Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 19, 1909)
'pv wy "Tr'vw'"""' rnwi -t v "' f NOVEMBER 19, lfW - fund struggles for a decent existence. In tho face of those facts what the republican platform says about maintaining 'the high standard of living of the wage earners of the country, who are the most direct beneficiaries of the protective system, looks like buncombe. 'High standard of living!' Where is the wizard of finance who can maintain even a decent standard of living at present trust and tariff- made prices on $G 47 a week? What sort of a 'high standard of liv ing homo can a head of a family maintain in Massachusetts on $8.53 per week? These are not the American 'wages,' for the maintenance of which tho people have consented to bo taxed by the 'captains of cotton,' these wages that rob the child of his playday, these wages that rob the babe of mother care, these wages that make the mill towns of New England an invit ing field for exploitation by procurers of 'daughters of the poor,' for dens of infamy in city Blums. These are the wages of a criminal system, the wages of a subjected people, the wages of oppression. And these 'profits' are not profits, but the fruits of graft and theft, the plundering of money gluttons run mad in their insatiate greed, piling fortune upon fortune until their accumulated wealth becomes a men ace to society, corrupting and dominating tho peoplo's government." SENATOR CUMMINS of Iowa made a speech In Chicago attacking Cannon and Aldrich. In that speech he said: "I-understand perfectly that it would have been holpful to party har mony if wo" could have voted together, but that Is not the question. The platform was for pro tection. All the republicans in congress were for protection, but the view of these high priests appears to be that if they thought that upon any given article protection required 50 per cent, and we thought the articlo would be amply protected with 25 per cent, unless wo voted for 50, wo w.ere no longer republicans. The wholo proposition is so aosurd that even the most rabid member of the triumvirate will not re peat it often. There need be no concern about the attitude of the insurgents and their' friends. They will do their best to nominate candidates who believe in a progressive republican party. When they succeed they will rejoice necause a step will have- been'-talc'en in the path df reform. When thejT fail they will be republicans still, for if there ever was a time when there was absolutely no reason for transferring any branch of the government to democratic hands, this Is the time. Individually, I have high regard for the integrity and patriotism of many of tho democratic senators and representatives in con gress, but collectively they are moro unfit to manage the affairs of a great country than ever before in the history of the organization. Never theless, we do riot Intend to accept as final the revision of the tariff against which wo voted, and we do intend to tell the people of the coun try from time to time why we could not and did not give the bill our approval." JOHN STEWART KENNEDY, the New York philanthropist who died recently leaving enormous sums to charity, did not boast of his benefactions, although during his lifetime he gave generously. Referring to Mr. Kennedy the Omaha World-Herald says: "While the world now learns that his will bequeaths $25,000,000 to educational and church institutions, to libra Ties and charity, his left hand seems to have knowfi nothing "about It. The right hand wrote silently and the world's knowledge comes too late for Kennedy to hear any praise. He got that big deed without the knowledge of the world of which he was still a part and this is the only word he left about it: 'Having been greatly prosperous in the business which I car ried on for more than thirty years In this, my adopted country, and being desirous of leaving some expression of my sympathy with its re ligious, charitable, benevolent and educational Institutions, I make these gifts.' He asks for no carving of his name above doors, on stones or walls. He does not ask that his name and memory be identified with any 'foundations.' And now his close friends recall that he was a big but quiet giver in his lifetime. He gave $800,000 in one place, $1,000,000 in another, $250,000 in another, $500,000 in another, $400, 000 In another, to say nothing of smaller sums, but under such circumstances, with so little an nouncement and ado that it requires his death, with a patticular survey of his life, to restore a recollection of his benefactions. Leaving an estate of almost $100,000,000, he had not sought or lived in the limelight as a rich man. He was The Commoner. ?n?? li pU8h eod things along without shout- noin?fnTieJyb0d?. to watch h,m- H contributed Sf; as h,o was able, to all tho main wnrM at. ,work,for io betterment of tho WJ ' JatMn? a tho whilo that modest re gard of himself which a judicious survey of man s general estato suggests and tho canons of Piety enjoin. If, when ho put down $100,000 for the University of Glasgow, and added tho note, where from my infancy I resided until I m0 ,, .thlB country "Q folt some pride, wo wm call It of tho noble sort, and when wo ob serve that bequests of from $10,000 to $25,000 are left to a large number of relatives and bo .quests of from $500 to $2,000 to old employes we almost wish ho might return so that wo might grasp that generous and discreot right hand." WILLIAM COURT GULLY, long tho leader . ,, noUBO of commons and the first Viscount Selby, died at London. He was born in I8db. A London cablegram to tho Chicago Record-Herald says: "Tho viscount was speaker or the house of commons from 1895 to 1905 Mr. Gully at the time of his election as 'first commoner of England' had achieved a high rep utation at the English bar. His grandfather was in his youth a well-known pugilist. The viscount was, educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took his B. A. degree in 1856,. and during his college career he showed great prom ise of tho oratorical ability which later on in great measure led to his advancement to tho speakership. On leaving the university Mr. Gully studied law and was called to tho bar in 1860. Seventeen years later he became a Q. C., 'taking the silk' from Lord Cairns in 1877. By this time Mr. Gully was well known on the northern circuit as a prominent and successful loader, and his eminence was recognized by his legal brethren in 1879 when they appointed him one of the benchers of tho inner temple. When Mr. Gully turned his attention to politics his connection with the northern circuit led him to look for a seat in parliament from the north of England. In 1880 and 1885 ho contested Whitehaven without success. In 1886 ho, stao,d for , Carlisle and was elected by a narrow ma jority. In April, 1895, during Lord Rosobery's premiership, Mr. Gully was elected speaker by the liberals to succoed Mr. Peel, who wished to retire, and later in the same year, when tho conservatives returned to power, he was re elected. The election of a speaker has no bear ing on party politics. Mr. Gully soon proved himself a success as speaker. Intense watchful ness, presence of mind and promptitude of action were his prime characteristics, and throughout his service he was highly respected by both sides of tho house. His readiness of action is told in scores of stories. As an illustration, on one occasion when a proposal to read an Irish bill was up an Irish member cried, 'I object.' Later the same member wished to speak on tho bill, but the speaker stopped him, telling him that ho had already spoken. The member indignantly denied this, whereupon Speaker Gully reminded him that in the beginning ho had said 'I object,' which constituted a speech from a parliamentary point of view." SPEAKING BEFORE the Knights of Colum bus at Omaha' Congressman G. M. Hitchcock attacked the central bank proposition. Con cerning Congressman Hitchcock's address tho Omaha World-Herald says: "He opened by ex plaining the revolutionary character of the pro posal. It contemplated depriving 7,000 national banks of the power to Issue bank notes on de posit of security with the government. It pro posed to give this power solely to the central bank. This bank to have a capital of $100, 000,000 and to receive all government deposits now scattered in banks all over the country and also all funds ordinarily kept in the treasury. This bank also to hold the reserves of all other national banks and to advance currency to them in time of need upon the deposit of securities. In other words the banks of tho country now in dependent would be made subordinate to tho central bank. It would have the power to .ex pand or contract the supply of currency, to ex tend or to refuse aid, to makes prices high by a plentiful supply of currency or to force prices down by contracting it and calling in loans. It would have the power to fix the rate of interest. What is tho need for such a revolutionary pro ceeding? Is our banking system in bad snap or are our banks languishing? On tho other hand tho banking power of the United States has grown more rapidly in fifty years than that of 7 iwfit'nn nUnt7; .Mu,ha". o recognized an tnorlty on tho Bubjcct, states that tho total hank ie i?.0V;?r ?f fh0 wor,tl ,8 $50,000,000,000 and of this tho United States has two-fifths whilo all i?i. S ,ml,ons combined only have threo fiftlm. Vory soon wo will have one-half the Jhn S.?f ?iOW?r .f th0 wh0,(J wor,d- Not on' that, but tho banks of America independent and owned by capitalists whore they d0P buslncss- tho ?,nnirm,rr0 87,,co to tI,0,r customers than tho banks of any European country. Then why copy the monarchical system of European conn- if Srli?"0 ft fW roat bM,kB w,th thousands of branches centralize control and destroy ln- dopendonco? Why emphasize that centraliza tion by creating a contral bank to dominate tho banking Interests of tho country? Is It necessary on account of lack of currency? Wo havo moro iai ?ny th?r country. Wo hnvo all that wo ncod legitimately. Tho real troublo Is that tho big interests in the east want a system which will put this currency into their control. Thoy want a system which will put tho wholo money supply in tholr hands. With a contral bank they would got it. This is too big a country to submit to such dictation. Tho Independence of our banks is a sourco of prldo and prosperity. Wo io npt want to see them become practical branches of a great central bank. Tho west has created and developed its own banks. It owns them and Is ablo to sustain them if tho law does not cripplo them and mako them subordi nate. Tho west ospoclally should ioauo a de claration of indopendonco for its banks and pro test against tho proposition to mako them de pendent and subordinate." A HUMAN Interest story sent by wire to tho Now York World from St. Louis follows: By a simple, earnest appeal to a burglar as she ii YPi In bed In th0 soml-gloom created by a night lamp, Mrs. Boulah Coleman of Ferguson reached hJs bettor naturo and caused him, with lowered head and slinking steps, to return tho money and jewelry ho hnd taken. 'You're a burglar, aren't you?' she asked of tho figure dim ly rovealed in tho kitchen adjoining, ills silence convicted Ulm. Tin not going to Aako you to task for that,' she continued In a low voico calculated not to awake her husband, asleep in tho front room, and tho children at nor side, 'My husband is an invalid and I am trying to support this little family I know you noed tho money, or you wouldn't bo hero, but I probably need it worse than you. You see those children who aro dependent upon mo, a woman. You aro a man. It is for you to decide who needs tho money most.' Tho thief did not answor, but tossed her husband's pockotbook on the foot of tho bed, slid tho jewelry out of his pockets to tho dresser and left," REFERRING TO tho federal court's decision against tho Nebraska guaranteed deposits law tho Springfield (Mass.) Republican says: "It is an extraordinary decision which comes from tho United States circuit court at Lincoln, Neb., nullifying tho slate deposit guaranty law. To enforco contributions by each bank to a com mon fund for tho payment of losses of failed banks is held by tho court to be depriving ono person of his money to pay the debts of an other, and therefore to bo taking property with out due process of law. At first sight this may seem to be a sensible judgment. But consider tho consequences if it should be approved by tho United States supremo court. Practically all of tho bank currency reform plans worthy of consideration, which havo been proposed, provide at least for a guaranty fund contributed by all the banks for the redemption of the notes of failed banks after the manner of tho Canadian banking system. Now between tho circulating bank note and bank deposits there is no essen tial difference. They aro merely different forms of bank credit. They aro equally a liability of tho bank. The federal government, moreover, is held to a provision against depriving any ono of his property without duo process of law as is tho legislature or government of Nebraska. Therefore, if this decision Is to stand, any re formed national bank system which should pro vide a general guaranty fund or mutual insur ance of circulating notes, would be outlawed to that extent. And ono may be euro banks will never be allowed to circulate notes against their general assets without such a mutual Insurance of their noto liabilities. It is not alone tho deposit guaranty plan which is hit by this de cision; it Is. bank currency reform also which receives a knockdown blow." 1 t -M 4 1 3 II ; 4 n 1 n . ...AOAj'i-