Words

At Denver, John W. Davis, going into new country, began to use new weapons, although he did not abandon the oil scandals, the Republican tariff. His first topic was irrigation and reclamation. He cited the mis- fortune which has overtaken many settlers on irrigation projects; told how, in many cases, settlers were in dire distress because the Government's estimated cost of reclaiming their lands had been greatly increased by the time the actual project was completed. He quoted the Republican platform which recommended the curtailing of irrigation projects to prevent overproduction, and then exclaimed:

"I invite every settler on any irrigation project to read that statement. He knows now with what earnest sympathy the leaders of the Repubcan Party view his difficulites."

At Cheyenne, on Defense Day, Mr. Davis turned to the problems of de- fense and spoke:

"So long as an adequate Navy guards our coasts, we need not fear the coming of any invader. . . .

"At the Washington Conference on Disarmament, we accepted a definite ratio in the matter of capital battleships of 5-5-3, as between Great Britain, America and Japan, startled an American to learn from the lips of the Secretary of the Navy himself that those in power have permitted America's actual strength in battleships to fall to the figure of four or below.

"When that Conference ended, the public, I think, gathered the impres- sion that equality in naval equipment between Great Britain and America was assured and that American superiority over Japan at the ratio of five to three was fixed for the next ten years. I do not charge that this impression was the result of any intentional misrepresentation. But the American public is entitled to know that that Conference dealt in no way with modern cruisers, with submarines or the auxiliaries of a fleet; that, against 44 modern cruisers owned by Great Britain and 25 by Japan, the United States has but 10; and that in ocean-going submarines and airplane-carriers, our position is still more disadvantageous. We must not let praise for the good intent that lay behind the Washington Conference blind us to the partial and in- adequate character of its scope and results." At Topeka, Mr. Davis, in a number of rear-platform speeches, turned his attention for the first time to Mr. LaFollette: "It is conceivable--I do not believe it probable--that the Republican Party may win . . . It is conceivable --and I think it is probable--that the Democratic Party will win. . . . "But is there anybody who believes that the third party, the Progressive Party, can win possession of the Presidency and a majority in the Senate and a majority in the House? I know of no one who contemplates that contingency. "I submit to those who wish to see progress in this country, to those who wish to see honesty in government and who wish a restoration of a Government of justice and courage, that they have in this election, as reasonable men, no cause to vote any ticket other than of the Democratic Party." He then returned to the theme of Republican corruption and the tariff, of which he said: "It costs the State of Kansas alone $66 million annually in the additional price the people of this state are compelled to pay for the things they buy." At Kansas City. After speaking at Topeka, John W. Davis went to Kansas City. There he stopped at the Hotel Muehlebach. He left his room and went to another room in the hotel. There he called on Senator James A. .Reed of Missouri, who is invaliding from a recent illness. Senator Reed not long ago announced himself as a supporter of Mr. Davis. So the two are on good terms, although Mr. Davis is a proponent of the League of Nations and Mr. Reed a violent opponent. At Bunceton. Next day, there was a great barbecue; 13,000 pounds of beef, 3,000 pounds of mutton and 14,000 wa- termelons--for 50,000 people at the farm of Dr. Arthur W. Nelson, Democratic nominee for Governor of Missouri. Some 50,000 people attended, and some went hungry. Mr. Davis was properly provisioned and then spoke: "Privilege creeps like a viper into the administrative chambers of your executive departments . . . Where can there be found such a chapter of shame in American history as that which contains the names of Fall, Edwin Denby, Harry M. Daugherty, Charles R. Forbes, Gaston B. Means, and a host of jackals who followed in their trail?" At Milwaukee, Charles G. Dawes went to the lair of LaFollettism to attack, not 'because the Republicans hope for success there, but rather because of the compelling interest which comes to those who attack the lion in his den. He declared that the LaFollette plank, which would permit Congress to override a decision of the Supreme Court that a law is unconstitutional, would destroy the authority of the Constitution which guarantees the civil and political rights of the individual, which reserves certain rights to the states. He said:

Of popular government: "That government whose policy is determined by the ultimate judgment of the people will permanently survive. The government whose actions are determined by the passing phases of pop- ular opinion, as distinguished from ultimate opinion, will perish. The Constitution of the United States establishes the rule of the people, as distinguished from the rule of the mob."

Of LaFollettism: It "represents the quintessence of demagogism ani- mated by the vicious purpose of undermining the constitutional foundation of the Republic."

Of LaFollette's Labor Day speech: "A violent and unsupported affirmation.

. . . Never in the history of the United States has the commonsense of the average individual received a greater affront."

At Washington, one William Meuser and a committee from the Steuben Society addressed Mr. LaFollette, promising him the support of six million U. S. citizens of German blood. Said Mr. Meuser: "The notification which we convey to you is the expression of the mature judgment of 90% of the most loyal, modest and conservative element in the American complex, which recognizes in you the shining qualities of conservative statesmanship and unbending devotion to the principles of constitutional government." Answered Mr. LaFollette : "From my heart I thank you for your stirring message and welcome the support you pledge. . . .We are hearing much in this campaign of the Constitution and of Americanism. I am content to have it so. But I insist that the best friends of the Constitution are those who dared to voice their protest when that instrument, ordained to give perpetuity to the immortal declaration 'conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,' is invoked as a shield for corrupt and law less wealth and for the oppression of the liberties of the people in the exercise of their inalienable rights.

"I maintain that the real enemies of the Constitution and the real menace to American Government are those un punished agents of corruption who have despoiled the public domain and betrayed the people, who have written the blackest page in the history of our Government from their high Cabinet posi tions, and who, it must be said to the shame of the country, have gone to this hour without Executive rebuke.

"To trace the progress of this malignant disease, which threatens the very foundation of Constitutional Government, we need only survey the wide chasm which separates Carl Schurz, Secretary of the Interior in Garfield's Cabinet, from Albert B. Fall, Harry M. Daugherty and others of intimate and daily association with this Administration."