To you, men and women who have come here to this great city of this great
State formally to launch a new party, a party of the people of the whole Union,
the National Progressive Party, I extend my hearty greeting. You are taking
a bold and a greatly needed step for the service of our beloved country. The
old parties are husks, with no real soul within either, divided on artificial
lines, boss-ridden and privilege-controlled, each a jumble of incongruous elements,
and neither daring to speak out wisely and fearlessly what should be said on
the vital issues of the day. This new movement is a movement of truth, sincerity,
and wisdom, a movement which proposes to put at the service of all our people
the collective power of the people, through their Governmental agencies, alike
in the Nation and in the several States. We propose boldly to face the real
and great questions of the day, and not skillfully to evade them as do the
old parties. We propose to raise aloft a standard to which all honest men can
repair, and under which all can fight, no matter what their past political
differences, if they are content to face the future and no longer to dwell
among the dead issues of the past. We propose to put forth a platform which
shall not be a platform of the ordinary and insincere kind, but shall be a
contract with the people; and, if the people accept this contract by putting
us in power, we shall hold ourselves under honorable obligation to fulfill
every promise it contains as loyally as if it were actually enforceable under
the penalties of the law. ...
THE FARMER
There is no body of our people whose interests are more inextricably interwoven
with the interests of all the people than is the case with the farmers. The
Country Life Commission should be revived with greatly increased powers; its
abandonment was a severe blow to the interests of our people. The welfare of
the farmer is a basic need of this Nation. It is the men from the farm who
in the past have taken the lead in every great movement within this Nation,
whether in time of war or in time of peace. It is well to have our cities prosper,
but it is not well if they prosper at the expense of the country. I am glad
to say that in many sections of our country there has been an extraordinary
revival of recent years in intelligent interest in and work for those who live
in the open country. In this movement the lead must be taken by the farmers
themselves; but our people as a whole, through their governmental agencies,
should back the farmers. Everything possible should be done to better the economic
condition of the farmer, and also to increase the social value of the life
of the farmer, the farmer's wife, and their children. The burdens of labor
and loneliness bear heavily on the women in the country; their welfare should
be the especial concern of all of us. Everything possible should be done to
make life in the country profitable so as to be attractive from the economic
standpoint and also to give an outlet among farming people for those forms
of activity which now tend to make life in the cities especially desirable
for ambitious men and women. There should be just the same chance to live as
full, as well-rounded, and as highly useful lives in the country as in the
city.
The Government must co-operate with the farmer to make the farm more productive.
There must be no skinning of the soil. The farm should be left to the farmer's
soil in better, and not worse, condition because of its cultivation. Moreover,
every invention and improvement, every discovery and economy, should be at
the service of the farmer in the work of production; and, in addition, he should
be helped to co-operate in business fashion with his fellows, so that
the money paid by the consumer for the product of the soil shall to as large
a degree
as possible go into the pockets of the man who raised that product from the
soil. So long as the farmer leaves co-operative activities with their profit-sharing
to the city man of business, so long will the foundations of wealth be undermined
and the comforts of enlightenment be impossible in the country communities.
In every respect this Nation has to learn the lessons of efficiency in production
and distribution, and of avoidance of waste and destruction; we must develop
and improve instead of exhausting our resources. It is entirely possible by
improvements in production, in the avoidance of waste, and in business methods
on the part of the farmer to give him all increased income from his farm while
at the same time reducing to the consumer the price of the articles raised
on the farm. Important although education is everywhere, it has a special importance
in the country. The country school must fit the country life; in the country,
as elsewhere, education must be hitched up with life. The country church and
the country Young Men's and Young Women's Christian Associations have great
parts to play. The farmers must own and work their own land; steps
must be taken at once to put a stop to the tendency towards absentee landlordism
and
tenant farming; this is one of the most imperative duties confronting the Nation. The question of rural banking and rural credits is also of immediate importance.
...
THE HIGH COST OF LIVING
There can be no more important question than the high cost of living necessities.
The main purpose of the Progressive movement is to place the American people
in possession of their birthright, to secure for all the American
people unobstructed access to the fountains of measureless prosperity which
their
Creator offers
them. We in this country are blessed with great natural resources,
and our men and women have a very high standard of intelligence and of
industrial capacity.
