Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The Plattsmouth journal. (Plattsmouth, Nebraska) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Aug. 13, 1908)
H3 " In Hsarty Accord Witt Platform. SHALL THE PEOPLE RULE That Is ths i uussnon. ! - REPUBLICANS RESPONSIBLE ill Present Abuses a Result of Their Acts, and They Are Im potent to Correct Them. Mr. Clayton and Gentlemen of the Notification Committee: 1 can not ac cept the nomination which you official ly tender, without first acknowledging my deep indebtedness to the Democrat ic party for the extraordinary honor which it has conferred upon me. Hav ing twice before been a candidate for the presidency, in campaigns which ended in defeat, a third nomination, the result of the free and voluntary act of the voters of "the party, can only be ex plained by a substantial and undis puted growth iu the principles stud pol icies for which I, with a multitr.de of others, have contended. As those prin ciples policies have given me what ever political strength I posset's, the action of the convention not only re Hews my faith ia them, but strengthens my attachment to them. A Platform Is Binding. I shall, in the near future, prepare a more formal reply to your notification, and, iu that letter of acceptance, will deal with the platform in detail, it is sufficient, at this time, to assure you that I am iu hearty accord with both the letter .uul the spirit of the plat form. I endorse it iu whole and in part, and shall, if elected, regard its declarations as binding upon me. And, I may add, a platform is binding as to what it omits as well as to what it contains. According to the democratic idea, the people think for themselves and select officials to carry ont their wishes. The voters are the sovereigns; the officials are the servants, employed for a fixed time and at a stated salary to do what the sovereigns want done, and to do it la the way the sovereigns "want it done. Platforms are entirely In harmony with this democratic idea. A platform announces the party's po sition on the questions which are at is syc; and an official is not at liberty to use the authority vested in him to uige personal views which have not been submitted to the voters for their 'approval. If one is nominated upon a platform which Is not satisfactory to Jiira. he must, if candid, either decline the nomination, or, in accepting it, pro pose an amended platform in lieu of the one adopted by the convention. Xo such situation, however, confronts your candidate, for the platform upon which I was nominated not only contains nothing from which I dissent, but it specifically outlines all the remedial legislation which we can hope to se cure during the next four years. Republican Challenge Accepted. The distinguished statesman who re ceived the Republican nomination for president said. In his notification ppeech: "The strength of the Republican cause in the campaign at hand is the fact that we represent the policies es sential to the reform of known abuses, to the continuance cf liberty and true prosperity, and that we are determined, las our platform unequivocally declares, to maintain them and carry them on" In the name of the Democratic party, I accept the challenge, and charge that the Republican party is responsible for all the abuses which now exist in the federal government, and that it is im potent to accomplish the reforms which are imperatively needed. Further, I can not concur in the statement that the Kepubli.-nn platform unequivocally leclares for the reforms that are nec essary: on the contrary, I affirm that it ipenly and notoriously disappoints the hopes and "xpectations of reformers, whether those reformers be Republic ans or Democrats. So far did the Re publican convention fall short of Its duty that the Republican candidate felt It necessary to add to his platform tu several important particulars, thus re buking the leaders of the party, upon whose co-operation he must rely for the enactment of remedial legislation. As I shall, in separate speeches, dis cuss the leading questions at issue, I shall at this time confine myself to the paramount question, and to the far reaching purpose of our party, as tbi.t purpose is set forth in the perform. Shall the People Rule? Our platform declares that the over- shadowing lmsu LIcu manifest Itself iu nil the questions uuv under discus sion, is "Shall tlie people rule? No matter which way we turn: no matter to what subject we address ourselves. 1 the same question confronts us: Shi: II the people control their own govern ment, and use that government for the protection of their rights and for the promotion of their welfare? or Khali tlie representatives of predatory wealth prey upon a del egoless puLlic. while the OiTeuders secure immunity from subservient oGicIuls whom they raise to power by unscrupulous methods? This Is the issue raised by the "known abuses" to which Mr. Taft refers. President's Indictment Against tht y' In a message sent to congress last January. President Roosevelt said: "The attacks by these great corpora tions ou the administration's actions have been given a wide circulation throughout the country, in the news papers and otherwise, by those writers aud speakers who, consciously or un consciously, act as the. representatives of predatory wealth of the wealth ac cumulated on a giant scale by all forms of iniquity, ranging from the