them perish. I also assumed that as the State
had just been to a large expense to protect your property you
would not want to have the public shoulder
the burden of relieving distress in your town.
As you refuse to do anything to relieve suffering in this case, I
am compelled to appeal to the humanity of
3 of 4 9/8/17, 10:38 PM
the people of Illinois to do so.
Respectfully yours,
JOHN P. ALTGELD
Source: John Altgeld, Live Questions (Chicago: George S.
Bowen and Son, 1899).
4 of 4 9/8/17, 10:38 PM

reference
Booker T. Washington Delivers the 1895 Atlanta Compromise
Speech
On September 18, 1895, African-American spokesman and
leader Booker T. Washington spoke before a
predominantly white audience at the Cotton States and
International Exposition in Atlanta. His “Atlanta
Compromise” address, as it came to be called, was one of the
most important and influential speeches in
American history. Although the organizers of the exposition
worried that “public sentiment was not
prepared for such an advanced step,” they decided that inviting
a black speaker would impress Northern
visitors with the evidence of racial progress in the South.
Washington soothed his listeners’ concerns
about “uppity” blacks by claiming that his race would content
itself with living “by the productions of our
hands.”
Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Board of Directors and
Citizens:
One-third of the population of the South is of the Negro race.
No enterprise seeking the material, civil, or
moral welfare of this section can disregard this element of our
population and reach the highest success. I
but convey to you, Mr. President and Directors, the sentiment of
the masses of my race when I say that in
no way have the value and manhood of the American Negro
been more fittingly and generously
recognized than by the managers of this magnificent Exposition
at every stage of its progress. It is a
recognition that will do more to cement the friendship of the
two races than any occurrence since the

dawn of our freedom.
Not only this, but the opportunity here afforded will awaken
among us a new era of industrial progress.
Ignorant and inexperienced, it is not strange that in the first
years of our new life we began at the top
instead of at the bottom; that a seat in Congress or the state
legislature was more sought than real estate or
industrial skill; that the political convention or stump speaking
had more attractions than starting a dairy
farm or truck garden.
A ship lost at sea for many days suddenly sighted a friendly
vessel. From the mast of the unfortunate
vessel was seen a signal,“Water, water; we die of thirst!” The
answer from the friendly vessel at once
came back, “Cast down your bucket where you are.” A second
time the signal, “Water, water; send us
water!” ran up from the distressed vessel, and was answered,
“Cast down your bucket where you are.”
And a third and fourth signal for water was answered, “Cast
down your bucket where you are.” The
captain of the distressed vessel, at last heeding the injunction,
cast down his bucket, and it came up full of
fresh, sparkling water from the mouth of the Amazon River. To
those of my race who depend on bettering
Speech http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/39/
1 of 3 9/8/17, 10:42 PM
their condition in a foreign land or who underestimate the
importance of cultivating friendly relations

with the Southern white man, who is their next-door neighbor, I
would say: “Cast down your bucket
where you are”— cast it down in making friends in every manly
way of the people of all races by whom
we are surrounded.
Cast it down in agriculture, mechanics, in commerce, in
domestic service, and in the professions. And in
this connection it is well to bear in mind that whatever other
sins the South may be called to bear, when it
comes to business, pure and simple, it is in the South that the
Negro is given a man’s chance in the
commercial world, and in nothing is this Exposition more
eloquent than in emphasizing this chance. Our
greatest danger is that in the great leap from slavery to freedom
we may overlook the fact that the masses
of us are to live by the productions of our hands, and fail to
keep in mind that we shall prosper in
proportion as we learn to dignify and glorify common labour,
and put brains and skill into the common
occupations of life; shall prosper in proportion as we learn to
draw the line between the superficial and
the substantial, the ornamental gewgaws of life and the useful.
No race can prosper till it learns that there
is as much dignity in tilling a field as in writing a poem. It is at
the bottom of life we must begin, and not
at the top. Nor should we permit our grievances to overshadow
our opportunities.
To those of the white race who look to the incoming of those of
foreign birth and strange tongue and
habits for the prosperity of the South, were I permitted I would
repeat what I say to my own race,“Cast
down your bucket where you are.” Cast it down among the eight
millions of Negroes whose habits you
know, whose fidelity and love you have tested in days when to

have proved treacherous meant the ruin of
your firesides. Cast down your bucket among these people who
have, without strikes and labour wars,
tilled your fields, cleared your forests, builded your railroads
and cities, and brought forth treasures from
the bowels of the earth, and helped make possible this
magnificent representation of the progress of the
South. Casting down your bucket among my people, helping and
encouraging them as you are doing on
these grounds, and to education of head, hand, and heart, you
will find that they will buy your surplus
land, make blossom the waste places in your fields, and run
your factories. While doing this, you can be
sure in the future, as in the past, that you and your families will
be surrounded by the most patient,
faithful, law-abiding, and unresentful people that the world has
seen. As we have proved our loyalty to
you in the past, in nursing your children, watching by the sick-
bed of your mothers and fathers, and often
following them with tear-dimmed eyes to their graves, so in the
future, in our humble way, we shall stand
by you with a devotion that no foreigner can approach, ready to
lay down our lives, if need be, in defense
of yours, interlacing our industrial, commercial, civil, and
religious life with yours in a way that shall
make the interests of both races one. In all things that are
purely social we can be as separate as the
fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual
progress.
There is no defense or security for any of us except in the
highest intelligence and development of all. If
anywhere there are efforts tending to curtail the fullest growth
of the Negro, let these efforts be turned
into stimulating, encouraging, and making him the most useful
and intelligent citizen. Effort or means so

invested will pay a thousand per cent interest. These efforts will
be twice blessed—blessing him that
gives and him that takes. There is no escape through law of man
or God from the inevitable:
The laws of changeless justice bind Oppressor with oppressed;
And close as sin and suffering joined We march to fate
abreast...
Nearly sixteen millions of hands will aid you in pulling the load
upward, or they will pull against you the
load downward. We shall constitute one-third and more of the
ignorance and crime of the South, or one-
third [of] its intelligence and progress; we shall contribute one-
third to the business and industrial
2 of 3 9/8/17, 10:42 PM
prosperity of the South, or we shall prove a veritable body of
death, stagnating, depressing, retarding
every effort to advance the body politic.
Gentlemen of the Exposition, as we present to you our humble
effort at an exhibition of our progress, you
must not expect overmuch. Starting thirty years ago with
ownership here and there in a few quilts and
pumpkins and chickens (gathered from miscellaneous sources),
remember the path that has led from these
to the inventions and production of agricultural implements,
buggies, steam-engines, newspapers, books,

