Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Morning Oregonian. (Portland, Or.) 1861-1937 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 2, 1904)
T STORM OF HEARTY APPLAUSE GREETS SALIENT POINTS THE MORNING OREGONIAN, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBERS X 1904 "While -wheat In that time advanced for the benefit o the producer 23 per cent In lact a very much greater per cent wheat flour for the benefit ol the consumer has adanced but 6.5 per cent. - "While in cotton the advance ha been 41.86 per cent, the price of print cloths has advanced but -4.04 per cent; In j-lnn-hams 15.68 per cent. In cotton denims 13.74 per cent, in cotton sheeting 13.55 per cent. In cotton tickings 8.34 per cent, in cotton shirtings 5.41 per cent, while calico is 4 per cent below the price of 1SUG. and hosiery 44 per cent below that of 1S90. The following from the Statistical Abstract shows conclusively the great decrease in the price of cotton goods alnce 1SS0: In 18S0 the price in the New York market of standard sheetings was 8.50c per yarc; while in 1903. last year, it was 6.25c per yard, or a decrease of 2.25c per yard. , . . In 1880 the price In New York of standard drilling was 8.50c per yard: last year, 1V03. the price was 0.37c per yard, a reduction or 2.20c In 1850 in Xew York bleached ahlrtlnss were 12.73c per yard; last year they were 10.75c per a o MHnoiinn nf 2-flRe rer yard. The prices in Jfew York in 1SSO of standard. cotton prints per yara was i.itu, ouu now 5c, or a reduction of 2.40c per yard Tariff Revision. But say our Democratic friends, the tariff 6hould be revised. "We answer, the Republican party will, whenever the conditions aro such as Xo call for a revision, attend to that mat ter, but JUEt at present, while our country is so prosperous, there does not seem to be any pressing necessity for a revision. "We say further, when a revision Is undertaken, it ehould be by the friends of the policy of pro tection to American Interests and American labor, and not by Its enemies. Xot by those who in 1000 declared the protective policy to be unconstitutional, a robbery and a fraud, and who in the present campaign denounce it mhiian nf the miuir to enrich the few. The Democratic candidate, Mr. Parker, in a recent epeecn ai jus jwaic m - " " discussing the tariff, refers to the report of Alexander Hamilton, of 1701. insisting it only refers .to manufactures, and therefore, does Tint ixvttifv an artrument in favor of protec tion on wool, lumber, coal, iron ore and other products of the roll. But the Democratic plat form denounces all kinds of protection as rob bery. It does not designate either as to ar ticle or measure of protection on any article. The platform does not declare that only pro tection on certain articles, or of a certain grade is robbery. It says In effect, all protec tion, of any and every Kina, is rooDery. wnetn er on manufactures or any other product. Should the revision -of the tariff, therefore. be given to a party which la on record as de claring that any act which gives any pro tection to any Industry, or to any kind of labor, is robbery? "W&at kind of a revision would the country expect xrom a party wnion holds to such opinions? Of course, it would be a revision that would wholly eliminate every .protection feature, and in its place enact a policy ox tami ior revenue omy, or a policy of free trade. The country's best interests, therefore, the best interests of the wage-earners, of the pro ducers and consumers of this country, demand that any revision of the tariff should be left to the friends and not to the enemies of the Republican policy of protection to American .Industries and American labor. And legisla tion not only relating to the tariff, but the money Question, the Philippines, the Panama mai. tne snipping ana commercial interests, -.the improvement of our rivers and harbors. f pensions, and the number of other subjects which, under the Republican administration (have contributed ho much to the present pros perity of our country, ahould be left to the I party under whose administration this great 'prosperity has come, and not to the party who has been engaged in criticising and de nouncing these several Republican policies. It was once said in a speech by Senator Morton, of Indiana, that the Democratic party was like a man sitting in a railway car on a railway train, with bis back towards the en gine, riding bftcitwards that it never 6aw anything until it had passed It. In support of this charge that the Demo cracy have for many years had no policy but one of finding- fault with anything and every thing that the Republican party proposes, I call your attention to the following extract from a speech made by Hon. Martin W. Lit tleton, of New York, before the New York Southern Society, February 22. last. But be fore reading. I must tell you who Mr. Little ton is. He is a very able Democratic lawyer of New York City, and the man who made the nominating' speech at the St. Louis ' Na tional convention this year, placing Mr. Park er in nomination for the Presidency. I read from his speech of February last, before the New York Southern Society. Among other things-, he said: "While the war between the United States was in progress it (the Democratic party) at tempted to swim against the tide on a policy that declared the war a failure, and met that fate which all parties have met that attempt it. "The Democratic party Bought to destroy the evil of some monopolist by assuming an antagonistic attitude to ail large corporate concerns, just at a time when the business of the country was being conducted almost wholly by corporate agency, and it went down under the Influence of a fact.. "It attempted to arrest the course of events In the Spanish-American "War, Just at a time when our fleets were fighting and our armies marching, and It went down again under the influence of a fact. "It endeavored to undo events which had taken place In the Philippines, and to reverse an accomplshed thing, and it went down under the weight of a fact. "It is now seeking to delay the progress of a great commercial enterprise on the Isthmus of Panama by opposing the treaty with the new republic just at a time when the Na tion, and especially the South, needs and de mands such an enterprise, and it will again go down under the Influence of a fact, if it persists. "It sought to change the money etandard of the country from gold to sliver. Just at a time when the powerful nations of the earth were holding or changing to gold, and it went down under the influence of another fact. "The policy of opposition Is not the true tra dition of the party. It held for nearly 50 years the affirmative place In the politics of the country. It stood upon aggressive grounds, it recognized events, it was not a doctrinaire, it held to the facts. It was until the war a constructive party of conservative principles, and under the misfortune of slavery it paused to defend that institution, and allowed the Republicans to take the ground from It, and since that time it has thought It wise to op pose its own policies, if they chanced to be es poused by the Republicans. "It does not heed to return to the ante bellum policies, but it does need to go back to the ante-bellum method of dealing with event It must understand that If Jefferson said he was opposed to expansion, and then proceeded to expand, what he did is the thing, and not what he caid. It must understand that If he said he was opposed to a navy, and then found it necessary to establish a navy, what he did Is the thing, and not what he said. It must understand that if Madison or Monroe said that they were opposed to National banks, but found they were necessary to establish a sound financial system, and did establish them, what they did Is the thing, and not what they said. It muet understand that if Jcffer eon. Madison. Monroe. Calhoun, Jackson and Benton all Insisted that the constitution should be strictly construed, but found on actual ex periment that it was best to give it a liberal construction, and did . what they did is the thing, and not what they said." I submit no stronger arraignment against the Democratic party has ever been made, or over can be made, by any Republican, than Is contained In this speech of the right-hand man of Candidate Parker. Commerce With the Orient. Permit a. word in reference to our com merce with the Orient: The policies of the Republican party, so vigorously enforced by tho Administrations of McKInley and Roose velt, have done wonders in opening up trade nnd commercial