{"1": {"fulltext": "vrm\\nS6", "height": "5306", "width": "3604", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0001.jp2"}, "2": {"fulltext": "Hollinger Corp.\\npH 8.5", "height": "4449", "width": "2681", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0002.jp2"}, "3": {"fulltext": "Y\\nDT 933\\n.S6\\nCopy 1\\nForeign Affairs and Domestic Obstacles.\\nSPEECH\\nOF\\nHON. WILLIAM ALDEN SMITH,\\nOF MICHIGAN,\\nIN THE\\nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,\\nTUESDAY, FEBRUARY ,6, 1900.\\ni\\nWASHINGTON.\\nI900.", "height": "4449", "width": "2681", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0003.jp2"}, "4": {"fulltext": "V7\\nCong. Record Of\\n10 Ja. 01", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0004.jp2"}, "5": {"fulltext": "3TT \\\\-3 3\\nForeign Affairs and Domestic Obstacles.\\nSPEEG H\\nOF\\nHON. WILLIAM ALDEN SMITH.\\nThe House being in Committee of the Whole House on the state of the\\nUnion, and having under consideration the bill (H. R. 7911) making appropri-\\nations for the diplomatic and consular service for the fiscal year ending June\\n30, 1901\u00e2\u0080\u0094\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH said:\\nMr. Chairman: The bill under consideration makes an appro-\\npriation for the consular and diplomatic service of our country.\\nNo more important measure will be presented for our considera-\\ntion. Very little attention has thus far been given in debate to the\\nspecific provisions of the bill, the result of patient and laborious\\ncare on the part of the committee, and especially commendable\\nto the distinguished and able chairman.\\nMany suggestions have been made by members of the commit-\\ntee and others during its preparation, looking to the improvement\\nof the foreign service; and I have no doubt whatever, but for the\\nrule which pre* ents new legislation on general appropriation bills,\\nsome of these suggestions might have met with favor.\\nNotice was given to the committee of my desire to incorporate\\na new provision in the bill authorizing a minister resident to the\\nOrange Free State and the South African Republic, not for the\\npurpose of adding to our perplexities, but because of the growing\\nimportance of our relations to those countries and the desire to\\nafford to the President, whenever he might think proper, this\\nwider latitude for diplomatic relationship.\\nRealizing the hostility of our committee to this plan in the pres-\\nent bill, and the fruitlessness of such an effort in the face of a\\nsingle objection. w T hich I am advised will be forthcoming, I have\\nconcluded not to press the matter in violation of the rules, with\\n4051 3", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0005.jp2"}, "6": {"fulltext": "which every member is supposed to be familiar, but shall content\\nmyself by bringing in a bill in the usual and orderly way.\\nv Mr. Chairman, much discussion has been going oti in the public\\npress and in Congress regarding our foreign affairs and much\\nabout the foreign affairs of other countries. It is not my purpose\\nto traverse these well-worn paths, but to briefly point out the dif-\\nficulties of our position and fix some of the responsibility therefor.\\nA very large and representative element in our country has\\nplaced itself in opposition to the annexation of new territory by\\nthe United States whenever it has been attempted in the past.\\nThere was much respectable opposition to the annexation of Louisi-\\nana, Texas, and that vast empire of the West now constituting a\\nveritable bulwark of American States; opposition loud and demon-\\nstrative against the cherished idea of President Grant to make\\nSanto Domingo a part of the American Union, when it was offered\\nto our country merely for the asking and defeated out of pure\\nspite by a tie vote in the Senate that rich gem of the Caribbean\\nSea, the natural resting place and rendezvous of our West Indian\\nfleet.\\nThe distinguished representative of this Government in the\\nHawaiian Islands under the Administration of President Harri-\\nson, and at a critical juncture in the affairs of that Pacific terri-\\ntory, raised the American flag with the concurrence of the author-\\nities of the Hawaiian group.\\nThese islands had long been under the care and protection of our\\ncountry. European powers understood that our interests were\\nparamount there, and no other government regarded these islands\\nas open to conquest. The attitude of our country was hailed with\\ndelight and satisfaction by the people there, and for the first time\\nthey felt themselves relieved from the doubt and anxiety of main-\\ntaining public order.