1 IUf mW.JB' M "IMPII HHjiffm-w r, ,
MAY 5, 1905
purging tho stock oxcliango and tho board of
trade of their gambling features. Aside from
the ruin that they bring to those who are led to
speculate they affect In an illegitimate way tho
honest dealers in securities. Object lessons are
required to awaken the public to any evil, but
surely we have had object lessons enough to
show the, evils of the stock exchange and tho
board of trade as at present conducted
JJJ
THE WORLD'S SCARECROW
On another page will be found a New York
World editorial which is reproduced that tho
readers of The Commoner may know the tactics
employed by tho defenders of private monopoly
and therefore be the better prepared to meet
them. Socialism is to be used as a scarecrow to
frighten those who, while desiring to have) com
petition preserved where competition is possible,
are in favor of securing for the wholo people tho
benefits of monopoly where monopoly is unvoid
able. This is not, as the World calls it, a now
"fad." It is a well settled policy and is being in
creasingly adopted in this and other countries.
The Commoner has for several years advocated
municipal ownership of municipal franchises, al
though it did not advocate the public ownership
of the railroads until last July.
The World's argument is as shallow as its
fears are groundless. It opposes the municipal
ownership of a telephone system because it thinks
it may develope first into a state system and then
into a national system. Is it any more likely to
do this under public ownership than under pri
vate ownership? The chances are much greater
that the system will become a great national
monopoly under private ownership than that the
federal government will swallow up the local sys
tems under public ownership. Greed, the great
controlling influence in private monopolies, is
absent from public enterprises and the popular
love lor local self government would constantly
work against the absorption of the local sys
tems. The city can operate' lines within the city, the
country can operate lines outside of the city and
within the county, while the state takes care of
the comparatively few lines necessary for inter
county communication. Adjoining states would
have no difficulty in making connections. The
telephone companies ar.e already consolidating
and the telephone lobbyist has joined the railroad
lobbyist at the state capitals. Unless the people
take hold of the telephone business they will
soon be engaged in a struggle with a telephone
monopoly national in extent. The same answer
can be made to the World's argument against
the municipal ownership of street car lines. The
World is afraid that street car systems will ex
tend to inter-urban systems and inter-state sys
tems. The more reason then why they should
be owned by the public. It is bad enough to have
street cars owned by a" local corporation, but it
would be infinitely worse to have a national
company monopolizing the streets of all the cities.
The World knows to what extent the inter-state
railway lines are consolidated; it knows to what
extent these railroads now influence politics; can
it view without alarm the absorption of inter
urban jines and street car lines by one or a few
great railroad systems? If the people of a city
own their own street car lines these lines are in
no danger of being surrendered to state or na
tional authority.
Local pride and local interest will offer a
successful barrier to absorption if the people are
In control. The World's argument is really an
argument in favor of municipal ownership rather
than against it.
Just now we are dealing with municipal own
ership and the World, unable to answer the arg
uments In favor of the public ownership of public
utilities, is trying to convert it into a national
questions Is, it afraid that all the gas plants and
water plants will be located at Washington, too?
Just now the issue is railroad regulation
not the government ownership of railroads. .The
editor of The Commoner believes that public
ownership is the ultimate solution, but he is
anxious to have" regulation tried under the mo3t
favorable circumstances.
He believes that state ownership of local lines
is not only preferable to national ownership of
these lines, but entirely feasible. A few trunk
lines owned by the federal government would be
sufficient to regulate inter-state commerce. Not
every inter-state line need be owned by the fede
ral government. If each state had an outlet over
one federal' line that fact would enable the vari
ous states to agree upon inter-state rates and
exchange of cars where two state lines formed
part of one through line, just as separate and
distinct systems now make traffic arrangements.
The Commoner.
Jefferson was opposod to centralization, and
not without good reason. Ho said, as tho World
suggests: "When all government, domestic and
foreign, in little as in great things, is drawn
to Washington as tho center of all powor, It will
render powerless tho checks of one government
on another, and will becomo as venal and op
pressive as tho government from which wo sepa
rated." The editor of The Commoner is in hearty
accord with Jefferson on the subject covered by
the above quotation, and it is to prevent central
ization that he has proposed state ownership of
local lines.
The World, while professing great rovoronco
for Jefferson, is defending tho very system which
will, if anything can, drive tho people to national
ownership. Tho extor.tion and discrimination that
hav accompanied prlvato ownership have made
many democrats willing to risk tho danger of
centralization rather than present evils, but state
ownership of the local lines offers tho benefits of
national ownership without its dangers.
The World has strengthened Tho Commoner's
position. Its warning against centralization will
do good, and tho absurdity of its arguments
against municipal ownership will encourage those
who are opposed to the present system with the
exploitation, graft and corruption which have ac
companied it.
The World can quote Jefferson with telling
effect against centralization, but it can not suc
cessfully throw the mantle of Jeffersonianism
over the financial magnates who, through the in
strumentality of private monopolies, aro despoil
ing the people of their heritage.
JJJ
' ' SPECIAL OFFER
Taking advantage of tho subscription offer,
an Omaha reader writes: "Wo aro pleased to
hand you list of twelve subscribers for your
valuable paper. It required about two hours'
time to get these subscriptions."
P. M. Allison, Orange, Ind., sends ten sub
scribers and $G.OO to pay for the same at tho
lot of five rate.
John B. Waddill, Springfield, Mo., writes:
"Herewith I hand you club of five subscribers
at your clubbing rate of GO cents a year in lots
of five or more."
Geo. S. Bird, Wellford, W. Va., writes:
"Pleaso find enclosed eight fliibBcrlbors for Th
Commoner at your lot of flvo rate, GO conto
year."
T. G. Sutton, Arjglyo, Minn., writes: "Pleaso
find herewith twenty subscribers for Tho Com
moner according to your lot of flvo rates."
N. R. Tucker, Fremont, O., sonde soven sub
scribers to Tho Commoner, and monoy ordor to
pay for tho same.
P. C. Schlyttcr, Wittenberg, Wis., writes:
"Enclosed pleaso find list of twolvo subscribers
for Tho Commoner."
According to tho terms of tho special sub
scription offer, cards, each good for ono year's
subscription to Tho Commoner, will bo furnished
in lots of five, at the rate of $3 per lot. This
places tho yearly subscription rate at GO cents.
Anyono ordering these cards may soil them
for $1 each, thus earning a commission of $2
on each lot sold, or ho may sell thorn at tho
cost price and find compensation in tho fact that
he lias contributed to tho educational campaign.
These cards may bo paid for when ordered, or
thoy may bo ordered and remittance mado after
they have been sold. A coupon is printed bolow
for tho convenience of thoso who deslro to par
ticipate in this effort to increase Tho Commoner's
circulation.
THE COMMONER'S SPECIAL OFFER
Application fr Subscription Cards
5
10
15
20
25
50
75
100
Publisher Commoner; I am Interested In In
creasing The Commoner's circulation, and de
slro 70a to send me- a supply of subscription
cards. I agreo to use my utmost endeavor to sell
the cards, and will romlt for thorn at the rale of
CO cents each, when sold.
tfanie
Box, or Street No..
P o
..Btate........
Ind lento the nutrber of cards wanted by mark
Ins X opposite one of the numbers printed on
end ol this blank.
If you believe the paper U doing a vtork Vxat mcrita
encouragement, fiU, out Uu above coupon ami mail it
to The Cotnmonir, Lincoln, Neb.
J
Good "Work at the Primaries Best Assurance
of Success at the Polls
Representative Champ Clark, writing under
date of Bowling Green, Mo., April 24, says: "I
'have carefully read the editorial in The Com
moner, "The Pledge Outlined," and heartily en
dorse the plan therein suggested. I have for
years advocated primary elections. My expe
rience and observation teach mo that the closer
we get to the great body of tho people on ques
tions of public policy, the better it will be. I
enclose a- signed pledge."
Extracts from other letters follow:
A M. English, Yankton, S. D. Enclosed find
my primary pledge, which I am very glad to sign.
I have always attended the caucuses. I have been
on the firing line many years, and although an
bid man, I hope to see a democrat in the White
House before my work is done.
Thomas A. Barr,' Malaga, Calif. I have read
your plan of organization and approve of it I
am a democrat of the old school never vote'd a
republican ticket in my life, and I will give my
pledge that I never will as long as I live.
D. H. Chamberlain, Harrlston, Miss. I have
heretofore considered it entirely unnecessary for
one who has never missed a primary to sign a
pledge to attend all tho primaries in tho future,
but since what you have to say in the last issue
of The Commoner, I am free to admit that I was
wrong, "l therefore send you herein the pledge,
duly signed, and will see to it that every demo
crat in my county shall have his attention called
'to the necessity of this method of procedure.
J. W. Pope, Orlando, Fla. Please find two
pledges, my own and that of J. F. Estes, my son-in-law.
We are with The Commoner in all its
plans. Let everything go forward.
x B. W. Brown, Manager News-Journal, Ram
sey, 111. The plan of organization suggested by
your valuable paper should meet with the appro
val of every democrat who believes in the right
of the majority of the party to rule in the party
councils. I most heartily endorse your plan, as
it certainly is the plan to get an honest expres
sion from tho people. Please enroll my name as
one in. the midst of an organized fight for tho
success of true democracy.
Daniel A. Langhorno, Lynchburg, Va. En
closed find my pledge and those of some friends
who think 'it all important that the great demo
cratic party should continue Its struggle against
organized wealth, which Is threatening to over
throw everything sacred In our inheritance from
tho Fathers. Father in Heaven! grant that there
may bo still enough patriotism and righteousness
in the land to save it.
P. W. Gorman, Gilbert, la. I wish a part
in this good work, so I enclose my pledge. I
join hands with the great common people through
tho columns of The Commoner, hoping tho labor
ing men of our nation may all get in the demo
cratic fold.
A. J. Donald, Assistant Principal Public
Schools, Gilman, Iowa. I send you my pledge.
It is just what Iowa democrats need, for tho rank
and file of the party have lost confidence. - The
plan will bring unity, and unity means success.
J. A. Teeple, Hancock, Mo. Herewith find tho
primary pledge, signed. I think the primary
pledge a grand step for pure Democracy, and I
shall try hard to get many more to sign tho
pledge.
Henry Stangler, Indianapolis. Enclosed you
will find primary pledge, signed. I would like to
see every true American citizen sign such ta
pledge.
Emmet N. White, El Paso, Texas. The work
being done by The Commoner in securing the
primary pledge, will bring great good to democ
racy and to the country at large. I rejoice that
the old party all along tho line presents itself
a party of usefulness, and is bringing a message
of promise to the people.
. S. P. Young, Dixon, 111. I have been a sub-
(Contlnued on page 5.)
41
t ,jt fr; j-.-tt..vt-'-s- . ,
, 4kJU3jmytH- fc, .
- 4f C
0 A , &tMt i.ttlr .- HiljK
4. J6- tw3U h.s -f -..t-i m .
t && -JtL-r- '.Itf. -Xll-r I