The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923, May 15, 1903, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    "nr-w " t""m v '
The Commoner.
Vol. 3? No. 17.
Lincoln, Nebraska, May 15 i93-
WhoIeNo. 1 ai.
An Ex Parte Statement
Tho Brooklyn Eagle, in launching the Cleve
land boom, says: "He is today regarded as tho
only man "who could heat Theodore Roosevelt
This reduces the case to those who would like to
heat Mr. Roosevelt and those who would not
He can be beaten by Grover Cleveland, in our
present opinion, but he might not be by any
other democrat Therefore, those who would not
have Cleveland, may, by the support of any other
democrat, fail to beat Mr. Roosevelt, and would
thereby contribute to. Mr. Roosevelt's re-election."
How pleasant it must be to be 'able to settle
questions so easily. The Eagle first decides that
Mr. Cleveland is the only man who could beat
Mr. Roosevelt, and having settled that it pro
ceeds to brand as men desiring the election of
Mr. Roosevelt, all who oppose its decree. And
this from a paper that helped to elect Mr. Mc
Kinley! The democrats who have been loyal to
the party answer the Eagle in two ways: In the
first place, they deny that Mr. Cleveland would be
a strong candidate. In 1894, after two years of
experience," the people repudiated his adminis
tration and elected a republican congress by an
enormous, majority, "What reason, have we to be
ifeve that they would treat hlnT "more kindly
now? Two years later, in 1896, ho left the demo
cratic party and threw his support, nominally at
least, to the Palmer and Buckner ticket, and that
ticket not only failed to carry a single state or
county, but actually carried but one precinct in
the United States, and that was .ot a large pre
cinct, but an obscure frontier precinct in western
Kansas where there were but six voters in the
precinct, and the Palmer and Buckner ticket only
received three out of the six. What was there
in the result of that contest to indicate that Mr.
Cleveland would be popular today?
If it is said that Mr. Cleveland's friends voted
the republican ticket instead of the Palmer and
Buckner ticket, will that be urged as an evidence
that he would become a popular democratic can
didate? If Mr. Cleveland's friends voted the re
publican ticket in order to carry out his wishes,
why don't they secure his nomination by the re
publican party? Why don't they boom Mr. Cleve
land for the vice presidency on the Roosevelt
ticket? Or, if that would not be acceptable, why
don't they have Mr. Moigan arrange with Mr.
Roosevelt to run for vice president with Mr.
Cleveland as the republican candidate for the
They seem to be very much afraid that the
business interests of the country '.111 be disturbed
by a real battle between the people and organized
wealth. Surely a combination between the friends
of -Mr. Roosevelt and the friends of Cleveland
ought to settle the matter entir .7, if both are
as popular as their friends say they are.
It is absurd in the extreme to mention in
connection with the democratic nomination a
man who, in the two last campaigns, did not sup
port the ticket and any one would see it who had
any knowledge of democratic voters or any sym
pathy with democratic principles.
A I esson of History.
A reader of The Commoner suggests that
elnce the reorganizers must know that their 'plan
does not promise, democratic victory, they must be
interested in aiding the republicans. The reor
ganizers ought to understand this, if they can
remember as far back as 1894, but some of them
argue that the democrats of tho south will vote
' the ticket anyhow, no matter who is nominated or
what the platform Is, and that the reorganizers
can carry enough votes in the east to give the
necessary number of electoral votes. The leading
papers among the reorganizers assume that thero
will bo a largo falling off In tho democratic voto,
but they arguo that tho falling off will bo in
states whoso votes are not necessary. But if the
reorganizers will look back to 1894 they will seo
that even in the eastern states tho .democratic
vote fell off under tho same leadership that is
suggested now.
President's St. Louis Speech
Organs of tho reorganizers, newspapers fiat
have habitually bolted democratic nominations,
4iro proceeding with calm assurance to choose the
democratic presidential candidate for 1904. These
organs seem now to havo settled upon Grover
Cleveland, although they are no more enthusiastic
concerning his availability than thoy were as to
the availability of tho several presidential candi
dates they have offered during tho past six
It is significant that these men who have had
so much to say concerning "harmony" and who
havo pretended that their great desire was to
harmonize the democratic party, have chosen as
"their candidate a man who, although repeatedly
honored by the party, deserted it during two pres
idential campaigns, even though ho knew that
thd party was required to carry the burden of
bis. political sins. It will occur to a great many
democrats that these disciples of "harmony" have
chosen a very strange olive branch.
