Decatur Democrat, Volume 50, Number 30, Decatur, Adams County, 27 September 1906 — Page 6

RIGHT TO THE POINT Republican Editor Will Keep His Dollar. The Empire, a Republican newspaper published in Concordia, Kansas, Cnted the following pointed editorial t week: -~- "We have been invited to send a dollar contribution to the Republican campaign fund that is being raised by popular subscription and .to which President Roosevelt recently subscribed. We would like to have our dollar in such select company, all right, but we’ve done all the contributing we intend to this year. “We recently have completed building a house at 'a coat of something over $4,000, and for every foot of lumber, every pane of glass, every sack of cement, every pound of nails, and in fact, for nearly every bit of material that went into it we made a good, liberal contribution through the trusts that control them, and we guess we have done our share. “It may be treason for a Republican newspaper to talk this way, but facts are facts, and it sort of relieves our conscience to tell the truth about the trusts once in a while. We’ll just let the several trusts to which we have had to pay unwilling tribute in the last year pay our dollar for us. We need it and they don’t.” The views of the Kansas editor make interesting reading and are very much to the point. In the same connection it is recalled that Charles S. Hernly, ex-chairman of the Republican state committee, a short time ago made the following remarks: “Everybody is for tariff revision except the protected interests and a few politicians. Representative Watson wanted to make a stand-pat speech in congress, but he knew that he did not dare to do so. The speech which Charlie Landis made, sounding the stand-pat slogan, will cost him thousands of votes. There is only one side to the tariff question. When steel rails sell for S2B a ton in the United States and $lB a ton in Canada it is time something is done. If any doubtful person wants to be convinced of the necessity of revision let him study the tariff on lumber and building materials generally. The time has actually come when a poor man cannot I build a home for himself because he cannot pay for the materials that enter into its construction.” But Mr. Hernly and the Kansas editor are not the only Republicans who have spoken their minds. Before the Oyster Bay conference settled upon "stand pat” as the campaign war-cry, Congressman C. B. Landis had made his speech committing himself to the trusts. Os that speech the South Bend. Tribune, not long ago the mouthpiece of the Republican state committee, said: “Charles B. Landis has boldly and arrogantly committed himself to the stand-pat theory. He made a speech in the house, in which he openly and strongly declared himself against tariff revision. • Mr. Landis may understand his subject well, he may be satisfied in his own mind regarding the tariff, but when he declares there is no sentiment in this state favoring revision he makes a mistake.” After the Oyster Bay conference and the adoption of the “stand pat” slogan, the Rising Sun Recorder, Republican from away back, said this: “About everybody in Indiana, we assume, favors, a revision of the tariff, and what is called the ‘stand pat’ policy has no friends among the masses of-the people. No matter how many consultations are held, at Oyster Bay or elsewhere, the fact cannot be downed that tariff reform is necessary and cannot be postponed much longer’. It will be wise to heed the demand.” • These are only samples of the disturbance in the Republican ranks,: and it is not much wonder that the campaign managers are looking wildly about for new “issues.” Pearls and the Steel Trust. The Indianapolis News printed the following item the other day: “Judge Elbert H. Gary, chairman of the United States Steel corporation directors, paid $31,800 duty on two pearls which he brought with him from France. He announced that they were a present for Mrs. Gary, who is especially fond of pearls. The pearls are worth $53,000.” , As the head of the steel trust, Judge Gary can doubtless buy pearls for $53,000 and pay $31,800 duty on them without cramping himself. The Dingley tariff “protects” the steel trust for the benefit of Gary and his associates—Carnegie, Frick, Schwab, Corey and the rest. It is estimated that the steel trust—which sells its products cheap abroad and high at home, will clear $160,000,000 this year. That is something like 31 per cent on the "real money” invested in its business. The people “pay the freight” and likewise the duty on Gary’s pearls, to say nothing of the costs ..of the numerous divorce suits of the steel magnates.

SAMPLE TwmM>*ROT. All the time remember that the election of a Democratic congress would tie the hands of President Roosevelt during the remaining years of his term. No good citizen should desire to see President Roosevelt embarrassed. —Lafayette Journal (Rep.). Nonsense! Who was it that tied the hands of President Roosevelt during the last session of congress? It was members of his own party, and. he had to call on Democratic senators for help. Who was it that “embarrassed” him? The same class of Republicans in congress. And their opposition would have been fatal to all attempts at reform legislation if it had not been for the support which the Democrats freely gave to Mr. Roosevelt. He proved ungrateful, but that does not change the facts. A Democratic congress will vote for all measures that are in the interest of the people, whether Mr. Roosevelt is for them or against them. Besides, the present congress will last until March 4,190 f? and as it has an overwhelming Republican majority, it can pass any bill that it wants to pass before the Democrats elected this fall could get a “look in.” IMPOSING ON THE NEWSPAPERS A recent “special” from Indianapolis which appeared in several of the state newspapers, contained some notably false and misleading statements* In order to show that the purpose of the writer is solely to serve the Republican party a part of the “special” is here set out as follows: “Democratic leaders admit that there is not the demand for Bryan in Indiana that there was prior to his Madison Square Garden meeting. Up until that time Secretary Reilley was besieged with requests from,all parts of the state that Bryan be sent to aid in electing Democrats. The requests now are few and far between. Republicans say that the tailing off in the demand for the Nebraskan is significant. It means, they say, that the people of Indiana will not stand for his government ownership ideas. It is quietly admitted that Bryan’s new issue will, have a marked effect on the present state campaign. This is conceded by Democrats and Republicans alike.” There is no truth whatever in the above statements. The demand for Mr. Bryan from all parts of the state has not fallen off, but it has grown to overwhelming proportions. Mr. Bryan has no more made “government ownership” an issue than Mr. Roosevelt did in his last message to congress last winter and in other published statements. Mr. Bryan would prefer ownership of the railroads by the government rather than ownership of the government by the railroads, as most other persons would, but like most others he favors effective public supervision and regulation rathe/ than public ownership. The effort of the Republican managers to draw attention away from their scandalous alliance with the trust, and from their dishonest and wasteful management in both the national and state governments shows how badly scared they are. Whenever they resort to methods of which the above mentioned “special” is a small sample the people know that the Republican politicians realize that defeat stares them in the face. Postmaster-General Cortelyou, who is also chairman of the Republican national committee, went to Oyster Bay to see President Roosevelt the other day and was there asked concerning the report that he might be a candidate for governor of York. Mr. Cortelyou said in reply: “You may quote me as saying that I am, as postmaster-general of the United States, engaged in efforts to improve the postal service. When I am a candidate for any office I will say so.” But not a word did Mr. Cortelyou say about returning to the widows and orphans the hundreds of thousands of dollars stolen by the officials of the New York insurance companies and given to him for use in the 1904 campaign. Os course the Landises are “‘standpatters.” Charles B. is a member of congress; his brother Fred is likewise a congressman; Kenesaw M., another brother, if? a United States judge in Chicago, g, life position; Walter, a fourth brother, is postmaster at San Juan, Porto Rico; Charles B.’s son is a cadet at West Point. All in all the Landis family should see no real reason why things should be changed. It is the same with the other “standpatters.” Speaker “Joe” Cannon has made $2,000,000 since he has been in congress and no argument will convince him that anything is wrong with the tariff or the trusts. And so it goes all through the stand pat list. 1

'FRANK ADMISSION: A Prominent Republican Sees Gloomy Outlook. Jefferson H. Claypool of Indianapolis is the Republican member of the state board of election commissioners under the nomination of the Republican state committee and the appointment of Governor Hanly. Mr. Claypool has frequently given his views upon public questions to the newspapers. In a communication printed in the Indianapolis Star of June 16, 1906, he said: "It is as certain as anything in politics can be that the Democratic party will unite on and accept Bryan as their leader and candidate in the next national struggle on a platform declaring chiefly for tariff teform and the dismemberment or control of the trusts. That such a candidate on such a platform will give the Republican party the battle of its life since the first election of Lincoln is as certain as any human prediction can be. That Mr. Bryan has stood two defeats as a candidate for president and today stands the idol of his party shows him to be a remarkable man.” Mr. Claypool then said this as to the Republican situation: “Our situation is beset with serious difficulties. We are in power in every department of the government - and can offer no excuse to the people if we fail to meet their expectations and correct within our lease of power the chief evils of which they complain. We shall have to give a good account of our present stewardship in the campaign of 1908, or go down to deserved defeat. From the present temper of congress the outlook for adequate remedial legislation is by no means favorabel. The party leaders are at war with the president in regard to most of the reforms he is demanding in the name of the people, and no one can foretell ‘the result, though the fate of the party hangs on it.” A little further along in the same article Mr. Claypool said: “The Republican party cannot serve two masters —the monopolies and the people—and the hour is fast approaching when its decision must be announced and carried out as to which it will forsake. The abuses which the people complain against must and will be abated, and if one instrumentality cannot be made to perform the work another will be found. The fact that the country has prospered in spite of an unjust and discriminating tariff and a reign of mammoth illegal business combinations cannot be safely relied upon by the Republican party to win in the next campaign.” Os the protective tariff on which the Republican leaders, including President Roosevelt, “stand pat,” Mr. Claypool said: “The protective tariff breeds the trusts* the trusts increase the price of manufactured commodities and cheapen the quality of products. No party can go against the sound economic proposition and gain the support of the majority of the electorate in 1908.” At the time Mr. Claypool wrote the above communication he did not know that his party leaders would force the “stand pat” issue in the present campaign. The Republican party has’ thereoy put itself on the side of the trusts as against the people, and, according to Mr. Claypool, should not win in the present campaign. The Republican Ticket Machine-Made , and Boss-Ridden. The 1906 Republican state convention gave an illustration of bossism and machine rule such as has never been witnessed before in this state. Disgusted delegates declared after the convention had adjourned that they had been used as mere trading stamps. They had no individual choice and their votes were bunched and dumped for one man and another as the manipulators of the machine dictated. What sort of "house-cleaning could be expected from the machine-made and boss-ridden nominees of this convention if by any chance they should be eelcted? Only the kind that will best answer the purposes of the politicians who are now in charge of the Republican organization. Surely it will not be what the people want. The people of Indiana will ,not allow themselves to be deceived by the “reform” and “house-cleaning” talk of the Republican state ring. There is not a genuine reformer or house-cleaner in the bunch. The Republican party of Indiana Is in the hands of a few political adventurers who want to control it—and the state, if possible—for the furtherance of their own ambitions. They don’t care about anything else, and a longer lease of power will be taken by them to mean practically a quit-claim deed to the state from the people. « A vote for the Democratic state ticket means a vote for honesty and ' economy, in the state government.

I FFOBLEM FOB GOVERNOR HAWLY There seems to be a very large queein the minds of a good many per-sc’-is as to the sincerity of Governor Hanly’s “law enforcement” professions Among the doubting persons just now is B. F. Watson, a member of the Prohibition party’s state central committee. On the 23d of last August Mr. Watson addressed a letter to the governor in which he called the lat'.er’s attention to his past professions and certain of his performances and asked him to cast his eyes toward alleged transgressors which he was meeting face to face every day. And now we quote from Mr. Watson’s letter: *1 refer primarily to the Columbia Club, of which likely you are a member. It is notorious that this great Republican organization maintains one of the finest bars in the state, at which liquors are sold, not only to its members, but to their friends and other visitors. In fact, lam informed that the club receipts from the sale of '.iquor are greater than from any other department. The Columbia Club has of course, no license to sell intoxicating liquor, as it could not obtain one. Every sale of liquor made by it, whether to members or others, is as clearly a violation of the law as was the gambling conducted at West Baden or French Lick. And in this case the law violation is not merely connected with the building owned by the corporation by a bridge or walk, but is in a conspicuous place just back of the main corridor. There would be no pretense, I opine, that the receipts do not go into the treasury of the club. “More than thirty years ago, in the case of Marmont vs. the State, 48 Ind. 21, the supreme court held that the sale of intoxicating liquor by an association or club to its members was a violation of law, and this decision has been followed by the appellate court as late as Haggard vs. State, 26 App. 695. If the power of the state should he used to suppress gambling at French Lick and West Baden, I submit the question whether the auditor of State ought not institute an investigation of the Columbia Club, with the view of revoking its charter for these notorious violations of the law, which go on 365 days in the year and practically twenty-four hours each day.” Op the first of September Governor Hanly wrote to Mr. Watson that his “favor” had been received and that it would be given “such consideration as its character and evident purpose” entitled it to receive. Just what the governor means by “character” and “evident purpose,” he does not explain. But in the meantime it may be suspected that the Columbia Club remains unreformed and steeped in the iniquity described by Mr. Watson. It is understood that not only Governor Hanly, but practically all of the candidates on the Republican state ticket, most of the congressional candidate's and dozens of 'other prominent Republicans’, including the Wice president of the United States ahd Senators Beveridge and Hemenway, all are members of the aristocratic Columbia Club. Nor should it be forgotten that Attorney General Miller and State Auditor Bigler also are reputed to be members of the institution whose alleged questionable practices are thrust so rudely into the face of that eminent apostle of patriotism in time of peace, the Hon. J. Frank Hanly. And the question is, what will Governor Hanly do abbut the charges so openly and boldly made against the Republican Columbia Club of Indianapolis? The Powder Trust Will; Object. Another objection to electing a Lincoln (Neb.) man president is, the great difficulty with which a naval review could be pulled off in his front yard.—Washington Post. It is true that President Roosevelt has an advantage in that respect and he uses it treely, greatly to the delight of his friend Senator Dupont, the head of the powder trust. The recent naval review in Oyster Bay before Mr. Roosevelt’s summer residence was the greatest display of the kind in the country’s history. All sorts of salutes were fired from hundreds of big guns and tons upon tons of powder were| consumed. The government pays the powder trust about 85 cents a pound for powder which experts say can be made at a profit for 35 cents a pound. Os course the powder trust will not be for Mr. Bryan. The Republican state convention of Washington by resolution has asked President Roosevelt to “lay aside his personal wishes” land take a nomina- 1 tion for a third term. Wonder if the Washington Republicans really knoy? j what Mr. Roosevelt’s “personal wishes” are? There is a suspicion abroad in the land that the president, when it comes to the question of a third nomination, will be about as obstinate as the celebrated but frail tkmna Julia.

I - BRIAN ON RAILROADS Regulation First, Ownership Only a Last Resort. In a speech at Louisville on September 12, before an audience of more than 20,000 persons, Mr. Bryan took occasion to settle once and finally the question as to his position with reference to the railroads. Because he made suggestions in his New York speech about possible government ownership as an ultimate remedy for abuses— not differing greatly in substance from utterances of President Roosevelt—Republican papers, politicians and other interested persons at once began to misrepresent his attitude. They charged that he had made an immediate issue of government ownership and had committed his party to it. Nothing that he had said gave the slightest warrant for this charge. He made no concealment of the fact that he favored government ownership of the railroads as a last resort if they would not yield to fair regulation, but he first favors regulation and hopes that thereby the rights of all concerned may be safeguarded. At Louisville he said: “This statement of my views has been assailed by some as an attempt to force these views upon the Democratic party -and by some as an announcement of an intention to insist upon the incorporation of these views in the next Democratic national platform. “Let me answer these two charges. I have tried to make it clear that I expressed my own opinion, and I have never sought to compel the acceptance of my opinion by anyone else. Reserving tfie right to do my own thinking, I respect the right of everyone else to do his thinking. I have too much respect for the rights of others to ask them to accept any views that I may entertain unless those views* commend themselves to others, and I have too much confidence in the independent thought in my own party to expect that any considerable number of Democrats would acknowledge my right to do their thinking for them, even if I ,were un-Democratic enough to assert such a right. “As to platforms, I have contended always that they should be made by the voters. I have in my speeches and through my paper, insisted that the platform should be the expression of the wishes of .the voters of the party and not be the arbitrary production of one man or a few leaders. "If you ask me whether the question of government ownership will be an issue in the-, campaign of 1908, I answer, I do not know. If you ask me whether it ought to be in the platform, 1 reply, 1 cannot tell until I know what the Democratic voters thihk on the subject. If the Democrats believe that the next platform Should contain a plank in favor of government ownership, then that plank ought to be included. If the Democrats think it ought not to contain suph a plank, then such a plank ought not to be included. It recta with the party to make the platform, and individuals can only advise. I have spoken for myself and for myself only. “I still advise strict regulation, ahd shall rejoice if experience proves that that regulation can be made effective. I will go farther than that, and spy that I believe we can, have more efficient regulation under a Democratic administration, with a Democratic senate and house, than we are likely to have under a Republican administration, with a Republican sen- 1 ate and house. "President Roosevelt, although expressing himself against government ownership, has announced that only successful regulation can prevent government ownership. Is there any Democrat who is not willing to* go as far as President Roosevelt and admit the necessity of government ownership in case the people are convinced of the failure of regulation? I cannot believe it. “Then, while we attempt to make regulation effective, while we endeavor to make the experiment under the most favorable conditions, namely, with the Democratic party in power, let us not hesitate to Inform the railroads that they must keep out of politics; that they must keep-them hands off of legislation >, that they must abstain from interfering with the party machinery and warn them that they can only maintain their private control of the railroads by accepting such regulation as the people may see fit to apply in their own interest and for their own protection. Without this threat our cause would be hopeless. It remains to be seen whether, with this threat, we shall be able to secure justice to the shippers, to the traveling public and the taxpayers.”