intercourse between the '-'uited States and the Orient. To abandon these policies as suggested by the Democratic party would be an act of jk1IUc1 folly and commercial suicide To do this would be to relinquish all our "claim to the immense value of the Oriental com merce, and to our share in the enlargement of that commerce in the last seven vears una to the incomparable character of our fu ture possibilities in Its participation, and especially In the share that must come di rectly to the Pacific Coast. The extent and value of the Oriental commerce. In the near future, are almost Incalculable. The total amount of the present annual Importations Irom ,all sources into the Oriental countries, located in the great semicircle of which Ma nila Is the central point, amounts today to over 1250 million dollars. In 1S0C. the year In which McKinley was elected Pres ident, our share of thlk Immense trade was In exports only C per cent, while today It is more than 12 per cnt. Our shipments to Asia and Oceanlca. including the Hawaiian Islands, for the past seven years Increased 149 ptr otT.t. while our exports to South America increased only 10.0 per cent, to Kuropo only 52.0 per cent, and to North America only S4.S per cent. Tho average increase In our exports to all nations In the past seven years was about 61 per cent, while the increase In our exports to the Orient, as I have stated, in that time was 149 per cent. During the seven years ending with the year 1S!)C. which Included Cleveland's Ad raiulnratlon. our increase in eximrts to Asia and Oceanlca was but a fraction over $8,000. 000. while our increase In exports to the tame countries for the seven j ear? ending with lest year. Jt03. was In round number about $04,000,000. or eight tlms thm for the preceding seven years. Our whole ex ports to those Oriental countries in 1003 were 106.500.000. Why then, should the people of this country, and especially the people of the Paclfle Coast, desire to turn their backs upon policies and administrations which are bringing about such tremendous changes In th interest of American commerce? The Panama Canal. And In this connection let me call your attention to the fact that the present Admin istration and President Roosevelt have the credit of having Inaugurated and -.set in mo tion the stupendous work of the construc tion of an Isthmian Canal. After conten- . tion and vain efforts running through a I period of more tha 200 years, it has remained I for Theodore Roosevelt, the present Presl- 1 dent ana the next President of the unltea States, to place this great National and inter - national work on Its feet, and today, through , his efforts, we can see, within a very lew years, the completion of this great inter national commercial highway, which will add so much to our commercial welfare, and to our naval and military prestige and power, both at home and abroad. And ri&bt in this connection I desire to say that an the criticisms made by the Democratic paVy as to the acts of President Roosevelt and his Administration in regard to the Panama. Canal, are absolutely baseless and without any foundation whatever. The 57th Congress passed an act authoriz ing the President to negotiate with the new Panama Canal Company of Paris for tne purchase of their plant and of their Interests upon tne lstbmus or Manama; ana wnicn. provided, if it was determined they could, make a good title, which was subsequently ascertained by the Department of Justice, he should pay the new Panama Canal Com pany $40,000,000. He was further author- lxed by this act to negotiate wun tne e publlc of Colombia, then having jurisdiction of the Isthmus, for a right of way for the canal over the Isthmus. The act further provided that in the event of the failure to purchase the plant of the new i'anarna uanai Company, or of the right of way from tha Republic of Colombia, within 'a reasonable time, that then the President should proceed with the construction of the canal over the Nicaragua route. Having agreed, however, with the new Panama Canal Company for the purchase of the property, the President turned his atten tion to the other branch of the subject, and entered into a treaty -with the Colombian Minister at Washington for a right of way over the Isthmus. This treaty was a most favorable one for the Colombian Government, It was promptly ratified by the United States Senate, but the Government of Colombia at Bogota promptly rejected It, to the great disgust of the people of Panama, who greatly favored it, and who were greatly interested in the construction of the canal. So incensed and disgusted were the Panamanians with this and other acts of hostility by the Colom bian Government to their interests, that they openly revolted and set up a government of their own. and, having done so, the President very promptly and very properly, as it was bis constitutional right to do, recognized the new government thus established. This rec ognition was promptly followed by all the groat governments of the earth. The Presi dent at once entered into a treaty with the new Republic of Panama, similar In most respects to that rejected by the Colombian Government. This treaty was promptly rati fied by both the United States and the Re public of Panama. Ten millions of dollars were paid for our right of way for the canal, and a commission was promptly appointed by the President, as provided for by the act of Congress, to proceed with the construc tion of the canal, and this commission, head ed by Rear-Admiral John G. Walker, under the immediate direction of President Roose velt and Secretary of War Taft, are today proceeding with the great work, and one over which every American in the land should rejoice, and sing hosannas of approval to the great man who brought it all about. Theodore Roosevelt, our invincible candidate for re-clectlon in this campaign. Trusts. Our friends of the opposition would have the country believe that they are the relentless foes of trusts, and that In the Republican party, and the Republican administration, are the friends, promoters and supporters of trusts. This is a gross misrepresentation of hls tnrirai far-tji. it la bevond the Dower of the opposition to point to a elngle Federal act of legislation promoted by the Democratic party having for its purpose the control,-regu-latlon or destruction of trusts or other illegal combinations of capital. The only law upon the statute books of the country, prior to the Roosevelt Administration, that has been ope rative against and effective in the destruction of trusts was recommended by President Har rison, introduced In the Senate by a Repub lican, the late benator tnerroan, irom uniu, and passed by a Republican Congress in 1800. Subsequently, in the Fifty-seventh Congress, Prn1if,nt 1!nnrelt recommended, and Con- rtw in "PVhmnrv 14. 1903. in pursuance of euch.' recommendation, enacted into law. three supplemental features; these three anti-trust features were, nrst, proniDiuon 01 rauwu rebates; second, providing for puDiicity; ana. third, to exnedlte anti-trust litigation. This Sherman law has been held valid, and in a great measure effective, by the Supreme Court of the united states, in more man cue c&oc. In pursuance of the inhibitory provisions in that statute, in the trans-Mlsslsslppl case, in volving a contract between '18 railroad com panies, including one-third of the whole rail road territory of the United States, the Su preme court or tne united aiaies ceciaxru It an lllrc-al contract. And again that gigantic trust, known as the train c agreement, Between 31 separate ana ais tlrwt rnllrnad r-omnnnleg. Involving an ag gregate capital of two billion, three hundred and seventy millions ot aouars, was au ac clared literal and sweat out of existence. While the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, under this same Sherman act, in the case of the Addystono Pipe & Steel Comnanv vs. the United States, held an agree ment between six different corporations, by which they stipulated not to compete with each other, was obnoxious to the provisions of that act and Illegal, and this decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. And you are all familiar with the recent decision of the Circuit Court of Ap peals for the Eighth Circuit, and affirmed by tho Supreme Court of the United States, in the Northern Securities cases. This litiga tion was in pursuance of the Sherman act, aided by the supplemental anti-trust legisla tion by a Republican Congress in 1003, in pur suance of President Roosevelt s recommenda tion. But when and where and under what