|
IT is a popular fallacy that the
Scot has not figured to any
appreciable extent in the political life of the United States or of the
several states. This may, in a measure at least, be accounted for by the
faet that one neither reads nor hears of the Scotch vote as a factor to be
reckoned with at elections by political parties and candidates for
political office. In the larger centers of our population it is
regrettably true that preliminary to an election we hear much of the
"Irish vote." the "German vote," the "Italian vote," and the "Hebrew" or
"Jew vote." Indeed, it has become a common practice with those who control
political conventions—especially municipal conventions—to bring about the
nomination of men as candidates, not because of their standing as citizens
and their known qualifications for the offices for which they are named,
but rather whether as an aggregation they represent the various classes of
hyphen-vote and will therefore bring to the ticket the support of the
so-called foreign vote. This influence is so manifest that it is not
infrequent that the inquiry is heard, Well, what about representation for
the American vote There may be those who, not having given thought
to the question, are of the opinion that the Scotch vote is not considered
for the reason that its proportions are too insignificant to command
consideration from political leaders; but if there be such they should be
undeceived. What might be termed the Scotch vote is not considered as such
for an altogether different reason. It is a recognized fact the world over
that the expatriated Scot readily assimilates and becomes wedded to the
institutions under which he lives. Sentimentally he ever remains Scotch,
but if it be that his desire for new fields of opportunity has brought him
to the United States his prime purpose at once is to become a good
American. His sentimentality and continued love for the scenes of his
youth and the "bonnie purple heather" never impair his loyalty to the land
of his adoption. It would not be accurate to say that all men Scotch born
who become naturalized American citizens take kindly to politics in the
sense of being willing to actually participate in the discussion of public
questions or of being candidates for public office, but it is nevertheless
true that from the very
foundation of our government—yea, even in colonial days, men of Scottish
birth have had conspicuous part in the affairs of government. An
undeniable truth is that wherever the Scot has figured in the affairs of
government, whether in our National or State Halls of legislation, or upon
the bench as jurist, he has left his imprint upon the pages of history.
Types of such men were James B. Beck, who for many years represented the
State of Kentucky in the United States Senate; David B. Henderson, a
member of the House of Representatives from the State of Iowa, and who
became Speaker of that body; and Arthur MacArthur, who was an Associate
Justice of the United States Supreme Court, retiring therefrom with great
honour in 1887. Another conspicuous figure is James Wilson, Secretary of
Agriculture in the cabinets of Presidents McKinley, Roosevelt and Taft,
retiring at the close of President Taft’s term greatly honoured, and with
the distinction of having served as a cabinet officer for sixteen
consecutive years, a record unparalleled in the history of our country.
These four names but serve as samples to illustrate the proud position
attained in the public life of the nation and the several states by the
naturalized Scot. Space forbids the enumeration of a long list of others
equally distinguished. The Americanized Scot is ever advised upon the
public questions of the day and can always give a sound reason for the
faith that is in him, and when he votes, be it always said to his credit,
he votes as an American and not as a Scot.
CHARLES P. MCCLELLAND.
New York City. |
