Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

EMPORIA, KANSAS, OCTOBER, 1898.

The wind hugs high, The wind hugs low,

A flurry of dust,

A flurry of snow,

Sunshine!

His-s-t!

The cricket sings,

The spider weaves,― A skurry of birds,

A skurry of leaves,Golden-rod!

Hark!

The wolf dog barks,

The pheasant thrums,

A rattle of hoofs,

A rattle of drums,October!

V.

THE POLITICAL CONTEST-A STUDY.

BY MARY A. WHITNEY.

The political contest is the life-perpetuating, life-directing force of nations. By it are erroneous principles uprooted and correct ones substituted; narrow views are widened; crooked paths made straight; national policies formed; scattered energies forged into one powerful strength and turned from ineffectiveness into a moulding force which shall operate to all time. By it are peoples gathered into nations and kingdoms erected: monarchies overthrown and republics founded; democracies are shaken to their very foundations, purged of viscious and degenerating tendencies and brought into a fuller knowledge of the purposes and ends of government.

Through many a twelve-month and many a storm appears the giant oak of the forest-the handi-work of nature. After years of human toil, based upon the accumulated results of centuries of Dame Nature's work, there rides upon the ocean-wave, that mystery of power, for commerce, peace, or war-the twentieth-century battleship-the handiwork of nature and man. At the close of the span of a life time, full of toil, bitter experiences, and long and deep thinking, there is given to the world a gem of thought, an epic, or a tragedy—the handiwork of nature, and man, and God. Three forces, three creations, three results. The force of nature alone produced the oakan object, of its own inherent qualities, totally incapable of affecting human society. The forces of nature plus human agencies produced the ship-an object able to modify existing conditions of human society. Human agencies reinforced by nature and breathed upon by Divine inspiration produce the poem, or the tragedy—a creation capable of revolutionizing relations in human society. Since no force is at its best except in such a unity, the true political contest is the manifest union of the forces nature, man, and ideal or God. Man strengthened and enriched by the abundance of his material things, guided by his largest knowledge and loftiest aspirations, struggles with his brother similarly endowed and guided, and there result those influences which determine the destinies of peoples.

From the time of the foundations of the earth, this natural force on its human side has been used of the Divine One to the leading out of the nations of the earth to a more perfect

No. 1

understanding of human government. Fitful and intermittent at times have been its manifestations. Anon as it grapples with the mightiest questions known to human society, affecting all classes, peoples, and times, we call it, Revolution. As it deals with questions of more limited scope and application, we call it, Rebellion. As it is found working in the questions of the day, so quietly and yet so steadily as scarcely to be noted by easy-going, live-for-today, surface-thinking man, we call it, Politics. By virtue of this political struggle, the Revolution, the Rebellion, and the every-day Politics, there have been evolved a few great fundamental principles of government. Two facts have been self-evident since the world was. Society is man's natural state, and government is a necessity. But not so self-evident has been the answer to the question: By whom shall the government of that society be administered?

Before the christian era, mankind was given to peopling the earth and subduing it. Since the christian era, because Christ came among men, that he might teach them how to live and dwell together, mankind has been preparing to solve that allimportant problem: By whom shall the government of society be administered? For centuries the attempt was made upon the principle of the "Divine right of kings to rule." No satisfactory results were attained and men's minds, struggling for light, were directed toward it. Man, now able to understand and utilize the forces of nature, and knowing how to appreciate government, was to have revealed to him, through the natural processes of evolution, the principles of self-government; and since government by "Divine right of kings" and by "the consent of the governed" are diametrically opposed, the one principle must be eradicated and the other established. In the process of the ages, while the shifting scenes of European civilization were bringing into power now one peoples and now another, while states were building, kingdoms rising, and governments evolving, a great nation was in the process of formation-a nation which should be rent with civil strife, but should give to the world one of the greatest behests within the power of human agencies to bestow. At length the fullness of time arrived. It is during the history of that century of struggle between the English people and the Stuart kings, that we see the final gathering of those forces which were to reveal to the world a new principle.

The English Revolutions of 1649 and 1688, proved that from that date English kings must recognize a new factor in the problem of English government-the English Parliament. "Divine right to rule" was thus replaced by "Parliamentary right to control." Absolute and unlimited extent of government was curtailed by the consent of the representatives of the governed. Had James II been less of a bigot and more of a statesman, he might have read the signs of the times, noted the errors of the early Stuarts, appreciated the spirit of the commonwealth period, profited by the unsatisfactory reign of Charles II, and stayed somewhat the storm which was gathering about his head. At the time of his coronation, he seemed to manifest a mild, yielding spirit, which, however, soon became extremely overbearing and exacting. Believing most thoroughly in his own kingship's rights, he proceeded to the indiscriminate violation of previous guarantees and constitutional prohibitions. The attempt to restore the ancient Catholic power, the appointment of a new ecclesiastical commission, the attack

upon the churches and universities, the Declarations of Indulgence, the proroging and final dissolving of Parliament, and the Bloody Assizes, mark the overthrow of the "Divine right of kings" and the establishment of parliamentary rights. Since that day, in England "no political minister, even, has been able to retain his office six months, in opposition to the sense of the Commons."

Great as was this struggle, important as was the principle it established, far-reaching as were its results, this same people in the next century were to pass through a political struggle which finds no equal in all history. A handful of English people crossed the trackless Atlantic and the new-world civilization was begun. This handful grew to hundreds; the hundreds to thousands; the thousands to three million. The territorial occupation increased to a stretch of country from the Atlantic westward to the "Father of Waters;" and from the timbercovered, snow-bound regions of the North to the sun-bathed, magnolia-scented climes of the South. Within this region dwelt a people like unto their kin-folk across the ocean-flesh of their flesh; spirit of their spirit-with the same ideas and tendencies, and the same general notions of government. But conditions in America were somewhat different from conditions in England. In America, nature had bestowed with lavish hand, riches more than sufficient to satisfy the daily needs of any race of human beings. In earth and sea and sky, in mountains and rivers and climate, man found the ministering agents to his necessities. America was well nigh self-supporting. In England, natural resources were less varied and in less abundance. In America, there was no strong, outside, monarchal influence tending to prejudice and to crystallize political thought in favor of monarchical institutions. In England, every outside influence tended in that direction. Despotic Spain, patriarchal France, and the other strong centrallized governments of central and eastern Europe, exerted an influence upon the modified monarchy of England which was a powerful factor in the shaping of her national policies. In America, there were just enough foes from without and within to unite her people and to cause them to seek diligently for and to consider carefully only those things which were for her highest general welfare. In England, the absence of these elements and the presence of internal disagreement, were productive of disunity and rash and injudicious actions. America, English institutions, unhampered by precedent, free from monarchical influence, and aided by the spirit of free inquiry, had room and opportunity to develop. In England, these same institutions, fettered by custom, guided by prejudice, and dominated by a dogmatic spirit, made slower progress toward their destined ends. With growth there must be change. More rapid growth implies more rapid change. This spirit of free inquiry, this rapid growth in ideas of government, and this necessary change in institutions in America found no exact counterpart in England. It is to America, then, we turn, to note that evolution of English institutions which should reveal to the world another of the great principles of government. To England, parliamentary rule meant popular participation in national legislation and in control of national revenues. To America it meant no such participation. The English claimed their institutions as peculiarly and exclusively adapted to their own country. The Americans viewed them as common property and easily adaptable to conditions in America. Parliament considered the colonies as the creatures of their own hand and subject to their direct and complete control. The Americans considered themselves the direct subjects of the King, and hence entitled to enjoy all the rights and privileges of all English citizens-a mere difference of

In

opinion as to representation and taxation; yet a difference sufficient to produce friction, and that friction produced the greatest of political controversies. The demand for "No taxation without representation" changed to "No legislation except by the colonies," and America was prepared to stand by that demand. Behind it were the almost limitless resources of a great continent, the English devotion to truth and principle, and the prophetic vision of larger national possibilities. It was the new-world, English institutions balanced against the old; the eighteenth century balanced against the seventeenth; the spirit of free inquiry balanced against monarchy; free institutions and self-government balanced against imperialism; the people balanced against the King. The American Revolution of 1776 was the final step in the answering of the question: "By whom shall the government of society be administered?” It established the principle of "the Divine right of the people to rule."