ad ministration did the Democratic party ever enact any legislation upon the subject, or In stitute any legal prosecution against trusts? Never at any time or place, nut on tne con trary, when, in the 56th Congress, they had an opportunity to vote for an amendment to the Constitution, which would have enabled Congress the more effectively to legislate against trusts, the Democrats In the National House of Representatives, wtlh five excep tions, voted Mildly against It. while the Re publicans, with but two exceptions, voted for it. But. say our opponents, as a new argument against a protective tariff and in favor of free trade, "a protective tariff breeds trusts." This again Is a misrepresentation of the facts. The moat gigantic monopoly, not only of America, but In all the world today, is the Standard Oil Company, and yet that company deals in a product (petroleum) upon which there is no duty whatever. As conclusive ot the proposition that protection Is not a breed er of trusts is the fact that not only the birth place of trusts was in free-trade England, but there also, amid the aroma of free trade, have trusts multiplied and expanded beyond those of any other country in the world. And again, when it is said that the Re publicans are interested in promoting, roster ing, building up and reaping the benefits of gigantic trusts, it may be proper to call at tention to the fact that the Sugar Trust, the Cotton Trust, the Tobacco Trust, the Ice Trust, all among the most gigantic and oppressive trusts of the age. were all promoted and are conducted by leading representative Democrats. While there are many answers to this as sertion that a protective tariff breeds trusts. one that ought to be entirely conclusive is the fact that free-trade Great Britain has nroduced more gigantic trusts than any other country in the world. Let me call your attention to some or these, an organized in less than two years, In the single Bradford District of 'England. Commencing with that of the Bradford Dyers' Association. Limited. This trust was organ ized December 14. 1888. It Included by ab sorption, amereni ousiness concerns, with a capitalization of nearly f22.000.000. The Yorkshire. Indigo. Scarlet and Colors Dreys, Limited, was organized July 4. 1899. and absorbcd 13 different business concerns, capitalized at $3,000,000. The Bradford Coal Merchants' & Consumers' Association, organized July 6. 1S99, absorbed nine separate and distinct business concerns, and was capitalized at about $2,000,000. The Yorkshire Wool Consumers' Association. Limited, organized October 0. 1899. absorbed 3S different business concerns, and was capi talized at about $13,000,000. While the British Cotton & "Wool Dyers' Association was organized April 4, 1000. in cluding 40 different business concerns, and was capitalized at about $14,000,000. These five great trusts, all organized Inside of two years In free-trade Great Britain, ab sorbed 120 different business concerns, all dealing In the necernaries of life, and wer capitalized In the aggregate at nearly $52. 0OO.OCO. The Bleaching Trust, organized in Benning ton. England. In February, 1000. was capi talized at 12.000.000 pounds, nearly $60.000.000 In 1893 a scheme was organized in Shef field. England, which Involved the consolida tion In a gigantic truat ot over 200 iron Anns. In the various cities of England, for the pur pose of controlling the prices of all classes of Iron. "Various other great trusts were organized In the decade ending with the year 1900, by which 325 different business concerns were consoli dated Into 15 gigantic trusts, with a total cap ital of mom than $230,000,000. s So It Is that Instead of a tariff being the breeder of trusts. It Is demonstrated beyond all question that more enormous, objectionable and gigantic trurts have appeared In free-trade England than in any other country in the world. National "Expenditures. The Democratic candidate for President, In his letter ot acceptance, lays great at res on what he characterizes as extravagant expen ditures; and In order to sustain his theoty, he either Intentionally or otherwise, mistakes the amount of the National expenditures for ordinary purposes the past year, and then de clares they are- out of all proportion to our lncreaso in population. Now. what are the facts? ilr. Parker says the expenses for the past year including the $50,000,000 paid for isthmian canal purposes. were $582,000,000; and not including the $50, 000.000. they were $532,000,000. This, I confidently assert, as the record i will show, is $25,727,923 too much, or more than the amount actually expended. The to tal amount ot the ordinary expenses ot the government last flscai year, as shown pj the records, was but $500,270,073. isut compare our annual National expendi tures per capita with the expenditures among the ether nations, both ReDubllcs and mon archies. ' The expenditures of the United States last year per capita were $7.07. while those of me repuouc or France were n.4; tnose oz Great Britain $21.39: those of the German empire, 9.44; ot Canada. $9.30; Australia com monwealth, $3,.G9; Kew Zealand, $33.33, ana Spain. $10. The Gold Standard. The Democratic candidate. Mr. Parker, says the money question is Irrevocably settled, and this statement. It seems to me, was one of the moat Indefensible and silliest ever uttered by a man in bis position. iz tne friends of the gold standard remain in power, the question Is undoubtedly irrevo cably settled, lr, however, the enemies of the gold standard should obtain control ot the Gov ernment, it Is not irrevocably settled or settled at all. Nothing Is Irrevocably settled which Congress and the Executive, acting in unison, have the power to change; and Congress and an Executive in harmony have the power to change the Bold standard should they wish to. There would be Just as much sense, and equally as little truth in saying the question of the protective tariff V Irrevocably eettled. or in saying that any other question which Congress and the President have the power to change is irrevocably settled. Why did not Candidate Parker, if be favored the retention ot the gold standard, instead ot saying the question is Irrevocably settled, say something like this to the convention and to the people of the country: "True. I have heretofore been in favor of the free coinage ot stiver at the ratio of 16 to 1; and while it Is equally true I did. both in 1890 and la 1900. vote for Mr. Bryan for President of the United States, then and now. the great champion of free sliver, I have changed ml mind. I think I was wrong. I think Bryan was and Is wrong. And 1 now believe the Republican party was absolutely right In estab. Ushlng the gold standard. Therefore. I am now In favor of the gold standard. I believe it Is right. I believe In Its retention, and If elected President of the United States. I will do all In my power to retain It. and will veto any act that Congress may pass looking to the estab lishment of the free coinage of silver." But Mr. Parker did not see proper to do this; and so far ac any declaration he has made upon the subject, the people of this country today do not know where he stands, except they have a right to believe, from the fact that he voted twice for Bryan and in favor of the free coinage of silver, that he still believes In that policy. And. therefore, he dodges the question, and satisfies himself with the declaration that the question Is Irrevocably settled. This Is not satisfactory to the people of this country, and especially to the business people of this country, who are thoroughly In earnest In support of the gold standard, and hence for this reason alone, even were there no other, Mr. Parker will not be. but Theodore Roosevelt will be elected President of the United States on Tuesday next. The two administrations of McKInley and Roosevelt are entitled to great credit for the remarkable Increase In value of our exports In the past seven years. In 1S03 our total exports were of the value of only $8S8.C0a.f)3S; while in 1903 they reached the enormous figure of $1,420,141,049. an in crease of $537,000,000 in seven years. This was $292,000,000 more than Great Britain exported the same year to other countries than her own colonies. The exports to her own colonies amounted In value to a fraction over $571,000.