\\nPresident Harrison promptly submitted a treaty of annexation\\nto the Senate, but before it was acted upon the Administration\\nchanged. The Democratic party came into power; the treaty of\\nannexation was withdrawn and a commissioner with paramount\\nauthority dispatched to these islands to connive and thwart the\\nmanifest purpose of his predecessor.\\nThe country well remembers the unjustifiable conduct of the\\n4051", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0006.jp2"}, "7": {"fulltext": "Democratic party at that time, and it disapproved this backward\\nstep. So soon as an opportunity was presented, the wrong done\\nby Commissioner Blount was remedied, and these islands came\\nlegally, effectively, permanently within the legal limits of our\\nsovereignty. [Applause.]\\nWere we wise in this action? Everyone now admits it. The\\ndanger of hostile attack upon our western coast has been re-\\nduced, and no foreign fleet hovers about this Pacific stronghold\\nprepared to dash upon our coast at the slightest provocation.\\nThe dream and hope and expectation of our statesmen, strate-\\ngists, and sailors received its final consummation when annexa-\\ntion became an accomplished fact. Is there a man upon the other\\nside of this Chamber who has the temerity to now rise in his\\nplace and say that he regrets the course pursued by the Repub-\\nlican party in this matter?\\nWhen the last revolution of the Cuban people was at its height;\\nwhen they were entitled to belligerent rights under every rule of\\ninternational law; when they had held at bay 200,000 soldiers, the\\nflower of the Spanish army, and had driven back to Spain every\\nprominent general who had been sent over for the purpose of ac-\\ncomplishing the pacification of the island; when they had main-\\ntained a separate government for upward of three years and the\\nisland was torn with war, devastated with fire and famine, and\\ndepopulated with disease and starvation from end to end: who was\\nit that opposed their recognition as belligerents? Why, of course,\\nit was a Democratic President, and his action was sustained for\\nmany months by his party in the Congress of the United States.\\nThe prayer of the struggling, the parched lips of the dying, the cry\\nof distress from women and little children, were not heard until\\nthe Democratic party was retired from power and the Republican\\nparty installed in its p^ce. [Applause.]\\nFrom what source does this wail of political opposition to the\\nannexation of the Philippine Islands come? Who is it that finds\\nmost fault and is loudest in denunciation of our conduct? No\\nless a personage than the late leader of the Democratic party in a\\nfruitless Presidential contest, who, if my memory serves me right,\\nwas, if it be a crime, particeps criminis in our action in this re-\\ngard, for he not only enlisted in the Army to put down the power\\n4051", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0007.jp2"}, "8": {"fulltext": "6\\nof Spain, knowing that the fruits of war would dispossess her of\\nher territory wherever it was the disposition of this Government\\nto strike, but he could scarcely wait to be discharged before he\\nposted off to Washington to advise the hesitating and halting\\nDemocrats in the United States Senate that they should ratify the\\nParis treaty of peace, which provided that the Philippine Archi-\\npelago, Puerto Rico, and the island of Guam should become part\\nof the territory of the United States [applause] and providing\\nalso for the payment of the $20,000,000 agreed upon in this con-\\nvention. How often since, with a brazenness and effrontery\\nunequaled, has he berated the Government and its high officers\\nfor doing the very thing which he himself advised and to which\\nhe was a party?\\nFrom what source does this criticism come, I ask again, for our\\npolicy as to the Philippine Islands and Puerto Rico and Guam?\\nIt comes from the disorganized, disordered, distracted organiza-\\ntion represented upon the other side of this Chamber, occasionally\\nsprinkled with a few well-meaning but misguided and mischievous\\ncritics, who, having taken a wrong position, have not the courage\\nto change it.