- u fsmm'
The Commoner.
: WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR
Vol. 5. No. 48
Lincoln, Nebraska, December 15, 1905
Whole Number 256
CONTENTS
"Hysteria, amd Rancor"
No Rktrkax
DlCFEW ON aHoNXSTYW
- "FOIXOWTETG RoOSEVTZLT"
A No vel Contest
BiJLeST TAIiK on Raxtkoads
A G-eand Old Man
. Mr. Beyan in Honolulu
. "CJONSTETJCTIVE OeITICISm"
Home Department
Comment on Current Topics
The Primary Pledge
- News oe the Week
&
&
A MICHIGAN SUGGESTION &
Owosso, Mich., Oct. 28. Did you ever t
stop to think what we a& subscribers to $
& The -Commoner could do in the way of &
& extending its usefulness if we only set S
5 about it. There are perhaps 150,Q00-of,,us.s$.
6 taking this paper. Now it stands to
& reason that we are in sympathy with $
s? what it advocates or we would not be &
tf taking it. This being true why not one &
& and ajl of us try to extend its usefulness &
J? and do it in this way: Each week when &
& we receive our paper and have read it, &
& let's pass it along. We will probably find ?
$ some article that appeals particularly to &
us, or that we consider especially good.
$ Let's encircle it with a lead pencil and ?
5 mail or hand it to a friend. Do this &
6 every "week. In a year's time we get &
& fifty-two copies each. Supposing the &
& whole of 150,000 of us would do as I sug- &
gest, just think what it would mean. &
It would mean practically an endless &
chain of readers of The Commoner and,
in my opinion, in a few months time &
would double the subscription list. Let's &
try it. &
If you have old copies on hand wrap &
$ them up in bunches and hand them out to
. , some one who you think will read them. &
& "Keep them' moving." &
& F. J. M'DANNEL. . S
ELKINS KNOWS
The Kansas City Star says: "It would be
wholly unsafe to look to Senator Blkins for a
good rate bill. Hjs natural bent is all one way -toward
the railways. But it is gratifying to note,
from his statement of what he thinks ought to
be done, that he has come a long way toward
meeting the overwhelming sentiment of the
country. He no longer talks about defeating legis
lation. He practically concedes a number of
points urged by the president."
Has the .editor of the Star forgotten that
"when the devil was sick, the devil a monk would
be; when the devil was well the devil a monk was
he?" Mr. Elkins may, in truth, "concede a num
ber of points urged by the president;" but the
Star stated the case in a nutshell when it said
"it would be -wholly unsafe to look to Senator
Elkins for a good rate bill." ,
If ever the time comes that Senator Elkins
and Mr. Roosevelt agree upon a rate bill, Mr.
Roosevelt will have made the material concession,
while Senator Elkins will be found doing business
at the old stand.
SHAKE I'M WITH YOU
"HYSTERIA AND RANCOR'
In his message to congress, and referring to
the corporation question, President Roosevelt
said: "This legislation should be enacted in a
spirit as remote as possible from hysteria and
rancor." Of course there should be no "hysteria
and rancor" in the transaction of public business,
any more than there should be "hysteria and
rancor" in the affairs of individuals. But it will
occur to a great many people that it was hardly
necessary for the president to warn a republican
congress against "hysteria and rancor" in the
framing of corporation legislation, unless, indeed,
he meant to caution that body not to display
too much rancor against a corporation-ridden
public pleading for relief, and not to Indulge in
too much hysteria while pulling corporation
chestnuts out of the fire.
Such phrases as those here used by President
Roosevelt were coined in the mints controlled
by the representatives of special interests. In
their view every man is "hysterical" who raises
his voice in protest against corporate imposition,
and pleads for equal rights to all and special
privileges to none; every man is "hysteri
cal" who rejects the proposition that
the Baers and the McCalls and the McCurdys are
divinely ordained to control the property inter
ests of the country and by reason of that high
commission are entitled tt select our pubic
officials and to control our public policies as
well as our public and private funds.
If the warning against "hysteria and rancor
has any serious meaning it is that in the dis
charge of every duty, whether that duty relates
to the affairs of government or to individual
concerns, raeij, should act calmly and without
malice. But no one, outside of corporation cir
cles will seriously contend that men confronted
with the duty of protecting popular government
from the foul hands of those who would destroy
It should not act resolutely.
No one is justified in accusing the American
people of "hysteria and rancor" in the contem
plation of the evils confronting them.
In 189G they were bo calm, so far from "hys
teria and rancor," that they gave their support
to a political organization that had mortgaged
Itself to a coterie of men whose purpose it was
to prey upon the people.
They are now so far from "hysteria and
rancor" that, although the republican party has
suffered to be put upon them Imposition after Im
position, they have borne it calmly and have
restored to power, and have again restored to
power, the political organization which, so far
as political organizations go, Is solely respon
sible for their woes.
They see sitting in the senate of the United
States a number of admittedly unworthy men.
Many of them are nothing more than the repre
sentatives of special Interests. Some of them
have been Indicted and convicted In courts of
justice. The dishonesty of some others has been
exposed before investigating committees. Yet
they all hold their offices, draw their salaries,
and continue to cast their votes against the pujpl
lie interests. The people are so far from "ttjir
teria and rancor" that there Is hardly a protest
against this affront to the Intelligence and
honesty of the country.
It has been shown before the Insurance com
mittee at New York that men In charge of great
commercial bodies have stolen millions of dol
lars of their policy holders money; that these
men have committed perjury and have caused
their subordinates to do likewise. Yet compara
tively few of these men have retired from their "
commercial positions. Those who have retired
have been succeeded by men who, In the presl-
. . ,. .,