Upon this basis the American government was founded and the American people entered into their heritage of great national possibilities. Soon political thought was again disturbed. Since this is a government of the people, for the people and by the people — "Who are the people?" Those who administer government, or the entire governed body? Is the governed body one unit or a composition of units? Is the governed body composed of the classes or the masses? Are the masses composed of every age, sex, race and condition of servitude? The Declaration of 1776 and the Constitution were clear upon that point, and yet because of that very clearness arose the political query. Answers differed. The thinkers of the time were at variance. For a decade or more the position had been maintained: "This is a government of the strongest kind of centralized powers, for the classes, by a political party." The largest political development demanded an answer different in all points. It was due to the strong, clear thinking and determined action of Jefferson, that the political struggle with this question finally shaped itself and reached somewhat definite conclusions. It is to the history of this contest that we direct our attention for a few moments.

The years 1785-9 had found Jefferson as our minister plenipotentiary to France. It was in those years, the most critical in our history, that the Constitution was drafted, discussed, and adopted. Thus the idea of a strong, central government based upon the doctrine of separation of powers was brought into American politics, to be bitterly assailed or firmly upheld, according as men saw in it the destruction or preservation of their newly acquired rights. The master minds of the country took issue upon it and the records show us the hostility it engendered. Among those who feared the centralized government, yet approved the separation of powers, was Jefferson. Under date of September, 1787, he wrote to John Adams: “*** the first principle of good government is certainly a distribution of its powers into executive, judicial, and legislative." In 1789 he returned to America and accepted a portfolio in the first cabinet. This brought him in touch with all the departments of government, but it is in his later attitude toward the judiciary that his views upon government and the people are most clearly outlined.

Until 1800, he evidenced the warmest spirit of friendliness toward the judiciary. He would have been pleased to have them invested with the veto power upon legislation in place of having that power remain in the executive hands. His confidence in their learning and integrity placed them above the influence of "the depraved ardor of domineering citizens or the voice of the populace." Hence, he would seek to "make that body most respectable by every possible means, to-wit.,

firm tenure in office, competent saleries, and reduction of their numbers."

Many maintain that the year 1800 witnessed as great a political revolution as was that of 1776. Jefferson's attack upon the judiciary meant that this being a government of the people denied the right of too strong a centralized government; for the people meant in accord with the needs of the masses; and by the people meant participation by more than one political party, and subject to the control of the masses. It was a struggle between Federalism and Republicanism; between consolidation of power directed toward interests of certain classes and manipulated by the same, continued, strongly intrenched political power against more equally distributed and balanced powers used in the interests of the masses and used by the direct representatives of those masses. In short, it was the struggle of the nation to realize a truer interpretation of the people.

Upon assuming the position of president, in 1801, Jefferson lost no time in indicating his purpose-Federalism must be annihilated. The judiciary was the last stronghold, and this at once became the object of his hatred and most virulent attacks. December, 1801, he wrote to John Dickinson: "My great anxiety at present is to avail ourselves of our ascendancy to establish good principles and good practices; to fortify Republicanism behind as many barriers as possible, that the outworks may give time to rally and save the citadel should that again be in danger. On their part, they have retired into the judiciary as a stronghold. There the remains of Federalism are to be preserved and fed from the treasury, and from that battery all the works of Republicanism are to be beaten down and erased. By a fraudulent use of the Constitution which has made judges irremovable, they have multiplied useless judges merely to strengthen their phalanx."

The Judiciary Act of 1801, creating new courts, new judg ships, and new salaried officials, with all the resulting appointments made by Mr. Adams, was indeed a bold stroke. Even the place of Chief Justice was filled upon the eve of the new administration, and thus was Marshall ushered in-one of the strongest Federalists of Virginia. Jefferson declared this to be an outrage on decency and immediately advocated the repeal of the law, taking the stand that the work of the judiciary was not sufficient to merit the existence of so large a number of courts. January 8, 1801, Senator Breckenridge moved the repeal of the act. The contention was bitter. The bill passed the Senate February 3 and the House March 3, and the new circuit courts and attendant officers were struck from the government roll. This was followed by a law by which sittings of the supreme court were suspended until February, 1803. This was to prevent the possibility of Chief Justice Marshall having the opportunity to declare the repeal unconstitutional. This, the first attack upon the judiciary, was successful. From then it proved no difficult task to see in the judiciary, a growing despotism, a power to be feared, and justly opposed for the national benefit. To Mrs. Adams he writes: the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for legislative and judicial also, in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch." Events now appear in rapid succession which develop the president's position. In March, 1804, Chief Justice Marshall rendered his famous decision in the Marbury vs. Madison case. In this decision Jefferson again saw the further tendency of the judiciary to encroach upon popular rights. The president's attitude as viewed by his opponents may be seen best in the words of Justice Chase, when two months later he addressed the grand jury in Balti more upon the democratic tendencies af their local and nation