statuary, carving, paintings, the management of drug stores and
banks, has not been trodden without
contact with thorns and thistles. While we take pride in what we
exhibit as a result of our independent
efforts, we do not for a moment forget that our part in this
exhibition would fall far short of your
expectations but for the constant help that has come to our
educational life, not only from the Southern
states, but especially from Northern philanthropists, who have
made their gifts a constant stream of
blessing and encouragement.
The wisest among my race understand that the agitation of
questions of social equality is the extremest
folly, and that progress in the enjoyment of all the privileges
that will come to us must be the result of
severe and constant struggle rather than of artificial forcing. No
race that has anything to contribute to the
markets of the world is long in any degree ostracized. It is
important and right that all privileges of the
law be ours, but it is vastly more important that we be prepared
for the exercise of these privileges. The
opportunity to earn a dollar in a factory just now is worth
infinitely more than the opportunity to spend a
dollar in an opera-house.
In conclusion, may I repeat that nothing in thirty years has
given us more hope and encouragement, and
drawn us so near to you of the white race, as this opportunity
offered by the Exposition; and here
bending, as it were, over the altar that represents the results of
the struggles of your race and mine, both
starting practically empty-handed three decades ago, I pledge
that in your effort to work out the great and
intricate problem which God has laid at the doors of the South,
you shall have at all times the patient,

sympathetic help of my race; only let this be constantly in mind,
that, while from representations in these
buildings of the product of field, of forest, of mine, of factory,
letters, and art, much good will come, yet
far above and beyond material benefits will be that higher good,
that, let us pray God, will come, in a
blotting out of sectional differences and racial animosities and
suspicions, in a determination to
administer absolute justice, in a willing obedience among all
classes to the mandates of law. This, coupled
with our material prosperity, will bring into our beloved South a
new heaven and a new earth.
Source: Louis R. Harlan, ed., The Booker T. Washington
Papers, Vol. 3, (Urbana: University of Illinois
Press, 1974), 583–587.
See Also:W.E.B. DuBois Critiques Booker T. Washington
Making the Atlanta Compromise: Booker T. Washington Is
Invited to Speak
"Equal and Exact Justice to Both Races": Booker T. Washington
on the Reaction to his Atlanta
Compromise Speech
"Cast Down Your Bucket Where You Are": Booker T.
Washington's Atlanta Compromise Speech
3 of 3 9/8/17, 10:42 PM
reference

W.E.B. DuBois Critiques Booker T. Washington
The most influential public critique of Booker T. Washington’s
policy of racial accommodation and
gradualism came in 1903 when black leader and intellectual
W.E.B. DuBois published an essay in his
collection The Souls of Black Folk with the title “Of Mr.
Booker T. Washington and Others.” DuBois
rejected Washington’s willingness to avoid rocking the racial
boat, calling instead for political power,
insistence on civil rights, and the higher education of Negro
youth.
Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others
From birth till death enslaved;
in word, in deed, unmanned!
Hereditary bondsmen! Know ye not
Who would be free themselves must strike the blow?
BYRON
Easily the most striking thing in the history of the American
Negro since 1876 is the ascendancy of Mr.
Booker T. Washington. It began at the time when war memories
and ideals were rapidly passing; a day of
astonishing commercial development was dawning; a sense of
doubt and hesitation overtook the
freedmen’s sons,—then it was that his leading began. Mr.
Washington came, with a single definite
programme, at the psychological moment when the nation was a
little ashamed of having bestowed so

much sentiment on Negroes, and was concentrating its energies
on Dollars. His programme of industrial
education, conciliation of the South, and submission and silence
as to civil and political rights, was not
wholly original; the Free Negroes from 1830 up to wartime had
striven to build industrial schools, and the
American Missionary Association had from the first taught
various trades; and Price and others had
sought a way of honorable alliance with the best of the
Southerners. But Mr. Washington first indissolubly
linked these things; he put enthusiasm, unlimited energy, and
perfect faith into this programme, and
changed it from a by-path into a veritable Way of Life. And the
tale of the methods by which he did this
is a fascinating study of human life.
It startled the nation to hear a Negro advocating such a
programme after many decades of bitter
complaint; it startled and won the applause of the South, it
interested and won the admiration of the
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/40
1 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
North; and after a confused murmur of protest, it silenced if it
did not convert the Negroes themselves.
To gain the sympathy and cooperation of the various elements
comprising the white South was Mr.
Washington’s first task; and this, at the time Tuskegee was
founded, seemed, for a black man, well-nigh
impossible. And yet ten years later it was done in the word

spoken at Atlanta:“In all things purely social
we can be as separate as the five fingers, and yet one as the
hand in all things essential to mutual
progress.” This“Atlanta Compromise” is by all odds the most
notable thing in Mr. Washington’s career.
The South interpreted it in different ways: the radicals received
it as a complete surrender of the demand
for civil and political equality; the conservatives, as a
generously conceived working basis for mutual
understanding. So both approved it, and today its author is
certainly the most distinguished Southerner
since Jefferson Davis, and the one with the largest personal
following.
Next to this achievement comes Mr. Washington’s work in
gaining place and consideration in the North.
Others less shrewd and tactful had formerly essayed to sit on
these two stools and had fallen between
them; but as Mr. Washington knew the heart of the South from
birth and training, so by singular insight
he intuitively grasped the spirit of the age which was
dominating the North. And so thoroughly did he
learn the speech and thought of triumphant commercialism, and
the ideals of material prosperity that the
picture of a lone black boy poring over a French grammar amid
the weeds and dirt of a neglected home
soon seemed to him the acme of absurdities. One wonders what
Socrates and St. Francis of Assisi would
say to this.
And yet this very singleness of vision and thorough oneness
with his age is a mark of the successful man.
It is as though Nature must needs make men narrow in order to
give them force. So Mr. Washington’s cult
has gained unquestioning followers, his work has wonderfully
prospered, his friends are legion, and his

enemies are confounded. To-day he stands as the one recognized
spokesman of his ten million fellows,
and one of the most notable figures in a nation of seventy
millions. One hesitates, therefore, to criticise a
life which, beginning with so little has done so much. And yet
the time is come when one may speak in
all sincerity and utter courtesy of the mistakes and shortcomings
of Mr. Washington’s career, as well as of
his triumphs, without being thought captious or envious, and
without forgetting that it is easier to do ill
than well in the world.
The criticism that has hitherto met Mr. Washington has not
always been of this broad character. In the
South especially has he had to walk warily to avoid the harshest
judgments,—and naturally so, for he is
dealing with the one subject of deepest sensitiveness to that
section. Twice—once when at the Chicago
celebration of the Spanish-American War he alluded to the
color-prejudice that is “eating away the vitals
of the South,” and once when he dined with President
Roosevelt—has the resulting Southern criticism
been violent enough to threaten seriously his popularity. In the
North the feeling has several times forced
itself into words, that Mr. Washington’s counsels of submission
overlooked certain elements of true
manhood, and that his educational programme was
unnecessarily narrow. Usually, however, such
criticism has not found open expression, although, too, the
spiritual sons of the Abolitionists have not
been prepared to acknowledge that the schools founded before
Tuskegee, by men of broad ideals and self-
sacrificing spirit, were wholly failures or worthy of ridicule.
While, then, criticism has not failed to follow
Mr. Washington, yet the prevailing public opinion of the land
has been but too willing to deliver the

