30 - 1916 and the war
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
How Capitalists Rule/Part 30
The Republocrats Series
Part 30:
1916 AND THE WAR
By Vince Copeland
A DINNER FOR ROOSEVELT
Theodore Roosevelt gave some signs to his biographers that he had fully expected to run for president again in 1916--that is, if there had been no third party in 1912 and the Republican Party had held together.
Some of the biggest capitalists, even in the Morgan stable, seem to have had the same idea--or else, upon reflection after four years of Wilson, they came to appreciate TR a little more. Furthermore, as they looked forward to entry into the European war, they undoubtedly felt he would be a strong and compelling war leader for the country.
A "secret" dinner for Roosevelt was held in December 1915 at the home of Judge Elbert H. Gary, president of U.S. Steel and close to the heart of J.P. Morgan. Besides old Roosevelt supporters like George Perkins(!), Medill McCormick, George B. Cortelyou and Cornelius Vanderbilt, it included George F. Baker, Daniel Guggenheim, August Belmont (whose grandfather had been chairman of the Democratic Party during the Civil War), Jacob H. Schiff, A. Barton Hepburn, R. Livingston Beekman, Frank A. Vanderlip, Frank T. Kellogg, Clarence McKay--and a whole list of Wall Street's finest.
Many of these names are unfamiliar to us. But they were so impressive to the New York Times that it quoted an unnamed top politician as saying:
"A survey of those who were present with Col. Roosevelt shows that the financial side of the Republican Party was well represented, and if the financial side has decided to cast its lot with Col. Roosevelt again, the politicians will be brought into line."(New York Times, December 19, 1915)
It seemed that nothing came of this star-studded dinner in the way of a possible amalgamation of the Republican and Progressive party forces behind a Roosevelt candidacy. But it may have had some other significance than the Times implied. That is, the big moguls, many of whom had Roosevelt's confidence, may have lain down the law in such a way as to convince him of the exact opposite--that he should definitely not run in 1916.
'HE KEPT US OUT OF WAR'
When Wilson ran for reelection in 1916, his main campaign slogan was "He kept us out of war" (an achievement he did not intend to continue for very long). At the Democratic National Convention, less than a year before the U.S. declaration of war, the predominant feeling was still one of staying out of the "European" conflict.
In the 1916 campaign it appeared that much of the big money crowd was split between Wilson and Justice Charles Evans Hughes. For instance, J.P. Morgan's man, George Harvey, came out for Hughes. The Rockefellers were also more intimate with Hughes, who was to become their general counsel a few years later. But Rockefeller agents were still prominent in support of the Democratic Wilson, as were the Morgans and their crowd.
Wilson had gotten the Democratic Party back in line. But Wall Street's favorite was still the Republicans, and they poured a little more money into the latter's campaign than into Wilson's. Wilson went to bed thinking he had lost the election, but when he awakened in the morning, the then slower returns from California showed that he had won.
The country was still basically against going to war and this was reflected in the secondary leadership of the political parties. A rather poignant incident at the Democratic National Convention of 1916 illustrates this feeling rather dramatically.
ANTI-WAR SENTIMENT AT THE CONVENTION
A leading delegate named Martin Glynn was assigned to make a speech lauding President Wilson for keeping the country out of war. But he went far beyond the limits generally set down or else taken too much for granted by the Wilson floor managers. He recounted the historical incidents in which the U.S. presumably suffered humiliation without going to war. Perhaps his original intention was to use these as a justification for the Preparedness program, which was now just as thoroughly Democratic as it was Republican. The delegates, however, took up his speech and applauded it in such a way as to turn the whole thing around toward a pointedly anti-war position.
William Jennings Bryan's biographer tells it like this:
"Glynn's choice of themes evidently was wholly unexpected by Wilson's managers, and the delegates' response surprised even Glynn. The passages of his address evoking his audience's most intense reception were intrinsically dull, but he had retained them, planning to rush over them in his reading. These consisted of several paragraphs in which Glynn recalled provocative incidents from history to which the United States did not respond with war.....