66

al governments: The late alteration of the federal judiciary by the abolition of the offices of the sixteen circuit judges and the recent change in our state constitution by the establishment of universal suffrage, and the further alteration that it contemplated in our state judiciary, will, if adopted, in my judgment, take away all security for property and personal liberty. The independence of the national judiciary is already shaken to its foundation, and the virtue of the people alone can restore it. Our republican constitution will sink into mobocracy, the worst of all possible governments. The modern doctrines by our late reformers, that all men in a state of society are entitled to equal liberty and equal rights, have brought this mighty mischief upon us; and I fear that it will rapidly progress until peace and order, freedom and property, shall be destroyed.”

[To be continued.}

The Belles-Lettres Society.

Mr. McGowen, president; Miss Wohlford, vice preeident; Miss Enfield, secretary; Mr. Stroup, treasurer. The hazy, variable weather brings with it the consciousness

that the real

"Summer's a step behind us,

And autumn's a thought before, And each fleet, sweet day

That we meet on the way

Is an angel at the door."

As the summer recedes the school year advances and with it the usual increase of responsibility in society work. The Belles-Lettres society, although sadly missing strong members who have taken up the burdens of life in new fields, or are resting, rejoice in the presence of such strong members as Miss Worcester, of essay fame, Mr. McConkey, our soldier boy who has enlivened one evening of this year with with stories of soldier life in camp, Mr. Stroup, president of the graduating class, and our orators, Messrs. Daniels and Woods.

We miss many who have helped advance the interests of the Belles-Lettres, as our peerless Allan St. Clair, Misses Kelson and Hall of dramatic art fame, A. B. Powell, who sang and worked tirelessly, and many others.

A number of the old members have returned; many new ones are joining our ranks, and the Belles-Lettres hand-shake and word of welcome are as heartfelt as of yore. Where could one find greater inspiration for self-improvement than in this cheerful circle? Here we find pleasant companionship, contact with a variety of resourceful intellects, a good-natured strife to keep pace with sister societies, all of which conspires to incite us to self-culture. These influences develop within us keenness of observation and reasoning; they impress upon us that society is the campus of the home, and that we must regularly and watchfully exercise therein if we would have our talents well developed and balanced.

If in the past any of our members have not been taking advantage of these stepping stones toward self-improvement, we hope they will resolve to shake off this lethargy and persistently use their talents for the society, and make stronger resolutions to "do or die" every time these words greet them:

Hurrah! Hurrah! Zip! Boom! Bah!
Belles Lettres! Belles-Lettres! Rah! Rah! Rah!

[blocks in formation]

Regents' Meeting.

At the meeting of the Board of Regents on September 20, the following named persons were elected to positions in the faculty: Miss Charline P. Morgan, of Leavenworth, kindergartner; Superintendent W. S. Picken, of Iola, assistant teacher in history; Professor F. B. Abbott, of Boston, teacher of manual training and assistant in drawing; and Professor Cora Marsland, teacher of elocution and oratory in place of Professor Hoaglin, who was given leave of absence for one year.

Mr. Picken graduated from the State Normal School with the class of '87. He served as private secretary for President Taylor during the last two years of the time in which.he completed the Latin course. Since graduation he has served as superintendent of schools at Dorrance, Eureka, and Iola. He has raised these schools to a high state of advancement, and ranks as one of the best school men in the state. As an institute conductor, there are few more popular men. During the past few years he has completed courses in American History under Professors Blackmar and Hodder, of the University of Kansas, and in American Literature under Professor Hopkins of the same institution. He has recently completed a two years' course in Universal History under the direction of the University of Chicago. He has also completed studies in other lines, which will add greatly to his efficiency as an instructor.

