THE NATION'S CRISIS. 635 



mechanic and laborer alike — once supposed to furnisli the brains as 

 well as the brawn of this republic, have become more and more 

 dependent. And here, again, we meet with the same apathy among 

 those not directly interested. Gigantic strikes, one after the other, 

 this country has witnessed since 1882, in which public sympathy at 

 the beginning has been with the striking workingman, only to be 

 transferred to the side of the rapacious corporation — already backed 

 by the executive and judicial branches of the Government — just as 

 soon as the inconvenience of the situation began to make itself felt 

 by all: the result of it all being a large middle class, insensible to 

 the encroachments on their personal freedom on the one hand, and a 

 dissatisfied, disgruntled working element without faith or confidence 

 in our political institutions on the other. 



Under such conditions this war with Spain may truly be said 

 to have found us unprepared, not so much from the lack of an 

 adequate navy or standing army as from the absence of a real na- 

 tional unity. It is generally held that — war having commenced — it 

 is unpatriotic to discuss now whether it was justifiable or not; it cer- 

 tainly is useless, and we may as well accept the situation as unavoid- 

 able and the war as a righteous one. It may seem strange, therefore, 

 perhaps unkind, to speak of the absence of national unity in the 

 face of the vigorous preparations made by the administration and 

 the willing response to its call for volunteers by our young men in 

 all parts of the country. Yet the thoughtful man can not shut his 

 eyes or ears to the chaotic state of opinion concerning the war and 

 its causes, and for the sake of the future of this nation it is well to 

 take a sober look at the situation. A war is always a crisis in a 

 nation's history, especially so when its traditional policy has been 

 one of peace. Earnest appeals to patriotism and humanitarian prin- 

 ciples have not been wanting; but side by side with the many 

 responses to these appeals, grumblings and bitter fault-findings have 

 been heard. The professional politician, as might be expected, has 

 come in for his share of alleged responsibility — his supposed aim 

 being personal gain or glory — though, strangely enough, the political 

 leaders who usually are the targets for the attacks of the professional 

 reformer were the most anxious to avert the conflict. ISTo more 

 satisfying is the charge that our politicians in Washington, who 

 were chiefly instrumental in working up the war feeling, were 

 actuated only by a desire to stem the tide of Bryanism by diverting 

 public attention from this movement — seeing that its brilliant leader 

 and some of his henchmen were as clamorous for war and military 

 glory as any of the rest; while the silver organs did not hesitate in 

 stigmatizing the President's efforts toward settling the difficulty 

 through diplomacy as being in the interest of Wall Street. 



