AMERICA’S PRESIDENTS

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 60, Issue 4233, 19 January 1940, Page 3

AMERICA’S PRESIDENTS

SOME REMARKABLE MEN. ■The year 1940 is an important one in the history of the -United States of America. A new President will be elected. The world will watch closely the march of events in America in the next few months, as on the trend they take will depend the identity of the new President and the attitude of the United States to the conflict in Europe. The first question to which the world will seek an answer is: Will Franklin D. Roosevelt consent to nomination for a third term as President ? If he does it will be setting a precedent, as no President of the United States of America has contested the position for a third time. There is no constitutional bar to contesting a third term: it is just a tradition. The attitude of the Roosevelt Administration to the conflict in Europe may be best summed up in the neutrality message of the President last -September, in which occurred the phrase: “ W'e are neutral in action, but I cannot ask the people to be neutral in thought as well as action.” This was a long step forward from the Wilson message in 1914, which said America was neutral in thought as well as action. In 1936 approval or disapproval of the New Deal was the chief issue. Roosevelt was accused of betraying the 1932 Democratic party policy, and the party was split, chiefly in New York State, on this question. This split, the opposition of big business, the clamourous fury of the Father Coughlan (the Radio Priest) Union for Social Justice, and the apparent rise in popular appeal of the Socialist and Communist elements, led to the view that Roosevelt would be lucky to gain re-election; only a narrow majority was expected by his most ardent supporters. Straw vote polls (notably that of the Literary' Digest) gave Landon, the Republican candidate, a majority. The Digest poll as late as 31st October (the last' minute before the election) gave' Landon a popular vote of 1,293,669 to 972,897, and a lead in the electoral colleges of 370 to 161. The vote of 3rd November registered an outstanding victory for Roosevelt, who carried 46 of the 48 States, with 523 votes to 8 for Landon. His popular plurality in a vote of over 44,000,000 was 11.000,000. The various minor parties polled under a million votes of which the Father Coughlan candidate, William Lemke, gained 743,000. The Republicans elected governors in only three States; the gained seats in the Representatives and tlie Senate. It was a complete vindication of Roosevelt’s New Deal. An interesting sidelight on the campaign is that the Literary Digest, which for years had correctly forecast the Presidential result, went out of publication soon after- Roosevelt’s return—it was no longer popular. NEUTRALITY ALWAYS AN a. ISSUE. America’s attitude to foreign wars has always been an issue in Presidential elections: it is the one big traditional issue. There have been thirty-two Presidents, and few have dared deny this policy. Those who

did—not excepting Woodrow Willson' —have disappeared from public life. The first President, George Whshington, issued the first proclamation j of American neutrality. President in 1789-1797, Washington issued this proclamation during an attempt by a French agent to claim the assistance of the United States for the French republic in 1793; he commissioned privateers and endeavoured to raise recruits. Washington’s proclamation was the first indication of the policy which has made the course of practically every President since a determined leaning to peace. Yet, it was this first proclamation which led to the uprising of feeling against Washington, and the first signs of disunity in his party. Strangely, too, it was the peace efforts of the second President, John Adams (1797-1801), who negotiated a peace with Napoleon following a short United States-French war, mainly on the sea, that, brought about his downfall. Madison was the last of the Federalist Presidents. He was followed by James Monroe (1817-1825), whose two terms were called the era of good feeling. The Republicans were in a dominant position; western America was beginning to develop, settlement was proceeding in the south, with the final subjugation of the southern Indians; national politics were beginning to bear- fruit. This was the period to which belongs the Monroe Doctrine, concerned with the good neighbourliness of the United States with southern American countries—actually the birth of pan-Am-ericanism, from which we are seeing some interesting results to-day. The Monroe Doctrine arose from the intention of the Holy Alliance to help Spain put down a revolt by ! South American colonists. Britain, which had been steadily drifting away from the alliance, determined to call} in the aid of the United States as a! check upon this intention. Hints were! acted upon, and in his message to Congress in December, 1823, Mbnroe : said: “ W ( e could not view any inter- ’ position for the purpose of oppressing them (the South American States), or controlling in any other manner their destiny by any Euroopean Power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States.” He added that “ the American continents, .by the .free and. independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonisation by any European Powers.” ..... ... A.'..- ! • Washington had foreshadowed the Monroe Doctrine in Jiis farewell address, in which he said: “ The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending .our commercial relations, to have With them as little political connection as. possible. Europe has a set of primary; interests which to us have none or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enemies.” THE PARTY SYSTEM. The existing method of choosing candidates for the Presidency goes back more than a century. Its genesis belongs to the period of Andrew Jackson, historically known as the reign of Andrew Jackson,” a species of dictatorial power when the predominating party began to dispense favours to party adherents. It has been said that Jackson’s popularity, his long struggle for the presidency, and his belief in official ownership of the subordinate offices gave to his administration (1829-37) at least an appearance of .Caesarism. Under Jackson’s rule men were removed from office almost solely for party purposes, and a clean sweep was made in the civil service. Other parties adopted the system, which remained the rule at a change of administration for almost seventy years and persists to a certain degree today. The system brought with it a rigid, semi-military reorganisation of parties, and led to the rise of the political “ boss,” through whom all favours were obtained. It led also to the holdings of State, country, and city “ conventions,” those enthusiastic trappings that, with much noise, colour, and blare of brass bands, precede the selection of party candidates for the Presidency. . The two great American parties, as we now know them, Democratic and Republican, were first brought into direct opposition in 1856, on the slavery issue, although the democrats themselves were split on the question. ELECTION OF LINCOLN. Abraham Lincoln, most famous of American Presidents, was chosen by the Republicans at Chicago in 1860,' largely because it was felt that his influence with the border States (mostly “rail-sitters” on the slavery question) would sway the election. The party was right, and Lincoln was elected. No candidate received a majority on the popular vote, but Lincoln had a clear majority on the electoral vote. Up to the last hours of his first administration, Which ended in 1864, Lincoln had a majority

in Congress only because of the absence of members from the seceding States.

But the divergence between North and South on the slavery question—to the South it was a custom legally recognised—-had caused the appearance in the South of a distinct nationality,; the burgeoning;; of which was to cause civil war. The war ended with the surrender of Robert •E. Lee, commander of the southern forces, to General U. S. Grant at Appomotox on 9th April, 1865. Five days later Lincoln was assassinated by |John Wjlkes Booth, a half-crazed enthusiast for the southern cause. . COLOURFUL PERSONALITIES.. Many colourful personalities have been Presidents of the United States of America. In recent years the most notable were William MlcKinley, who fought the powerful trusts, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Woodrow Wilson, and the present President. Even more colourful than any of them was William Jennings Bryan, who should have been President, but was not, although he contested four campaigns. Parenthetically, the second of the Presidents ■to be assassinated, James A. Garfield (the “ log cabin to White House ” hero), was a compromise Repubican candidate contesting a third term. Wlilliam McKinley, the third President to be assassinated, was first elected in 1897. His opponent was jßiyan, called the great commoner, and the peerless leader of American popular movements. He gave life to tlie “ free silver ” policy, he opposed trusts and rings; he gave wider, more national scope to tho McKinley reform and anti-Tammany movements and crusades. They were opponents in two campaigns—-1897 and 1901— and McKinley’s victory in the second campaign was even greater than m the first. In September,. 1901, a few months after his second term began, McKinley was shot by an assassin.

His successor was Theodore Roosevelt, who had been elected Vice-Pre-sident in 1901. He showed a bolder spirit, a readiness to break new paths, and to take short cuts; and as the ' years passed he became even more radical and ever more popular with the American “ man in the street.” In 1904 he was returried with an unprecedented majority. The 1912 election was the most sensational of the many sensational .Presidential campaigns. At the Chicago convention of the Republican -party Roosevelt blasted his' way 'through the opposition only to find that right to inscribe as delegates was challenged by the Taft supporters.. Roosevelt advised his .supporters to- take no part in the proceedings, and at the final roll call Taft was chosen.

Meanwhile at Baltimore Bryan was in a position to dictate the choice of Democratic candidate, and his choice fell on Woodrow Wilson, Governor of New Jersey. In the field then were Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and Woodrow Wilson. The issues were well known— Republican high tariffs; Democratic revenue high tariff only. But men not platforms decided the election and they were three colourful men. Before long it became apparent that the final issue rested between Roosevelt and W.ilson. Roosevelt and his Progressives had organised the campaign well; women were largely used for the first time as an organised campaign body supporting Roosevelt. The issue resolved itself into whether Roosevelt could sway sufll|eient Democratic votes; but the Democrats voted for the party, and Wiilsqn was elected.

Since Wilson, America has kept as much as possible to domestic politics. Circumstances may force it into the international field again. That is why, in the eyes of the world, the 1940 Presidential campaign looms ro large.