Miss Charline P. Morgan was elected to succeed Miss Montgomery as kindergartner. Miss Morgan was educated at Antioch College, Cook County Normal, and the Kindergarten Training School at St. Louis. She taught for several years in the city schools of Leavenworth and Kansas City. For the past four years she has been in charge of the kindergarten training classes in the Omaha city schools, and during the last two years was supervisor of the kindergartners of the entire city. She has had additional work in child study under G. Stanley Hall, and kindergarten work under Miss Wheelock at Martha's Vineyard.

Mr. Abbott was educated in the Providence, R. I., high school, in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and in the Rhode Island State Normal School. He has taken much work in special lines, having completed a course in sloyd under Herr Solomon in Sweden. He is well versed in clay modeling, wood carving, wood working, etc. Mr. Abbott has had several years' experience as a teacher. During the last three years he has taught manual training in the Boston city schools, and has had charge of evening drawing and clay classes during much of the time.

Professor Marsland has been teaching in Olivet College, Olivet, Michigan, most of the time since leaving the Normal. She was a most efficient and popular instructor while here, and her return for the year is very gratifying to her many friends. All of them are busily at work in their departments as though they had been with us for years. Everybody is pleased at the good fortune of the regents in securing such satisfactory additions to the faculty.

THE following battalion boys are known to fill official positions in the United States volunteer forces in the war against Spain: Arthur D. Orendorff, first sergeant, Company H., Twenty-second Kansas; Bert R. Smith, second sergeant; Henry Amyx, George Lucas, and Fred Stevenson, corporals in the same regiment; Charles R. Oakford is a sergeant in a Washingten regiment; Charles Calkins is a captain, and A. F. Watson a second lieutenant in the Twenty-first Kansas. Many former members of the battalion were privates in the ranks.

Nature Work for October.

In beginning our studies of nature this fall, I would again emphasize the importance of making a collection. Young people, as well as those older, become fascinated in making collections of coins, stamps, buttons, books, insects, fossils. stones, autographs, eggs, tobacco tags, marbles, wood of trees, leaves, flowers, paper dolls, picture cards, bits of silk dresses, ancient China, and even old boots and shoes. Without attempting to find why people become deeply interested in making a collection, nor to ascertain why the usefulness of the things collected is decidedly a secondary consideration, let us devise ways and means for using this universal tendency in the development of the powers of the child. Nearly all naturalists were started in their work by a suggestion from some friend or book, that they make a collection. Many pupils in our schools have already made a beginning in this work, and all that they need is direction and encouragement. It is suggested:

First. That neighboring schools or rooms collect the same sort of objects-fossils, for example.

Second. That the superintendent be invited to decide which school or room has the largest, neatest and best arranged collection.

Third. That the children be encouraged to invent names for the specimens. The names for the larger groups may be suggested by the teacher.

In a similar way make a collection of different kinds of wood. Take limbs two or three inches in diameter and saw them into lengths of four inches, leaving bark on. Then label them neatly and show the collection to visitors.

L. C. Wooster.

The Friends' University.

Many of our readers are aware that Mr. James M. Davis, of St. Louis, purchased the Garfield University, at Wichita, last spring, and donated it to the Friends' church; also, that exState Superintendent Edmund Stanley has been elected to the presidency of the new university. During the summer months busy hands were hard at work putting the building in shape for the opening day. On the morning of September 21 it was dedicated to higher education in Kansas. A large and enthusiastic audience was present. The Wichita Eagle speaks in terms of warmest praise of President Stanley's inaugural address. We quote passages from it elsewhere. The new university opens with flattering prospects and we predict a most successful administration under the direction of President Stanley. His high ideals of scholarship and of manhood, combined with his wide experience as a superintendent and teacher, fit him most happily for the presidency of such an institution.

Among the members of the faculty we notice Doctor Hoss, a former president of the State Normal School, Prof. Bevan Binford, a graduate of the State Normal School and more recently a graduate of Earlham College, at Richmond, Indiana, and other men and women of experience and reputation. We give a most cordial welcome to the new organization and hope that the new life it has put into the great building may attract hundreds of ambitious young men and women from all parts of the Sunflower state.

MARK CUBBISON returns to public school work as principal of the Bronson, Kansas, schools for the current year.

The mid-term classes at the State Normal School will be formed on November 15, the examinations beginning the day before. If you desire catalogues and circulars, write at once to the President.

« PreviousContinue »