solution of a wearisome problem into his hands, and say, “If
that is all you and your race ask, take it.”
Among his own people, however, Mr. Washington has
encountered the strongest and most lasting
opposition, amounting at times to bitterness, and even to-day
continuing strong and insistent even though
largely silenced in outward expression by the public opinion of
the nation. Some of this opposition is, of
course, mere envy; the disappointment of displaced demagogues
and the spite of narrow minds. But aside
2 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
from this, there is among educated and thoughtful colored men
in all parts of the land a feeling of deep
regret, sorrow, and apprehension at the wide currency and
ascendancy which some of Mr. Washington’s
theories have gained. These same men admire his sincerity of
purpose, and are willing to forgive much to
honest endeavor which is doing something worth the doing.
They cooperate with Mr. Washington as far
as they conscientiously can; and, indeed, it is no ordinary
tribute to this man’s tact and power that,
steering as he must between so many diverse interests and
opinions, he so largely retains the respect of
all.
But the hushing of the criticism of honest opponents is a
dangerous thing. It leads some of the best of the
critics to unfortunate silence and paralysis of effort, and others

to burst into speech so passionately and
intemperately as to lose listeners. Honest and earnest criticism
from those whose interests are most nearly
touched,—criticism of writers by readers, of government by
those governed, of leaders by those led, —
this is the soul of democracy and the safeguard of modern
society. If the best of the American Negroes
receive by outer pressure a leader whom they had not
recognized before, manifestly there is here a certain
palpable gain. Yet there is also irreparable loss,—a loss of that
peculiarly valuable education which a
group receives when by search and criticism it finds and
commissions its own leaders. The way in which
this is done is at once the most elementary and the nicest
problem of social growth. History is but the
record of such group-leadership; and yet how infinitely
changeful is its type and character! And of all
types and kinds, what can be more instructive than the
leadership of a group within a group?—that
curious double movement where real progress may be negative
and actual advance be relative
retrogression. All this is the social student’s inspiration and
despair.
Now in the past the American Negro has had instructive
experience in the choosing of group leaders,
founding thus a peculiar dynasty which in the light of present
conditions is worth while studying. When
sticks and stones and beasts form the sole environment of a
people, their attitude is largely one of
determined opposition to and conquest of natural forces. But
when to earth and brute is added an
environment of men and ideas, then the attitude of the
imprisoned group may take three main forms, — a
feeling of revolt and revenge; an attempt to adjust all thought
and action to the will of the greater group;

or, finally, a determined effort at self-realization and self-
development despite environing opinion. The
influence of all of these attitudes at various times can be traced
in the history of the American Negro, and
in the evolution of his successive leaders.
Before 1750, while the fire of African freedom still burned in
the veins of the slaves, there was in all
leadership or attempted leadership but the one motive of revolt
and revenge,—typified in the terrible
Maroons, the Danish blacks, and Cato of Stono, and veiling all
the Americas in fear of insurrection. The
liberalizing tendencies of the latter half of the eighteenth
century brought, along with kindlier relations
between black and white, thoughts of ultimate adjustment and
assimilation. Such aspiration was
especially voiced in the earnest songs of Phyllis, in the
martyrdom of Attucks, the fighting of Salem and
Poor, the intellectual accomplishments of Banneker and
Derham, and the political demands of the Cuffes.
Stern financial and social stress after the war cooled much of
the previous humanitarian ardor. The
disappointment and impatience of the Negroes at the persistence
of slavery and serfdom voiced itself in
two movements. The slaves in the South, aroused undoubtedly
by vague rumors of the Haitian revolt,
made three fierce attempts at insurrection, — in 1800 under
Gabriel in Virginia, in 1822 under Vesey in
Carolina, and in 1831 again in Virginia under the terrible Nat
Turner. In the Free States, on the other
hand, a new and curious attempt at self-development was made.
In Philadelphia and New York color-
prescription led to a withdrawal of Negro communicants from
white churches and the formation of a
peculiar socio-religious institution among the Negroes known as

the African Church, — an organization
still living and controlling in its various branches over a million
of men.
3 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
Walker’s wild appeal against the trend of the times showed how
the world was changing after the coming
of the cotton-gin. By 1830 slavery seemed hopelessly fastened
on the South, and the slaves thoroughly
cowed into submission. The free Negroes of the North, inspired
by the mulatto immigrants from the West
Indies, began to change the basis of their demands; they
recognized the slavery of slaves, but insisted that
they themselves were freemen, and sought assimilation and
amalgamation with the nation on the same
terms with other men. Thus, Forten and Purvis of Philadelphia,
Shad of Wilmington, Du Bois of New
Haven, Barbadoes of Boston, and others, strove singly and
together as men, they said, not as slaves; as
“people of color,” not as “Negroes.” The trend of the times,
however, refused them recognition save in
individual and exceptional cases, considered them as one with
all the despised blacks, and they soon
found themselves striving to keep even the rights they formerly
had of voting and working and moving as
freemen. Schemers of migration and colonization arose among
them; but these they refused to entertain,
and they eventually turned to the Abolition movement as a final
refuge.

Here, led by Remond, Nell, Wells-Brown, and Douglass, a new
period of self-assertion and self-
development dawned. To be sure, ultimate freedom and
assimilation was the ideal before the leaders, but
the assertion of the manhood rights of the Negro by himself was
the main reliance, and John Brown’s raid
was the extreme of its logic. After the war and emancipation,
the great form of Frederick Douglass, the
greatest of American Negro leaders, still led the host. Self-
assertion, especially in political lines, was the
main programme, and behind Douglass came Elliot, Bruce, and
Langston, and the Reconstruction
politicians, and, less conspicuous but of greater social
significance Alexander Crummell and Bishop
Daniel Payne.
Then came the Revolution of 1876, the suppression of the Negro
votes, the changing and shifting of
ideals, and the seeking of new lights in the great night.
Douglass, in his old age, still bravely stood for the
ideals of his early manhood,—ultimate assimilation through
self-assertion, and no other terms. For a time
Price arose as a new leader, destined, it seemed, not to give up,
but to re-state the old ideals in a form less
repugnant to the white South. But he passed away in his prime.
Then came the new leader. Nearly all the
former ones had become leaders by the silent suffrage of their
fellows, had sought to lead their own
people alone, and were usually, save Douglass, little known
outside their race. But Booker T. Washington
arose as essentially the leader not of one race but of two,—a
compromiser between the South, the North,
and the Negro. Naturally the Negroes resented, at first bitterly,
signs of compromise which surrendered
their civil and political rights, even though this was to be
exchanged for larger chances of economic