\\nWhen the declaration of war was made with Spain it contained\\na proposition binding upon our Government a certain course of\\nconduct with reference to the future government of Cuba. I\\nregretted that condition then and I regret it now. From what\\nsource did that provision emanate? It was tacked ori to the decla-\\nration in the Senate of the United States by a Populistic Senator\\nas a mere sop to the jealous powers of Europe.\\nWho are they, Mr. Chairman, who have upon every occasion given\\naid and comfort to the enemies of our country in rebellion against\\nthe flag borne so bravely by Lawton and Logan and the soldiers\\nof our Union in that far-off land? Democrats, Populists. Sir,\\nthey have criticised the President for not acting earlier in Cuba;\\nhave criticised the President for acting at all in the Philippines.\\nWe can not satisfy them. They urged ns to war with Spain before\\nthe country was ready, and want us to stop before we are through.\\nThe Democratic party were eager for our soldiers to go into Cuba\\nand, lo and behold, are as eager for them to get out. You are a\\nparty of negation, fault-finding, demagogy, and demoralization,\\n4051", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0008.jp2"}, "9": {"fulltext": "You complain of the treaty of peace, ratified tinder the wtip\\nand spur of public opinion, many Democrats being forced to vote\\ntherefor; and now, with sublime impudence, you arise here upon\\nevery occasion to find fault with us for occupying the ceded ter-\\nritory. Consistency, thou art a jewel, but indeed rare upon the\\nother side of this Chamber. [Applause.]\\nComplaining of our embroilment in the affairs of the far east,\\nto which point you say we have unlawfully stretched the Con-\\nstitution, you now seek to involve our country in the affairs of\\nthe South African Republic. Can we safely be governed by their\\nadvice? When has it been wise and helpful? I pause for a reply,\\nand the only answer is the echo of your wailing cry.\\nYou accuse us of making an alliance with England. What for?\\nThe occasion does not exist, and the desire is not present in the\\nheart or mind of any worthy public official. The charge is base-\\nless, unworthy its authors, and intended merely as a cheap scare-\\ncrow to alarm timid people.\\nThe only alliance known to me between England and the United\\nStates was dissolved yesterday by mutual agreement. It was\\nmade before the Republican party was born, and is known as the\\nClayton-Bulwer treaty, providing for the joint use and occupation\\nof a canal across the Isthmus. It was an ill-gotten child and\\nnobody regrets its demise.\\nAlliance with England! Intangible, indefinite, indistinct hallu-\\ncination, born in the small brain of a distorted demagogue for\\npolitical purposes in this campaign only! [Applause.]\\nFor several weeks past the tender sympathies of the American\\npeople have been aroused and their interest excited in the unjusti-\\nfiable war now being waged by England in South Africa. Public\\nmeetings have been held, resolutions of sympathy adopted, and\\nfunds raised to ameliorate suffering and distress\u00e2\u0080\u0094 all commenda-\\nble, praiseworthy manifestations of the federation of mankind\\nand humanity s interest in humanity, though seas divide and con-\\ntinents separate. [Applause.]\\nDemonstrations of this character are cosmopolitan, embracing\\nAmericans, native and foreign born, but whether of Dutch, Ger-\\nman, Irish, Scandinavian, or Polish descent, they vie equally with\\none another in upholding the right and condemning the wrong.\\n4051", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0009.jp2"}, "10": {"fulltext": "8\\nTheir love of liberty may have been born in the throes of revolu-\\ntion. The ax of the Duke of Alva may have been made crimson\\nwith the blood of ancestors spotless in the sight of heaven, or their\\nnative soil despoiled and they driven forth into the world without\\na country, save, perhaps, this God-given land of their adoption\\nwhere the bright bow of promise lured them. Emigrants though\\nthey were, they have been true and loyal to the country through\\nstorm and trial.\\nI have the honor to represent upon this floor more Holland-\\nAmericans than any member here. They are among the best\\ncitizens of our Commonwealth. Honest, sturdy, self-reliant,\\nfrugal, they plod the weary path of life with hope as their guid-\\ning star and faith in the life to come.\\nSirs, I would consider myself unworthy to represent them here\\nif for a moment I yielded to the precipitate pressure of the over-\\nzealous or did any act that might in its consequences place our\\ncountry in a false light in the eyes of the world, involve the de-\\nstruction of the salutary doctrine enunciated by Monroe, or lessen\\nthe feeling of security now enjoyed by all classes of our citizen-\\nship. A man in the private walks of life is responsible only to his\\nconscience may give expression to his feelings unrestrained but\\nthose charged with official responsibility must never forget that\\nno matter how many are pro-English or pro-Boer, it is his bounden\\nduty under the Constitution he has sworn to uphold to be openly,\\navowedly, loyally pro- American. [Applause.]\\nGentlemen upon the other side of this Chamber mistake the\\ncharacter of those sympathizing with the Boer and underestimate\\ntheir love of liberty and devotion to America if they think these\\nsturdy men would for an instant imperil our institutions or impair\\nthe security of our homes, the peace of our firesides, or cast dis-\\ncredit upon our Government by any hasty, unwise, unlawful, or\\npremature act.\\nYesterday upon this floor, in the heat of debate, a distinguished\\nand able Representative, after detailing the conquests of England,\\nexpressed the wish that this last war in South Africa might work\\nthe beginning of the end of the British Empire. Shame! Shame!\\nWould you welcome the fall of a vast empire, bringing wreck\\nand ruin upon the millions of peasants and yeomanry who are\\n4051", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0010.jp2"}, "11": {"fulltext": "only temporarily represented by a foreign secretary, bent upon\\nhis present nnholy mission? Far, far more preferable be it said\\nthat Joseph Chamberlain misinterprets the will of the English\\npeople. Public sentiment does not sustain him at home, and the\\nwide, wide world is encircled with disapproval.\\nThe ministry overstepped when they undertook to interfere in the\\ndomestic affairs of the South African Republic. I need not go to\\nthe other side of this Chamber for witnesses. 1 can summon to\\nthe bar of public opinion many of the foremost statesmen of Eng-\\nland. Take, for example, the uncontradicted statements of James\\nBrice, W. T. Stead, of Sir William Vernon-Harcourt, the great\\nLiberal leader of England and formerly in the cabinet of Glad-\\nstone, who says:\\nThat convention as it was called, of 1881, reserved to Great Britain the\\nright of veto upon treaties with foreign states. Secondly, in regard to its\\ninternal administration, it limited, in a certain degree, the internal govern\\nment and autonomy of the Transvaal State, but as Lord Derby, who was\\nthen colonial secretary, stated (I give his words), In all other respects en-\\ntire freedom of action was accorded not inconsistent with the rights expressly\\nreserved, so that in the convection of 1881\u00e2\u0080\u0094 follow me here\u00e2\u0080\u0094 it was in that\\nfirst convention of 1881 the independence so limited was expressed by the\\nword suzerainty, a vague word, but one which was employed in that con-\\nvention of 1881.\\nThen as for the new convention. You have a convention in which the\\nword suzerainty has disappeared. You have a reservation of the control\\nof this country over the treaty relations of the Transvaal, and what was the\\nresult of that new convention? The result of that new convention was stated\\nby Lord Derby; and now this is a very important statement. He said:\\nBy the omission of those articles in the convention of 1881, which assigned\\nto Her Majesty and the British Government certain specific powers and func-\\ntions connected with the internal government and the foreign relations, your\\nGovernment will be left free to govern the country without intei ference, to\\nconduct its diplomatic intercourse and shape its foreign policy, subject only\\nto the requirements embodied in the fourth article of the new draft that any\\ntreaty with a foreign state shall not have effect without the approval of the\\nQueen.\\nTherefore, I think you may take it with absolute certainty that the new\\nconvention of 1884 was this It kept the control of foreign affairs under the\\nveto of the British Government, and in respect of their internal affairs\\nstruck out the word suzerainty, leaving or giving to the people of the\\nTransvaal absolute internal authority home rule, in fact, for themselves.