Surely such being the case, we cannot permanently support conditions
under which each family finds it increasingly difficult to secure the necessaries
of life and a fair share of its comforts through the earnings of its members.
The cost of living in this country has risen during the last few years
out of all proportion to the increase in the rate of most salaries and
wages; the
same situation confronts alike the majority of wage-workers, small business
men, small professional men, the clerks, the doctors, clergymen. Now,
grave though the problem is, there is one way to make it graver, and that
is to deal
with it insincerely, to advance false remedies, to promise the impossible.
Our opponents, Republicans and Democrats alike, propose to deal with it
in this way. The Republicans in their platform promise all inquiry into
the facts.
Most certainly there should be such inquiry. But the way the present Administration
has failed to keep its promises in the past, and the rank dishonesty of
action on the part of the Penrose-Barnes-Guggenheim National Convention,
makes their
every promise worthless. The Democratic platform affects to find the entire
cause of the high cost of living in the tariff, and promises to remedy
it by free trade, especially free trade in the necessaries of life. In
the first
place, this attitude ignores the patent fact that the problem is world-wide,
that everywhere, in England and France, as in Germany and Japan, it appears
with greater or less severity; that in England, for instance, it has become
a very severe problem, although neither the tariff nor, save to a small
degree, the trusts can there have any possible effect upon the situation.
In the second
place, the Democratic platform, if it is sincere, must mean that all duties
will be taken off the products of the farmer. Yet most certainly we cannot
afford to have the farmer struck down. The welfare of the tiller
of the soil is as important as the welfare of the wage worker himself,
and we
must sedulously
guard both. The farmer, the producer of the necessities of life, can himself
live only if he raises these necessities for a profit. On the other hand,
the consumer who must have that farmer's product in order to live, must
be allowed
to purchase it at the lowest cost that can give the farmer his profit,
and everything possible must be done to eliminate any middleman whose function
does not tend to increase the cheapness of distribution of the product;
and,
moreover, everything must be done to stop all speculating, all gambling
with the bread-basket which has even the slightest deleterious effect upon
the producer
and consumer. There must be legislation which will bring about
a closer business relationship between the farmer and the consumer. Recently
experts in the Agricultural
Department have figured that nearly fifty per cent of the price for agricultural
products paid by the consumer goes into the pockets, not of the farmer,
but of various middlemen; and it is probable that over half of what is
thus paid
to middlemen is needless, can be saved by wise business methods (introduced
through both law and custom), and can therefore be returned to the farmer
and the consumer. Through the proposed Inter-State Industrial Commission
we can
effectively do away with any arbitrary control by combinations of the necessities
of life. Furthermore, the Governments of the Nation and of the several
States must combine in doing everything they can to make the farming business
profitable,
so that he shall get more out of the soil, and enjoy better business facilities
for marketing what he thus gets. In this manner his return will be increased
while the price to the consumer is diminished. The elimination of the middleman
by agricultural exchanges and by the use of improved business methods generally,
the development of good roads, the reclamation of arid lands and swamp
lands, the improvement in the productivity of farms, the encouragement
of all agencies
which tend to bring people back to the soil and to make country life more
interesting as well as more profitable — all these movements will
help not only the farmer
but the man who consumes the farmer's products.
There is urgent need of non-partisan expert examination into any tariff
schedule which seems to increase the cost of living, and, unless the increase
thus caused
is more than countervailed by the benefit to the class of the community
which actually receives the protection, it must of course mean that that
particular
duty must be reduced. The system of levying a tariff for the protection
and encouragement of American industry so as to secure higher wages and better
conditions of life for American laborers must never be perverted so as
to operate
for the impoverishment of those whom it was intended to benefit. But, in
any event, the effect of the tariff on the cost of living is slight; any
householder
can satisfy himself of this fact by considering the increase in price of
articles, like milk and eggs, where the influence of both the tariff and
the trusts is
negligible. No conditions have been shown which warrant us in believing
that the abolition of the protective tariff as a whole would bring any substantial
benefit to the consumer, while it would certainly cause unheard of immediate
disaster to all wage-workers, all business men, and all farmers, and in
all
probability would permanently lower the standard of living here. In order
to show the utter futility of the belief that the abolition of the tariff
and
the establishment of free trade would remedy the condition complained of,
all that is necessary is to look at the course of industrial events in England
and in Germany during the last thirty years, the former under free trade,
the
latter under a protective system. During these thirty years it is a matter
of common knowledge that Germany has forged ahead relatively to England,
and this not only as regards the employers, but as regards the wage-earners
— in
short, as regards all members of the industrial classes. Doubtless, many
causes have combined to produce this result; it is not to be ascribed to
the tariff alone, but, on the other hand it is evident that it could not
have come about
if a protective tariff were even a chief cause among many other causes
of the high cost of living.