development. The rich and dominating North, however, was not
only weary of the race problem, hut was
investing largely in Southern enterprises, and welcomed any
method of peaceful cooperation. Thus, by
national opinion, the Negroes began to recognize Mr.
Washington’s leadership; and the voice of criticism
was hushed.
Mr. Washington represents in Negro thought the old attitude of
adjustment and submission; but
adjustment at such a peculiar time as to make his programme
unique. This is an age of unusual economic
development, and Mr. Washington’s programme naturally takes
an economic cast, becoming a gospel of
Work and Money to such an extent as apparently almost
completely to overshadow the higher aims of
life. Moreover, this is an age when the more advanced races are
coming in closer contact with the less
developed races, and the race-feeling is therefore intensified;
and Mr. Washington’s programme
practically accepts the alleged inferiority of the Negro races.
Again, in our own land, the reaction from
the sentiment of war time has given impetus to race-prejudice
against Negroes, and Mr. Washington
withdraws many of the high demands of Negroes as men and
American citizens. In other periods of
intensified prejudice all the Negro’s tendency to self-assertion
has been called forth; at this period a
policy of submission is advocated. In the history of nearly all
other races and peoples the doctrine
preached at such crises has been that manly self-respect is
worth more than lands and houses, and that a

4 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
people who voluntarily surrender such respect, or cease striving
for it, are not worth civilizing.
In answer to this, it has been claimed that the Negro can survive
only through submission. Mr.
Washington distinctly asks that black people give up, at least
for the present, three things, —
First, political power,
Second, insistence on civil rights,
Third, higher education of Negro youth,
— and concentrate all their energies on industrial education, the
accumulation of wealth, and the
conciliation of the South. This policy has been courageously
and insistently advocated for over fifteen
years, and has been triumphant for perhaps ten years. As a
result of this tender of the palm-branch, what
has been the return? In these years there have occurred:
1. The disfranchisement of the Negro.
2. The legal creation of a distinct status of civil inferiority for
the Negro.
3. The steady withdrawal of aid from institutions for the higher
training of the Negro.
These movements are not, to be sure, direct results of Mr.
Washington’s teachings; but his propaganda

has, without a shadow of doubt, helped their speedier
accomplishment. The question then comes: Is it
possible, and probable, that nine millions of men can make
effective progress in economic lines if they
are deprived of political rights, made a servile caste, and
allowed only the most meagre chance for
developing their exceptional men? If history and reason give
any distinct answer to these questions, it is
an emphatic No. And Mr. Washington thus faces the triple
paradox of his career:
1. He is striving nobly to make Negro artisans business men and
property-owners; but it is utterly
impossible, under modern competitive methods, for workingmen
and property-owners to defend their
rights and exist without the right of suffrage .
2. He insists on thrift and self-respect, but at the same time
counsels a silent submission to civic
inferiority such as is bound to sap the manhood of any race in
the long run.
3. He advocates common-school and industrial training, and
depreciates institutions of higher learning;
but neither the Negro common-schools, nor Tuskegee itself,
could remain open a day were it not for
teachers trained in Negro colleges, or trained by their graduates.
This triple paradox in Mr. Washington’s position is the object
of criticism by two classes of colored
Americans. One class is spiritually descended from Toussaint
the Savior, through Gabriel, Vesey, and
Turner, and they represent the attitude of revolt and revenge;
they hate the white South blindly and
distrust the white race generally, and so far as they agree on
definite action, think that the Negro’s only

hope lies in emigration beyond the borders of the United States.
And yet, by the irony of fate, nothing has
more effectually made this programme seem hopeless than the
recent course of the United States toward
weaker and darker peoples in the West Indies, Hawaii, and the
Philippines,—for where in the world may
we go and be safe from lying and brute Force?
The other class of Negroes who cannot agree with Mr.
Washington has hitherto said little aloud. They
deprecate the sight of scattered counsels, of internal
disagreement; and especially they dislike making
5 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
their just criticism of a useful and earnest man an excuse for a
general discharge of venom from small-
minded opponents. Nevertheless, the questions involved are so
fundamental and serious that it is difficult
to see how men like the Grimkes, Kelly Miller, J.W.E. Bowen,
and other representatives of this group,
can much longer be silent. Such men feel in conscience bound
to ask of this nation three things.
1. The right to vote.
2 Civic equality.
3 The education of youth according to ability.
They acknowledge Mr. Washington’s invaluable service in

counselling patience and courtesy in such
demands; they do not ask that ignorant black men vote when
ignorant whites are debarred, or that any
reasonable restrictions in the suffrage should not be applied;
they know that the low social level or the
mass of the race is responsible for much discrimination against
it, but they also know, and the nation
knows, that relentless color-prejudice is more often a cause than
a result of the Negro’s degradation; they
seek the abatement of this relic or barbarism, and not its
systematic encouragement and pampering by all
agencies of social power from the Associated Press to the
Church of Christ. They advocate, with Mr.
Washington, a broad system of Negro common schools
supplemented by thorough industrial training; but
they are surprised that a man of Mr. Washington’s insight
cannot see that no such educational system ever
has rested or can rest on any other basis than that of the well-
equipped college and university, and they
insist that there is a demand for a few such institutions
throughout the South to train the best of the Negro
youth as teachers, professional men, and leaders.
This group of men honor Mr. Washington for his attitude of
conciliation toward the white South; they
accept the “Atlanta Compromise” in its broadest interpretation;
they recognize, with him, many signs of
promise, many men of high purpose and fair judgment, in this
section; they know that no easy task has
been laid upon a region already tottering under heavy burdens.
But, nevertheless, they insist that the way
to truth and right lies in straightforward honesty, not in
indiscriminate flattery; in praising those of the
South who do well and criticising uncompromisingly those who
do ill; in taking advantage of the
opportunities at hand and urging their fellows to do the same,

but at the same time in remembering that
only a firm adherence to their higher ideals and aspirations will
ever keep those ideals within the realm of
possibility. They do not expect that the free right to vote, to
enjoy civic rights, and to be educated, will
come in a moment; they do not expect to see the bias and
prejudices of years disappear at the blast of a
trumpet; but they are absolutely certain that the way for a
people to gain their reasonable rights is not by
voluntarily throwing them away and insisting that they do not
want them; that the way for a people to
gain respect is not by continually belittling and ridiculing
themselves; that, on the contrary, Negroes must
insist continually, in season and out of season, that voting is
necessary to modern manhood, that color
discrimination is barbarism, and that black boys need education
as well as white boys.
In failing thus to state plainly and unequivocally the legitimate
demands of their people, even at the cost
of opposing an honored leader, the thinking classes of American
Negroes would shirk a heavy
responsibility,—a responsibility to themselves, a responsibility
to the struggling masses, a responsibility
to the darker races of men whose future depends so largely on
this American experiment, but especially a
responsibility to this nation,—this common Fatherland. It is
wrong to encourage a man or a people in
evil-doing; it is wrong to aid and abet a national crime simply
because it is unpopular not to do so. The
growing spirit of kindliness and reconciliation between the
North and South after the frightful difference
of a generation ago ought to be a source of deep congratulation
to all, and especially to those whose
mistreatment caused the war; but if that reconciliation is to be
marked by the industrial slavery and civic

