Political and Religious New York by W. W. P.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jul 15, 1909

Political and Religious New York

By W. W. P.

Two articles in the June magazines are of more than ordinary significance. One of these, in McClure’s Magazine, describes the control of New York City by a political organization which uses professional criminals to control the elections. The opening paragraph reads thus:—

From 1870 to 1890 the Democratic party was in absolute and natural control of New York City. By reason of great changes in the population, its natural popular majority then left it. From 1894 to the present day—fifteen years—it has been in charge of New York two thirds of the time. In all that period, with one doubtful exception, it has never had one majority of the popular vote at a city election that was not obtained through the votes of trained bands of “repeaters,” composed largely of professional criminals.

The testimony adduced to justify this shocking statement is full and explicit. Names, dates, figures, and places, together with circumstantial details, may abound in an article of seventeen pages, which tells of the shameless traffic in votes with the same definiteness as one would employ in reporting the cotton or grain market. One paragraph, which analyzes the present situation, ought to be reprinted:—

No stranger spectacle has ever appeared than the present organization of this criminal population of New York as professional fraudulent voters. The two thirds of a million registered votes of the city are divided so closely along conventional party lines that only a slight balance is needed to secure control of the government. This balance is furnished by these organized criminals, trained to manufacture fraudulent votes at elections and primaries. And by this means not only the city but the party organization is held in absolute control. The government of the second largest city in the world, when the system is in full working order, depends at bottom upon the will of the criminal population—principally thieves and pimps. The eighteenth-century governments founded on mercenary troops offer mild examples of social decadence compared with this.

In the light of such facts as these, popular government in New York City becomes a farce, and property and life have little promise of permanent protection.

If investigation should show that other American cities are similarly controlled, it will require no prophetic vision to foresee that the stability of these great municipalities is no longer assured, and the effect of such corruption upon state and national governments will be most demoralizing. This is one of the signs of the times.

The other article to which we call attention is in the American Magazine, and is entitled “The Godlessness of New York.” Some paragraphs will indicate the general tenor of this striking article:—

No, there is no lack of money. The Protestants have the money, and they are willing to expend it. More money is put into Protestant church work now than ever before; but in spite of this inflow, the churches have steadily lost influence. . . .

Many church leaders have been seeking endowments, building more churches and parish houses, preaching more energetically. And like any institutional group under pressure, its position has often been one of denial and opposition. Having no power of prophecy, no triumphant message, it has scattered its energies in preaching and working against various minor evils. . . .

All the new devices, indeed, taken together, have not prevented the steady decline of church influence, nor have they changed, as yet, the tone of disheartenment with which many Protestant leaders look upon the situation. A million or more Protestants are still outside of Protestant church influence, to say nothing of the Roman Catholic and Jewish people. . . .

The Protestant churches, as churches, may be said, indeed, to have no longer any very positive convictions or any very definite program. They no longer believe their own creeds, and the old fervor of hostility with which they becudgelled one another (a sign of life at least) has departed. No longer fighting one another, neither do they unite; there is no fire to fuse them. . . .

This is the situation which the Protestant churches are facing. Many of the rich are in the churches: nearly all the poor are outside. The churches feel that somehow they must “get back to the people.” But they have not yet touched the real problem. Here and there a man is crying in the wilderness, crying to a people who are spending their money on themselves. The churches, as churches, have not waked up. . . . It is not enough that men give money, they must give themselves: and the same is true of churches. The churches are still far more interested in having fine buildings, in being Baptists, or Lutherans, than they are in reaching the people. They make no real surrender. A complaint has gone up

from the churches for several years of a lack of young men entering the ministry: it is laid down as a reason that ministers are not paid enough salary. But that is not the true reason: the true reason is that young men of ideals feel no inspiration or vision within the churches. The churches offer them no great message to deliver. . . . Can the Protestant churches, divided among themselves, full of the pride of tradition, and rich in worldly possessions, ever rise to the situation?

Those who see in the present departure from Bible standards and the loss of spiritual power in the churches a clear fulfilment of prophecy, the inevitable result of the rejection of a heaven-sent message to this generation, are thought to be prejudiced observers, and their testimony is often discredited; but no charge of this kind can be brought against Ray Stannard Baker, who has here written down facts and conclusions. “These quoted paragraphs show to what an extent the churches are failing to fulfil their message. How significant are the words, ‘Having no power of prophecy, no triumphant message’! And yet the true church of Christ should have both.”

It can hardly be thought that it was through any collusion of writers or publishers that these two articles should appear at the same time, but together they give a terrible picture of conditions in New York City, and it is not likely that other cities are in a condition to throw stones at New York. The great cities certainly need the third angel’s message.

W. W. P.