A Prefatory Postscript
As this volume goes
to press, the whole country, nay, the whole world, is stirred to
its profoundest depths of feeling, over the dastardly assassination
of President McKinley.
This outrage is the legitimate outcome
of the agitation which certain classes of demagogues have been carrying
on for years. The generation and aggravation of class hatred, the
wholesale denunciation of rich men, the persistent attacks and aggravation
of class hatred, the wholesale charges of robbery and oppression
continuously brought against large employers of labor, could not
but end in violence, sooner or later.
That this fiendish act of Czolgosz
was inspired by his long cherished hatred of rich men is evidenced
by the assassin’s own words. Czolgosz is one of a large and growing
class who suffer from Plutophobia. He says: “I hope he dies.
I shot him because it was my duty. The man who succeeds him must
not be the slave of capital, or he will perish, too.”
Emil Schilling, treasurer of an anarchist
club in Cleveland, said to a reporter of the Leader: [iii][iv]
“The man who shot the President
knew that McKinley and his clique were taking millions from the
men who produce the wealth. What could be more natural than that
he should shoot him?”
Another individual is reported to
have said that Czolgosz ought to have shot Mark Hanna.
Among certain classes in this country
the hatred for Mark Hanna is so intense that it would not have been
surprising had he been included in the plot against McKinley’s life.
The idea has been persistently inculcated by many papers that Mark
Hanna was the actual President, and McKinley only his obedient and
submissive servant. Expressions from anarchistic sympathizers in
various quarters show too plainly that this poisonous seed, scattered
by the hands of demagogues, has taken root among the enemies of
government; and we may at any time expect to reap a further harvest
of blood from these lusty but pernicious plants.
According to report, Emma Goldman,
“the High Priestess of Anarchy,” and the inspiring angel of assassin
Czolgosz, uttered the following sentiments in Chicago:
“Mark Hanna has been the ruler
of this country, not McKinley. McKinley has been the most insignificant
ruler this country has ever had. He [iv][v]
has neither wit nor intelligence, but has been a tool in the
hands of Mark Hanna.”
That the assassination of McKinley
alone is not sufficient to bring about the anarchist’s dream of
an earthly paradise is evidenced by her further remarks:
“I am not in a position to say
who ought to be killed. The monopolists and the wealthy of this
country are responsible for the existence of a Czolgosz.”
According to these words, the blood
of Mark Hanna, and of the wealthy business men whose class interests
he is mistakenly supposed to champion, must be poured out in sacrifice
upon the altar of liberty, before the masses can be free in this
America. Is it surprising that the Government Secret Service men
have thrown a guard around the person of Mr. Hanna? And must we
furnish guards for Pierpont Morgan, Russell Sage, John D. Rockefeller,
and their kind, to protect them from the weapons of red-eyed madmen
like Czolgosz?
For years this hatred of our prosperous
business men has been inculcated in the speeches and papers of socialists
and anarchists. Several years ago, a revolutionary sheet published
in Chicago contained the following: [v][vi]
“A LETTER TO TRAMPS.”
“Stroll you down
the avenues of the rich, and look through the magnificent plate
windows into their voluptuous homes, and here you will discover
the very identical robbers who have despoiled you and yours. Then
let your tragedy be enacted here! Awaken them from their wanton
sports at your expense. Send forth your petition, and let them read
it by the red glare of destruction. Avail yourselves of those little
methods of warfare which science has placed in the hands of the
poor man, and you will become a power in this or any other land.
Learn the use of explosives.”
This fire of hatred against the prosperous
and wealthy, whose enterprise has given employment and brought ever-increasing
wealth to workingmen, is spreading far and wide. Its angry flames
leap to the sky, and show us in their lurid light the forms of madmen
arming for murder and destruction. The horrors of revolution are
upon us, unless this devouring fire be quenched.
It is not enough that we shall quell
the tumult of open riot whenever and wherever it arises. The fire
that smoulders in secret may yet break forth and destroy the institutions
of our nation. [vi][vii]
In the dark cellars and the dusty
lofts of cities these agents of revolution hold their secret councils,
and plot against the lives and fortunes of the rich and powerful.
There is no open plot, no visible organization; but this brotherhood
of murderers exists, and carries on its bloody councils in the silence
and the dark.
Its wrath is fed by all the demagogues,
of whatever name, who cry against the rich and prosperous; who magnify
the poverty and suffering of the poor, and lay the real and fancied
wrongs of workingmen at the doors of those who are victorious in
life’s battle.
Thousands of workingmen fall a ready
prey to demagogues, who come like wolves in sheep’s clothing to
breed strife and discontent in Labor’s fold. They listen to the
poisoned words of malice, and the words rankle in their hearts.
It is but a step from discontent to violence.
Although thousands of workingmen know
that Mark Hanna has ever been a friend to Labor, there are other
thousands who have listened to the envenomed words of demagogues
until they are convinced that Mark Hanna is their enemy and oppressor
and that President McKinley was his meek and submissive slave. This
sentiment grew and strengthened until it found a logical expression
through the murderous hand of Czolgosz, extended in Judas-treachery
to take McKinley’s life. [vii][viii]
The assassination of McKinley is of
far more direful significance to the nation than was the assassination
of either Lincoln or Garfield. The murder of Lincoln was the last
convulsive effort of the expiring serpent of Secession, fixing its
poisoned fangs in the flesh of him who had given it a fatal blow.
The killing of Garfield was the act
of a madman, whose brain, naturally weak and unbalanced, had become
inflamed by the hatred engendered in party strife. Dreadful as it
was, the act had only a local and temporary significance, so far
as its motive was concerned.
But the death-blow to McKinley was
aimed at the wealth and prosperity of the nation. It was inspired
by class hatred. It was insane Poverty striking blindly at the form
of Wealth. It was the act of a Samson, in blind rage seeking to
pull down the temple of national prosperity, whose fall should be
his own destruction.
To the befogged brain of the anarchist
Czolgosz, McKinley and his supporters represented the brutal hand
of corporate Wealth, snatching from starving Labor the crust of
meager opportunity which Unionism has thus far insured for its subsistence.
But it is not alone the anarchist
who takes this dismal and distorted view of the present indus- [viii][ix]
trial situation in America. Czolgosz has simply given expression
in action to what has long been expressed in language and cartoon.
It is not enough for us to stamp out
the anarchy of deed; we must also stamp out the anarchy of the printed
and spoken word. It is not sufficient for us to imprison or hang
the anarchist who resorts to force; we must suppress in every legitimate
way the demagoguery which inspires him. It is of no use to brush
away the web, and leave the spider which is weaving it.
Czolgosz struck a blow for liberty
and equality, firmly believing that these great principles would
be subserved by the assassination of McKinley and the intimidation
of his supporters. The power of the demagogue is always a despotic
power; and this act of Czolgosz, which expressed the spirit of demagoguery
in its last and logical application, was one of the most striking
examples of despotic power in the world’s history. This point was
so forcibly and eloquently brought out in an address given in Plymouth
Church, Cleveland, by Mr. J. G. W. Cowles, a prominent business
man of Cleveland and an active member of the Chamber of Commerce,
that I am constrained to quote some of his words:
“Anarchy,” he said, “which professes
to aim its blows at despotism, is itself the worst of [ix][x]
despotism. When Czolgosz seized the pistol to shoot our President,
he grasped at absolute and despotic power. Czolgosz already had
the power of the ballot, the same power which every American citizen
possesses. He was not satisfied with that.
Seven millions of American citizens
by their suffrage made McKinley President. One man with his deadly
pistol removed him from that office. One man reached forth his frenzied
hand, and the destinies of a nation trembled in the balance. One
man smote the nation’s head, and the heart of the nation bled.
The Czar of Russia does not exercise
such absolute and despotic power as this man usurped and wielded,
in the sacred name of liberty. The worst despotism which the world
has seen never equaled this of anarchy’s apostle Czolgosz in this
free land of ours.
Are we to tolerate this hideous form
of despotism in our midst? Life and liberty are not inalienable
where one man can seize and wield so absolute a power. This is a
form of despotism which we must drive forever from our shores. Life
and liberty are not secure, where anarchy is tolerated.” [x][xi]
HANNA AND McKINLEY.