6 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
death of those same black men, with permanent legislation into
a position of inferiority, then those black
men, if they are really men, are called upon by every
consideration of patriotism and loyalty to oppose
such a course by all civilized methods, even though such
opposition involves disagreement with Mr.
Booker T. Washington. We have no right to sit silently by while
the inevitable seeds are sown for a
harvest of disaster to our children, black and white.
First, it is the duty of black men to judge the South
discriminatingly. The present generation of
Southerners are not responsible for the past, and they should not
be blindly hated or blamed for it.
Furthermore, to no class is the indiscriminate endorsement of
the recent course of the South toward
Negroes more nauseating than to the best thought of the South.
The South is not “solid”; it is a land in the
ferment of social change, wherein forces of all kinds are
fighting for supremacy; and to praise the ill the
South is to-day perpetrating is just as wrong as to condemn the
good. Discriminating and broad-minded
criticism is what the South needs, — needs it for the sake of her
own white sons and daughters, and for
the insurance of robust, healthy mental and moral development.
To-day even the attitude of the Southern whites toward the
blacks is not, as so many assume, in all cases

the same; the ignorant Southerner hates the Negro, the
workingmen fear his competition, the money-
makers wish to use him as a laborer, some of the educated see a
menace in his upward development,
while others—usually the sons of the masters—wish to help him
to rise. National opinion has enabled this
last class to maintain the Negro common schools, and to protect
the Negro partially in property, life, and
limb. Through the pressure of the money-makers, the Negro is
in danger of being reduced to semi-
slavery, especially in the country districts; the workingmen, and
those of the educated who fear the
Negro, have united to disfranchise him, and some have urged
his deportation; while the passions of the
ignorant are easily aroused to lynch and abuse any black man.
To praise this intricate whirl of thought and
prejudice is nonsense; to inveigh indiscriminately against “the
South” is unjust; but to use the same breath
in praising Governor Aycock, exposing Senator Morgan,
arguing with Mr. Thomas Nelson Page, and
denouncing Senator Ben Tillman, is not only sane, but the
imperative duty of thinking black men.
It would be unjust to Mr. Washington not to acknowledge that
in several instances he has opposed
movements in the South which were unjust to the Negro; he sent
memorials to the Louisiana and
Alabama constitutional conventions, he has spoken against
lynching, and in other ways has openly or
silently set his influence against sinister schemes and
unfortunate happenings. Notwithstanding this, it is
equally true to assert that on the whole the distinct impression
left by Mr. Washington’s propaganda is,
first, that the South is justified in its present attitude toward the
Negro because of the Negro’s
degradation; secondly, that the prime cause of the Negro’s

failure to rise more quickly is his wrong
education in the past; and, thirdly, that his future rise depends
primarily on his own efforts. Each of these
propositions is a dangerous half-truth. The supplementary truths
must never be lost sight of: first, slavery
and race-prejudice are potent if not sufficient causes of the
Negro’s position; second, industrial and
common-school training were necessarily slow in planting
because they had to await the black teachers
trained by higher institutions,—it being extremely doubtful if
any essentially different development was
possible, and certainly a Tuskegee was unthinkable before 1880;
and, third, while it is a great truth to say
that the Negro must strive and strive mightily to help himself, it
is equally true that unless his striving be
not simply seconded, but rather aroused and encouraged, by the
initiative of the richer and wiser
environing group, he cannot hope for great success.
In his failure to realize and impress this last point, Mr.
Washington is especially to be criticised. His
doctrine has tended to make the whites, North and South, shift
the burden of the Negro problem to the
Negro’s shoulders and stand aside as critical and rather
pessimistic spectators; when in fact the burden
belongs to the nation, and the hands of none of us are clean if
we bend not our energies to righting these
7 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
great wrongs.

The South ought to be led, by candid and honest criticism, to
assert her better self and do her full duty to
the race she has cruelly wronged and is still wronging. The
North—her co-partner in guilt—cannot salve
her conscience by plastering it with gold. We cannot settle this
problem by diplomacy and suaveness, by
“policy” alone. If worse comes to worst, can the moral fibre of
this country survive the slow throttling
and murder of nine millions of men?
The black men of America have a duty to perform, a duty stern
and delicate,—a forward movement to
oppose a part of the work of their greatest leader. So far as Mr.
Washington preaches Thrift, Patience, and
Industrial Training for the masses, we must hold up his hands
and strive with him, rejoicing in his honors
and glorying in the strength of this Joshua called of God and of
man to lead the headless host. But so far
as Mr. Washington apologizes for injustice, North or South,
does not rightly value the privilege and duty
of voting, belittles the emasculating effects of caste
distinctions, and opposes the higher training and
ambition of our brighter minds,—so far as he, the South, or the
Nation, does this,—we must unceasingly
and firmly oppose them. By every civilized and peaceful method
we must strive for the rights which the
world accords to men, clinging unwaveringly to those great
words which the sons of the Fathers would
fain forget: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all
men are created equal; that they are endowed
by their Creater with certain unalienable rights; that among
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness."
Source: W. E. Burghardt Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk

(Chicago, 1903).
See Also:Booker T. Washington Delivers the 1895 Atlanta
Compromise Speech
Making the Atlanta Compromise: Booker T. Washington Is
Invited to Speak
"Equal and Exact Justice to Both Races": Booker T. Washington
on the Reaction to his Atlanta
Compromise Speech
"Cast Down Your Bucket Where You Are": Booker T.
Washington's Atlanta Compromise Speech
8 of 8 9/8/17, 10:43 PM
Home | Ancient History Sourcebook | Medieval Sourcebook |
Modern History Sourcebook | Byzantine Studies Page
Other History Sourcebooks: African | East Asian | Global |
Indian | Islamic | Jewish | Lesbian and Gay | Science | Women's
Modern History
Full Texts
Multimedia
Additions
Search
Help

Selected Sources
Sections
Studying History
Reformation
Early Modern World
Everyday Life
Absolutism
Constitutionalism
Colonial North
America
Colonial Latin
America
Scientific Revolution
Enlightenment
Enlightened Despots
American
Independence
French Revolution
Industrial Revolution
Romanticism