\\nWhy should we copy an old preamble in a new convention? In the pream-\\nble of 1884 the word suzerainty disappears, and it is not found in any of the\\narticles of that convention. This may seem rather technical to you, but it\\nreally lies at the bottom of what is at issue to-day.\\nMr. W. H. Smith, who was the respected leader of the House of Commons,\\nas the representative of that Government, said:\\nThe convention of London made in 1884 between Her Majesty and the\\nSouth African Republic contains no express reservation of the Queen s right\\n4051", "height": "4389", "width": "2557", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0011.jp2"}, "12": {"fulltext": "10\\nof suzerainty; and though Her Majesty retains under the convention the\\npower of refusing to sanction the treaties made by the South African Re-\\npublic with foreign states and nations and with certain native tribes, the\\ncardinal principle of that settlement [mark this] was that the internal gov-\\nernment and legislation of the South African Republic shall not be inter-\\nfered with. What is the use of talking of the existing of suzerainty over\\ntheir international affairs reserved in the preamble of the convention of 1881\\ntvhich was done away with by the convention of 1884?\\nClearly no legal right existed in Great Britain to regulate the\\nsuffrage laws and fix new qualifications for electors. This was a\\ndomestic affair, to be regulated by the Government of the Trans-\\nvaal.\\nIn his dispatch of December 31, 1895, Mr. Chamberlain defined\\nthe South African Republic as a foreign State which is in\\nfriendly treaty relations with Great Britain.\\nAgain, on May 8, 1896, he said in the House of Commons.\\nTo go to war with President Kruger in order to force upon him reform in in-\\nternal affairs of his State, in which secretaries of state, standing in this place,\\nhave repudiated all right of interference\u00e2\u0080\u0094 that would be a course of action\\nas immoral as it would be unwise.\\nTo whom shall he now answer for this deplorable war, with its\\nfearful loss of life? To high heaven and his country and mankind.\\nOnce aroused, the common sense of England will hurl him from\\nhis high office and, following the example of Gladstone, whose\\nwisdom still rules us from its urn, will halt her troops, wherever\\nscattered, and bid them return to the constitutional and legal limits\\nof her lawful domain.\\nGentlemen upon the other side have upon the rostrum and in\\nthis presence said it was our duty to interfere. The gentleman\\nfrom Colorado [Mr. Shafroth] says it is our duty to offer medi-\\nation. Mr. Chairman, such doctrine is unknown in the law of na-\\ntions, and such course upon our part would properly subject us to\\nthe charge of unwarranted meddlesomeness. We do not know\\nthat our offer would be acceptable to either party. The Boers,\\nwho have shown a disposition to take care of themselves, have\\nnot asked us to interfere, while Great Britain bears her defeats\\nwithout complaining. Where does our duty lie?\\nMuch as we deplore war, sincerely as we would welcome peace,\\nthe war is not of our making and our sympathies must not be\\npermitted to involve us.\\n4051", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0012.jp2"}, "13": {"fulltext": "11\\nWhile Secretary, Daniel Webster thus wrote to the President\\nin 1852, as follows:\\nIt has never been the purpose of the Government of the United States to\\ninterpose, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of the States of Central Amer-\\nica, with a view to settle the controversies between them by any influence\\nwhatsoever exercised by this Government without their request or free con-\\nsent.\\nMr. Everett, Secretary of State, in writing to Sir Edward Thorn-\\nton, the British minister, in September, 1879, apropos of the prop-\\nosition to join with Great Britain and Germany in offering their\\nmediation in the war then pending between Chili and Peru, made\\nthe following statement:\\n1 am able to say, however, that our ministers have given and are giving\\nattention to the wishes of th.s Government to procure its good offices in\\nfavor of peace at the earliest indication of the readiness of the belligerents\\nto consider such good offices acceptable.\\nOur course is plain. We must await events or expose our own\\ncountry to criticism and possibly obloquy. The Boers in South\\nAfrica seem amply able to take care of themselves. [Applause.]