Tide for 1. He preacher in me musiasm ins youth. he reiterated i vien he reached the age of maturity: he owned i va benedictions nns id age Who will say that, of lung, he would ezparlize it to-day by engrating upon t me icene of goverament by external forme

Upon the fourth proposition Jefferson is no less explicit Yow, when some are suggesting the wISdom of a military government for the Philippines, or a colonial stem such as England administers in India, it will act be out of place to rerer to the manner in which Jefferson meved the mablity of aliens to prescribe lavs and administer government. 18:7 a French society was formed for the purpose of settling upon a tract of land near the Tombigbee River. Jefferson was invited to formulate laws and regulations for the society. Cn the 10th of January of that year he wrote from Monticello expressing his high appreciation of the confidence expressed in him, but declining to undertake the task. The reasons he gave are well worth considering at this time. After wishing them great happiness in their undertaking he said:

"The laws, however, which must effect this must flow from their own habits, their own feelings, and the resources of their own minds. No stranger to these could possibly propose regulations adapted to them. Every people have their own particular habits, ways of thinking, manners, etc., which have grown up with them from their infancy, are become a part of their nature, and to which the regulations which are to make them happy must be accommodated. No member of a foreign country can have a sufficient sympathy with these. The institutions of Lycurgus, for example, would not have suited Athens, nor those of Solon, Lacedæmon. The organizations of Locke

were impracticable for Carolina, and those of Rosseau for Poland. Turning inwardly on myself from these eminent illustrations of the truth of my observation, I feel all the presumption it would manifest should I undertake to do what this respectable society is alone qualified to do suitably for itself."

The alien may possess greater intelligence and greater strength, but he lacks the sympathy for, and the identification with, the people. We have only to recall the grievances enumerated in the Declaration of Independence to learn how an ocean may dilute justice and how the cry of the oppressed can be silenced by distance. And yet the inhabitants of the colonies were the descendants of Englishmen-blood of their blood and bone of their bone. Shall we be more considerate of subjects farther away from us, and differing from us in color, race and tongue, than the English were of their own offspring?

Modest Jefferson!-he had been Governor, Ambassador to France, Vice-President and President; he was ripe in experience and crowned with honors; but this modern lawgiver, this immortal genius, hesitated to suggest laws for a people with whose habits, customs and methods of thought he was unfamiliar. And yet the imperialists of to-day, intoxicated by a taste of blood, are rash enough to enter upon the government of the Filipinos, confident of the nation's ability to compel obedience, even if it cannot earn gratitude or win affection. Plutarch said that men entertained three sentiments concerning the ancient gods: They feared them for their strength, admired them for their wisdom, and loved them for their justice. Jefferson taught the doctrine that governments should win the love of men. What shall be the ambition of our nation; to be loved because it is just or to be feared because it is strong?

THE ARMY.

In his annual message sent to Congress December 5, 1898, the President makes the following recommendations in favor of a permanent increase in the standing army:

"The importance of legislation for the permanent increase of the army is therefore manifest, and the recommendation of the Secretary of War for that purpose has my unqualified approval. There can be no question that at this time, and probably for some time in the future, one hundred thousand men will be none too many to meet the necessities of the situation."

It is strange that this request for so large an increase in the permanent army should be asked of a peace-loving people just at the time when the Czar of Russia is urging the nations of the world to join in the reduction of military establishments. But, strange as it may seem, the President not only requests it, but the Republican leaders in Congress seem inclined to grant the request.

Progress in Europe; retrogression in the United States!

In the old world "the currents of destiny" seem to be running in the direction of relief to the people from military burdens; shall they run in an opposite direction here?

During the recent campaign the people were urged to support the party in power until the "fruits of victory" could be made secure. Is the first fruit of victory to be realized in the transfer of a large body of men from the field and workshop to the camp and barracks from the ranks of the wealth producers to the ranks of the tax consumers? Such a transfer

will lessen the nation's wealth-producing power and at the same time exact a larger annual tribute from those who toil.

Any unnecessary increase in the regular army is open to several objections, among which may be mentioned the following:

First-It increases taxes, and thus does injustice to those who contribute to the support of the Government.

Second-It tends to place force above reason in the structure of our Government.

Third-It lessens the nation's dependence upon its citizen soldiery-the sheet-anchor of a republic's defense.

No one objects to the maintenance of a regular army sufficient in strength to maintain law and order. in time of peace and to form the nucleus of such an army as may be required when the military establishment is placed upon a war footing; but the taxpayers are justified in entering a vigorous protest against excessive appropriations for military purposes.

It is not surprising that the protest is most vigorous from the masses, because under our system of taxation the bulk of our Federal revenues is collected from import duties and internal revenue taxes upon liquors and tobaccos, all of which bear most heavily upon the poor. Import duties are collected upon articles used by the people, and the people do not use the articles taxed in proportion to income.

For instance, a man with an income of $100,000 does not eat, nor wear, nor use a hundred times as much of articles taxed as the average man with an income of $1,000. The people with small incomes, therefore, pay, as a rule, a larger percentage of their incomes to support the Federal Government than people with large incomes. The same is true of in

ternal revenue taxes collected upon liquors and tobaccos. Men do not use liquor and tobacco in proportion to their incomes. Thus it will be seen that our Federal taxes are, in effect, an income tax; not only an income tax, but a graded income tax, and heaviest in proportion upon the smallest incomes.

If we could supply a part of our necessary revenues from a direct income tax the burdens of a large army would be more equitably borne, but, according to the decision of the Supreme Court, the income of an individual is more sacred than the individual, because the citizen can be drafted in time of danger, while his income cannot be taxed either in peace or war.

The army is the impersonation of force. It does not deliberate, it acts; it does not decide, it executes; it does not reason, it shoots.

Militarism is the very antithesis of Democracy; they do not grow in the same soil; they do not draw their nourishment from the same source.

In an army orders come down from the commander to the soldier, and the soldier obeys; in a republic mandates issue from the sovereign people, and the public servant gives heed. If any one doubts the demoralizing results which follow the use of force, even when that force is justified by necessity, let him behold the change which has taken place in the views of many of our people during the last eight months and then estimate, if he can, the far-reaching effect. which a large increase in the permanent army would have upon the thoughts, the purposes and the character of our people.

Our Government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed, and its strength from the people themselves. We cannot afford to weaken the Government's reliance upon the people by cultivating the idea that all the work of war must be done by pro