tWirlpf
The Commoner.
pmniffr -wfwtt)
difficult to understand how a layman, or even a
non-christian, can fail to see the wrongfulness
of taxation without representation, even though
wc do the taxing and the Porto Ricans or the
Filipinos are the victims. How, then, can a
minister with a quickened conscience fail to
see the error of our position? It ib surprising
that any one can regard stealing from others
a8 less reprehensible viewed from a moral
standpoint, than being stolen from. And yet
there are ministers who defend a government
based upon force, merely because we adminis
ter the government and use the force against
others.
But imperialism attacks the foundations of
our religion as well as the foundations of our
goverment; it substitutes arbitrary authority
for persuasion and love. It makes our nation
an exponent of the doctrine of war, conquest,
aud subjugation, rather than a high and noble
example. The Christian religion rests upon
the doctrine of human, brotherhood, just as our
government rests upon the kindred doctrine
that all men are created equal, and the two
doctrines will disappear together when we at
tempt to build a republic upon the bloody
foundation upon which empires rest.
It requires moral courage and often sacri
fice to do one's duty, and yet duty cannot be
shirked with impunity. The minister believes
that moral principles apply to nations as well
as to individuals, and that nations cannot vio
late those principles with impunity. Ministers
believe that the punishment meted out to na
tionals more terrible than the punishment meted
out to individuals, because the sin is greater.
Let them Tbeware, then, of giving their endorse
ment, or even silent acquiescence, to national
wrong-doing. No one can assume that others
will be more interested than himself in the
triumph of right, nor ought he to assume that
the sacrifices of others will be sufficient to save
him. from the natural results of his own indif
ference. Every one, the minister included, is
in duty bound to give to his country the ben
efit of his judgment and his conscience.
Fusion, Open and Secret.
. In the last campaign the republican papers
denounced democrats and populists for co-operating
against the common enemy. Both
parties were accused of sacrificing principle to
"get office." The subject is mentioned at this
time because D. Clem Deaver, a Nebraska pol
itician who had charge of the middle-of-the-road
populist campaign in the west, haB re
cently received at the hands of President Mc
Kinley a substantial reward for opposing fu
sion. A republican by the name of Dickson
severely criticised Mr. Dcaver's appointment
on the ground that Mr. Deaver was not a re
publican. In reply Mr. Deaver gave this ex
planation olhis appointment:
"I have no desire personally to answer the
strictures of Dr. Dickson, but as a matter of record
I wish to say that my application for appoint
ment to this office was indorsed by Governor Diet
rich and every other republican state officer, also
by R. B. Schneider, republican national commit
teeman, and the leaders of every faction of the
republican party in this state.
"Further, upon the promotion of Governor
Dietrich to the senate, he 'took up my case an 3
enlisted the support of Senator Millard, who had
nover mdt mo prior to tho timo of his election,
March 28.
"In view of the fact," concluded Mr. Deaver,
"that the party leaders were a unit in supporting
my application, Senator Millard's assent was
cheerfully given. I have about perfected my bond
and expect to assume the duties of tho office
August 1."
- During tho last presidential campaign Mr.
Deaver went up and down the country urging
tho populists not to have anything to do with
the democrats, and the republican newspapers
spoke of Mr. Deaver as a populist who "stood
by his principles." But now all the republi
can leaders ask for and secure a valuable ap
pointment for him. This proves, if indeed
proof was necessary, that there was secret fu
sion between tho republicans and the middle-of-the-road
populists. In 1890 the republicans
and gold deihocrats denounced fusion between
democrats and populists', and yet when tho
election was over prominent democrats like
Bynum and Irish applied for and received ap
pointments from tho administration, showing
that thero was a secret understanding between
the republicans and those who were in charge
of the Palmer and BuokneY movement.
Tho cry "Down with fusion" does not coriio
with good grace from populists and gold dem
ocrats who have been affiliating14 with republi
cans. With even pporer' grace -does tho 'cry
come from republicans who have made ' use of
the two extremes, gold democrats on the one
hand and middle-of-the-road populists on tho
other. ' ' . . ? : i .
Honest co-operation "between tho reform
forces is natural and necessary and such co
operation will be advocated by those who aro
earnest in their effort to overthrow republican
policies. Secret and dishonest co-operation
will still be indulged in by those who denounce
fair and open methods.
Inconsistent Bankers.
The Minnesota bankers in convention as
sembled have denounced tho parolo of tho
Younger brothers.
The Younger brothers were bank robbers.
They had one advantage over some other
bank robbers in that they had not been en
trusted with the savings ot men and women
who had been led to believe in their integrity.
They did not pose as first citizens of a com
munity, and through the advantage thus ob
tained rob their trusting depositors of hard
earned money.
President McKinley has granted immunity
to 35 bank robbers. Of these, 21 were par
doned outright, and yet no one has ever heard
of a convention of bankers criticising Mr.
McKinley because of this exercise of tho
pardoning power.
"Whatever difference there may be between
the bank robbery of the Younger brothers and
thebank robbery of the 35 men to whom Mr.
McKinley extended clemency, the advantage,
on tho whole, is in favor of the Younger
brothers. Society can protect itself in advance
from the bank robbery of the Younger variety.
But a society that prefen to believe that the
great majority of mon aro honest, that ro
ltcs implicitly upon the promises and tho prc
teusos of the respected bank official, cannot
protect itself from that official's wickedness.
Theso associations of bankers have a few
peculiar habits. They aro wrought to tho
heights of indignation because of the rcleaso of
bank robbers like tho two whom tho Minnesota
authorities paroled, yet they have no word of
condemnation for tho pardon of the bank rob
bersliko thoso to whom Mr. McKinley ex
tended clemency.
In connection with the protest of tho Min
nesota bankers association against paroling tho
Younger brothers it is interesting to observe
that tho Younger brothers were sentenced to
prison for life and that they served for a period
of nearly 25 years. Tho term of service of tho
85 men for whom Mr. McKinley issued pardon
or commutation of sentence would aggregate
214 years. These 85 mon served terms in
prison aggregating not exceeding 85 years.
The two Younger brothers were each sentenced
for life and tho aggregate term served was 50
years. Tho crnno for which the Yo.ungcr
brothers were sentenced Was an attempted bank
robbery. The crimes for which tho 35 men to
whoso importunities Mr. McKinley yielded
wore sentenced was the stealing of hundreds of
thousands of dollars, tho exact figures of which
are not at Hand, but it would not bo surprising
if hey amounted to several millions.
Arid yet this Minnesota bankers associa
tion expresses indignation because of the 're
lease of tho Younger brothers while it does h"o
condemn tho releasing of thirty-five offenders
by the grace of the republican president.
Bank robbing is wrong, and bank robbers
should be punished, but banks aro robbed from
tho inside as well as from the outside. Tho
official who robs from the inside adds breach of
trust to larceny, and is certainly as much a
criminal as the burglar who enters the bank in
the night or the highwayman who breaks into
the safe by daylight. It is only fair, therefore,
that an association which condemns the parolo
of bank robbers after twenty-five years of ser
vice in tho penitentiary should condemn the
pardon of embezzling bank officials who have
stolen more and yet have served for shorter
terms.
t '
Getting Something for Nothing.
The bankers associations have had much
to say on the question of repudiation. They
have waxed indignant and denounced as at
tempted repudiation the principle of bimetall
ism; and yet it is not uncommon to read in
our news dispatches the reports of bank direct
ors offering to settle' with confiding depositors
at rates varying from 10 to 60 cents on this
dollar.
Tho man who in 1896 went to banking
houses to obtain inspiration on the money ques
tion was told that the bimetallists simply
wanted to "get something for nothing," and
that such a thing wag impossible in this busy
and practical' world. And yet as a result of
the banker's victory in 1896 one of the things
accomplished was to remove the reserve on the
fl
i
i
i
i
A
A
-i
n
'4
-i