"A deft and powerful orator, Glynn cast a spell over the crowd from which Bryan himself did not escape. Seated in the press stand, he was seen to weep with emotion as Glynn depicted the victories of peace. The mood was suddenly jostled when a Texas delegate, leaping onto his chair, yelled, 'And don't forget that policy is also satisfactory to William Jennings Bryan.' The crowd laughed, and Bryan with them.
"Each instance that Glynn cited was received with rapturous cheers, and a pattern of response quickly developed. As Glynn finished his statement of a provocation, delegates from all over the hall yelled, 'What did we do?' and the question was taken up in an exultant chant, 'What did we do? What did we do?' Glynn answered, 'We didn't go to war.' A joyful roar greeted this response; men jumped upon their seats, danced about the aisles, waved flags, shouted, and screamed. With puzzlement creasing his face, Glynn read from his text, 'American ambassadors who sought to adjust these wrongs were refused recognition and openly insulted at the French court.' 'What did we do?' came the yell again, and the chant swept around the hall, 'What did we do? What did we do?' Glynn answered, 'We did not go to war,' and again American flags waved and the delegates shouted deliriously. 'It was probably the first time in the history of conventions,' an observer noted, 'that one of them ever became frantic with joy over a mere recital of diplomatic precedents.' When Glynn praised or mentioned Wilson, he got only perfunctory applause."(Louis W. Koenig, "Bryan," pp. 563-64)
BRYAN'S AMBIVALENCE
This would have been Bryan's opportunity to put the convention squarely on record as opposing entry into the European war that he personally was against. But Bryan was also a "good Democrat" who wanted to see Wilson and the slate win the presidency.
"Bryan, standing a solid figure of rectitude, satisfaction gleaming in his eye, raised hackles of fear in good Wilson men. But consternation evaporated when Bryan immediately proclaimed an unlimited admiration for the President and the absolute necessity of the Democrat's continuation in power. Bryan acknowledged he had differences with the president, but raising his voice, he uttered a sentence that triggered a mighty shout: 'I join the people in thanking God that we have a President who does not want the nation to fight.'"(Koenig, p. 564)
Bryan was as pacifistic as most of the non-socialist opponents of the war, but like many another of his kind, he was taken in by Wilson, even though he had felt that Wilson's course was leading to war when he resigned his office as Secretary of State. In fact, this was so true that it was Bryan's fate to be one of the most important leaders to shepherd the party into supporting Wilson and thence into support of the war itself.
Just to show Bryan's ambivalence, Koenig tells of a speech he made at the City Club of Chicago during the convention.
"This time, while extolling the glories of peace, he attacked the follies of preparedness. 'If individual pistol toting is a menace to the community,' he cried, 'pistol toting by nations in logic must be a menace to the peace of the world.' He did not want to see 'a single American mother's son shipped across an ocean 3,000 miles wide to bleed and die in the settlement of some King's dispute.' Wilson was duly nominated, yet it was Wilson's convention less than it was Bryan's. He and his allied orators had created for the Presidential campaign of 1916 a theme and slogan that unquestionably were unwelcome to the party nominee: 'He kept us out of war.'"(Koenig, p. 565)
Nor was Bryan wholly innocent about the purport of the Morgan loans to England. He had advised against allowing the Morgan banks to loan $500 million to England, calling it an act of war. But Wilson had countermanded him.
Anyone looking at the actions and discounting the words could have easily seen that the road to war was being prepared at a furious pace.
This was hardly unnoticed by the makers and shapers of public opinion. The New York Times of Aug. 30, 1916, carried the headline: "Wilson Completes Defense Program--Army and Navy Bills Signed." (The United States entered the war in April 1917.) And with the exception of the excitable Theodore Roosevelt, who practically called Wilson a coward, the ruling leaders of high finance understood Wilson very well.
-30-
(Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted if source is cited. For more info contact Workers World, 46 W. 21 St., New York, NY 10010; via e-mail: ww%nyxfer@igc.apc.org or workers@mcimail.com.)
+ Join Us! Support The NY Transfer News Collective +
+ We deliver uncensored information to your mailbox! +
+ Modem: 718-448-2358 FAX: 718-448-3423 e-mail: nyxfer@panix.com +