It is also asserted that the trusts are responsible for
the high cost of living. I have no question that, as regards certain trusts,
this is true. I also have
no question that it will continue to be true just as long as the country
confines itself to acting as the Baltimore platform demands that we act.
This demand
is, in effect, for the States and National Government to make the futile
attempt to exercise forty-nine sovereign and conflicting authorities in the
effort
jointly to suppress the trusts, while at the same time the National Government
refuses to exercise proper control over them. There will be no diminution
in the cost of trust-made articles so long as our Government attempts the
impossible
task of restoring the flint-lock conditions of business sixty years ago
by trusting only to a succession of lawsuits under the Anti-Trust Law — a
method
which it has been definitely shown usually results to the benefit of any
big business concern which really ought to be dissolved, but which cause
disturbance
and distress to multitudes of smaller concerns. Trusts which increase production
— unless they do it wastefully, as in certain forms of mining and lumbering
— cannot
permanently increase the cost of living; it is the trusts which limit production,
or which without limiting production, take advantage of the lack of governmental
control, and eliminate competition by combining to control the market,
that cause all increase in the cost of living. There should be established
at once,
as I have elsewhere said, under the National Government an inter-State
industrial commission, which should exercise full supervision over the big
industrial
concerns doing an inter-State business into which an element of monopoly
enters. Where these concerns deal with the necessaries of life the commission
should
not shrink, if the necessity is proved, of going to the extent of exercising
regulatory control over the conditions that create or determine monopoly
prices.
By such action we shall certainly be able to remove the element of contributory
causation on the part of the trusts and the tariff towards the high cost
of living. There will remain many other elements. Wrong taxation,
including failure to tax swollen inheritances and unused land and other natural
resources
held
for speculative purposes, is one of these elements. The modern
tendency to leave the country for the town is another element; and exhaustion
of the soil
and poor methods of raising and marketing the products of the soil make
up another element, as I have already shown. Another element is that of
waste
and extravagance, individual and National. No laws which the wit of man
can devise will avail to make the community prosperous if the average individual
lives in such fashion that his expenditure always exceeds his income.
National extravagance — that is, the expenditure of money which is not warranted
— we can ourselves control, and to some degree we can help in doing away
with
the
extravagance caused by international rivalries.
These are all definite methods by which something can be accomplished in
the direction of decreasing the cost of living. All taken together will not
fully
meet the situation. There are in it elements which as yet we do not understand.
We can be certain that the remedy proposed by the Democratic party is a
quack remedy. It is just as emphatically a quack remedy as was the quack
remedy,
the panacea, the universal cure-all which they proposed sixteen years ago.
It is instructive to compare what they now say with what they said in 1896.
Only sixteen years ago they were telling us that the decrease in prices
was fatal to our people, that the fall in the production of gold, and, as
a consequence,
the fall in the prices of commodities, was responsible for our ills. Now
they ascribe these ills to diametrically opposite causes, such as the rise
in the
price of commodities. It may well be that the immense output of gold during
the last few years is partly responsible for certain phases of the present
trouble — which is an instructive commentary on the wisdom of those men
who sixteen years ago insisted that the remedy for everything was to be found
in
the mere additional output of coin, silver and gold alike. There is no
more curious delusion than that the Democratic platform is a Progressive
platform.
The Democratic platform, representing the best thought of the acknowledged
Democratic leaders at Baltimore, is purely retrogressive and reactionary.
There is no progress in it. It represents an effort to go back; to put this
Nation
of a hundred millions, existing under modern conditions, back to where
it was as a Nation of twenty-five millions in the days of the stage-coach
and canal
boat. Such an attitude is toryism, not Progressivism.
In addition, then, to the remedies that we can begin forthwith, there should
be a fearless, intelligent, and searching inquiry into the whole subject made
by an absolutely non-partisan body of experts, with no prejudices to warp their
minds, no object to serve, who shall recommend any necessary remedy, heedless
of what interest may be helped or hurt thereby, and caring only for the interests
of the people as a whole. ...