Conservative Order
Nationalism
Liberalism
1848
19C Britain
19C France
19C Germany
19C Italy
19C West Europe
Modern History Sourcebook:
Albert Beveridge: The March of the Flag
Albert Beveridge was US Senator from Indiana (1899-1911),
and, as is evident here, a fervent
supporter of American imperialism. He gave this speech as a
campaign speech on September 16,
1898.
The March of the Flag
It is a noble land that God has given us; a land that can feed and
clothe the world; a land whose
coastlines would inclose half the countries of Europe; a land set
like a sentinel between the two
imperial oceans of the globe, a greater England with a nobler
destiny.
It is a mighty people that He has planted on this soil; a people

sprung from the most masterful
blood of history; a people perpetually revitalized by the virile,
manproducing workingfolk of all the
earth; a people imperial by virtue of their power, by right of
their institutions, by authority of their
Heaven-directed purposes-the propagandists and not the misers
of liberty.
It is a glorious history our God has bestowed upon His chosen
people; a history heroic with faith in
our mission and our future; a history of statesmen who flung the
boundaries of the Republic out
into unexplored lands and savage wilderness; a history of
soldiers who carried the flag across
blazing deserts and through the ranks of hostile mountains, even
to the gates of sunset; a history of
a multiplying people who overran a continent in half a century;
a history of prophets who saw the
consequences of evils inherited from the past and of martyrs
who died to save us from them; a
history divinely logical, in the process of whose tremendous
reasoning we find ourselves today.
Therefore, in this campaign, the question is larger than a party
question. It is an American question.
It is a world question. Shall the American people continue their
march toward the commercial
supremacy of the world? Shall free institutions broaden their
blessed reign as the children of liberty
wax in strength, until the empire of our principles is established
over the hearts of all mankind?
Have we no mission to perform no duty to discharge to our
fellow man? Has God endowed us with
gifts beyond our deserts and marked us as the people of His
peculiar favor, merely to rot in our own

selfishness, as men and nations must, who take cowardice for
their companion and self for their
deity-as China has, as India has, as Egypt has?
Shall we be as the man who had one talent and hid it, or as he
who had ten talents and used them
until they grew to riches? And shall we reap the reward that
waits on our discharge of our high
duty; shall we occupy new markets for what our farmers raise,
our factories make, our merchants
sell-aye, and please God, new markets for what our ships shall
carry?
Hawaii is ours; Porto Rico is to be ours; at the prayer of her
people Cuba finally will be ours; in the
islands of the East, even to the gates of Asia, coaling stations
are to be ours at the very least; the
flag of a liberal government is to float over the Philippines, and
may it be the banner that Taylor
unfurled in Texas and Fremont carried to the coast.
Internet History Sourcebooks
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1898beveridge.asp
1 of 4 9/8/17, 10:50 PM
19C East Europe
Early US
US Civil War
US Immigration

19C US Culture
Canada
Australia & New
Zealand
19C Latin America
Socialism
Imperialism
Industrial Revolution
II
Darwin, Freud
19C Religion
World War I
Russian Revolution
Age of Anxiety
Depression
Fascism
Nazism
Holocaust
World War II

Bipolar World
US Power
US Society
Western Europe Since
1945
Eastern Europe Since
1945
Decolonization
Asia Since 1900
Africa Since 1945
Middle East Since
1945
20C Latin America
Modern Social
Movements
Post War Western
Thought
Religion Since 1945
Modern Science
Pop Culture
21st Century

IHSP Credits
The Opposition tells us that we ought not to govern a people
without their consent. I answer, The
rule of liberty that all just government derives its authority from
the consent of the governed,
applies only to those who are capable of selfgovernment We
govern the Indians without their
consent, we govern our territories without their consent, we
govern our children without their
consent. How do they know what our government would be
without their consent? Would not the
people of the Philippines prefer the just, humane, civilizing
government of this Republic to the
savage, bloody rule of pillage and extortion from which we have
rescued them?
And, regardless of this formula of words made only for
enlightened, selfgoverning people, do we
owe no duty to the world? Shall we turn these peoples back to
the reeking hands from which we
have taken them? Shall we abandon them, with Germany,
England, Japan, hungering for them?
Shall we save them from those nations, to give them a selfrule
of tragedy?
They ask us how we shall govern these new possessions. I
answer: Out of local conditions and the
necessities of the case methods of government will grow. If
England can govern foreign lands, so
can America. If Germany can govern foreign lands, so can
America. If they can supervise
protectorates, so can America. Why is it more difficult to
administer Hawaii than Nevs Mexico or
California? Both had a savage and an alien population: both

were more remote from the seat of
government when they came under our dominion than the
Philippines are today.
Will you say by your vote that American ability to govern has
decayed, that a century s experience
in selfrule has failed of a result? Will you affirm by your vote
that you are an infidel to American
power and practical sense? Or will you say that ours is the
blood of government; ours the heart of
dominion; ours the brain and genius of administration? Will you
remember that we do but what our
fathers did-we but pitch the tents of liberty farther westward,
farther southward-we only continue
the march of the flag?
The march of the flag! In 1789 the flag of the Republic waved
over 4,000,000 souls in thirteen
states, and their savage territory which stretched to the
Mississippi, to Canada, to the Floridas. The
timid minds of that day said that no new territory was needed,
and, for the hour, they were right.
But Jefferson, through whose intellect the centuries marched;
Jefferson, who dreamed of Cuba as
an American state, Jefferson, the first Imperialist of the
Republic-Jefferson acquired that imperial
territory which swept from the Mississippi to the mountains,
from Texas to the British possessions,
and the march of the flag began!
The infidels to the gospel of liberty raved, but the flag swept
on! The title to that noble land out of
which Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana have been
carved was uncertain: Jefferson, strict
constructionist of constitutional power though he was, obeyed
the AngloSaxon impulse within him,

whose watchword is, ''Forwardl'': another empire was added to
the Republic, and the march of the
flag went on!
Those who deny the power of free institutions to expand urged
every argument, and more, that we
hear, today; but the people's judgment approved the command of
their blood, and the march of the
flag went on!
A screen of land from New Orleans to Florida shut us from the
Gulf, and over this and the Everglade
Peninsula waved the saffron flag of Spain; Andrew Jackson
seized both, the American people stood
at his back, and, under Monroe, the Floridas came under the
dominion of the Republic, and the
march of the flag went on! The Cassandras prophesied every
prophecy of despair we hear, today,
but the march of the flag went on!
Then Texas responded to the bugle calls of liberty, and the
march of the flag went on! And, at last,
we waged war with Mexico, and the flag swept over the
southwest, over peerless California, past
the Gate of Gold to Oregon on the north, and from ocean to
ocean its folds of glory blazed.
And, now, obeying the same voice that Jefferson heard and
obeyed, that Jackson heard and
obeyed, that Monroe heard and obeyed, that Seward heard and
obeyed, that Grant heard and
obeyed, that Harrison heard and obeyed, our President today
plants the flag over the islands of the
seas, outposts of commerce, citadels of national security, and
the march of the flag goes on!