oppres sion of wage earners to unfair and un wholesome methods of crushing out competition, and to defrauding the public by stock-Jobbing and the manip ulation of securities. Certain wealthy men of this stamp, whose conduct should be abhorrent to every man of ordinarily decent conscience, and who commit the hideous wrong of teaching our young men that-phenomenal busi ness success must ordinarily be based on dishonesty, have, during the last few mouths, made It apparent that they have banded together to work for a re-action. Their endeavor Is to overthrow and discredit nil who hon estly administer the law, to prevent any additional legislation which would check and restrain them, and to secure. If possible-, a freedom from all re straint which will permit every un scrupulous wrong-doef to do what he wishes unchecked, provided he has enough money." What an arraignment of the predatory Interests! Is the president's indictment true? And, if true, against whom .-as the indictment directed? Not against the Democratic party. Mr. Taft Endorses the Indictment. Mr. Taft says that these evils have crept in during the last ten years. lie declares that, during this time, some "prominent and influential members of the community, spurred by finaii' i.il success and in thoir hurry for greater wealth, became unmindful of the com mon rules of business honesty and fidelity, and of the limitations imposed by law rpon thoir actions'." and that "the revelations of the breaches of trusts, the disclosures as to rcbr.tcs and discriminations by railroads, the accumulating evidence cf the viola tions of the anti-trust laws, by a num ber of corporations, and the over-issue of stocks and bo nils of interstate rail roads for the unlawful enriching of di rectors and for the purpose of concen trating the control of the railroads un der one management," all these, he charges, "quickened the conscience of the people and brought on a moral awakening." During all this time. I beg to remind you. Republican officials presided in the executive department, filled the cab inet, dominated the senate, controlled the house of representatives and occu pied most of the federal judgeships. Four years ago the Republican plat form boastfully declared that since ISOO-with the exception of two years the Republican party had been in con trol of part or of all the branches of the federal government; that for two years only was the Democratic party In a position to either enact or repeal a law. Having drawn the salaries; hav ing enjoyed the honors: having secured the prestige, let the Republican party accept the responsibilitj'! Republican Party Responsible. Why were these "known abuses" permitted to develop? Why have they not been corrected? If existing laws are sufficient, why have they not been enforced?, All of the executive ma chinery of the fed2ral government is in the hands of the Republican party. Are new laws necessary? Why have they not been enacted? With a Re publican president to recommend, with a Republican senate and house to carry out his recommendations, why does the Republican candidate plead for further time in which to do what should have been done long ago? Can Mr. Taft promise to be more strenuous in the prosecution cf wrong-doers than the present ejsocutive? Can he ask for a larger majority in the senate than his party now has? Does he need more Republicans in the house of represent atives or a speaker with more unlim ited authority. Why No Tariff Reform? The president's close friends have been promising for several years that be would attack the iniquities of the tariff. We have had irtiniation that Mr Taft was restive under the de mands of the highly protected in dustries. And yet the influence of the manufacturers, who have for twenty five years contributed to the Republican campaign fund, aud who in return have framed the tariff schedules, has bem sufficient to prevent tariff reform. As the present campaign approached, botli the president and Mr. Taft de clared in favor of tariff revision, but set the date of revision after the elec tion. But the pressure brought to bear by the protected Interests has been great enough to prevent any attempt at tariff reform before the election; and the reduction promised after the elec tion is so 'dged about with qualify ing phrases that no one can estimate with accur y the sum total of tariff reform to I e expected ia case of Re publican success. If the past can lie taken as a :ide, the Republican prrty will le so .ligated by campaign con- trlbuflons from CLe beneficiaries of pro tection, as to muke that party power loss to brine to the country any ma terial relief from the present tariff burdens. Why No Anti-truct Legislation? A few years ago the Republican lead ers la the house of representatives .V,.e cocrt.t.d Ly j,ubIic oplllloa ,uto , Kl,r,j0rt of au .Ult;.lrust law which , u, cnUorsenieut of (,K. ,)res!dMlt, . t WJuate refllsed even to con. xl.ivr the measure, and since that time no effort has been made by the domi nant party to secure remedial legisla tion upon this subject Why No Railroad Legislation? ' r t ........ meree Commission has been asking for j nn enlargement of Us powers, that it might prevent rebates and discrimina tions, but a Republican senate and a Republican house of representatives were unmoved by Its entreaties. In 1900 the Republican national conven tion was urged to endorse the demand for railway legislation, but Its platform was silent on the subject. Even in 1904 the convention gave no pledge to remedy these abuses. When the presi dent finally asked for legislation he drew his inspiration from three Demo cratic oatioual Dlat forms and he re ceived more coiuial support from the Democrats than from the Republicans. The Republicans in the senate deliber ately defeated several amendments of ferred by Senator La Fxdlette and sup ported by the Democrats amendments embodying legislation asked by the In terstate Commerce Commission. One of these amendments authorized the Ascertainment oT the value of rail roads. This amendment was not only defeated by the senate, but it was over whelmingly rejected by the receut Re publican national convention, and the Republican candidate has sought to res cue his party from the disastrous re sults of this act by expressing him self, in a qualified way, iu favor of ascertaining the value of the railroads. Over-issue of Stocks and Bonds. Mr. Taft complains of the over-issue of stocks and bond;? of railroads, "for the unlawful enriching of directors and for the purpose of concentrating the control of the railroads under one management," and the complaint is well founded. But, with a president to point out the evil, and a Republican congress to correct it, we find uothing done for the protection of the public. Why? My honorable opponent has, by his confession, relieved me of the ne cessity of furnishing proof; he admits the condition and he can not avoid the logical conclusion that must be drawn from the admission. There is no doabt whatever that a large majority of the voters of the Republican party recog nize the deplorable situation which Mr. Taft describes; they recognize that the masses have had but little influence upon legislation or upon the ad ministration of the government, and they are beginning to understand the cause. For a generation the Re publican party has drawn its cam paign funds from the beneficiaries of special legislation. Privileges have been pledged aud granted in return for mouey contributed to debauch elec tions. What can be expected when of ficial authority is turned over to the representatives of those who first fur nish the sinews of war and then reim burse themselves out of the pockets of the taxpa3-ers? Fasting In Wilderness Necessary. So long as the Republican party re mains in power, it is powerless to re generate itself. It can not attack wrong-doing in high places without dis gracing many of its prominent mem bers, and it, therefore, uses opiates in stead of the surgeon's knife. Its male factors construe each Republican vic tory as an endorsement of their con duct and threaten the party with de feat if they are interfered with. Not until that party passes through a pe riod of fasting in the wilderness, will the Republican leaders learn to study public questions from the standpoint of the masses. Just as with individ uals, "the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the truth," so in politics, when party leaders serve far away from home and are not in constant contact with the voters, con tinued party success blinds their eyes to the needs of the people and makes them deaf to, the cry of distress. Publicity as to Campaign Contribu tions. An effort has been made to secure legislation requiring publicity as to campaign contributions and expendi tures; but the Republican leaders, even in the face of au indignant public, re fused to consent to a law which would compel honesty in elections. When the matter was brought up in the receut Republican national convention, the plank was repudiated by a vote of 8S0 to 94. Here, too, Mr. Taft has been driven to apologize for his convention and to declare himself in favor of a publicity law; and yet, if you will read what he says upon this subject, you will find that his promise falls far short of the requirements of the situation. He says: "If I am elected president, I shall urge upon congress, with every hope of success, that a law be passed requiring the filing. In a federal office, of a state ment of the contributions received by fommittees and candidates in elections for members of congress, and In such other elections as are constitutionally within the control of congress." 1 shall not embarrass him by asking him upon what he bases his hope of success; it is certainly not on any en couragement he has received from Re publican leaders. It is sufficient to say that i! his hopes were realized if, in f I ite of the adverse action of his con vention, he should succeed In securing the enactment of the very law which he favors, it would give but partial re lief. He has read the Democratic plat form; not only his language, but his evident alarm, indicates that o nas read It carefully. He even had before him the action of the Democratic na tional committee In interpreting and applying that platform: and yet, he fails to say that he favors the publica tion of tlie contributions before the election. Of course, it satisfies a nat ural curiosity to find out how au elec tion has been purchased, even wheu the knowledge comes too late to be of service, but why should the people Ik kept in darkness until the election Is past? Why should the locking of the door be delayed until the horse is gone? An Election a Public Affair. An election Is a public affair. The people, exercising the right to select their officials and