Whatever may be said concerning the char
acter of an effort to harmonize the party with
Grover Cleveland as harmonizer-In-chief, it will,
very generally, be admitted that if the reorgan
izers are to be permitted to control the demo
cratic party, Grover Cleveland is their logical
candidate. This is true because Mr. Cleveland
represents the evils against which tho democratis
party has always been presumed to stand and to
ward which, during the campaigns of 1896 and
1S00, the democratic party directed stern protest
But although time will demonstrate to
the satisfaction of these reorganizers that they
cannot make progress with Mr. Cleveland as their
preferred candidate, the man whom they finally
choose for this honor will bo one upon whom the
same influences that dominated Mr. Cleveland's
second administration may confidently depend
for faithful protection of their special Interests.
In the presence of this situation, then, every
democrat who believes in the perpetuation of dem
ocratic principles and who desires that his party
shall remain true to itself, must exert himself in
order to prevent these influences from obtaining
control of the party. The reorganizers are amply
supplied with money and they will loose no op
portunity to advance their cause. It will be the
duty of democrats everywhere to organize for
the protection of their party and for the defense
of the principles with which tho representatives of
special interests are at war and upon which tho
success of popular government must depend.
The Commoner calls upon democrats to or
ganize in every precinct throughout the United
States. A democratic club in every precinct and
pledged to the defense of democratic principles
may do much to prevent the republicanization j
the democratic party. These clubs may exert
powerful influence in primary elections and J
their members are watchful thoy may see to It
that delegates chosen to democratic conventions
are faithful to democratic doctrine.
The Commoner will furnish a form of con
stitution and membership blxraks for the use of
democratic clubs and as rapidly as these clubs
are organized the fact should be reported to this
Tho president's speech at the dedication of the
St Louis exposition is mainly important, first,
becauso of his falluro to emphasize Jefferson's con
nection with tho purchase. Ho only referred to
Jefferson onco in tho entire speech, and then only
incidentally. In mentioning tho trans-MissfssIp-pl
country, ho speaks of "this-great region ac
quired for our pooplo under the presidency of
Jefferson." One would suppose that so Import
ant an addition to our territory would havo jus
tified tho president in giving some slight praise
to tho man whoso foresight and statesmanship led
him to see at an early date tho importance of
making the trans-Mississippi country a part of
the American republic.
Tho second thing noticeable in tho speech
was his attempt to turn tho occasion to partisan
advantage. Tho wholo burden of his speech was
expansion, expansion, expansion. Tho entire
speech was an effort to justify the Philippine pol
icy of the United States without expressly men
tioning it He started in by declaring that the
Louisiana purchase determined that" wo should be
a "great, expanding nation, Instead of relatively
a small and stationary, one." Ho said: "This
work of expansion was by far tho greatest work
of our people during tho years that intervened
between tho adoption of tho constitution and the
outbreak of the civil war;" that "our triumph
in this process of expansion was indlssolubly
bound up with tho success of our peculiar kind
of federal government;" that "only tho adventur
ous and far-seeing can bo expected to welcome
the process of expansion, for tho nation that ex
pands Is a nation which Is entering upon a great
career, and with greatness thero must of neces
ity come perils which daunt all save the most
stout-hearted " etc.
VHe took occasion to discuss the different forms
of colonization, condemning both tho Greek and
the Roman forms. Greece, he explained, formed
colonies, but each colony as created became en
tirely independent of tho mother state, and in af
ter years often an enemy.' "Local self-government,
local independence," he said, "was secured, but
only by the absolute sacrifice of everything rep
resenting national unity." "National power and
greatness were completely sacrificed to local lib
erty." TJtome, ho asserted, did exactly the op
posite! "The imperial city rose to absolute do
minion over all the p3oples of Italy, and then
expanded her rule- over tho entire civilized world
by a process which kopt the nation strong and
united, but gave no room whatever for local lib
erty and self-government All other cities and
countries were subject to Rome. In consequence
this great masterful race of warriers, rulers,
road-builders and administrators stamped their
indelible impress upon the af ter-life of our race,
and yet let an overcentralizatlon . eat out the
vital, of their empire until it became an empty
shelVso that when the barbarians came they
destroyed only what had become worthless to
pie then explained the American plan of mak
ing each acquisition a component part of the
whole! ""We," he said, "expanded by carving the
wilderness into territories, and out of these ter
ritories building new states when once they had
received as permanent settlers a sufficient num
ber of our own people. Being a practical nation
we have never tried to force on any section of
our new territory an unsuitable form of govern
ment marely because It was suitable to another
section under different conditions. Of the terri
tory covered by the Louisiana purchase a portion
". -- X,