Democratic Sentinel, Volume 16, Number 37, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 30 September 1892 — CONSPIRATORS ON THE RUN. [ARTICLE]

CONSPIRATORS ON THE RUN.

The Or gun of the People’s Party on Partisan Coarts —Additional Charges Made Against the Revolutionists. The American Non-Conformist has struck another heavy blow at the Republican conspiracy to revolutionize the government through a partisan court. After paying Judge Elliott a glowing tribute for his non-partisan record, The Non-Conformist castigates the other judges severely for having done what has never been done before—excused their conduct through interviews—a partisan newspaper, The Indianapolis Journal. The Indianapolis News, owned in part by C. W. Fairbanks, the millionaire Republican candidate for United States senator, at first tried to redicule the charges of The Non-Conformist by asserting that it was an obscure sheet, but when it was proven that The NonConformist circulation was double that of The News, the Republican began to realize that something should be done to meet the arguments of the People’s party organ, and the state committee ordered the interviews with the judges of the supreme court to be published in The Journal. Judge Elliott maintained his reputation by declining to be interviewed. “Who Ezenseth Himself, Accuseth Himself.” The Non-Conformist continues: A celebrated English judge was once accused of questionable conduct and the attacks became so general that he was finally induced to “make a statement” in his defense, something like our modern interview. Commenting on this another famous English judge, noted for his integrity, remarked: “A judge who excuseth himself, accuseth himself.” That observation fits this case exactly. The judges who attempt to excuse themselves through the columns of a partisan sheet, really accuse themselves. If their integrity was assaulted in such a way as to be deemed worthy of notice, they should have noticed it in a far different way. They should have proceeded as judges, by summoning the accusers before them to answer for contempt of court. The law provides their remedy as well as their vindication, and the former is as summary as the latter is complete. Beveral Rotten Kgga in the Bowl. The Non-Conformist therefore takes great pleasure in acquitting Judge Elliott. It is really unnecessary to state to those who know him that he is incapable of a dishonorable action. If all the members of the state court were equally conscious of the honor that befits a judge, this discussion would not be in progress. Coming back to the point of the controversy, The Non-Conformist avers that several of the judges, whose denials are so loudly published, are .guilty as charged in the original indictment Our charge is this: That less than eight weeks ago certain judges of the supreme court met in conference with leaders of the Republican pasty to discuss political matters; that among other subjects discussed was the proposed suit to test the gerrymander. This conference took place in a room at the Dennison hotel, and some fifteen or more persons were present. Among the number was Chairman Gowdy, of the Republican state central committee. All the members of the committee were not present. The meeting did not take place in the regular committee room. It war attended only by choice spirits of the Republican party—members of the “inner circle,” as it were. Even the United States court was represented by a disquiahed member. We derive our information from one who was present at the meeting. If this is not sufficiently specific, we will try to make it more so. The Journal shall be satisfied that the charge is not “obscure,” even if it thinks the source from which it emanates is of that character.

Bnndy and Other*. Judge Olds, in an interview quoted above, is not content with giving the supreme court a bill of health. Ha goes out of the way to whitewash the nisipriiis judges also, stating that his familiarity with the Indiana judiciary qualifies him to pronounce it puts and above reproach. This is a somewhat risky statement to make in view of past occurrences, but with details pf' the present controversy storing the P" 'ic jn toe face. Does Judge Olds the method of bringing the gerrymander suit a proper and dignified proceeding? Does Judge Bundy appear to him as suoh a model of a nisi-prius judge as to justify his sweeping eulogy? If so, we are constrained to say that his ideal is not high nor his conclusions such as can generally be accepted. The case before Bundy, though one involving the highest rights of the state and the most vital consequences to the whole people, was partisan in its inception as well as its progress so far, and if pressed to its logical termination must be partisan in its conclusion. It is not only partisan but practically ex-parte. By that w e mean that only one party appears either jn the bringing or the hearing. All the. papers in the case were prepared here in Indianapolis, with a typewriter. This includes even the order of the court for an alternative writ of mandate. All the judge had to do or was expected to, do, Was to sign his name. There was. in-: deed, a sham show made of having the either side represented in court. This went to the appointment of a lawyer to appear for the defense. And whom, will it be supposed, was selected for this duty? {Tone other than ex-Judge Mailed, who is the father-in-law of Judge Bundy, lives in the same house and eats at the sSme toble. The extent of his duties, as appears from the record, consisted in filing a general demurrer to the complaint which in due time his son-in-law will proceed to overrule. The case therefore stands thus: It was brought iu the interests of the Republic can party, before a Republican judge, by Republican attorneys, with * sWn Republican defense. Everything in and about case smells of partisanism,' and a very low grade of partisanism. The pleadings were not only out-and-dried, but the decision was ready-made. The time as well as the ndture of the final judgment was agreed on in advance. This judge, like a “swift witness," knew beforehand what he was going to say. He had been “seen" as well as coached. Last week one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs was openly eg-' pressing hto disgust and disappointment because Bnndy had u otß ®u* him me deoisioh as ‘promptly as expected. vV The arrangement was that' it should be here' before the supreme court adjourned, so that all Ihe- preliminary steps in that oouH might be taken. But the gang K somewhat abashed, ‘not to say htoned, at the publicity given their

proceedings. Bundy hesitated and failed to come to time. The supreme court has adjourned until Oct. 4 without having a chance to act on Bundy’s cookedup record. What will be the result of this delay remains to be seen. The conspirators may go to the extent of summoning a special session. This, however, is not likely and after reassembling the time for effective action will be short. The “obscure” exposure of The Non-Conformist greatly embarrassed the crowd and seems to have sadly “obstructed the course of justice” from a Republican standpoint. The people are now watching matters so closely tnat no step can be taken without sharp scrutiny ana stinging criticism. Perhaps the game has been flushed before the hunter was ready. Perhaps the great gerrymander case will prove one of premature accouchment, necessitating a certificate from the political doctors of “died-a-boraing.” To still quote medical language, if it turns out to be an instance of “breech presentation” it will not be the first time that partisan tricksters have appeared before the public wrongend foremost.

Who Fiji th* Sugar Bounty t The bounty paid to the Louisiana sugar growers by the government last year exceeded $10,000,000. That is a tax of sixteen cents for each man, woman and child in the United States, or $850,784.64 for Indiana. The estimate for the coming year exceeds over $15,000,000, and the Louisiana papers have boasted that within five years the sugar growers would receive in bounty from the government over $20,000,000 annually. Knowing the Democrats would repeal this bounty, if ever returned to power in every branch of the government, or refuse to appropriate money to carry out this provision, if they ever secured the house, the billion-dollar congress made a continuous appropriation until July, 1905, to pay this bounty. The people will have to pay this bounty as long as the Republicans continue in power. But this is not all. The wealthy sugar growers of Louisiana have been led to believe that the government owed then this bounty, and they threaten to sue the government, through the court of claims, for the recovery of damages, should Cleveland be elected, and the bounty law of the McKinley tariff repealed, claiming that the government entered into a contract with them to pay them a bounty of two cents per pound, for fourteen years. The Sugar Bowl and Farm Journal, the organ of the sugar growers, published in New Orleans, in its edition of. July 16, boldly asserts this proposition as follows: *

We fully agree in all our St. Mary correspondent says below, except the settlement part. The Sugar Bowl has all along maintained that the bounty law is a settlement of the sugar question for fourteen years, in fact, a contract, and we have simply to so contend and it will never be repealed. Our people have for no many years had their fears wrought upon by the annual agitation of the sugar question that they have continued to feel uncertain. When that law passed, settling the question for fourteen-years, they felt that it was too good to be true, although the bounty was no more than had been the duty. Hence, as it is a contract, under faith of which millions of dollars have already been expended and millions more will be annually so long as it lasts, the government will not— dare not—abrogate it. Should they do so, heavy damage suits would result, especially by owners of beet sugar plants, and for this reason alone it wyl not be repealed. A second and most important reason for the maintenance of the bounty is that it gtyes the people of the United States sugar at about two cents per pound cheaper than hitherto, and hence they have no cause to complain. A third reason why the bounty law will be maintained is that the Republican party are committed to it, and even though the Democratic nominee for president, with his free trade ideas, should be elected, the senate is Republican and will remain so fen: more than four years to come, and they will not favor its repeal.

Shall He Be a Millionaire t For the first time in the history of Indiana, the people are threatened with the possibility of being represented in the United States senate by a millionaire. Indiana can boast of the proud distinction of being the only northern state that never has beep represented to the United States senate by a millionaire. If the Republicans carry the legislature she will boast no more for the man who makes a profession of betting on elections, can safely offer to bet two to one that if the Republicans -carry the next legislature, Charles W. Fairbanks, the millionaire railroad lawyer and speculator of Indianapolis, will succeed Senator Tnrpie in the United States senate. Mr. Fairbanks is reported to, be the richest paan in thp state, wealth acquired within the short period of twelve years by speculating on Wall street. And strange to say, he relies upon the fanners to elevate him to the millionariea’ club — the United States senate. He believes that the People’s party will draw from the Democratic party three votes to one from the Republican party and thereby allow the Republicans to carry jjhe state Mr. Fairbanks owns a railroad and is largely interested in others. Hq owns the Indianapolis News which is now engaged in bulldozing the supreme, court into revolutionizing the state government by declaring the apportionment unconstitutional. He is a stockholder in the Elwood tin plate works which has been built by taxing 63,Q0Q,Q0Q consumers. He is interested to otlier. corporations and is a corporation man throughout. His only hope of success is through Democrats; who vote the People’s party ticket. A vote for toe People’s party candidate for the legislature is equal to half a vote for Millionaire Fairbanks for the United States senate.