2 of 4 9/8/17, 10:50 PM
Distance and oceans are no arguments. The fact that all the
territory our fathers bought and seized
is contiguous, is no argument. In 1819 Florida was farther from
New York than Porto Rico is from
Chicago today; Texas, farther from Washington in 1845 than
Hawaii is from Boston in 1898;
California, more inaccessible in 1847 than the Philippines are
now. Gibraltar is farther from London
than Havana is from Washington; Melbourne is farther from
Liverpool than Manila is from San
Francisco.
The ocean does not separate us from lands of our duty and
desire_ the oceans join us, rivers never
to be dredged, canals never to be re paired. Steam joins us;
electricity joins us-the very elements
are in league with our destiny. Cuba not contiguous? Porto Rico
not contiguous! Hawaii and the
Philippines no contiguous! The oceans make them contiguous.
And our navy will make them
contiguous.
But the Opposition is right- there is a difference. We did not
need the western Mississippi Valley
when we acquired it, nor Florida! nor Texas, nor California, nor
the royal provinces of the far
northwest We had no emigrants to people this imperial
wilderness, no money to develop it, even no
highways to cover it. No trade awaited us in its savage

fastnesses. Our productions were not
greater than our trade There was not one reason for the landlust
of our statesmen from Jefferson to
Grant, other than the prophet and the Saxon within them But,
today, we are raising more than we
can consume, making more than we can use. Therefore we must
find new markets for our produce.
And so, while we did not need the territory taken during the
past cen tury at the time it was
acquired, we do need what we have taken irl 18981 and we need
it now. The resource' and the
commerce of the immensely rich dominions will be increased as
much as American energy is greater
than Spanish sloth.
In Cuba, alone, there are 15,000,000 acres of forest
unacquainted with the ax, exhaustless mines of
iron, priceless deposits of manganese, millions 0f dollars' worth
of which we must buy, today, from
the Black Sea districts There are millions of acres yet
unexplored.
The resources of Porto Rico have only been trifled with. The
riches of` the Philippines have hardly
been touched by the fingertips of modern methods. And they
produce what we consume, and
consume what we produce-the very predestination of
reciprocity-a reciprocity "not made with
hands, eternal in the heavens." They sell hemp, sugar,
cocoanuts, fruits of the tropics, timber of
price like mahogany; they buy flour, clothing, tools,
implements, machinery and all that we can raise
and make. Their trade will be ours in time. Do you indorse that
policy with your vote?

Cuba is as large as Pennsylvania, and is the richest spot on the
globe. Hawaii is as large as New
Jersey; Porto Rico half as large as Hawaii; the Philippines
larger than all New England, New York,
New Jersey and Delaware combined. Together they are larger
than the British Isles, larger than
France, larger than Germany, larger than Japan.
If any man tells you that trade depends on cheapness and not on
government influence, ask him
why England does not abandon South Africa, Egypt, India. Why
does France seize South China,
Germany the vast region whose port is Kaouchou?
Our trade with Porto Rico, Hawaii and the Philippines must be
as free as between the states of the
Union, because they are American territory, while every other
nation on earth must paty our tariff
before they can compete with us. Until Cuba shall ask for
annexation, our trade with her will, at the
very least, be like the preferential trade of Canada with
England. That, and the excellence of our
goods and products; that, and the convenience of traffic; that,
and the kinship of interests and
destiny, will give the monopoly of` these markets to the
American people.
The commercial supremacy of the Republic means that this
Nation t is to be the sovereign factor in
the peace of the world. For the conflicts of the future are to be
conflicts of trade-struggles for
markets-commercial wars for existence. And the golden rule of
peace is impregnability of position
and invincibility of preparedness. So, we see England, the
greatest strategist of history, plant her
flag and her cannon on Gibraltar, at Quebec, in the Bermudas,

at Vancouver, everywhere.
3 of 4 9/8/17, 10:50 PM
So Hawaii furnishes us a naval base in the heart of the Pacific;
the Ladrones another, a voyage
further on; Manila another, at the gates of Asia - Asia, to the
trade of whose hundreds of millions
American merchants, manufacturers, farmers, have as good right
as those of Germany or France or
Russia or England; Asia, whose commerce with the United
Kingdom alone amounts to hundreds of
millions of dollars every year; Asia, to whom Germany looks to
take her surplus products; Asia,
whose doors must not be shut against American trade. Within
five decades the bulk of Oriental
commerce will be ours.
No wonder that, in the shadows of coming events so great, free-
silver is already a memory. The
current of history has swept past that episode. Men understand,
today, the greatest commerce of
the world must be conducted with the steadiest standard of`
value and most convenient medium of
exchange human ingenuity can devise. Time, that unerring
reasoner, has settled the silver question.
The American people are tired of talking about money-they
want to make it.
. . . .

There are so many real things to be done-canals to be dug,
railways to be laid, forests to be felled,
cities to be builded, fields to be tilled, markets to be won, ships
to be launched, peoples to be
saved, civilization to be proclaimed and the Rag of liberty Hung
to the eager air of every sea. Is this
an hour to waste upon triflers with nature's laws? Is this a
season to give our destiny over to word-
mongers and prosperity-wreckers? No! It is an hour to
remember our duty to our homes. It is a
moment to realize the opportunities fate has opened to us. And
so is all hour for us to stand by the
Government.
Wonderfully has God guided us Yonder at Bunker Hill and
Yorktown. His providence was above us At
New Orleans and on ensanguined seas His hand sustained u
Abraham Lincoln was His minister and
His was the altar of` freedom the Nation's soldiers set up on a
hundred battlefields. His power
directed Dewey in the East an delivered the Spanish fleet into
our hands, as He delivered the elder
Armada into the hands of our English sires two centuries ago
[Note - actually in 1588]. The
American people can not use a dishonest medium of` exchange;
it is ours to set the world its
example of` right and honor. We can not fly from our world
duties; it is ours to execute the purpose
of a fate that has driven us to be greater than our small
intentions. We can not retreat from any soil
where Providence has unfurled our banner; it is ours to save that
soil for liberty and civilization.
This text is part of the Internet Modern History Sourcebook.
The Sourcebook is a collection of public
domain and copy-permitted texts for introductory level classes