- The Republican Tarty Has Kept Jts'PIedges. The Republican party nan, under the admin istrations of McKInley and Roosevelt, kept every pledge It has ever made to the people. It can. therefore, look the people of this country in the face today without a blush. Moreover, It can and does point with a degree of pardon able pride to the grand achievements of the last two administrations, such as the redemp tion of Cuba, Porto Rico and the Philippines from the iron heel of Spanish despotism, the annexation of and establishment of a territorial government over Hawaii, the restoration of a protective tariff, the permanency of the gold standard, the establishment of the rural free delivery system and the Irrigation system, the commencement of the work and the assurance of the compleUon of the Panama Canal, the organization of the great Department of Com merce and Labor, the Improvement of our rlv "' and harbors, the construction of public buildings, the enactment of laws for the educa tion, amelioration and elevation of the people of Porto Rico and the Philippines, and the general safeguarding and upbuilding. In many WS?'8- f fke great American Republic That this great work may be continued the people of this country will, on the 8th day of ttila month, one week from today, elect Theo dore Roosevelt President of the United States And I trust and believe that the people of Oregon will contribute toward that great result by a popular majority of more than 30.000. Imperialism. ,I.uhai? been a.mazei at the recent speech S5ui f Democratic candidate for President, In S?iii the d,8C,ussel Imperialism and the Philippines, and In which he went back to the position of his party of four years ago. and suggested and advocated our withdrawal from the Philippines, and In which he desig nated Imperialism as the paramount issue 1" this campaign. But for this speech I should not have said anything on that sub ject. But we are now. by this speech and other recent Democratic utterances. Justi fied in saying that the opposition to the Republican party places in this campaign in the forefront of the Issues upon which they appeal to the American voter, what they are pleased to term "Imperialism." They would have the people of this country believe that the Nation is on the verge of plunging from a Republican to an imperial government from a Republic to an empire. Now. there are in this world today, as a matter of fact, two kinds of imperialism. The one, American imperialism, an Imperi alism of expansion and civilization of mod ern birth and growth, and the other, Euro pean or Asiatic imperialism, of ancient and barbaric growth. The one, the latter. Is an Imperialism which Ignores and repudi ates the rights and Interests of the people. In the interest of Kings and Emperors r;d their satellites; while the other and former. American Imperialism. Is the outgrowth of development, of expansion, of the extension and enlargement of human liberty, of the uplifting of the lowly and oppressed, of the quickening and vitalizing of the wheels of human progress In a word, an Imperialism which results in the upbuilding, advance ment and spreading of the very highest order of modern civilization, an Imperialism which opens, widens and elevates the reat causeway of modern development and mod ern achievement, and which broadens, widens and strengthens not only the foundations, but the great pillars of the Republic, and which stimulates, animates and energizes the high est and best hopes and grandest aspirations of all the people. It was this principle of American Imperial Ism which was Inaugurated by Thomas Jef ferson In 1803. when he purchased from the great Napoleon for $15,000,000 the territory of Louisiana containing more than 1,000,000 square miles, and over CO.000 people; and all of which territory and all of whose people were in the formative period, under the direction and administration of Thomas Jef ferson, governed without the consent of those 90,000 people. It was the same principle of American Imperialism which Induced Presi dent Monroe, In 1819, to secure by treaty with Spain the Floridas for the sum of $5,000,000. and by which over 70,000 square miles were added to our domain; and which in 1845 caused a Democratic Con gress and a Democratic President, by joint resolution, to annex Texas with its 370,000 square miles ot territory. But the march of American Imperialism, which has brought to our beloved land such an Infinitude of blessings, and which has crowned our Republic from year to year with a renewed panoply of prestige and power, both at home and abroad, was not stayed in its triumphant progress. but again by the treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo, between the United States and Mexico, we acquired from Mexico over 500.000 square miles of territory, and thus the imperialism of our Republic on the Pacific shores was extended and strengthened, while by the Gadsden Purchase 45,000 square miles more were added to our domain. And while all these acquisitions, and by which we added to our National domain within a fraction of 2.200,000 square miles of territory, and embracing an area of over 1,440.000.000 acres, were acquired while every branch of the Federal Government was controlled by the Democratic party, the Re publican party In 1807. following on the same line of territorial expansion, under the direction of that far-seeing statesman; Will iam H. Seward, reached out and by treaty with Russia acquired Alaska with Its 560. 000 square miles of territory, and Its, In numerable, and in value Inestimable re sources. And thus again was the banner of the imperialism of our Republic broad ened and widened. Thus was the American flag, unshorn of any of its beauty, undlmmed in any of its stars, but clothed in a new radiance of imperial grandeur and glory and power, in whose magnificent mirror was re flected the image of cjir great and expanding Republic made to wave In unmolested splen dor over territory not contiguous to, but far separated from, our original domain, by Brit ish territory These are a few, and but a few of the mighty causes that have co-operated to con stitute he imperialism of this Republic This is American imperialism, but it is an imperialism, which. Instead of breeding human oppression and National and individ ual debasement, is based upon the eternal principles of humanity, and National and individual Justice. If this then Is the kind of Imperialism the Democracy is protesting against, and If such an Issue could be submitted to the vote of the American people, that' vote I Imagine, would be overwhelming In favor of such Imperialism But. fellow citizens, our trethrea ol the opposition would have us believe that they believe, that we have already launched, or are about to launch our Republic upon the great sea of European and Asiatic Imperial Ism; that the Republican party and the Roosevelt administration are about to change, and will, if continued in power, speedily change our form ot government from' that of a republic to that of an em pire; that they will change our princlpar ruler from that of ' a President chosen by electors chosen by the people to that ot an empire chosen by his own proclamation; and this our brethren say Is the great, para mount and controllng Issue of the present campaign. The cry of Imperialism is a false Issue. It Is. I may be permitted to say without giv ing or intending offense, a dishonest propo sition. It is dishonest because its pro moters, as I believe, do not believe It them selves. It Is a nuge scarecrow in the politi cal cornfield. The Idea Is not altogether of modern birth or growth. It originated in the fertile but Insincere brain ot the poli tician so long ago as the days ot Thomas Jefferson, and was revived in the days of the War ot the Rebellion, and It was then woven Into form by the deft lingers of polit ical bucaneers for the purpose of Irigntening the American people and controlling elec tions. This cry of Imperialism Is but the echo of that hurled against General Jackson in 1830, against Lincoln in 1804 and against Grant still later on. The cry was no less ill-founded and insincere upon the part of the leaders then than it Is Insincere and groundless upon the part of the political leaders today. It waa a political scarecrow then; It is a political bugaboo now. The wall of the opposition that the repub lic is about to die. and that upon Its ruins an empire a la European or a la Asiatic I to be erected by Roosevelt and the Repub lican party, obtained its Inspiration from ouch speeches as were made by Daniel Voor-. hies, of Indiana, and other Democratic lead ers In the National House of Representatives In 1804. On the 5th day ot March, 1S04. Representative Voorhles, of Indiana, after denouncing Lincoln as a tyrant and his acts tyrannical, and deplorlpg that tho shadow