With his innermost conviction that his successor would be incompetent, incapable and that he would commit so many blunders while in office that at the expiration of his term the people would unanimously demand the renomination of the third termer, he thought to remove that obstacle of the third termer and to make it appear that he was not ambitious and that a renomination would have to be forced upon him, he solemnly declared, "Never again will I run for president," but again ambition had blindfolded him and robbed him of his judgment of men in selecting William H. Taft as his successor although his most intimate friend Mr. Taft was aware of his oath of office and his duties toward the nation, there never was a whiter man in the white house and no one ever more deserved a re-election as an honor for his services to the country against the revolutionary machine of the third termer in the house and senate than William H. Taft.

Gentlemen of the jury, the third term, "never again will I run for president," has a parallel in the history of Rome. Whoever read the history of Julius Caesar, knows that this smart politician, while elected dictator, managed to become so popular with the people that they offered him the kingly crown, but Julius Caesar knew that he had to bide his time, that the rest of senators knew of his ambition, and after refusing three times, he knew they would offer it to him a fourth time, and when then he accepted it, he was murdered for ambition sake.

Never again will I run for president and under no circ.u.mstances, said this man, and four years later we find him eagerly seeking renomination at Chicago, to his friends, who advise him to run, he didn't have the heart to tell that if he were not a man of word he could never be a man of honor, but what shame lies in between his never again and his profane declaration that the crooks, thieves, scoundrels and liars had stolen the nomination from him, although he knew that the party could not give him what they had a third term not to give for the great Republican party determined to sooner go down to defeat than to violate the third term yet.

Gentlemen of the jury, the third termer had license to create a new party and be the power behind the throne and perhaps lead his party to victory. But having been deceived by the selection of his successor and having removed the mask he determined to insist on a third term. Had we lived in a time of panic, general disorder, strikes with armies of unemployed, most likely the third termer would have an easy walkin. He was anxious waiting for the government at Washington to start military intervention in Mexico, but the leaders of the Republican party feared that the third termer would muster an army of volunteer rough riders and return at election as the conquering hero.

Gentlemen of the jury, the danger of the third termer was less in his probable election than in his sure but close defeat. The man who cried of the theft at Chicago would never submit to the verdict on November 5, however honest it may be; he would again yell robbery, and if he carried a solid west as was then expected, he would give way to his fighting nature and try to take the presidency on the battlefield and so invite civil war, yet, Ab. Lincoln said that war is h.e.l.l, and that he who wilfully invites war deserves death. Do we realize the horrors of civil war; are we willing to wash out the sin of violating the third term with the blood of our sons imagine torn from home, family and parents, from prosperity to dire want in order to place a man to the presidency he is legitimately not ent.i.tled to? Yet, gentlemen of the jury, the United States may still be able to subdue the rebels the danger the more grave than even civil war is the possibility of intervention by foreign powers, who may help the third termer in order to keep the union disunited and separated for we must know that our strength is not in our army and navy, money power, our strength is in our union, we would at once realize that we are surrounded by a pack of hungry wolves ready to destroy this hated republic, ready to destroy Monroe doctrine, ready to annex the Panama ca.n.a.l and the great land of the brave and free, the home many millions free people, the dream of all heroes and martyrs for political freedom to 1848 would have ceased to be owing to the ambitions of one man and one man's rule.

I hope that the shot at Milwaukee has awakened the patriotism of the American nation, that it has opened their eyes to the real danger and shown them the only safe way out of it as is proven by election returns in the great Democratic party the north, south, east and west is once more and more solidly united and proudly can we prove to the nations of the world that the spirit of 1776 is still alive and shall never die, and that self-government is an established fact and a success.

I have been accused of having selected a state where capital punishment is abolished. I would say that I did not know the laws of any state I traveled through, it would be ridiculous for me to fear death after the act, as I expected to die during the act and not live to tell the story and if I knew that my death would have made the third term tradition more sacred, I am sorry I could not die for my country.

Now, honorable men of the jury, I wish to say no more, in the name of G.o.d, go and do your duty, and only countries who ask admission by popular vote and accept the popular vote never wage a war of conquest, murder for to steal abolishes opportunity for ambitious adventurers, for all political adventurers and military leaders have adopted the career of conquering heroes, wholesale murder, wholesale robbers called national aggrandizement. Prison for me is like martyrdom to me, like going to war.

Before me is the spirit of George Washington, behind me that of McKinley.

CHAPTER XXI.

SCHRANK'S UNWRITTEN LAWS.

The following are John Flammang Schrank's four unwritten laws, "The Pillars of the Republic," he calls them. They are presented exactly as written by Schrank, and as incorporated in the report of the alienists.

BY JOHN FLAMMANG SCHRANK.

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have hitherto connected them with another, due respect to mankind requires that we should declare the cause of such action. In these modest lines our forefathers have at once laid out the roads on which we should travel, it demonstrates their willingness to consult the opinions of others, as well as it duly respects the rights and feelings of others. In these critical days it is more than necessary to call the attention of the nation to the three wonderful doc.u.ments which have established our people as an independent nation and under their guidance laid down in these doc.u.ments we have become the most powerful nation on earth. The Declaration of Independence; The Const.i.tution, and the farewell-address of George Washington. The most sacred custom of all nations has ever been their reverence for their ancestors, the honor they pay to their dead, and the utmost respect to the good deeds who live after them, these customs observed hundreds of years handed down from one generation to another, we have come to call the traditions of a people. Tradition is an unwritten law when it concerns a whole nation, it is above the written statute, I would doubt the right of a court to have jurisdiction over a man who has defended tradition of his country, against violation. As we are not an original nation or race, the founders of the republic were the sons of the nation whose language we speak, it is tradition with us especially that identified us as a nation. This nation has four unwritten laws, the oldest and most sacred, because established by Geo.

Washington, is the third term tradition, it has never been violated and is an affective safe-guard against unscrupulous ambition, but never before has been established a test case of its inviolability as a warning to coming adventurers. In the present campaign for the first time in American history we are confronted by a man to whom practically nothing is sacred and pretends to stand above tradition. This man abused our const.i.tution, he wants it amended until it is abolished. If our const.i.tution is too old and in the way of progress after we have grown to be a rich nation with it, then the ten commandments so many thousand years old, must be a useless piece of junk. He has abused our highest Courts, he has spoken in the profanest language of our legislators, he has abused our best and most venerable citizens, calling them liars and scoundrels, he has shamefully abused our president, thereby undermining the dignity of the office, how can we expect our foreign born citizens to respect our inst.i.tutions when an ex-President circ.u.mtravels the Union telling everybody that those honorable men at Chicago were thieves and crooks. Shall the people rule, is one of his demagogic phrases, yet he knows that in the very sense he wants this catchword to be understood is an impossibility, the people and herewith I mean the rich as well as the poor never rule in a republic, they cannot rule, they have no time to rule, therefore they elect a body of honorable men to do the ruling to the benefit of all, in other words they entrust a body of men with their government, that is why Grover Cleveland said that a public office is a public trust.

And a political party is the medium between the people and the elected government, and any party that should nominate a man in violation of the third term tradition does no longer deserve to be a party entrusted by the people. This third termer could have been of more value to the country had he lent his advice and honest opinion to his party and our president who eagerly sought his advice, for a man's honest advice is his ideas and convictions but with man's ideas it is like digging a pan of sand from a river from the gold regions, the sand must be sifted and filtered, there might be one or more grains of gold found in it. A man's ideas must pa.s.s through the brains of other men, to be sifted and filtered and every grain of gold found will be appreciated, but a man who claims that he knows it all better, is equal to saying that his pan of sand is all gold. The third termer claims that it is not a third term, if not followed by two consecutive terms, then a second term would not be a second, if given to man 8 years after his first, I wonder what to call such term, after a while he will tell us that a monarchy in this country is not a monarchy if the monarch is a native born; let it be established now and forever that it is a man's third term if he has twice been in office and if each time only twenty-four hours after taking oath and if third term is given to him or he seeks it twenty years after the second. If the third termer thought that the republican party whom he hailed from needed chastis.e.m.e.nt because she refused to violate tradition in his favor, he had the right to create a third party, nominate all officials for same and be the very soul and power behind the throne, but when it became evident that the whole party movement was only enacted to give him a third term, he had forfeited his citizenship and his life. Anybody who finances a third term movement should be expatriated and his wealth confiscated. It is ridiculous to say that if he is defeated in November it is also a verdict of the people to uphold the third term tradition, as we may as well say it is the verdict of the people to abolish the third term if he wins in November, the third term tradition has never been before the people as an issue to vote and for this reason it should never be put before them. It is almost a certainty, that if voted upon last year, the people would have declared in favor of upholding the tradition, while it is dead sure that if we were living this year in a panic, a business depression, with hundreds of thousands out of work instead of a general prosperity, the third termer would walk in over the decision of the previous year. The dangers in this campaign are these, the third termer is sure that the nomination has been stolen and that the country and the job belong to him, therefore if he gets honestly defeated in November he will again yell that the crooks of both parties have stolen the election, and should he carry a solid West, he and the hungry office seekers would not hesitate to take up arms to take by force what is denied him by the people, then we face a civil war, and it was Ab.

