air," or "to throw away your vote," or to give a halfvote to the enemy; and that to vote with the opposite party is, of course, "to turn the government over to its enemies." All that is bad in one party is urged by the advocates of the other as reasons against independent voting. ship Illustrates the Spirit of These are the usual party pleas, and many of them have weight. The natural party disposition of most men is to give them full force and effect. But sensible party men who make these pleas do not themselves surrender the "divine right to bolt." They know the need of a reasonable measure of personal independence, and they recognize that throughout our party history such political independence has been a constant and powerful influence History of in determining the course of political events. Party Leader- The history of American parties is full of illustrations: Salmon P. Chase, Charles Sumner, Independence. George F. Hoar, George A. Boutwell, Henry Wilson, and others who as young men left their party for their cause in 1848; Lincoln, Seward, Trumbull, Colfax, and all who were in at the making of the Republican party in 1854 and 1856, and who, for their cause, were ready to see their old parties defeated and shattered; Horace Greeley, Charles Francis Adams, Senator Depew, Whitelaw Reid, Murat Halstead, who, later in the history of the Republican party, sought to bring it to defeat in 1872; Martin Van Buren, Samuel J. Tilden, David Dudley Field, William Cullen Bryant, among Democrats in 1848; Breckinridge in 1860; Cleveland and Hill and Palmer and others in 1896,-all these renowned leaders and party managers among both the great parties have at times asserted their independence of party authority and have sought to compass their party's defeat. If party men by withstanding party authority are likely to lose influence with their party or weight in its councils (which is not always the case), it by no means follows that they weaken their influence over the course of events, or receive a more unfavorable judgment from history. No absolute rule for determining one's relation to party can be laid down. It is a part of the universal conflict between freedom and authority, between individualism and social action. What one will do in such a matter will depend upon his circumstances; upon the merits of the situation; upon personal disposition; upon one's estimate of the value of the party; upon the intensity of one's interest, conviction, and purpose in reference to the public policies at issue. cause. Party Authority and dependence. It is obvious that men sometimes act independent of parties from good motives, sometimes from bad motives; sometimes from public interests, sometimes The Rule for from personal and selfish interests; sometimes for a noble cause, sometimes for an ignoble Personal InRecognizing party as a necessary or beneficial agency in popular government, if it be asked whether bolting is justifiable, it must be answered that it is not if the bolting is prompted by reasons that are trivial, petty, spiteful, selfish, ignoble; but that it is justifiable if the reasons given are good and sufficient. Who is to judge the reasons that are given? Manifestly the only reply is that every man must answer for himself to his own individual conscience and judgment. There is no other tribunal to which he can appeal. He may seek guidance and wisdom from experience, history, revelation, from whatever source he will, but if he is an intelligent, self-directing agent his action must be his own, and he alone is responsible. And he must stand or fall before public sentiment and posterity-the Court Supreme to which he must be willing to submit his case-by the reasons that he gives. According to the judgment wherewith he judges shall he be judged. It is certainly only reasonable independence for the voter to insist that party interest shall always be subordinated to the country's interest; that one should never unreservedly pledge himself to an unknown result of party action; that the party's principles in the opinion of the voter be designed to promote the public welfare, and that the party should be faithful to its principles; and that when the party abandons its principles and fails to present faithful and fit candidates for offices, it is not only the privilege but it is the duty of all good citizens to withhold their votes. "Let it be known that you are interested in the success of the party. Asking nothing for yourself take a hand in shaping the party policy and making nominations, being guided by public interests rather than personal ones. If against your protests they make bad nominations, bolt them and return to the charge. Keep standing up for men and things that are honest and of good report."' Perfect "Party is always to be subordinated to patriotism. party discipline is the most dangerous weapon of party spirit, for it is the abdication of individual judgment. It is for you to help break this withering spell. It is for you to assert the independence and the dignity of the individual citizen, and to prove that the party was made for the voter and not the voter for the party. When you are angrily told that if you erect your personal whim against the regular party behest you make representative government impossible by refusing to accept its conditions, hold fast by your conscience and let the party go. 12 The services of party to liberty and popular government should be recognized.' But when national interests are sacrificed or subordinated to personal interests parties degenerate into factions. As long as the party is bound together by a common attachment to principles and a supreme regard for the national welfare its existence is 1 Washington Gladden, Century Magazine, vol. vi. 2 George William Curtis, Orations. 3 See May's Constitutional History of England, vol. ii., chap. i. justified. When it becomes a machine for the dispensation of patronage it is a menace to the State.' and Corrup tion. Critics of democracy have imputed its failures and blunders and misgovernment in America, as seen especially in large cities, to the ignorant and the commercialism poor and to the evils of an unrestricted suffrage. The indictment is misplaced. Ignorance and poverty are but the prey, not the source, of political corruption. Its source is found farther up, in the commercialism of the rich and powerful classes, among the "respectable" and the "well-to-do," who look upon polities and the laws only as a means of private gain.2 Usually in the rank and file of the common people we find the intelligence and patriotism that are the saving forces of the state. They will not fail to deliver their parties and their party government from the control of the selfish and the venal. To this end the great need in American politics to-day is that young men of high ideals and resolute purposes for good government should devote themselves to political activity, standing up stoutly and constantly for honest government, high ideals in politics, and that active participation in political life by which better government is brought to pass. This is a path to honor and to the highest service, and it may be a path to national fame. For our political history shows that it is the men who have these high standards of integrity and ideals of public service whom the vicissitudes of polities and party struggles bring into leadership and into the highest honor and office in the gift of the people. REFERENCES ON PARTIES AND INDEPENDENCE I. "What is a Party?" Political Science Quarterly, vol. ii. 2. "Despotism of Party," Atlantic Monthly, vol. liv. 1 Bolingbroke on Parties. 2 See Commercialism and Corruption," Gustavus Myers, New York Independent, January 17, 1901. 3. "Political Parties and Independents," D. B. EATON, North American 4. "Ethics of Party Loyalty," Forum, vol. xx. 5. "The Spirit of Party," Nineteenth Century, vol. xi., and Nation, vol. 6. " Regularity and Independence," Century, May, 1892, and October, 7. “The Independent in Politics," James Russell Lowell, Works. 9. See Poole's Index for other references. |