ot empire- wittrSV upbntn republic said: ThU'Dovernment-fs dying. dTlng. sir, dylngl We are standing round its bed of death, and will soon be wretched mourners at 1U tomb unless the sovereign and heroic remedy Is soon applied. The very foundations of civilized Jurisprudence have been tom away, and the whole structure Is In ruins. Not one right which constitutes the freedom and safety pf the citizen but has been utterly and wantonly violated." So today, the leaders of the opposition would have the people of this great, free country believe that the shadow of empire, European empire, is upon us; that the principles of our Constitutional Government are being subverted; that individual rights and human liberty are in peril; that the grandeur and glory of the Re public are being gradually but surely obscured and swallowed up In the somber atmosphere ot despotic Imperialism arid military domination. If this be so. then like the Issue tendered by the Democratic party In 1804, to the effect that the war for the suppression of the Rebellion was a failure. It will be swept Into eternal and fathomless oblivion by the votes of the Amer ican people on Tuesday next. 8uch a thing as the metamorphosis of this grand Republic from a republic to an empire Is, In view of the Im perishable grandeur and glory and Immutability of the principles upon which our Republic Is bjifed. and the vitality and uplifting energy of American Institutions, and the love of liberty that animates the American mind and quickens the patriotic pulsations of the American heart, a moral and political Impossibility. What has elthe McKInley or Roosevelt, or the Roosevelt Administration done. I Inquire, to justify for one moment the alleged fear of either Imperialism or militarism. I Insist that up to and Including the ratifica tion by the Senate, on the 6th day of February, 1899. of the Paris treaty, the Democracy, and especially their then great leader, William Jen nings Bryan, are estopped from any fault-finding with 'what has occurred In our war with Spain or in the Philippines. The ratification of the treaty of Parts, as all agree, was strongly favored by Mr. Bryan. In his spetch accepting the nomination for President, deliv ered at IndtanapIUs. Mr. Bryan, In referring to the treaty ot Paris, said: "I was among these who believed it better to ratify the treaty and end the war." But for Mr. Bryan's advecacy and support, that treaty never could have been ratified. This is uni versally admitted. A two-thirds majority was necessary to secure ratification. It is conceued by all and by Mr. Bryan himself that he went to Washington and labored earnestly with his Democratic friends in the Senate to vote for the ratification. The treaty was ratified by but one vote, and of those who voted for rati fication. 17 were Democrats. This ratification took place February' 1S0H Two days prior to this, on February 5. 1889. although our Army and Navy had taken Manila on Auguat 13, 1898, nearly six months before, and al though we Bad occupied the Philippine Inlands for more than two months In pursuance of the treaty of peace with Spain ceding them to us in December, 1808. Agulnaldo and his band of In surgents and cutthroats made sudden, unpro voked and cruel war upon our soldiers. It was at this point and under these circumstances and at this stage of the game that Mr. Bryan urged and secured the ratification of the treaty of Paris. What Is it. therefore. I Inquire that has been done since, either by President McKInley. or by the Republican Administration, from tne date when Congress declared war against Spain until the Senate ratified the treaty of peace with Spain, of which the Democracy can right fully complain? Do you challenge the right eousness of that declaration of war or of the war itself? No, because If you do. not only the American people. Irrespective of party, but all Christendom and the whole civilized world, would rise up In one universal protest and deny the challenge. Nay, If such a claim should be asserted the blood of the brave men whose red current moistened the rugged hills of El Caney and ot Santiago, and led by our present gallant standard-bearer, Theodore Roosevelt, , In vindicating the honor of the American flag on foreign soil, and In lifting the iron heel of Spanish ' despotism from the Cubans, a crushed and helplers people, would co aloud In solemn protest against the In justice ei tne cUlm. Do you question the acts or the glory that attaches to the acts of Admiral Dewey and his brave officers and sailors In destroying the Spanish fleet In Manila Bay; or of that ot Ad mirals Sampson and Schley and their associate officers and men In destroying the remainder of the Spanish fleet at Santiago? No, you will not do this, because If you do the historic splendor ot those great achievements would beat down upon you and put you tt shame. Do you object to the treaty of peace known as the Paris treaty, or any ot its provisions, whereby the Philippine archipelago and Porto Rico were ceded to the United States in De cember. 1898, or to any of its provisions? No, because you are estopped from doing this, be cause your then great leader, chieftain and candidate urged Its ratification by the Senate of the United states'. That treaty, when pend ing before the Senate, contained this clause: "The civil rights and pollttcM status of the native Inhabitants In the territory hereby ceded to tho United States shall be determined by the Congress." That same treaty also contained at the same time a provision that the United States should pay to Spain the sum of $20,000,000, and yet no amendment was proposed even by any Democratic Senator, either on their own ac count, or at the Instance .of your then great party leader. Do you claim that that treaty when ratified created Imperialism, or do you claim that it was the opening wedge to Imperialism or mili tarism, of which you have so much to say? If you do. then I reply that William Jennings Bryan, more than any other one man In the United States. Is responsible for creating Im perialism, or driving the opening wedge that is to result in imperialism, because without his earnest efforts it never could have been ratified. But if. on the other hand. It Is claimed that Mr. Bryan favored the ratification ot the treaty, not because he believed it to be right, but for tne purpose of creating an Issue, then I reply you have not come into court with clean hands. Upon the contrary, you have resorted to a spe cies ot practice which neither Judicial courts nor Senates, nor the great political tribunal of the American people will tolerate for one mo ment, and by It you must not be permitted to take anything. If, therefore, there is not one ot the great icu ol uie .Administration, is so far as they have any relation to our war with .Spain and the execution and ratification of the treaty of peace, of which you, the Democrarcy, can rightfully complain in this campaign, what has occurred since the ratification of that treaty. let us inquire, of which you can rightfully cuHjpima. ana now can sucn complaint be justified? Our Title to tne Philippines. By the ratification of the treaty of Paris, th Philippine archipelago, as well as the island of Porto Rico, became parts ot our territorial domain, and the sovereignty of the United states was extended to and over them by that treaty. With Cuba it was different: our sov ereignty never was by that treaty or by any other act whatever extended over Cuba, and this is the real difference in the relations sua tallied by our Government towards these Islands respectively. Our sovereignty extends over Porto Rico and the Philippine archipelago. It does not and never did extend over Cuba. Our title, therefore, to th Philippines and Porto Rico is precisely the same. And that it la a title of .the same character and Just as valid as our title to Louisiana under Jefferson's treaty with Napoleon, and to the Floridas un der Monroe's treaty with Spain is a, proposition which is absolutely unassailable. The title is . by treaty and purchase. Any claim, therefore, that there is any defect In ouc title to the Philippine archipelago, based on the s Irani e suggestion of our Democratic friends that at the time of the treaty of Paris the Filipinos were in the possession of those islands, and had virtually cosquered Spain and substantially procured their .Independence, as asserted by Mr. Parker, the Democratic candidate, is whol ly barren of support. As a matter of fact, those, people had aot keen urging & war for In dependence, and as a matter of fact they did not succeed