successfully, not even to think along partisan lines, he declared that never before in his twenty-five years of service had partisanship been so obliterated and legislation run so smoothly. Of the committee charged with appropriating nine billions of dollars, he said: The majority of this sub-committee was of course Democratic, because the Democrats are in the majority in this Congress and the party in power always controls and has a majority upon every one of the committees. The two Republicans on this sub-committee were Mr. Cannon, of Illinois, and myself, and I suppose it has sometimes been thought of both of us that we were not entirely devoid of partisanship, but I am happy to say that in all the deliberations of that committee and in all the contests which occurred there-and there were often points of difference which were strenuously contested-there was never the slightest suggestion of partisan division. I think both the majority and the minority were constantly actuated by the same desire to give the Administration every dollar of money which we thought it could wisely use, and I do not believe anybody who had listened to the discussions or recorded the votes in that committee could have guessed who were the Democrats and who were the Republicans. I am happy to say the Democratic majority treated us in the minority with just as much consideration and respect as if we were of their party, and all the deliberations were carried on, as far as partisanship went, with the most perfect harmony. Surely no handsomer tribute than that could be asked by anybody. True, Mr. Gillett deprecated, as well he might, the Administration's backward movement on civil service reform and disapproved of sending unofficial or unknown representatives abroad while our Allies were sending to us their most competent and best known, but even we, in the process of friendly and somewhat persistently constructive criticism, have gone as far as that. In point of fact, all that we could find in Mr. Gillett's speech that might offend the most sensitive spirit was the following: Inasmuch as Republicans have been quite as loyal and earnest and hearty in their support of the Administration on all war measures and have not hesitated to grant unheard of powers, both in money and in possession of property and in control over the acts and business of the citizens, it seemed to me that in return there should have been given to Congress the fullest information as to how these great powers were exercised, and that all departments of the Administration would be overscrupulous in putting before a friendly Congress the full facts. of their administration, but I regret to say that spirit has not always been visible. I fear that there has been a studied effort to disclose to Congress and the public only the favorable side and conceal discour aging facts. We have not been allowed to know how far below expectation our assistance to the Allies has been, and now as the facts are leaking out there is deep disappointment and suspicion. Which is true as gospel. Mr. Gillett concluded gallantly: However, my friends, although the partisanship exhibited by the Administration is not agreeable to us, yet it is not going to diminish our support. It may take from it something of cordiality and heartiness, but it will not take from it anything of force or efficiency. The Republican Party in Congress in the future, as in the past, intends to prove that its one purpose, in which it is engaged heart and soul, is to give to the Administration everything possible to make it more forceful and more successful; not to criticize, not to complain, but ignoring all sectional or partisan feelings to vie with the men from the South and West and the North who differ from us in political faith in supporting the Executive until this terrible scourge of war is over. These are good words; and they not only ring true, but are borne out by the record of Republican voting. Upon all of the war propositions combined the Republican vote in the Senate has been 76 per cent plus against 75 per cent minus Democratic, while in the House 169 Republicans voted for and 42 against the President's selective-draft measure, as contrasted with 144 Democratic ayes and 67 Democratic noes, and later 164 Republicans voted for and only 14 against the essential modification urged by the President, as contrasted with 79 Democratic ayes and 118 Democratic noes. Clearly no fair mind can fail to give to the Republicans of Congress a clean bill of patriotism in upholding the President to the full and in putting aside all partisan considerations. And best of all is the bugle call from Elihu Root, Republican of Republicans but also patriots, delivered amid tumultuous cheers to the National Security League and reported in this wise by the newspapers: We are going to elect a Congress this coming fall. There is one great single predominant qualification for an election to that Congress, and that is a loyal heart. (Applause.) I don't care whether a man is a Democrat or a Republican or a Progressive or a Socialist or a Prohibitionist, or what not, he must have a loyal heart, or it is treason to send him to Congress. (Applause.) There are probably from twenty to thirty Congressional districts in this country where there is a loyal majority but where there is so large a disloyal minority that a division of the loyal majority may let a pro-German in. In every one of those districts, Democrats and Republicans and all loyal men should get together and agree upon the loyal man of one party or the other who is the surest to carry the district, and all unite on him without regard to party. (Applause.) Any man who would not accept the idea and follow it I would want to live a hundred years to vote and work against. (Applause.) Human nature has not changed. There are going to be parties, going to be politics hereafter; but now they are subordinate, they are unimportant. The one thing only is to win the war and put men in Congress who will represent the driving power of the American people; the driving power that is behind Congress, that is behind the Administration, and that, God grant, may make itself felt behind the men who are puttering over contracts and lingering on the road to victory. (Applause.) The great thing