A friend of Mr. Hanna,
who has known him for years, said to the writer: “Governor McKinley
was fortunate in having Marcus A. Hanna for his personal friend
and political adviser, and the manager of his campaigns; and Mr.
Hanna was equally fortunate in his alliance with McKinley. It was
a compact of power with popularity, which made both men greater
and more successful, and more useful to the public. The personal
affection and devotion of each to the other was honorable alike
to both, and an example of the best qualities of friendship among
men.”
It is safe to say that no heart has
been more cruelly hurt by the stroke that laid McKinley low than
the big heart of his nearest and dearest political friend, Mark
Hanna. This stroke has added several years to the burden of age,
which already bore heavily upon Mr. Hanna’s shoulders. Since the
dreadful news of that black Friday, when the heart of the President
began to fail, Mr. Hanna has been as one crushed by an irresistible
power. His face is drawn, his shoulders droop, and he leans heavily
upon his cane. His friend, for whom Mr. Hanna laid such a sacrifice
of health and labor upon the altar of his country’s welfare, is
gone. [xi][xii]
The strongest bond between Mr. McKinley
and Mr. Hanna was the tie of an enduring friendship. Next to this
came the affinity of political sympathy. They believed in the same
great principles. They clasped hands to work for the same broad
ends.
The notion that Mr. Hanna dictated
the political policy of the President can be entertained only by
those who are not familiar with the character of the two men. They
were one in an enduring friendship, whose foundations lay far deeper
than the community of their political interests. They were one in
their adherence to certain great principles which the Republican
party represents. But far above the personal aims of either was
the starry emblem of their country’s welfare, which they ever kept
in view.
There are ignorant and malicious minds
who will see, in the death of President McKinley, the setting of
Mr. Hanna’s star of destiny: and in the unutterable grief that mantles
him in gloom these will see chiefly the regret of a man disappointed
of his political aspirations, and deprived of the chief means by
which his own imperious will was executed.
Mr. Hanna has been universally known
as the friend of President McKinley. Is it not possible that this
intimate relation has somewhat ob- [xii][xiii]
scured the vision of his own character and attainments? My own belief
is that the influence of Mr. Hanna in American politics has been
chiefly due to his own qualities as a man. His strength, sagacity,
political insight, his force of character, his qualities of leadership,
his intimate acquaintance with the business interests of the country,
must all be taken into account.
Mr. Hanna’s friend is dead. Mr. Hanna’s
power of leadership and command remain. We shall now see whether
this man’s star is a sun, or merely a planet, reflecting the light
of a Presidential orb. If my estimate of Mr. Hanna’s character is
correct, his star of destiny will not be darkened by this eclipse
that has fallen upon the nation’s chief.
This orb that rose above the smoke-stained
city by the lake is not an errant comet, with menace in its train
to all the people. It is not a planet, deriving its light from a
Presidential Sun to whose system it was attached as a leading planet.
It is a self-illumined Sun, a source of light and power; and though
it may never shine from the President’s chair at Washington, it
will still illumine the councils of the nation, and lead its retinue
of stars and planets along the track of the national zodiac.
Mr. Hanna, in other words, will not
drop into [xiii][xiv] obscurity because
of the loss of his friend, our President McKinley. Mr. Hanna, like
all men of great natural power, intuitively knows his proper place.
He has often ridiculed the idea of a presidential nomination for
himself; but he knows his power as a leader of men, and will not
abdicate it while life remains to him. In the councils of the nation
his voice will still be heard; and because it is a calm, sane voice,
the voice of a large experience, the voice of a practical wisdom,
it will be heeded, and its utterance will have the weight of a natural
and underived authority.
His character as a statesman has been
slowly but surely emerging from the mists of popular ignorance and
misunderstanding; and it will yet shine out clearly, by its own
light, as one of the most forceful, acute, able, that has arisen
in the nation’s horizon. Mr. Hanna, as McKinley’s friend, would
live for many years in the fond memory of McKinley’s hosts of admirers;
but Mr. Hanna, the Senator, will be remembered for his own strong
qualities of leadership—exerted during one of the most important
epochs of the nation’s history—long after the popular conception
of his relation to President McKinley has been obscured by the mists
of time.
|