Lincoln who said that war is h.e.l.l and that he who wilfully invited war deserves death. We would then be compelled to wash out the sin of violating the third term with the blood of our sons. Yet, this is not the greatest danger we are facing. We have allowed an adventurer to circ.u.mtravel the Union with military escort, with the torch of revolution in his hands to burn down the very house we live in while we should be aware that we are surrounded by a pack of wolves ever ready to jump on us. Does anybody think that the European powers would sit idly while we are disunited, would a certain power hesitate to help the third termer and make good the gravest mistake that power has made in 1861 by not keeping this country disunited and separated while we are just getting ready to become their greatest compet.i.tor on the seas after the completion of the Panama Ca.n.a.l. Our strength is not in our Army or Navy nor in our Money power, our strength is in our Union. In Union alone can we uphold the Monroe Doctrine our second unwritten law so much hated and dreaded by all the world. The sister republic's Transvaal and Orange Free State were not destroyed because it was the connecting link between Egypt and the Cape, not because gold was found, no, but because Great Brit. could not allow a second United States to establish a Monroe Doctrine on African soil. Reciprocity would have profited both the Union and Canada but England fears a too close a relation between the two nations and Premier Leurier's sin was that he was first a Canadian, second an American and third a Britisher, he had to be replaced by a man who is in the first, second, and third place a Britisher. The outcome of the present campaign interests the powers more than us, all actions of Congress or Cabinet are sooner known in the Cabinets of Europe than we hear about them. There is today a "Cato"

in the Senate of every country and in the folds of his cloak he has concealed several figs of unusual size, everyone of these figs represent one of our great American Trusts, and he concluded every speech with Carthage must be destroyed. With our Union destroyed we would cry with the Israelites in the desert: Lead us back to the meat pots of Egypt, give us a thousand trusts sooner than one third termer.

If we think that we need a one man's rule, whose place cannot be filled by another among millions intelligent citizens, then it were about time that we got a licking from somewhere. What are we about to do, do we want the great building we have helped to build tear down and give everybody a brick, the people which is only the present generation cannot do what they want, for what they have and what they are they are greatly in obligation to the past and earlier generations who also helped to build up, therefore this generation called the people cannot do as they please which is so ardently advocated by the third termer.

Have we learned no lesson about a one man's rule experienced in France with such disastrous results as the end of the reign of Napoleon I and Napoleon III.

We are trying to establish here a system like our ancestors have done in Europe which all revolutions of a 1,000 years could not abolish, it would be useless to forcibly remove a third president because the system would then be established. Are we under no obligation to the heroes of all wars for freedom and independence, are we overthrowing our republic while the heroes of the French revolutions and the martyrs of 1848 gladly gave their lives to establish republican inst.i.tutions.

May G.o.d enlighten the nation, may the spirit of 1776 still be alive, and when they tell us that there is a Rome on the other side let them understand that U. S. A. is not Carthage. In this campaign we may observe that prosperity is as dangerous to our inst.i.tutions as hard times are, people are too busy making money, they gradually lose all interest in politics, unless a third termer tells them that government is only medium to enrich them still more, how else can we explain his remark that Mr. Perkins wants his children to live better in this country after his departure, a millionaire's children can only live better when the third term party doubles the millions of their father.

In this critical time I find that men have more interest in the baseball results than to register, think and vote. But of course some people have no more sense than three guinea pigs. His movement is not progressive, they are insurgents, insurgents and revolutionary. Hardly any revolution has started without pretending that their movement was progressive.

The abolition of the third term tradition is the abolition of the Monroe Doctrine also. In this Doctrine we are overtaking the guardianship over all republics on the American continent against Foreign encroachments. Naturally the third termer would prove too in 1916 that the fourth term is only his second, to do this he would have to become the conquering hero, we would commit the same faults France did 100 years ago National aggrandis.e.m.e.nt, yet France no larger today than before Napoleon I. The fourth termer could hardly gather laurels in a European or Asiatic war the natural consequences would that South America would become the field of his actions. We have upheld the Monroe Doctrine without the consent of these countries so she could prevent those nations from inviting a European power to protect them by declaring that inasmuch as the third term tradition is abolished, the Monroe Doctrine is no longer binding, because they are more afraid of the third termer than they would be of any foreign prince. The prudence of our forefathers has delivered to us an equally sacred unwritten law which reads that no president should embrace another Creed than Protestant if possible a sect of the English church. I am a Roman Catholic. I love my religion but I hate my church, as long as the Roman parish is not independent from Rome, as long as Catholic priests are prevented from getting married, as long as Rome is still more engaged in politics and acc.u.mulation of money contrary to the teachings of the Lord, the Roman Catholic church is not the religion for a president of the United States. The separation of state from church in France has sufficiently proved that Rome and republic are enemies.

The fourth unwritten law which is practically supplementary to the second we find in George Washington's farewell address where he advises us to live in peace with your neighbor. We have no right to start a war of conquest with any nation and our relations to the South American republic can be improved if we remove their fear of a steady conquest by us by observing this law. Does it not look ridiculous that established governments in this enlightened age sends thousands of unfortunates to prison as punishment for murdering, for to steal and rob, while these same nations are armed with all descriptable weapons like so many bandits ever ready to jump at each other's throat. What else is war but murder for to rob that which belongs to others. Since men have learned to work they have no more right to war. The salvation of the human family must be worked out by international Commercialism the sooner all industrial establishments of the world unite like in the days of the Hansa can the social questions be solved. International Commercialism must have individual legislation and jurisdiction, independent from national legislation, but must be acknowledged by all states and the United States is the only power ruled by commercialism without a mailed fiat and will be the first to recognize International Commercialism for this alone will abolish and distribute wealth more fair and just, and work to a higher state of civilization.

JOHN SCHRANK.

CHAPTER XXII.

UNUSUAL COURT PRECEDENT.

Judge August C. Backus' method of conducting the Schrank case has established a precedent for such cases, and the action of the court in establishing a new form of procedure has met with favorable comment on the part of lawyers, alienists, court officials and editors all over the world.

Instructing the commission of five alienists in its duties Judge Backus said:

Gentlemen of the Commission:

"You have been appointed as an impartial commission to examine into the present mental condition of the defendant John Schrank, who is charged with the crime of a.s.sault with intent to kill and murder Theodore Roosevelt, with a loaded revolver, on the 14th day of October, 1912, in the city and county of Milwaukee and state of Wisconsin.

"The court in this proceeding will finally determine the issue. I have decided to take this method of procedure instead of a jury trial, because as a rule in trials by jury the case resolves itself into a battle of medical experts, and in my experience I have never witnessed a case where the testimony of the experts on one side was not directly contradicted by the testimony of as many or more experts on the other side. Where men especially trained in mental and nervous diseases disagree, how can it be expected that a jury of twelve laymen should agree? Such testimony has been very unsatisfactory to the jury and to the court, and generally very expensive to the community.

[Ill.u.s.tration: James G. Flanders, Attorney for Schrank.]

"Bear in mind, gentlemen, that your appointment has not been suggested by either counsel for the state or for the defendant, or by any other party or, source directly or indirectly interested in this inquisition.

You are the court's commission, and you must enter upon your duties free from any bias or prejudice, if any there be. You should a.s.sume your duties, and I know you will, with the highest motives in seeking the truth, and then p.r.o.nounce your judgment without regard to the effect it may have upon the state or upon the defendant; in other words, in your inquiry and deliberation you are placed on the same plane as the judge.

"If any person seeks to influence you or talks to you as a commission, or to any member of the commission, who is not duly requested to appear before you, report him to the court so that an order to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt may issue.

"If there be any witnesses you desire, the court will command their attendance. The court will grant you the services of a phonographic reporter so that everything that is said and done may appear of record.

"This commission may now retire, select a moderator and proceed with the inquiry.

"Now, gentlemen, perform your duties fairly and impartially and render such findings to the court as your consciences and your judgments approve.

"The question for your determination is, 'Is the defendant John Schrank sane or insane at the present time?'"

Editorial comment from three newspapers is herewith presented as showing the general trend of comment on the course followed by Judge Backus:

The Milwaukee Free Press said:

"The findings of the alienists appointed by Judge Backus to determine the mental condition of Schrank were foreseen. There has been little doubt at any time of the derangement of that unfortunate man. This fact, however, does not detract from appreciation of the excellent and novel course pursued by Judge Backus in taking advantage of the statute that permitted him to submit the question of Schrank's sanity to a body of alienists appointed by himself instead of leaving the question to a jury at the tender mercy of alienists employed alike by state and defense.

"The judge justified his procedure in these words, when instructing the examining physicians:

"'I have decided to take this method of procedure instead of a jury trial, because as a rule in trials by jury the case resolves itself into a battle of medical experts, and in my experience I have never witnessed a case where the testimony of the experts on one side was not directly contradicted by the testimony of as many or more experts on the other side. Where men specially trained in mental and nervous diseases disagree, how can it be expected that a jury of twelve laymen should agree? Such testimony has been very unsatisfactory to the jury and to the court, and generally very expensive to the community.'"

"Worse than that. It has been a scandal to the medical profession, a source of travesty to judicial procedure and all too often a means of defeating the ends of justice.

"The very course pursued by Judge Backus was advocated by President Gregory of the American Bar a.s.sociation not very long ago, and the outcome in this instance at least is such as to recommend its adoption by the bench wherever the statutes permit."

The Chicago Record-Herald said: