MARK TWAIN'S REMEDY.
Mark Twain, who was the next speaker, and who, Mr. Peckham said, would view the matter from a different standpoint, took issue with Bishop Potter at once. He said that there was lust for gain and dishonesty, but that it must be admitted that if such a condition was universal this country could not survive. He said that he believed that forty-nine out of every fifty men were honest, and asked if this were true why it was that the forty-nine honest ones could not have their way. The whole matter simplified, he said, was that the wrong man was in authority.
"Now I am here, " said Mr. Clemens, "with the utmost seriousness of manner to tell you what's to be done, and how to do it. I have exercised the trade of unsalaried statesmanship for years. I am a statesman not for reward, but for the peace of mind it brings me. I am too old to learn, but I am not too old to teach.
"Now, to set this whole thing right is very simple. I know all about it. It has been said by somebody, and if it hasn't it will be now, that we must learn wisdom out of the mouths of babes and sucklings or something of that sort. The whole solution of the question rests just there. Fifty-one years ago, when I was fourteen years old, I was a member of a party of a peculiar sort, and it was my belief that if we could have such a party now we would soon clear the political atmosphere. I bring it to you here now for the salvation of this town. The party was called the Cadets of Temperance.
"Its members wore red merino scarfs and walked in church parades and picnics. On entering it a boy had to promise not to smoke," said Mr. Clemens, removing the cigar from his mouth, "never to drink or gamble, to keep the Sabbath, and not to steal watermelons. In fact, you promised to leave behind all the liberties that were of any value, and pursue a career of virtue that was irksome to yourself and a reproach to all other people.
"There were thirty-four members of the party, and they were divided into two factions, the reds and the blues. Five of the members were purchasable, and they had to be purchased every month, when there was an election. Four could be secured on reasonable terms, but the fifth held out for war prices. The bribes were paid in the shape of doughnuts and chewing gum. There were two boys - the most incapable of the lot, but the most enterprising, who were always to the fore. There was Croker Brown on one side and Platt Higgins on the other, and one or the other managed to get himself elected every time. The good boys stood no show at all. They couldn't get elected.
THE ANTI-DOUGHNUT PARTY
"When we had stood this thing a long time, we got an idea. We good boys stepped out when we saw the balance of power with the purchasables, and formed another party. We called ourselves the incorruptibles, but we were not always known by that name. We had obloquy heaped on us, and we got the name of the 'Anti-Doughnut Party' because we couldn't be approached on the usual terms. Well, we started wrong by putting up one of our members for office, and of course he got licked.
But we stuck together, we twelve, and enunciated new principles. They were that none of us would ever accept office of any kind. We are here, we said, to put some virtue into the gang, and we're going to do it. We won't take office, but we warn you - meaning the other two parties - that you've got to put up your best men for office or you won't get our support. We were strong enough to make those terms, and that was the end of the Crokers and the Platts. The good boys were put up, and then we picked the best one and voted for him and he was elected.
There's the problem, gentlemen, solved. What we want today is an 'Anti-Doughnut Party' that won't take office, but will keep the other parties safe. I am sure that it can be done. In a modified form it has been done by the mugwumps, of which body, I am the only living representative. An 'Anti-Doughnut Party' of 60,000 or 80,000 can do the trick. It would spread from the city to the country, and in time it would dictate the nomination of every office holder from constable to President. All it would ask for was the best possible man, and its support would mean the best man's election.
"Not long ago we had two men running for President. There was Mr. McKinley on the one hand and Mr. Bryan on the other. If we'd had an 'Anti-Doughnut Party' neither would have been elected. I didn't know much about finance, but some friend told me that Bryan was all wrong on the money question, so I didn't vote for him. I know enough about the Philippines to have a strong aversion to sending our bright boys out there to fight with a disgraced musket under a polluted flag, so I didn't vote for the other fellow. I've got that vote, and it's clean yet, ready to be used when you form your 'Anti-Doughnut Party' that will want only the best men for the offices, no matter what party they belong to, and which will solve all your political problems.
John Jay Chapman gave what some considered an announcement of the Citizens' Union that they would insist on Controller Coler being nominated for Mayor on the reform ticked. "The Democratic machine wants the emoluments of office, and so does the Republican machine," said Mr. Chapman.
"It seems to me that the most practical way to win a victory for honesty an civic righteousness is by commencing a year ahead. Let us take a man like Coler, for example, and announce our candidate and say to the public, 'Here is our man.' Let us stand together without compromise. Let us say we stand for Coler and no compromise. People may sneer at the Citizens' Union and their efforts at organization, but it is the only way practicable to bring about an end of misrule in municipal government."
Others who spoke to the subject of the evening were St. Clair McKelway, Charles Sprague Smith, and Frank Moss.













BWAK!
Terrific. Again, you RAWK!
Many lessons can and should be learned from what's in this post!
Thanks.
May 15, 2009 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Its members wore red merino scarfs and walked in church parades and picnics. On entering it a boy had to promise not to smoke," said Mr. Clemens, removing the cigar from his mouth, "never to drink or gamble, to keep the Sabbath, and not to steal watermelons. In fact, you promised to leave behind all the liberties that were of any value, and pursue a career of virtue that was irksome to yourself and a reproach to all other people."
