Publication information |
Source: Railroad Telegrapher Source type: journal Document type: news column Document title: “From Washington, D. C.” Author(s): Valesh, Eva McDonald Date of publication: October 1901 Volume number: 18 Issue number: 10 Pagination: 956-57 |
Citation |
Valesh, Eva McDonald. “From Washington, D. C.” Railroad Telegrapher Oct. 1901 v18n10: pp. 956-57. |
Transcription |
full text |
Keywords |
William McKinley (death: public response: criticism); anarchism (personal response); anarchism (dealing with). |
Named persons |
William McKinley; Theodore Roosevelt. |
Document |
From Washington, D. C.
So far as official circles in Washington are
concerned, it would be very difficult to discover the slightest token of grief,
although it is only ten days, at this writing, since President McKinley died.
The sad days of the funeral services were marked
by heartfelt sorrow on the part of the average citizen, both in Washington and
elsewhere, but McKinley’s official associates, and those who should have mourned
him most on account of personal acquaintance, were immediately engrossed in
the scramble to get on the right side of Roosevelt. I happen to know of three
United States Senators who had the bad taste to stay at their hotel instead
of attending the services at the Capitol. “Too much of a crowd,” they said.
There was an awful crowd, and the affair was so
badly managed by police and military that more than a score of people were seriously
injured in the crush before the Capitol steps, but our Senators are not obliged
to mix with the mob, and their neglect of so ordinary a mark of respect was
by no means a good example to the general public.
The callousness of Washington in general is well
known, but I was shocked to hear the various bands on their way back from the
White House playing cheerful rag-time music and to see them escorted by a rabble
which seemed glad to get rid of the solemnity of the occasion.
Still, there are few Presidents who so merited
respect and mourning as McKinley, for he was personally one of the kindest of
men. You might not agree with him nor his policy, but you could not help liking
him if you met him personally.
It was my good fortune to be the only person who
ever interviewed him for publication, and, while he did not especially care
to be interviewed, yet he asked me many questions about labor conditions and
took pains to make me feel that I brought as well as received something of value
from the interview.
There is no doubt but the general public is very
much aroused over the deed of the assassin at the present time. It is only to
be hoped that the feeling will continue and bear fruit in the shape of both
legal measures and a public sentiment which will visit the severest punishment
upon anarchy, violence and law-breaking of every sort.
Naturally, it is very difficult to say just what
should be done to rid the country of anarchists and their teachings. There is
not much difference of opinion about the desirability of getting rid of those
who openly advocate the assassination of rulers and the overthrow of government
by violence.
Nor need there be any fear but organized labor
stands ready to do its best to help toward this end. It has suffered too severely
and too often by being mistakenly connected with such movements not to be ready
to help get rid of such. The great question is, “How?”
It is easy enough to pass a law to deport every
person found preaching anarchy to some convict island. But Russia has been sending
nihilists to Siberia by the thousands for years and has not succeeded in stamping
out the sect.
No one has yet discovered how those who conspire
secretly against the government or the Chief Executive are to be reached effectively
or how he is to be guarded from such attacks.
President Roosevelt is setting a courageous example
by refusing to be surrounded by guards. He believes that the great mass of the
people are law-abiding citizens and he proposes to take his chance with the
occasional criminal or lunatic.
The labor unions have year in and year out pointed
out the dangers of allowing indiscriminate immigration to this country. There
is no doubt but we have received the pauper and criminal classes of Europe along
with the many [956][957] self-respecting and intelligent
immigrants who come here to become American citizens and help to uphold our
institutions.
It is likely that the coming Congress will pass
a law materially restricting immigration. It would be well, too, if we were
not so hasty in admitting to citizenship persons who have no knowledge or respect
for our institutions. They are generally made citizens in haste in order to
be voted like sheep, with no knowledge of what the act signifies.
The question is so grave and goes so deeply into
the root of our national life that it is difficult to know what phase can be
reached first or most effectively.
At the memorial service in Washington, attended
by clergy of every denomination, more than one courageously pointed out that
although the assassin and his kind are worthy of speedy punishment, yet it must
not be forgotten that in the last forty years—in which time three Presidents
have been assassinated—there has been a growing disposition to hold those, who
had sufficient wealth, above the operation of law. Not only to allow them exemption,
but to place the military and the courts at their disposal and thus work injustice
to the common citizen.
There is no doubt but this is true, and that it
creates a widespread dissatisfaction, but it is a question whether the public
conscience is sufficiently aroused to realize the danger of this hidden malady
of the body politic.
During the past few days I have read newspapers
from every section of the country, and if the resolutions passed by organized
labor are any guide, it can be counted upon to do its share in every needed
reform.