to Independence. They had not. prior to the destruction ot the Spanish fleet by uewef f tuna .hal wct were con tending for tadep Jeaoe. They claimed to he fighting slranly for- the purpose of compellinc cert.n reforms, as they delated, such as the riafct ot representation to the Cortes, the ex pulsion of the friars and the restoration to tha i people of their lands, with a division of tne I episcopal sees between the Spanish and nativa j priests; freedom ot the press, religious tolera tion, economic autonomy, and laws similar to the laws of Spain. I But even were It true that they had been ' ugnung ior independence and. bad virtually ac complished such purpose. It is not claimed that their independence had ever been recog nized by Spain or the United States, or any other sovereign power of the world; and by a universally accepted rule of international law, until this Is done the territory remained under the sovereignty of Spain, and the people wer subjects ot Spain. By that treaty, therefore, which clothed th United States with absolute sovereignty over those Islands, it was specifically provided as follows; "The civil rights and political status ot the native, Inhabitants of the territory thereoy ceded to the United States shall be determined by the Congress." In the absence, therefore, of any action upon the part of Congress, what. I Inquire, was the President's sworn constitutional duty on the ratification ot that treaty. In view of the then existing stats ot affairs in the Island of Lu zon? It will be borne in mind that two days before the ratification of that treaty. Agulnaldo and his Tagal followers had made war on our soldiers in the Island of Luzon. They had fired on the American flag. They had com mitted open acts ot insubordination and Insur rection. This was continued after the ratifica tion of the treaty. It was therefore an insur rection upon the part of the Inhabitants of those islands, or a small portion of them. against the sovereignty of the United States. And while It la true, the President has no power under the Constitution to declare war. he not only has the power, but It Is his sworn constitutional duty to call out the military and naval forces of the United States for the pur pose of suppressing Insurrections. This autnor lty is expressly conferred upon the Chief Ex ecutive ot the Nation, first by section 3 of article n. of the Constitution ot the United States, which provides, among other things, that the President shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed; and by two stat utes that have remained unrepealed on the statute books of the Republic, one for more than 100 years, and the other for nearly 10O years; one waa passed February 2S, 1795, and the other. March 3. 1807. Now, the Democrats declared and said in their platform four years ago that the United States was carrying on "a war cf criminal aggression against the Filipinos." While the precise contrary was the fact- It was a war for the suppression of a most unjustifiable In surrection against the Government of the United States. By that declaration, therefore. In the Democratic platform of four years ago that a war of criminal aggression was being waged against the Filipinos by the United States, that party allied itself distinctively and positively against the Government, against our brave soldiers who Imperiled he!r lives, and many who have surrendered up their Uvea In the distant fields of Luzon. And by that declaration our Democratic friends became, many of them doubtless unconsciously, allies in sympathy and in law with insurrectionists and rebels who were defying the sovereignty of this Nation and shooting down American soldiers and the American flag. This war then, upon the part of Agulnaldo and his followers. Insofar as Its legal aspect was concerned, waa precisely Identical with the war waged by the Confederates in the late War of the Rebellion. In each case It was an assault upon the United States sovereignty, an assault upon the Nation's flag, an assault upon the military and naval forces of the United States. It was Identical In law and effect with the Insurrection In Louisiana, which President jerteroon suppressed in Its lnfahcy by the em ployment of ths military arm of the Govern ment. It was precisely Similar In Its legal aspect to the Florldla't wars waged by th Semlnoles for seven long years. It was of nxe cnaracter with the Dorr rebellion in Rhode Island In 1842. and for which the leader. Thomas W. Dorr, was In 1844 convicted of mgn treason and sentenced to imprisonment for life It was In law and effect similar to the Whisky Insurrection In Pennsylvania In .1794; and In every essential particular was upon an fours with every Insurrection, great and nmatl. that ever lifted Its rebellious and bloody band against the Nation's flag In any part of this country, whether within the Juris diction of a state or territory. And why is this so? It Is so because the Philippine archipelago was then, is now and ever has been since the date of the ratification of the treaty of peace by the United States and Spain, a portion of the territory of th'? United States. By that treaty not only the sovereignty over all that territory was trans ferred from Spain to the United States, but also the allegiance of all the Inhabitants ot that territory was. ipso facto, transferred, whether with or without their consent, from Spain to the United States. And from the date of Its ratification, they, the Filipinos, owed allegiance to the United States and the American flag, just as much as do the inhab itants of Alaska. Arizona and New Mexico to day; and whenever they made war upon that nag as tney ma. they Decame insurrectionists, and It became the constitutional duty of the President of United 8tates to Invoke the etrong arm of the military and naval forces of the united states in suppressing It. . "But." say our friends of the. opposition. you are governing those people without their consent; they never consented t'o this transfer or either territory or of oensonal alleciance. and therefore you are violating the great doc- inn enunciated Dy the Declaration of Inde pendence as to the consent of the sroverned. and you should at once on the contrary de clare ior tneir independence. ' The answer to all this Is so lneontMtible. and so absolutely conclusive and overwhelm ing, and bristling from so manv of the Judicial, political and historical pages of our uuioty, inai it seems almost in credible that anyone of prominence In this country, much less the great political leaders of a great political party in "National con vention should assert It- It Is a principle of international law. conceded by all writers on that subject, that it is not necessary to pro cure the consent of the inhabitants of terri tory ceded by one sovereignty to another. In order to make that transfer perfect, both as to the transfer ot the territory itself and of the allegiance of those occupying it. And I defy any representative of the opposition In Ore gon or elsewhere to cite a solitary Instance In the history of this Government, from the ces sion of Louisiana to that of the Phllinnlnes and Porto Rico, wherein It was ever sug gested by anyone connected with either of the treaty-making powers, that It was neces sary to consult the occuDants of such ceded territory, much less to obtain their consent to the cession. Consent was never obtained or asked In the Louisiana Purchase, nor In the Florida ces sion, nor in the annexation of Texas, nor In the treaty of Guadalouoe Hldalro. nor when we made the Gadsden purchase, nor lnour treaty witn nussia Dy which we acquired Alaska, nor when our sovereignty was ex tended over Hawaii. Why. then. In the face of this great funda mental principle of International law. with out the recognition and enforcement of which nations would be perfectly Dowerless to con clude treaties of peace, and In the face of tnese nistoncai precedents of a century. should It now be said you cannot acaulre the Philippines or Porto Rico without obtaining tne consent ot tne occupants or tnose islands, and you have no right whatever to smvern them without giving them a voice In the gov ernment, in otner woras, says tne Democ racy, 'ion snouia eitner wunaraw rrom the Philippines, give them Independence at once. or at least promise them they shall have it witnin a given time. They say we should - treat them as we have treated tho Cubans, but they never stop to inquire as to tne uinerence in tne two cases; that in the one case the sovereignty of the Nation never was extended, that Is. over the Cubans, while In the other It was. The Cubans were an Independent nation, owing no allegiance to the United States. It was wnouy and absolutely different with the Philippines. To Have With drawn From the Philippines, as Suggested by the Democrats la Their Platform of Four Years Ago, Would Have Been Moral and Political Cowardice. To Do So Now, as Suggested by the Demo cratic Candidate, Would Be Infamous. The Democracy of four years ago insisted in their platform and on the stump that It waa the duty of our Government to withdraw from the Philippines and leave them to their fate. They are now insisting that It is our duty to either withdraw, give them Independ ence at once or promise them they shall have It within a certain time, and incidentally they are constantly casting aouots upon our title to the Philippine Archipelago. As I have intimated, the Philippine Islands are ours; ours by purchase, ours by treaty, ours as the result of a most successful war with Spain, and of brilliant and statesman like diplomacy- at the close of the war. The people of that archipelago, by every principle oi international taw, owe allegiance to the United States and to the American flasr. Our duty, therefore, was plain. To have with drawn, as suggested ny the Democratic party, would have been moral and nolitical cow. ardlce: to have withdrawn would have been to admit our Incapacity as & Nation to deal with great Questions, which the emergency ot war had thrown upon ua; to have with drawn would have been to acknowledge that It is not the duty of the United States to sup press insurrections against Its authority in a portion or its lerntory; to have withdraws would have been to admit that the war that had been waged by our American soldiers in suppressing the Philippine insurrection. was an unnoir war. and a war of criminal ag gression. It would have been to admit that the brave, young Oregonlans and the other noble and patriotic men from other states who perished in that war died in a- worthless and unrighteous causo; to have withdrawn would nave been an act of criminal and une&rdoa. abta perfidy, that would have broaght to the cneeic ot tne jsepuouc tne Mush of suae, and which would have invited Dm uw-a contempt of the whole civlfiaed world; to have withdrawn would have ,been to put a price which this Republic could not afford to pay by way ot deference to- tb? Democratic party or any rsn la it, however great he saay bei The blood of Ike brave Iawim. atwi nf mIm1 patriotic men whose lives went 'eat ,1b' up aoiamg tne American nag in tawee leiaiMB pro tested aaiac it. xna yosee of patriottem. speaking through the radiant stars and re splendent stripes of the American flag, cried out in oppotjitlon, and demanded that that proud banner should never be lowered while under fire. ' From the shores beyond the great jiver that separates time from eternity, came the spirit voices of the 200 brave men who perished with the Maine, saying it must not oe done. i-Tom Dewey. Sampson. Schley. Clarke. Slgsby. Merritt. Otis. Shatter. Ander son. Greene. McArthur. Chaffee. Summers and Hj otner leading naval and military neroes. came the united and determined demand that the insurrection be put down, that the Integrity of the American flag be vindicated, that the ownership by the United States of that archipelago should be forever maintained; and last, but not least, there came rrom the great majority of the American people a protest to the effect that the purposes of the Democratic party In regard to the Philippines could not be permitted to prevail. And wnat is tne result; xne democracy in the Dresent campaign seemed for a time, in the beginning of the campaign, to have yielded to this protest and abandoned the proposition to withdraw from the Philippines, leaving them to their fate, and to have taken the otner equally untenable position, that it Is the duty ot the Government to grant Independence at once to the people of the Philippine Island--, or to make them a definite promise when It shall be done. But now. at the close ot tne cam paign, with defeat staring them in the face, their candidate again suggests the withdrawal and the scuttle policy. To this, neither this Government, .nor tho great majority of the people of this country will ever consent. Nei ther will they, having In mind the present and future welfare of those people, make any oen nlte Dromise of Independence. That those peo ple at the present time are not capable of self- government, has been demonstrated oy an abundance of the most reliable testimony. To grant them Independence, therefore, or to guar antee them Independence within any give time, would re a crime upon tne part ot tne uov- ernment ot the United States. The Govern ment having put down the Insurrection, peace having been restored, the great work of the amelioration, education and elevation ot those people was at once inaugurated by the Re publican administration. They have been treat ed and are being treated with great considera tion and kindness and given every constitu tional right, and the enjoyment ot every con stitutional privilege to which they In their present condition are entitled, and the same right to manage, in a large degree, their own affairs, enjoyed by the Inhabitants of other territories of the United States. There has been extended to them a measure of proper sen-government wnicn tney never knew before, and never would have been permitted to enjoy under their Spanish masters. An era of new civilization has been opened to them. They are being instructed In ail the modern arts of peace and of physical and mental development and human 'progress, and there is being opened up a trade and commerce with us which will be of Inestimable value to them as well as to us. Our Nation's Future. We have but recently entered uron a new century. A new era of higher and grander civilization beckons us on towards Its bewilder ing splendors. Today we stand In the forefront of the cavalcade of nations. We are first In commerce, first In manufactures, first In Inven tions, first In agriculture, first in mineral wealth, first in productive capacity, first In the intelligence ana inventive genius of our people, first in every essential attribute that constitutes' nationality, first in all that makes u- Incom parable, as well as Invincible in the great march of material development, physical and mental progress and modern civilization. With the ever-Increasing Inventions constantly ema nating from the inventive brain of our Amer ican' inventor, whereby the labor of the country is measuraoiy perrormed by mechanical con trivances, there has " been a steady and cor responding increase and widening of the ave- nuea pf labor; these create new and multiplied conditions: the result of the American and republican spirit of expansion and modern de velopment. For the continuance of thin nollcv of nan- slon. not only in territory rightfully, honorably and legally acquired, but In every department of material levelopment the Republican party stands pledged today. The policy of the Re- jmDiican party is protection to home Industries and American labor and with fM mmllfW. tion only our gates are not only ajar but awung wiae jopen to the trade and commerce No longer does our grand Remihll ntand parleying with foreign powers and begging for a. ns-nt ot way in tne contested commercial race or tne nations; but in all Its imperial republicanism, in all the beauty anil strnirih and grandeur, and glory, and power, of its true democracy, it valiantly and cflurazeouslv asserts its primacy, and proclaims unhesita tingly us ngnt to leadership In the great march ol me nations toward ultimate destiny. Theodore Roosevelt Our Candidate. For a time in the hezlnnlne- or tl-il. ram. palgn. the Democracy were Inclined, to mnlrx thi3 a personal campaiagn against our can didate. But this was soon abandoned. It was soon discovered no successful war could be waged against the personality of Theo dore Roosevelt- The fact had been demon strated Deyond all question that for un assailable integrity, strong executive ability, firmness of character and disposition to do rlgnt, and to treat all sections, and all classes ot all sections with eaual firmness. and to prosecute and punish all violators of law, whether in exalted or minor noaltions. whether Republicans or Democrats, that Theodore Roosevelt stood ore-eminent. He is a man, while to some extent impul sive in nis nature, wno never acts on any important matter without the most careful consideration, ueiiDerauon and consultation with his friends. But when a decision is once reached, there he stands firm as the rock of Gibraltar, immovable as Mount Hood by either appeals or threats. There Is no element of weakness or vacillation in the make-up of Theodore Roosevelt, but strong in character, firm In his convictions, with a clear nead. a warm and sympathizing heart. and a comprehensive knowledge, not only of our own country and its conditions, but of the history of other nations and their conditions, he has made in the past and will make In the future a most admirable- Presi dent of the United States. While tha great aotuty and nign character of Charles W. Fairbanks makes him a fitting running mate. I hope, therefore, every voter in Oregon will go to the polls on Tuesday next, and I am sure an overwhelming majority will cast their votes for Theodore Roosevelt and Charles W. Fairbanks, and I trust and be lieve that those who cannot seo their way clear to do so. will be pretty evenly divided among the Democratic. Populist. Prohibition and Socialist candidates, so that all will Dave a lair show. IS HARD TO "RFiATiTZK. Growth of Portland Astonishes Old- Time Theatrical Wan. "It don't seem possible!" exclaimed Samuel Carmen Mott. the plcneer theat rical manager, as he stood at Sixth ani Washington streets yesterday evening1. when the lights were turned on, and In numerable playhouses sprang into electric prominence. "It don't seem possible!" "What don't seem possible, old man? Feeling queer about the skypiece? Bet ter come have something for it." "Why, the change in Portland since the days I first used to bring attractions here. This corner used to be 'way out in the country during the days when the Park Opera Company o-wneu the North west. You don't remember those days, do you? Come to think of it, I am a lit tie thirsty." Mr. Mott has been coming to Portland, Io! these many years, and he loves to talk over the days when Jeannle Winston took the town by storm and waa wined and dined by the society of the Rose City In a way no other theatrical star has ever been. "Tell you what, old man, they simply went wild over her here. Why, the so ciety people kept her so busy with din Tiers and luncheons that she 'had difficulty In attending to her performances. And what a hit she made! They don't turn 'em out nowadays to equal Jeannle. In light opera, such as 'Olivette 'Bocatt- do ana 'The Queen s Iace Handker chief,' she had none to touch, her. Pity that sort of stuff has been dropped now. Is there a field for it? Well, I should say there Is only the operas are not written. Public seems to be running toward musl cal comedies entirely; just gone crazy over them." Mr. Samuel' Carmen Mott's tone of voice indicated severe disapproval of the rou si cal comedy as opposed to light opera. "Were you named Carmen because you were Intended for the stage?" Mr. Mott looked dangerous for an in stant, "but It was soon over, and he smiled out loud. He explained that his kind of a Carmen was spelled another way and that his family had named him so without the least suspicion of histrionic ambition. "Not that I have never been on the stage, for I have, several times.. I never made a hit, though; at least not like the stars I have managed. When I had Jean nie Winston here with the. Park Opera Company we played 12 weeks straight running In the old Park Theater. Those were great days," he continued, and then the far-away look In his eyes hit on The uregomaa bulldlnc- "Now. thre's a good example- of the way Portia ad has grown. It only; seems SORE HANDS Itching, Burning Palms, Painful Finger Ends, Shapeless Nails. SOREFEET Inflamed, ' Itching, Burning, Sore, Tender and Perspiring, ONE NIGHT TREATMENT. 8oak the hands on retiring in a strong, hot, creamy lather of Caticura Soap. Dry and anoint freely with Cuticura Ointment, the great skin cure and purest of emollients. Wear, daring the night, old, loose kid gloves., or bandage lightly In old, soft cotton or linen. For red, ronghand chapped hands, dry, fissured, itching, feverish palms, frith brittle, shapeless nails and painful finger ends, this treatment is simply -wonder nl, fre quently curing in' a single application. Complete local and constitutional treatment for every humour of the skin, scalp and. blood, with loss of hair, may now be had for one dollar. Bathe with hot water and 'Cuticura Soap, to cleanse the surface of crusts and scales, and soften the thickened cuticle. Dry, without hard rubbing, and apply Cuti cura Ointment freely, to allay itching, irritation and inflammation, and soothe and heal, and lastly, take the Cuticura Resolvent Pills to cool and cleanse the blood. This treatment affords instant relief, permits rest and sleep in -the severest forms of Eczema and other itching, burning and scaly humours, and points to a speedy, permanent and economical core of torturing, disfigur ing humours, from pimples to scrofula, from infancy to age, when all other remedies and the best physicians fail. Sold throughout tht world. Cnticnra Eeiolrtnt. 50c (ta Potter Dror a CTmel. Cara 8oI Proprietor. a"r-Bnd for " How to Core Ertry Hstawar." yesterday that we fellows used to go Into the little oUlce on Front street and write our own dope and hang It on the hook. Jerry Coldwell used to make things pret ty lively for us around there Jerry here yet? And there was Joe Levlnson he was a dramatic critic away back in the 'SOs. What has become of Baltimore, and Greenwood, and all those fellows?" Mr. Mott thinks the proposition of put ting vaudeville into all the houses In Port land for the next year Is a bad one. "It will be overproduction. If there is going to be a crowd here they will want variety, so give it to them give It to them," he said. Mr. Mott is now advance man for the Davy Crockett production which is star ring James J. Jeffries, and has great yarns to spin about the wonderful hunt ing trips of the redoubtable James. Coal Engineers on Strike. ST. LOUIS, Nov. L Dispatches from Illinois points indicate that less than 100 of the 300 coal mines in that state are hoisting coal today as a result of the strike of engineers, which went into effect at midnight. The total number of oper ators who deserted their posts of duty Is about 800, and nearly 50,000 miners are thrown out of work as a result. The engineers do not look for an early settlement of the difficulties, which were brought about by the action of the oper ators in cutting- the wages of hoisting- en gineers. Many of the miners, however, are against the strike, and are working hard for an early settlement. MRS. JOHN H0SKINS SAYS: "WHY DON'T YOU PUB LISH WHAT VINOL HAS DONE FOR OUR BOY, So That Other Portland Parents May Be Benefited as We Have Been." Such requests are continually coming to us, and we have over and over again published in The Oregonian for the benefit of Portland people, not only our opinion of "VInol and why It is so far superior to all of the other tonics and cod liver oil preparations, but unquestionable testi mony from our best class of citizens and physicians proving its wonderful cura tive and strength creating properties. Mrs. Hosklna writes: "Our boy since a child has suffered terribly with bron chitis during the cold weather. For years we used cod liver oil, emulsions and other medicines, which upset his. stom ach, gave only temporary relief, and did i'f CLIFFORD H0SKINS. not cure. VInol was recommended and we tried It, and I am thankful to say he Is entirely cured and In better health than he has been for years. I wish you would publish this in The Oregonian. as l am sure many mothers will be glad to know of such, a healing and strength creating medicine for their chndren." Woodard, Clarke & Co. say: "The reason Vinol accomplishes such results after everything else fails is because it contains in a concentrated form all of the curative, strength-creating properties of cod liver oil. but without a drop of oil to upset the stomach and retard its work, whereas many of the imitations of Vinol, claiming to be cod liver oil perparations, contain drugs and chem icals claimed to have the same effect as Vlaol, but which, cannot, as they never came from the cod's liver at all and con tain no cod liver oil elements. The 'secret of separating" the medicinal elements of the Cod liver from the oil is known only to the makers of" VInol. Therefore, there can ba no other cod liver oil preSawi tion Just as- good i or just like Viaol." So sure are we that Vinol is far -superior to all other tonics, cod Hrer oil. and emulsions that we freely offer to return the -money In every case whero It fails to give perfect satlsfaetioQ. Woodard. .Clarke Jb C., Orucsista,