Oh the promises I sometimes made. Ah youth
May 15, 2009 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Peckham will get you.
May 15, 2009 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I always enjoy reading an essay about honesty by a man who signed his work with a fake name. But I digress...thanks for a good read!
May 15, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Samuel is coming to get you and give you a bigger wedgie than you have already, for that!
Heh heh heh! =D
May 15, 2009 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!
May 15, 2009 10:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny dat. But truth is stranger than fiction.
I find a lot of points of similartude with our contemporary times. But I am a chicken.
Just wanted to add, good post and discussion, the other day. I'm a little burnt from work, but read avidly. Quite a contribution, so thanks.
May 15, 2009 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. I haven't had time to post much lately and find that I'm a little out of practice in dealing with the more obtuse dissenters. It was a good long discussion though, and continues somewhat on my continuation of the thread today.
May 15, 2009 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks so much for posting this. I'm reminded of critics of shows like The Daily Show--and especially of David Frum's rainy-cloud appearance on Rachel Maddow's show, when he basically said that important political questions were being spoiled by comedy.
May 16, 2009 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Comedy generally helps.
I think.
May 16, 2009 2:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, feathered friend. Did you remember that we first waterboarded under McKinley?
I found some insight regarding Twain's view of McKinley and Washington politics by reading "The Gilded Age".
May 16, 2009 12:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is the new and improoooved gilded age. Trucknutz and all.
Oh and chat haz troubles, so try here: mibbet.
May 16, 2009 12:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mibbit my arse! (Oh well. Think I sorta plowed thru help etc. enough to make it work. Left mangled test msg. Next time! Though why Mibbet doesn't learn from Lingr, I donno.....)
May 16, 2009 2:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno either. Sorry I missed you.
=(
May 16, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I enjoyed this. It reminded me of the great writings of Professor M. M. Quimby, Petroleum V. Nasby, and other noted orators and innovative lecturers. Mr. Sugar told me that Mark Twain, or "Longhorn" as he was called by streetwalking New Orleanian's, once happened upon him whilst using yon outhouse at night. Mr. Sugar then proceeded, with some embarassment, to report on the queer discussion the two gentlemen embarked upon on that cold, winter night in 1906, which, for sake of good taste, shall not be spoken here.
No, not really.
May 16, 2009 1:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps the "Anti-Doughnut Party" is alive and well? Perhaps implementing it's reach over the people who wait on subway platforms, and who drink yahoo.
May 16, 2009 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nah
Humor might be the mechanism, Joe. Mr. Clemens was wise.
You've been known to engage in a bit yer ownself.
;D
"Longhorn" was actually his Middle name. Just sayin' I have no idea if that was so.
May 16, 2009 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Clemens was wise. Great writer too.
I recall that he took a lot of heat from his own family for funding a college education to an African-American man in the later years of his life. He told them to go to hades.
He didn't brag about it, but this was at a time when that was a no no.
He took alot of heat when I was a kid because of his use of the N word in his novels, like Huckleberry Finn, yet they failed to read the actual book to see where his sympathies truly were. Then, he rode out old betsy on Halley's Comet!
A Missouri man like me too. Great one liners and sound-bytes, so he was ahead of his time.
May 16, 2009 2:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent, bwak. And so true.
May 16, 2009 4:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for this bwak.
A formative read for the very late night reader.
I think he's right.
(er, left)
We could have an Anti-Twinky Party. (Holding up our left wings(^)
(wait a minute, do frogs have wings?) Well whatever, may the best one win.
May 16, 2009 5:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
It seems like a timeless remedy, for sure.
Thanks for reading.
May 16, 2009 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not so much anti-doughnut as pro-doughnut hole, but a great story from our greatest story teller. Thanks for the comic relief (and wisdom), Bwak.
May 16, 2009 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bwakfat, did you see how pretty your avatar looks at the top of the "front page sneak peak" reader comment section looks?
Josh just put up the link. Congrats, you're the first to sit on the top of all the other eggs.
May 16, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I am soooooo not worthy
May 16, 2009 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I still can't proof-read.
May 16, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bwak -- you are brilliant. Cutting to the chase, compassionately.
May 16, 2009 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is this guy, some kind of commie who hates America?
(/snark)
May 16, 2009 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think some bankers probably thought so.
I'm not surprised he lost a fortune to them.
=D
May 16, 2009 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome post btw Bwak. :)
May 16, 2009 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh my, I read this some time ago on some research journey. I assumed everyone knew about it except me.
=D
Great stuff. Mr. Clemens wisdom and wit has helped to keep me sane these past few years. I just feel awkward, although I did think of this for some reason, (general blogs and political conversation,) I can't take credit for it.
But thanks everyone for reading. I do feel strong parallels with his Times. I'm glad so many seem to feel the same way.
May 16, 2009 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dashboard update
June 12, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
and another
June 16, 2009 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also.
June 21, 2009 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You haz a dashboard too???? But can u drive?????
June 21, 2009 11:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I keep one eye on da road.
=D
June 21, 2009 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Refresh, er, you know
June 28, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is delightful!!! Before I ever got here!!
June 28, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink