Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (May 2, 1902)
May 2, 190a
and the rise is no hardship as it would have been
Now, if this increase in the price of beef 13
due to good times, why is it necessary for these
beef firms to enter into an agreement, as the Eagte
says they havo done, to maintain prices?
If the Eagle's general statement is correct,
would 'not these facts themselves operate to main
One need not search for statistics to disprove
the Eagle's statement concerning general condi
tions. The fact that a large number of working
men are required to do without meat as a food
indicates that even if the increase In the price of
other things has been commensurate with the In
crease in the price of the products of the beef
trust, there has I -en no similar increase in the
wages of the working man.
The fact is that the average household feels
the burden of the beef trust's greediness. Accord
ing to the New York papers, the increase In beef
prices has been so marked that a large number of
small butcher shops have been driven out of busi
ness because thoy could not obtain customers for
their high priced beef.
The Brooklyn Eagle has perhaps exerted it3
best efforts to provide a defense for this great
trust, and yet it is difficult for an intelligent man
to read the Eagle's opinion on this subject without
being convinced that it is the trust system, rather
than. any general beneficial conditions, that is re
sponsible for the large increase in the price of one
of the necessities of life.
Gardener's Startling Report.
The senate committee on the Philippines has
dragged from the war department the report of
Major Cornelius Gardener, civil governor of the
province of Tayabas, to which report reference was
made by General Miles in his correspondence with
It was the reference in General Miles' letter to
this report which aroused, more than did any
thing else, the anger of the president. That It
was the administration's intention to conceal
this report ther; is abundant evidence.
In this testimony before the senate committee.
Governor Taft submitted reports from twenty
three provinces and after doing so, he explained
that it was "quite probable there might be in the
mail other reports." He did not, however, pro
duce them and he particularly failed to produce
the report to which General Miles referred and
.which report was made public at the urgent re
quest of the senate committee.
In this report Governor Gardener reveals a
'deplorable state of affairs in his province. He re
fers to "the oxtensive burning of barrios in trying
to lay waste the country so that the Insurgents
cannot occupy it, the torturing of natives by the
so-called water cure, and other methods, in order
to obtain information, the harsh treatment of na
tives generally," and he says that these things
have had the effect of destroying any favorable
sentiment and as a consequence, "A deep hatrei
toward us is engendered."
Governor Gardener says that the course now
being pursued in at least four of the provinces lar
in his opinion, ' sowing seed for a perpetual rev
olution against us hereafter whenever opportunity
occurs." According to the governor, "The politi
cal el-uation is slowly l-irogradlhg and the Amer
ican sentiment is decreasing and we are daily
making permanent enemies."
In his speech made at Charleston, President
Hoosevelt said that tL:re was more warfare over
the Philippines' within the United 'States than
ithere was in the Philippine islands, and other
represc-i-Uves of the administration have been
exerting every effort to place the Philippine situa
tion in a good light But even with the necessar
ily limited congressional investigation into these
affairs, enough has been devoloped to show that
the administration has been deliberately conceal
ing tho truth, and deceiving the American peo
ple. It is not strango that these gentlemen go to
such unusual lengths to conceal tho truth.
Enough is alreaJy known by tho dally newspaper
rea;,-:r to convince the intelligent man that in tho
Philippines the American people have an elephant
on their hands which is costing them oven mora
in the loss of dignity and self-respect than it is
in the enormous sums of money wo aro required
to expend in maintaining our Philippine policy.
Good Enough for a King.
Commenting on a letter written to a Now York
society by Mr. Bryan relating to tho sending of a
special envoy to represent this country at tho
coronation ceremonies of King Edward, tho New
York World Insists that we do not surrender our
convictions "by an act of common courtesy to
ward a friendly and kindred nation and its ruler."
The World adds that
If this assumption be true, it follows that
Great Britain, Germany, Russia and all other
European countries whose ambassadors and
ministers attended the inaugural ceremonies
of our presidents must "surrender their con
victions" in so doing and approve of tho doc
trine that "governments derive their just
powers from the consent of the governed,"
and that a democracy is the true system.
"It is a poor rule that won't work both ways."
Then tho World says that this government
should pay the expenses of this special envoy.
It is true that common courtesy toward a
friendly nation is due from this government, but
when the inaugural ceremonies of our president,
to which the World refers, occur, Great Britain,
Germany, Russia and those European countries do,
not send special envoys. The heads of those gov
ernments think that "common courtesy" is met
by being represented by their ministers regularly
stationed at Washington. Why would not Mr.
Choae and his retinue be sufficient for the pur
pose of "common courtesy?" Y.'hy is it necessary
that this government be represented by a special
envoy at the coronation of a king, when all that
is necessary for a king's representation at tho
inaugural ceremonies of a president is the reg
ular diplomatic representative of his country re
siding at the time in the city of Washington?
It is indeed a poor rule that won't work both
ways. The rule with respect 'to the king's repre
sentation at the inaugural ceremonies of the pres
ident ought to be sufficient for the republic's rep
resentation at the coronation ceremonies of the
"Duty" vs. Ambition.
Walter Wellman, tho Washington correspondent
of the Chicago Record-Herald, who very often
has made accurate predictions of the administra
tion's action, recently wired his newspaper
that "President Roosevelt la .both deeply
wounded and highly incensed at General Miles'
conduct. He was already sufficiently irritated by
previous occurrences, but this episode is under
stood to be the last straw."
This relates to General Miles' testimony ueforo
the senate committee. Describing Mr. Roosevelt's
feelings, Mr. Wellman adds:
If he finally decides to retire General
Miles, which is equivalent under the exist
ing circumstances to dismissal in disgrace,
. he hopes to have reasons to give for his ac
tion which will satisfy fair-minded men. The
president will state these reasons in an offi
cial order and will state them fully. President
Roosevelt greatly regrets that matters have
taken such a turn, but he has his duty to per
form as the official head of the army, and
. neither political agitation nor quips about
the youthful bronco buster riding roughshod
over the veterans of the army and navy will
deter him from doing what he ,thinks is right.
Now it would be too bad, indeed, if Mr.
Roosevelt neglected i he opportunity of retiring
Gonoral Miles, which, according to Mr Wollman,
would bo "equivalent, undor tho existing circum
stances to dismissal in disgrace." It is to bo ob
served, however, that lovol-hcaded republican poll
tlcians have advised the president that it would
hardly be safe, from tho political standpoint, for
tho prcsidont to become responsible for Genoral
Miles' "dismissal in disgrace."
But of courso tho president "has his duty to
perform as tho official head of tho army," and
while Mr. Wellman Intimates that nothing would
deter him from doing what ho thought to bo his
duty, it Is noticeable that at tho last writing, Mr.
Roosevelt had concluded to pause a while beforo
discharging this rathor delicate task.
JJJ ? nn
Not Duty but Bounty.
A reader of Tho Commonor calls attention to
tho fact that tho republican national platform of
1896-favored discriminating duties instead of boun
ties as a means of building up our merchant
marine. The plank reads as follows:
Wo favor tho American policy of discrimi
nating duties for the upbuilding of our mer
chant marine and tho protection of our ship
ping in the foreign carrying trade, so that
American ships the product of American la
bor, employed in American shipyards, sailing
under the stars and stripes, and manned, offi
cered and owned by Americans may regain
the carrying of our foreign commerce.
Mr. McKinley's letter accepting the first nomi
The declaration of the republican platform
in favor of the upbuilding of our merchant
marine has my hearty approval. Tho policy
of discriminating, duties in favor of our ship
ping, which prevailed in tho early years of
our history, should bo again promptly adopted
by congress and vigorously supported until .
our prestige and supremacy on the seas aro
That was tho position of tho republican party
In the campaign of 1890. The resolutions commit
tee of tho republican convention of 1900 refused
to indorse a ship subsidy bill because the republi
cans were not willing to risk judgment upon that
issue. But when the election resulted in a victory
the greedy corporations that dominate republican
policies at once demanded not a fulfillment of the
St. Louis platform or of the platform of 1900, but
of the secret promises made by Mr. Hanna and his
associates. As a result tho senate has passed as
conscienceless a bill as over received the support
of a majority of the senate.
Tho same reader 'who called attention to tho
republican plank in regard to discriminating du
ties points out that Lincoln once declared that a
person elected upon a plank was not at liberty
to shift his position. Poor Lincoln! How unkind
of him to use words which so emphatically con
dem 1 the shifting policies of tho republican party!
For several years past It has made platforms for
the purpose of deceiving the people and has imme
diately shifted its position as soon as it won a
Governor Stone's Candidacy.
Some of the reorganlzers in Missouri are at
tempting to make political capital out of tho
fact that The Commoner has not said anything
in regard to tho candidacy of Governor Stone.
The Commoner does not take part in contests be
tween democrats for a party nomination, unless
,tho contest involves the principles of the party.
When Congressmen Clark 'and De Armond wero
candidates against Governor Stone nothing was
said in behalf of any of the candidates because all
stood for the same principles and all were worthy
representatives of those principles. Now that Mr.
Clark and Mr. De Armond have withdrawn and
Governor Stone is the only one who is running
upon the Kansas City platform. The Commoner
can wish him success and express its confidence
Ir. life ability and in his loyalty to tho principles
of the party as promulgated at Kansas City.
Governor Stone served through the campaigns of
1H96 and 1900 as the second member on the na
. tional committee and no leader of the party has
been more trusted or Is more deserving of con
Powered by Open ONI