to decide upon the policies to be pursued, proceed to their several polling places on election day and register their will. What excuse can be given for secrecy as to the in fluences at work? If a man, pecun iarily interested in "concentrating the control of the railroads in one manage ment," subscribes a large sum to aid In carrying the election, why should his part in the campaign be concealed un til he has put the officials under obli gation to him? If a trust magnate contributes $100,000 to elect political friends to office, with a view to pre venting hostile legislation, why should that fact be concealed until his friends are securely seated In their official po sitions? This Is not a new questlou; It Is a question which has been agitated a question which the Republican leuders fully understand a question which the Republican candidate has studied, and yet he refuses to declare himself in fa vor of the legislation absolutely neces sary, namely, legislation requiring pub lication before the election. Democratic Party Promises Publicity. How can the people hope to rule, if they are uot able to learn until after he election what the nredatorv inter ests are doing? The Democratic party meets the issue honestly and coura geously. It says: "We pledge the Democratic party to the enactment of a law prohibiting any corporation from contributing to a campaign fund, and any individual from contributing an amount above a reasonable maximum, and providing for the publication, before election, of all such contributions above a reason able minimum." The Democratic national committee immediately proceeded to interpret and apply this plank, announcing that no contributions would be received from corporations, that no individual would be allowed to contribute more than S-'lO.Oon. and that all contributions above '$100 would be made public be fore the election those received before October l." to be made public on or before thnt day, those received after ward to le made public on the day when received, and no such contribu tions to be accepted within three days of the election. The expenditures are to be published afier election. Here is a plan which is complete and effec tive. Popular Election of Senators. Xext to the corrupt use of money. tlie present method of electing United 1 States senators is most responsible for the obstruction of reforms For one hundred years after the adoption of the constitution, the demand for the popular election of senators, while find ing increased expression, did not be come a dominant sentiment. A con stitutional amendment had from time to time been suggested and the matter had been more or less discussed in a few of the states, but the movement had not reached a point where it mani fested itself throusrh congressional ac tion. In the Fifty -second congress, however, a resolution was reported from a house committee proposing the necessary constitution;!! amendment, and this resolution passed the house of representatives by a vote which was practically unanimous. In the Fifty-third congress a similar resolu tion was reported to, and adopted by, the house of representatives Both the Fifty-second and Fifty-third con gresses were Democratic. The Repub licans gained control of the house as a result of the election of 1894 and in the Fifty-fourth congress the proposi tion died in committee. As time went on. however, the sentiment grew among the people, until it forced a Republican congress to follow the example set by the Democrats, and then another and another Republican congress acted fa vorably. State after state has endorsed this reform, until nearly two-thirds of the states have recorded themselves in its favor. The United States senate, however, impudently and arrogantly obstructs the passage of the resolution, notwithstanding the fact that the vot ers of the United States, by an over whelming majority, demand it. And this refusal is the more significant when it is remembered that a number of senators owe their election to great corporate interests. Three Democratic national platforms the platforms of 1900. 1904 and 1903 specifically call for a change in the constitution which will put the election of senators in the hands of the voters, and the proposi tion has been endorsed by a number of the smaller .parties, but no Repub lican national convention has been willing to champion the cause of the people ou this subject The subject was ignored by the Republican national convention In 1900; it was ignored in 1904. and the proposition was explicit ly repudiated in 1908. for the recent Republican national convention, by a vote of SCO to 114. rejected the plank endorsing the popular election of sena torsand this was done in the conven tion which nominated Mr. Taft. few delegates from his own state voting for the plank. Personal Inclination Net Sufficient. In his notification speech, the Repub lican candidate, speaking of the elec tion of senators ty the people, says: "Personally. I am inclined to favor it. but It is hardly a party question." What is necessary to muke this a party question? When the Democratic con vention endorses a proposition by a unanimous vote, and the Republican convention rejects the proposition by a vote of seven to one. does It not be come an Issue between the parties? Mr. Taft can not remove the question from the arena of politics by express ing a personal inclination toward the Democratic position. For several years he has been connected with the administration. What has he ever said or done to bring this question be fore the public? What enthusiasm has he shown in the reformation of the senate? What Influence could he exert iu behalf of a reform which his party has openly and notoriously con demned in lis convention, and to which he is attached only by a belated ex pression of personal inclination? The Gateway to Other Reforms. "Shall the people rule?" Every remedial measure of a national char acter must run the gauntlet of the senate. The president may personally Incline toward a reform; the house may consent to it; but as long as the senate obstructs the reform, the peo ple must wait. Tlie president may Leed a popular demand; the house may yield to public opinion; but as long as the senate is defiant, the rule of the people is defeated. The Democratic platform very properly describes the popular election of senators as "the gateway to other national reforms." Shall we open the gate, or shall we allow the exploiting interests to bar the way by the control of this branch of the federal legislature? Through n Democratic victory, and through a Democratic victory only, can the peo ple secure the popular election o,f sen ators. The smaller parties ore unable to secure this reform; the Republican party, under its present leadership, is resolutely opposed to it; the Democratic party stands for It and has boldly de manded It. If I am elected to the presidency, those who are elected upon the ticket with me will be. like my self, pledged to this reform, and I shall convene congress In extraordi nary session immediately after inau guration, and ask. among other things, for the fulfillment of this platform pledge. . House Rules Despotic. The third Instrumentality employed . to defeat the will of the people is found in the rules of the house of rep resentatives. Our platform points out that "the house of representatives was designed b3' the fathers of the consti tution, to be the popuiar branch of our government, responsive to the public will," and adds: "The Iwuse of representatives, as controlled in recent years by the Re publican party, has ceased to be a de liberative and legislative body, respon sive to the will of a majority of the members, but has come under the ab solute domination of the speaker, who has entire control of its deliberations, and powers of legislation. "We have observed with amazement the popular branch of our federal gov ernment helpless to obtain either the consideration or enactment of meas ures desired by a majority of its mem bers " This arraignment is fully justified. Tlie reform Republicans iu the house of representatives, when in the minor ity in their own party, are as helpless to obtain a hearing or to secure a vote upon a measure as are the Democrats. In the recent session of the present congress, there was a considerable ele ment in the Republican party favorable to remedial legislation; but a few lead ers, iu control of the organization, despotically suppressed these mem bers, and thus forced a real majority ia the house to sulimit to a well organ ized minority. The Republican national convention, instead of rebuking this attack upon popular government, eulo gized congress and nominated as the Republican candidate for vice president one of the men who shared in the re sponsibility for the coercion of the houe. Our party demands that "the house of representatives shall again become a deliberative body, controlled by a majority of the people's repre sentatives, and not by tlie speaker," and is pledged to adopt "such rules and regulations to govern the house of representatives as will enable a ma jority of its members to direct its de liberations aud control legislation." "SLnili the people rule?" They can not do so unless they can coutrol the house of representatives, an 1 through their representatives in tlie house, give expression to thoir purposes and their desires. The Republican party is committed to t he methods now In vogue in the house of representatives; the Democratic party Is pledged to such a revision of the rules as will bring the popular branch of the federal government Into harmony with the ideas of those who framed our consti tution aud founded our government. Other Issues Will Be Discussed Later. "Shall the people rule?" I repeat. Is declared by our platform to be the overshadowing question, and as the campaign progresses. I shall take occa sion to discuss this question as it man ifests Itself in other issues; for whether we consider the tariff question the trust question, tho raiiroad question, the banking question, the labor ques tion, the question of imporiuiisru. the development of our waterways, or any other of the numerous problems which press for solution, we shall find that the real question involved in each is. whether the government shall re-main a mere business asset of favor seeking corporations or be an Instrument in the hands of the people for the ad vancement of the common weal. Democratic Party Has Earned Con fidence. If the voters are fati-n. with the record of the Republi. -an parry and with its management of pub.k- affairs we can not reasonably ask for m change In administration; If, bowerer, the voters feel that tne people. whole, have too little influence in shap ing the policies of the government; If they feel that great combinations of capital have encroached upon the rights of the masses, and employed tur instrumeutallties of government to se cure an unfair share of the total wealth produced, then we have a right to ex pect a verdict against the Itepubllcara party and In favor of the Democratic party: for our party has risked defeat aye. suffered defeat iu its effort to arouse the conscience of the public and to bring about that very awakeuiaj to which Mr. Taft has referred. Only those are worthy to be entrust ed with leadership In a great cause who are willing to die for it, and the Democratic party has proven its worthi ness by Its refusal to purchase victory by delivering the people into tho hand of those who have despoiled tbem. I a this contest between Democracy on tb one side and plutocracy on the other, the Democratic party has taken Its po sition on the side of equal rights, and invites the opposition of those who use- politics to secure special privileges and governmental favoritism. Gauging tha progress of the nutioa, not by the hap piness or wealth or, refinement of a. few, but "by the prosperity and aJ- vancement of the average man." the Democrat Ic party charges the Repub lican party with being the promoter of present abuses, the opponent of neC93 sary remedies and the only bulwark of private monopoly. The Democratic par ty affirms that In this campaign it Is the only party, having a prospect of success, which stands for Justice in government and for equity in the divi sion of the fruits of industry. ' Democratic Party Defender of Honest: Wealth. - We may expect those who nave com-- mitted larceny by law and purchased immunity with their political influence. to attempt to raise false Issues, and to employ "the livery of Heaven" to con- coal their evil purposes, but they can no longer deceive. The Democratic party is not the enemy of any legiti mate industry or of honest accumula tions. It is, on the contrary, a friend of industry and the steadfast protector of that wealth which represents a serv ice to society. The Democratic party docs not seek to annihilate all corpora tions: it simply asserts that as the gov ernment creates corporations, it must retain the power to regulate and to control them, and that it should cot permit any corporation to convert itself into a monopoly. Surely we should have the co-operation of all legitimate corporations in onr effort to protect business and industry from the odium which lawless combinations of capital ii. if unchecked, cast upon them. Only by tho separation of tho eood from the bad can the good be made secure. Net Revolution, but Reformation. The Democratic party seeks not revo lution but reformation, and I need hardly remind the student of history that cures are mildest when applied at once: that remedies Increase in severity ns their application Is postponed. I'.lood poisoning may be stopped by tlie loss of a finger today: It may cost an arm tomorrow or a life the next day. So poison in the body politic can not be removed too soon, for the evils pro duced by it Increase with the lapse of time. That there are abuses which need to be remedied, even the Repub lican candidate admits; that his party is unable to remedy thern. lias been fu'Iy demonstrated during the last tea years. I have such confidence Iu the Intelligence as well as the patriotism of the people, that I can not doubt their readiness to accept the reasonable re forms which our party proposes, rather than permit the continued growth of existing abuses to hurry the country oa to remedies more radical and more drastic. Our Party's Ideal. The platform of our party closes with a brief statement of the party's ideal. It favors "such an administration of tlie government as wiii insure, as far as human wisdom can. that each eitl 7on shali draw from society a reward commensurate with his contribution to the welfare of society." Governments are good in proportion as they assure to each member of so ciety, so far as governments can. a re turn commensurate with individual merit. TVie Divine Law cf Rewards. There is a Diviue law of rewards. When the Creator gave us the earth, with its fruitful soil, the sunshine with its warmth, and the rains with their moisture. Fie proclaimed, as clearly as if His voice had thundered from the clouds, "do work, aud according to your industry and your intelligence, so shall be your reward." Only where might has overthrown, cunning under mined or government suspended thi3 law, has a different law prevailed. To conform the government to this law ought to be the ambitiou of the states man; and no party can have a higher mission than to make it a reality wher ever governments can legitimately op erate. Justice to All. Roco'-uizirig that I am indebted for my nomination to the rank and file of our party, and that my election must come, if it comes at all, from the un purchased and unpurchasable suffrages of the American people. I promise, If entrusted with the responsibilities of this high office, to consecrate whatever ability I have to the cse purpose of making this, in fact, a govern ment In which the people rule a government which wiil do justice to all. and offer ro every one the highest possible stim ulus to great and persistent effort, by assuring to each the enjoyment of hia just share of the proceeds of his toil, no matter in what part of the vineyarj he labors, or to what occupation, pro fession or calling be devotes himself.