in modern European and World
history.
Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the
document is copyright. Permission is
granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for
educational purposes and personal use.
If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No
permission is granted for commercial
use of the Sourcebook.
(c)Paul Halsall Aug 1997
4 of 4 9/8/17, 10:50 PM
William Jennings Bryan, "Cross of Gold" Speech (1896)
William Jennings Bryan was well known for his dramatic
speeches. During the Democratic Convention of 1896,
Bryan delivered his best-known speech, which attacked the gold
standard. His stirring rhetoric captivated his
audience and won him the Democratic presidential nomination
for the election of 1896.
Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Convention: I would be
presumptuous, indeed, to present myself against
the distinguished gentlemen to whom you have listened if this
were a mere measuring of abilities; but this is
not a contest between persons. The humblest citizen in all the
land, when clad in the armor of a righteous

cause, is stronger than all the hosts of error. I come to speak to
you in defense of a cause as holy as the cause
of liberty-the cause of humanity. . . .
We say to you that you have made the definition of a business
man too limited in its application. The man who
is employed for wages is as much a business man as his
employer; the attorney in a country town is as much a
business man as the corporation counsel in a great metropolis;
the merchant at the cross-roads store is as
much a business man as the merchant of New York; the farmer
who goes forth in the morning and toils all day-
who begins in the spring and toils all summer-and who by the
application of brain and muscle to the natural
resources of the country creates wealth, is as much a business
man as the man who goes upon the board of
trade and bets upon the price of grain; the miners who go down
a thousand feet into the earth, or climb two
thousand feet upon the cliffs, and bring forth from their hiding
places the precious metals to be poured into the
channels of trade are as much business men as the few financial
magnates who, in a back room, corner the
money of the world. We come to speak for this broader class of
business men.
Ah, my friends, we say not one word against those who live
upon the Atlantic coast, but the hardy pioneers
who have braved all the dangers of the wilderness, who have
made the desert to blossom as the rose-the
pioneers away out there [pointing to the West], who rear their
children near to Nature's heart, where they can
mingle their voices with the voices of the birds-out there where
they have erected schoolhouses for the
education of their young, churches where they praise their
Creator, and cemeteries where rest the ashes of
their dead-these people, we say, are as deserving of the

consideration of our party as any people in this
country. It is for these that we speak. We do not come as
aggressors. Our war is not a war of conquest; we are
fighting in the defense of our homes, our families, and
posterity. We have petitioned, and our petitions have
been scorned; we have entreated, and our entreaties have been
disregarded; we have begged, and they have
mocked when our calamity came. We beg no longer; we entreat
no more; we petition no more. We defy them.
. . .
We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin and
issue money is a function of government. We
believe it. We believe that it is a part of sovereignty, and can no
more with safety be delegated to private
individuals than we could afford to delegate to private
individuals the power to make penal statutes or levy
taxes. Mr. Jefferson, who was once regarded as good
Democratic authority, seems to have differed in opinion
from the gentleman who has addressed us on the part of the
minority. Those who are opposed to this
proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of
the bank, and that the Government ought to
go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather
than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the
issue of money is a function of government, and that the banks
ought to go out of the governing business. . . .
We go forth confident that we shall win. Why? Because upon
the paramount issue of this campaign there is not
a spot of ground upon which the enemy will dare to challenge
battle. If they tell us that the gold standard is a
good thing, we shall point to their platform and tell them that
their platform pledges the party to get rid of the
gold standard and substitute bimetalism. If the gold standard is
a good thing, why try to get rid of it? I call

your attention to the fact that some of the very people who are
in this convention today and who tell us that
his...
1 of 2 9/8/17, 10:46 PM
we ought to declare in favor of international bimetallism—
thereby declaring that the gold standard is wrong and
that the principle of bimetallism is better—these very people
four months ago were open and avowed
advocates of the gold standard, and were then telling us that we
could not legislate two metals together, even
with the aid of all the world. If the gold standard is a good
thing, we ought to declare in favor of its retention
and not in favor of abandoning it; and if the gold standard is a
bad thing why should we wait until other nations
are willing to help us to let go? Here is the line of battle, and
we care not upon which issue they force the fight;
we are prepared to meet them on either issue or on both. If they
tell us that the gold standard is the standard
of civilization, we reply to them that this, the most enlightened
of all the nations of the earth, has never
declared for a gold standard and that both the great parties this
year are declaring against it. If the gold
standard is the standard of civilization, why, my friends, should
we not have it? If they come to meet us on
that issue we can present the history of our nation. More than
that; we can tell them that they will search the
pages of history in vain to find a single instance where the
common people of any land have ever declared
themselves in favor of the gold standard. They can find where

the holders of fixed investments have declared
for a gold standard, but not where the masses have. . . .
Upon which side will the Democratic party fight; upon the side
of "the idle holders of idle capital" or upon the
side of "the struggling masses?" That is the question which the
party must answer first, and then it must be
answered by each individual hereafter. The sympathies of the
Democratic Party, as shown by the platform, are
on the side of the struggling masses who have ever been the
foundation of the Democratic party. There are
two ideas of government. There are those who believe that, if
you will only legislate to make the well-to-do
prosperous, their prosperity will leak through on those below.
The Democratic idea, however, has been that if
you legislate to make the masses prosperous, their prosperity
will find its way up through every class which
rests upon them.
You come to us and tell us that the great cities are in favor of
the gold standard; we reply that the great cities
rest upon our broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities
and leave our farms, and your cities will spring
up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will
grow in the streets of every city in the
country.
My friends, we declare that this nation is able to legislate for its
own people on every question, without waiting
for the aid or consent of any other nation on earth; and upon
that issue we expect to carry every State in the
Union. I shall not slander the inhabitants of the fair State of
Massachusetts nor the inhabitants of the State of
New York by saying that, when they are confronted with the
proposition, they will declare that this nation is not
able to attend to its own business. It is the issue of 1776 over

again. Our ancestors, when but three millions in
number, had the courage to declare their political independence
of every other nation; shall we, their
descendants, when we have grown to seventy millions, declare
that we are less independent than our
forefathers? No, my friends, that will never be the verdict of our
people. Therefore, we care not upon what lines
the battle is fought. If they say bimetallism is good, but that we
cannot have it until other nations help us, we
reply that, instead of having a gold standard because England
has, we will restore bimetallism, and then let
England have bimetallism because the United States has it. If
they dare to come out in the open field and
defend the gold standard as a good thing, we will fight them to
the uttermost. Having behind us the producing
masses of this nation and the world, supported by the
commercial interests, the laboring interests, and the
toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold
standard by saying to them: You shall not press
down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not
crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
his...
2 of 2 9/8/17, 10:46 PM

Woodrow Wilson, from The New Freedom (1913)This excerpt is.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from ambersalomon88660

More from ambersalomon88660 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Woodrow Wilson, from The New Freedom (1913)This excerpt is.docx