TREASON TO FAIRBANKS About two weeks ago the Indianapolis Star printed a double-leaded editorial formally announcing the candidacy of Charles W. Fairbanks for president. As Mr. Fairbanks has been, an avowed candidate for two years, the Star’s announcement was superfluous. The Republican state convention, however, did not indorse Mr. Fairbanks as a candidate. Its failure in that respect was regarded as singularly strange, but perhaps there was. method in it. The Indianapolis News spoke of theplatform adopted by the convention as. a "Hanly platform.” From this it. was understood that Governor Hanly dictated the platform. Since that time the governor has persuaded the Republican state committee to indorsehim as “the issue” in the state campaign. Some other Republican authorities have declared Roosevelt to be“the issue” as to national matters. Capable political experts, putting this and that together; eame to theconclusion that possibly Governor Hanly expected that the two “issues,”’ namely, himself and the president, would be made into the Roosevelt and Hanly ticket in 1908. But it appears that Hanly may have a higher ambition. The Indianapolis Star quotes a prominent Republican editor as declaring that he will be "the next Republican candidate for president.” He thinks he will be nominated about like Garfield was. "He stands a better show,” says the editor, “of being the next Republican national standard bearer than any other man in this country.” Now, all this is plain treason to Mr. Fairbanks—and doubtless it is premeditated treason. It it is not premeditated, why does Hanly insist on being * "the issue’’? If he should win he would be the great Republican “It” in Indiana and Fairbanks would be politically discredited before the country. t t — V BILLS KILLED. OR “DEFERRED" BY CONGRESS. The session of congress lately adjourned lasted seven months. The Republicans had a large -majority in both the house and senate. The presiding officers of both bodies were Republicans and the president, who must approve all legislation, is a Republican. 'the chairman of every - committee was a Republican. It would have been easy for the Republicans, , therefore, to pass any bill that they wanted to pass. But there were many bills that they did not want to pass and yet were afraid to openly vote against, and so such bills were smothered in committeees or held back by other processes. It was thus that the labor bills were killed. Among the regular measures that lost their lives at the last session were the following: The eight-hour bill. The anti-injunction bill. The bill limiting the working hour* of railway employes. The letter carriers’ bill. v • Publicity of campaign affairs. Prohibiting corporation campaign contributions. .’ J ” ■’ . ; ; Election of United States senator* by direct vote of the people. To prevent competition with con-vict-made goods, ~ For the greater safety of Inland navigation. To build government powder sac- • tory to prevent the extortions of the powder trust. To unseat Senator Smoot, Mormon i apostle. Other measures in which there was popular interest could be added to the list. Speaking of the matter in the ' closing days of the last session Congressman Sulzer, of New York, said: “And there are others of almost as: much importance, but I am sorry to say because these bills are opposed by great corporate and financial interests it is absolutely impossible, apparently, to have them brought to a vote, sothat the. members will be compelled to go on record and votei|or them or vote against them. Such is Republican policy.” ■* T J' ’-’ - When the rate bill was pending: President Roosevelt repeatedly warned the railroads that if they prevented government regulation they might expect a demand for government ownership. Mr. Bryan declares that if the railroads will submit tb fair regulation in the interest of the people government ownership will not be necessary, but that if they refuse tosubmit to such regulation it may come.