CONSERVATION
There can be no greater issue than that of Conservation in this country. Just
as we must conserve our men, women, and children, so we must conserve the resources
of the land on which they live. We must conserve the soil so that our children
shall have a land that is more and not less fertile than that our fathers dwelt
in. We must conserve the forests, not by disuse but by use, making them more
valuable at the same time that we use them. We must conserve the mines. Moreover,
we must insure so far as possible the use of certain types of great
natural resources for the benefit of the people as a whole. The public should
not alienate
its fee in the water power which will be of incalculable consequence as a source
of power in the immediate future. The Nation and the States within their several
spheres should by immediate legislation keep the fee of the water power, leasing
its use only for a reasonable length of time on terms that will secure the
interests of the public. Just as the Nation has gone into the work of irrigation
in the West, so it should go into the work of helping reclaim the swamp lands
of the South. We should undertake the complete development and control of the
Mississippi as a National work, just as we have undertaken the work of building
the Panama Canal. We can use the plant, and we call use the human experience,
left free by the completion of the Panama Canal in so developing the Mississippi
as to make it a mighty highroad of commerce, and a source of fructification
and not of death to the rich and fertile lands lying along its lower length.
In the West, the forests, the grazing lands, the reserves of every kind, should
be so handled as to be in the interests of the actual settler, the actual home-maker.
He should be encouraged to use them at once, but in such a way as to preserve
and not exhaust them. We do not intend that our natural resources shall
be exploited by the few against the interests of the many, nor do we intend
to
turn them over to any man who will wastefully use them by destruction, and
leave to those who come after us a heritage damaged by just so much. The man
in whose interests we are working is the small farmer and settler, the man
who works with his own hands, who is working not only for himself but for his
children, and who wishes to leave to them the fruits of his labor. His permanent
welfare is the prime factor for consideration in developing the policy of Conservation;
for our aim is to preserve our natural resources for the public as a whole,
for the average man and the average woman who make up the body of the American
people.
ALASKA
Alaska should be developed at once, but in the interest of the actual settler.
In Alaska the Government has an opportunity of starting in what is almost a
fresh field to work out various problems by actual experiment. The
Government should at once construct, own, and operate the railways in Alaska. The
Government should keep the fee of all the coal-fields and allow them to be
operated by
lessees with the condition in the lease that non-use shall operate as a forfeit. Telegraph
lines should be operated as the railways are. Moreover,
it would be well in Alaska to try a system of land taxation which will, so
far as possible,
remove all the burdens from those who actually use the land, whether for building
or for agricultural purposes, and will operate against any man who holds the
land for speculation, or derives an income from it based, not on his own exertions,
but on the increase in value due to activities not his own. There
is very real need that this Nation shall seriously prepare itself for the task
of remedying
social injustice and meeting social problems by well-considered governmental
effort; and the best preparation for such wise action is to test by actual
experiment under favorable conditions the device which we have reason to believe
will work well, but which it is difficult to apply in old settled communities
without preliminary experiment. ...
Surely there never was a fight better worth making than the one in which we
are engaged. It little matters what befalls any one of us who for the time
being stand in the forefront of the battle. I hope we shall win, and I believe
that if we can wake the people to what the fight really means we shall win.
But, win or lose, we shall not falter. Whatever fate may at the moment overtake
any of us, the movement itself will not stop. Our cause is based on the eternal
principles of righteousness; and even though we who now lead may for the time
fail, in the end the cause itself shall triumph. Six weeks ago, here in Chicago,
I spoke to the honest representatives of a Convention which was not dominated
by honest men; a Convention wherein sat, alas! a majority of men who, with
sneering indifference to every principle of right, so acted as to bring to
a shameful end a party which had been founded over half a century ago by men
in whose souls burned the fire of lofty endeavor. Now to you men, who, in your
turn, have corne together to spend and be spent in the endless crusade against
wrong, to you who face the future resolute and confident, to you who strive
in a spirit of brotherhood for the betterment of our Nation, to you who gird
yourselves for this great new fight in the never-ending warfare for the good
of humankind, I say in closing what in that speech I said in closing: We stand
at Armageddon, and we battle for the Lord.