is to make Germany feel that the hundred millions of America are going, as one man, to beat them (applause), to make every American feel that all the rest of the hundred millions are with him in his mightiest efforts to beat the German. (Applause.) A noble and inspiring utterance, worthy of Patrick Henry, from the foremost living statesman in the world. II. THE DEMOCRATIC POSITION "In this critical situation," said Secretary McAdoo in New Orleans, we cannot think of or play cheap partisan politics, which is practiced too much, I am sorry to say, in America, and which even a great war does not wholly silence. That is the kind of politics we cannot for one moment permit to raise its head in this perilous time. I have infinite contempt for those who would take advantage of the situation in which our country finds itself to-day to advance any personal interest or ambition-public or private.' The effect of this admirable declaration, we regret to say, was marred somewhat by his subsequent statement in Texas that "as for 1920, in my judgment, there is only one man in America,"-meaning, of course, Mr. Wilson,-" who deserves the gift of that exalted office [the Presidency] from the American people "; but this may be readily overlooked as merely a filial, though ill-timed, tribute voiced in a moment of enthusiasm. Speaker Clark's frankly partisan speech in Indiana, in which he appealed to " the grand inquest of the Nation" for approval of the Democratic record, “ a magnificent, a wonderful record which anybody save a stark idiot can easily and successfully defend," may be regarded as an offset to Senator Gallinger's sneer, even though the World did administer a sharp rebuke to him for going so far at this particular time. was It is really the President himself who has the most difficult task in making his words square with his deeds respecting the injection of partisan strife into the forthcoming elections. It was not surprising that Senator Lewis, in the recent Senatorial campaign in Wisconsin, should have urged the election of Mr. Davies upon the ground that the return of a Democrat and a "personal friend of the President requisite to "the saving of the Nation "; that was to have been expected. Neither were the rankly partisan tirades of the Vice-President so unusual as to evoke particular emotion; after all, he is from Indiana. But when the President himself took typewriter in hand and drew a sharp line between Democratic patriotism and Republican disloyalty as embodied in the respective candidates, he certainly dazed though, judging from the result, hardly hypnotized those independent voters who still hold consistency and straightforwardness to be cardinal virtues. To Mr. Davies he wrote: May I also add a word of thanks to you for your steadfast loyalty and patriotism during that trying period before we were thrust into the war, while to avoid becoming involved therein every effort was being made aggressively to assert and fearlessly to maintain American rights? Frankly confessing, in the absence of plans and specifications, our utter inability to resolve into logical relationship the purpose and method thus set forth, we regard it as certain that the President meant to convey to the people the impression that the election of Mr. Davies would meet with his approbation. On the other hand, aiming straight at Mr. Lenroot, he added: The McLemore resolution, the embargo issue, and the armed neutrality measure presented the first opportunities to apply the acid test in our country to disclose true loyalty and genuine Americanism. It should always be a source of much satisfaction to you that on these crucial propositions you proved true. Obviously, since Mr. Davies was not a member of Congress, the President must have spoken from personal knowledge, but that is neither here nor there; we have no doubt that his diagnosis of his friend's sentiments was correct. In any case, the issue was defined with almost startling clearness; the "acid test to disclose true loyalty and genuine Americanism" was the record of a candidate on the "crucial propositions" enumerated. But it was not retroactive. It did not apply, for example, to Representative Kent of California, who, after having voted against tabling the McLemore resolution, and after having been defeated for re-election, was appointed a member of the Tariff Commission. Nor do we recall that, in the election of 1916, the President by so much as a hint or suggestion opposed the return of 20 Democratic Congressmen, including the famous McLemore himself, all of whom voted as Mr. Lenroot voted and failed equally in meeting "the acid test" of "true loyalty and genuine Americanism." We have not the remotest idea that Mr. Wilson ever countenanced or heard of the appeal to the soldiers in Camp Grant published in a Rockford newspaper in these ringing words: Tuesday, April 2, you are entitled to vote for United States Senator from Wisconsin to succeed Senator Paul O. Husting. President Wilson, your Commander in Chief, desires all loyal Americans to vote for Joseph E. Davies for United States Senator. Davies's election means joy at Washington and gloom at Berlin. That sounds more like Creel. In any event, 576 soldiers voted for Mr. Lenroot to 403 for Mr. Davies and, as everybody knows, Mr. Lenroot carried the State by a handsome majority. It is but natural, in the circumstances, that even the great body of Republicans who, in common we believe with the great body of Democrats, deplore partisan strife at this crucial time, should feel that the President means to apply his "acid test" exclusively to Republicans; but we do not concur in that view. We are disposed to believe (1) that his alert mind drew a salutary lesson from the result in Wisconsin, (2) that he has seen a great light in the death struggle and crying need of all that United America can give in France, and (3) that when he declares to the Congress and the people "Politics is adjourned," he means precisely what he says. In that belief we seek his help. III. PATRIOTISM BEFORE POLITICS The readers of this REVIEW, as we remarked at the outset, are cognizant of our endeavors to eliminate partisan strife from the forthcoming Congressional elections and are familiar with our reasons for believing that it can be done to a |