Republic to our President to endorse their democratic peace terms, and I observed that that appeal was not answered in the affirmative by our Government, and it was answered in the negative by the British Government. I was again aroused in my emotions, and I wrote this article "Conscription—for what?" which seems to me a more passionate and less deliberate thing than anything else here printed. And the reason for that is that it is the transcript of a speech. It is the transcript of a speech which I made at a meeting in Madison Square Garden called to demand from our Government the endorsement of the Russian peace terms. And the speech did contain, and the article does contain, and conclude with, the demand that we should endorse those Russian peace terms. That is its underlying and fundamental intent. Nevertheless it contains extremely vigorous assertions, that I do not believe the Government has a right to conscript men to a foreign war, and that I still doubt if the American people will peaceably submit to it. This was written, and that speech was made, remember, at least ten or twelve days before the conscription law was passed.
ONE of the members of my father's family three or four generations back, was named Daniel Webster, and Daniel Webster's speech on the subject of conscription in the war of 1814 was, more than any other one thing, the thing which determined the policy of this country toward conscription for a period of more than 100 years. That speech is one of the most noted and important state papers in the history of the United States. I am sure it is well known to the District Attorney and to His Honor and to everybody else who has read American history. I think His Honor will grant me the permission to read these excerpts from a historic docu-
23