\\nAnd I nope and trust that no false sentimentality will prompt our\\ncountry to enter upon any other course than will be creditable to\\nit now and in the future. I would not have England crush the\\nBoers; neither do I wish for England calamity within her proper\\nand legitimate domain, and I do not believe the most ultra pro-\\nBoer in the United States wishes any such destiny for that great\\nEmpire across the sea.\\nWhy, Mr. Chairman, what does it mean? It means that the\\npolicy of the colonial secretary, Mr. Chamberlain, is to bring down\\nupon the heads of the common people of England the failure and\\nfall of their country and their Government. Any man or party\\nor set of men who wou|d wish such an end for the British Empire\\nisth mghtless indeed. Are you talking for mere party advantage?\\nHow unjustifiable. Who constitutes the British Empire? Not\\nSir Joseph Chamberlain alone, but Sir William Vernon Harcourt\\nas well and those whom he represents as the great leader of so\\nmany thousands of Liberals who oppose and think unwise the\\npolicy of Mr. Chamberlain in this crisis.\\nWhy, Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman from Missouri [Mr,\\nClark] bring down ruin upon the common people of England?\\nGreat in her history, great in her sober, steady yeomanry, it is\\n4051", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0013.jp2"}, "14": {"fulltext": "not the mere temporary representative in power, but it is the\\ncommon people behind that representative, for whom I speak; and\\nmuch as my sympathies go out to the Boers, much as I believe\\nEngland to be wrong in this controversy, much as I believe that\\nhistory will hold her forever the unlawful aggressor in the field of\\nher present military operations, still I do wish for England honor,\\nfame, and renown as a country, because I believe in the ultimate\\nglorious destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race.\\nMr. Chairman, I am well aware of the fact that the President\\nhas been urged again and again to mediate in this controversy.\\nThe gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Shafroth] holds that he\\nhas this power of mediation at any time. A close reading of in-\\nternational law throws doubt upon this proposition. Indeed, if\\nhe goes according to the rule of nations, he must wait until one\\nof the parties to the contest or both of them ask him to mediate\\nor intervene.\\nI find in this resolution which I hold in my hand, passed by over\\n4,000 citizens of my home city at Grand Rapids, at a pro-Boer\\nmeeting, sympathizing strongly, as does every lover of liberty the\\nworld over, with the Boers I find in the closing paragraph of this\\narraignment of Great Britain and her course a provision that the\\nPresident shall be requested to mediate and offer his good offices\\nwhenever it may be done within the rules of international law,\\nand I am ready tu await the action of the President. I am eager\\nto follow in his lead. He can be trusted to do what is right, both\\nfor our country and for others, should they ask mediation.\\nMany of us recall how we urged the President to take early ac-\\ntion with reference to Cuba. Committees were appointed from\\nthis House to wait upon him and urge him that civilization and\\nthe people of the country wanted him to act. But he waited,\\nwith thoughtful hesitation, not wishing to be rushed unduly into\\na scene the end of which no man could foretell. And I recall\\nhow, sitting around his Cabinet table one da3 T members of this\\nHouse urged him to act promptly and vigorously.\\nI know one gentleman, now in my hearing, who said to him,\\nMr. President, those torpedo boats are upon the high sea. They\\nwill soon menace our harbors. We must have protection for our\\n\u00e2\u0080\u00a2coast cities. We think it is time for you to act. I recall the re-\\n4051", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0014.jp2"}, "15": {"fulltext": "13\\nply, as do others sitting near me, when the President said, You\\nask me to act. You say you are afraid of the torpedo boats now\\nupon the sea and headed for our country. Give yourself no un-\\neasiness, sir. While I do not propose to go to war if it can be\\navoided, while I pray to God that we may be absolved from this ter-\\nrible thing\u00e2\u0080\u0094 I know what war is while I shall not shrink from it\\nif it comes, but would be saved from it if possible, if those torpedo\\nboats come to our country our American Navy will take care of\\nthem, sir. Give yourself no uneasiness upon that point. [Ap-\\nplause.]\\nAnd so they did: and I recall with what splendid composure\\nthe President awaited the final outcome, while many were criti-\\ncising him. Indeed, in some sections of the country he was hung\\nin effigy. In the theaters his name was hissed; but splendidly,\\nsuperbly, with great composure, he stood at the helm in the midst\\nof the storm and awaited the final outcome. And when the time\\ncame to act, he acted in harmony with that judgment of which\\nhe alone seems to be capable, and met every situation that con-\\nfronted the country with matchless tact and great ability, which\\ncovered our country with glory and imperishable renown. [Ap-\\nplause.] That we were wiser in his leadership than we should\\nhave been without it everyone now concedes. That he was su-\\npremely right and met the full measure of his responsibility all\\nadmit.\\nNow, Mr. Chairman, in this exigency, when he is asked to in-\\ntervene, when he is asked to mediate, when he is asked to take\\naction, shall we await the ripened judgment of his splendid\\nmind, equal to every emergency, or shall we unduly force him\\nwhen it is unnecessary? For my part, I am willing to follow the\\nPresident.\\nIf he ever sees the time when he thinks it will be appropriate to\\nintervene, so may it be; but until that time comes I do not be-\\nlieve there is a single citizen of my district or State, I do not\\nbelieve there is a single person in the United States, who, down\\ndeep in his heart, would have the President act otherwise than\\naccording to his own best judgment. He has led the country\\nthrough many a perilous period. He will do it again. Thank\\nGod, 1 have never yet in the course of my life felt called upon to\\n4051", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0015.jp2"}, "16": {"fulltext": "14\\ncriticise in severe or harsh language any President of the United\\nStates. My respect for that high office prompts me to pause, and\\nmy respect for its present occupant would not permit severe criti-\\ncism or abuse to be hurled at him without making an attempt in\\nhis defense.\\nHe is our President, no matter what political party puts him in\\npower. He is the President of the whole people; and it ill be-\\ncomes any citizen of the country to abuse him without cause.\\n[Applause on the Republican side.] The burden of the President\\nof the United States is heavy enough without our adding greater or\\nmore onerous ones for him to carry. The people of rny district\\ndo not desire to embarrass the President, and our Democratic\\nfriends on the other side should not do so merely to meet the re-\\nquirements of political exigencies. [Applause on the Republican\\nside.]\\nMr. Chairman, why do not our Democratic opponents criticise\\nsomething in the Administration of President McKinley at home?\\nNot a single word of criticism upon the tariff law, which a special\\nsession of Congress put upon the statute books, reviving industry\\nand giving employment to labor; not a single criticism about any\\nof our internal affairs chargeable to the President. Instead, they\\ncarry us far out into the Pacific and to the Sulu Islands.\\nMr. RICHARDSON. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him\\na question?\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH. The farther away their inquiry is\\ndirected the better the excuse for heaping opprobrium upon the\\nPresident and his party.\\nMr. RICHARDSON. Will my friend allow me to ask him a\\nquestion?\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH. Certainly.\\nMr. RICHARDSON. I understand you are ready to follow the\\nPresident on the questions of the day. I want to ask the gentle-\\nman if he is going with him in recommending free trade for Puerto\\nRico, or is he going to vote to tax them at 25 per cent?\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH. Yes.\\nMr. RICHARDSON. Then you will not go with the President.\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH. Yes; I am with the President,\\n4051", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0016.jp2"}, "17": {"fulltext": "15\\nand follow his leadership, because I believe it inspired by the\\nhighest wisdom and loftiest patriotism.\\nMr. RICHARDSON. He has recommended free trade, and tfte\\ncommittee recommend 25 per cent tax. Are you going to vote for\\nthat, or are you going to vote for free trade and be with the Presi-\\ndent?\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH. I am going to stand with the Presi-\\ndent.\\nMr. RICHARDSON. That is all right.\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH (continuing). The leader of our\\nparty and the embodiment of more wisdom than will ever be\\ngathered up from all the cohorts of the Democracy of the North,\\nEast, South, or West. [Applause on the Republican side and in\\nthe galleries.]\\nThe CHAIRMAN. Applause in the galleries is not permissible.\\nMr. RICHARDSON. I am glad the gentleman is with us in that.\\nMr. WM. ALDEN SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I reassert that they\\nhave not made a criticism upon our domestic affairs upon which\\nthey dare to go to the country in the next Presidential election.\\nThe} r know that factories have been opened as well as the mints.\\nThey know that the country is prosperous. We know it. From\\nevery State represented on the other side of this Chamber the\\nuncontradicted testimony comes, while the great industries of my\\nhome city were never more prosperous.\\nTwice a year the buyers of furniture throughout the United\\nStates make their way to the city of Grand Rapids. In the past,\\n300 buyers, representing as many cities, filled the measure of our\\nrealization; but this year, this great year of Republican pros-\\nperity, over 800 buyers, from States represented on the other side\\nf the Chamber as well as this, have gone there to buy the handi-\\nwork of our genius. [Applause.]\\nYou can not stop this march of progress; you can not cripple\\nthe prosperity of our land. You know that your efforts are futile,\\nand so you perch yourselves upon a very lofty plane and criticise\\nour policy in the farthest nook of the world with which we may\\npossibly have some temporary relation.\\nNo, Mr. Chairman, the Democratic party will never succeed by\\n4051", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0017.jp2"}, "18": {"fulltext": "yiRARY _ OF CONGRESS\\n019 920 727 1\\n16\\nmisrepresentations. The country is too wise: it knows their\\nmethods; it knows the results of their government, and they will\\nav* id you as surely as the time comes to test our strength. Will\\nthey nominate for President their last and only leader? Will he\\nsay that the annexation or attempted annexation in the Philip-\\npine Islands was unwise, when he fought to obtain this identical\\nconquest? He advocated the payment of this money and he advo-\\ncated the ratification of the treaty which meant the annexation of\\nthese islands. Will he go to the country upon a platform that he\\nwas or is opposed to that policy? The country will see through\\nhis sham.\\nNo, Mr. Chairman, this is too great a country for small eva-\\nsions. The people are too sincere and devoted to it to be trifled\\nwith. Our struggles are our chaplets woven in the woof of his-\\ntory. Mankind the world over shares in our triumphs. Where\\nwe think and act, and by action change into reality the dreams\\nof optimists who love their fellows; where by suffering we wring\\nfrom defeat the glories of victory, it seems to the listening nations\\nof an awakened world that our heroic efforts are glorified and\\ngraced by the approval of heaven itself and redound to the benefit\\nof the whole human race, and the spectacle is shown of the Giant\\nof the West, with burnished shield and drawn sword, standing in\\nthe midst of the nations of earth as the champion of the oppressed,\\nthe defender of the weak, and the acknowledged arbiter of the\\neternal right.\\nIt was once said of the resurrection of Greece and the cession\\nby Great Britain of Crete, Thessaly, Epirus, and the Ionian Isles,\\nThus did the old Hellas arise from, the grave of nations; scorched\\nby fire, riddled by shot, baptized by blood, she emerged victorious\\nfrom the conflict. She achieved her independence because she\\nproved herself worthy of it. She was trained to manhood in the\\nonly school of real improvement the school of suffering. Thus\\nour country was born, cradled, and reared, and for the incarna-\\ntion of this mighty spirit I follow willingly and gladly the match-\\nless leadership of William McKinley, President of an indissoluble\\nand united country. [Great applause.]\\n4051\\no", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0018.jp2"}, "19": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0019.jp2"}, "20": {"fulltext": "\u00e2\u0096\u00a0SEEL* con \u00c2\u00abess\\n019 920 S\u00e2\u0084\u00a2", "height": "4253", "width": "2413", "jp2-path": "foreignaffairsdo00smit_0020.jp2"}}