Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (May 29, 1903)
"'x'frtrvn ff (Hi'-fvfy!" o-.r jw, -j w The Commoner. MAY 2,9,, 1105., 5 EDITOR RICHARD L. METCALFE OF THE OMAHA WORLD-HERALD TO EDITOR NORMAN E. MACK OF THE BUFFALO TIMES. ' i""i Omaha, Neb., May 16, 1903. Nor man E. Mack, Editor Times, Buffalo, N. Y. Dear Sir: Many western dem ibcrats were interested in the editorial entitled "The Presidential Nominee," and appearing in a recent issue of the ,Times. You say that for the demo cratic party to "incur the hostility of -either Mr. Cleveland or Mr. Bryan ,and their many followers" would he .the height of folly, and you add that friends of both these gentlemen "must e willing to eliminate their individ ual preferences and to join their in terests for the good of the party." You Jiave struck an interesting vein of thought hero and I think that dom .ocrats tlirougout the country who ad .mire you as a man and a democrat jwould he glad to have you go a bit deeper along this lino. . We must agree that it is not too much to ask democrats to eliminate "individual preferences" if by this you refer to the candidate; and yet it will also bo agreed that the candi date should be a man whose record and character would justify popular confidence that he would honestly en deavor to fulfill the platform pledges. But while very -properly advising dem ocrats to yield their preference, so far as the candidate is concerned, would you, counsel them to become indiffer ent as to the character of the plat form? I am sure you would be the last to give such advice. And this prompts me to ask that you present through the columns of . the Times- a. program by the adoption of which the democratic party would not "incur the hostility of Mr. Cleve land and his followers." In the first place, could these gen tlemen be persuaded to support the ticket in 1904 if the nominee for president were 'a man who had faithfully- supported - the democratic plat form and ticket in 1896 and in 1900? " Would you advise that, in order not .to Incur the hostility of Mr. Cleveland and his followers, democrats general ly agree to the proposition that no man who heartily subscribed to thy national platforms of 1896 and. of 1900 .be considered eligible to the nomina tion?. . "What would you have democrats do in the construction of their platform in order to avoid incurring the hostil ity of Mr. Cleveland and his follow ' ers? How many of the principles and the policies in which we believe must we surrender in order to avoid in curring this hostility? ' Persistent effort has been made to have it appear that the question of bimetallism is the sole obstacle to harmony so far as the platform is con cerned. Nothing has occurred sinco 1896 to justify the bimetallist in abandoning his position. On the con trary, the bimetallist contends that the very prosperity of which the re publican leaders boast is chiefly due to the increase in the volumo of money, a thing which in the cam paign of 1896 democrats claimed, and republicans denied, would bring us better times; and even though the amount of money has largely increased during the past seven years, thero is constant agitation for further in crease. Republican leaders would ac complish this result by multiplying the national bank notes, Increasing the output to the fullest extent possible by the government bond doposit plan and in addition thereto conferring up on banks the extraordinary privilege of issuing notes on their assets. The bimetallist prefers to obtain this in crease in the democratic way, through bimetallism. Yet for your convenience in providing an answer to these ques tions, let us assume that democrats who believe in bimetallism would, for the purpose of obtaining harmony so far as the platform is concerned, be willing to omit that question during one campaign. Do you believe that a platform that made no reference to the money ques tion would avoid incurring the hostil ity of Mr. Cleveland and his follow ers? Do you think that a democratic plat form that failed to make explicit ref erence to the money question could command the respect either of bime tal! lsts or of single gold standard ad vocates? In order to avoid incurring the hos tility of Mr. Cleveland and his fol lowers, would it not be necessary for the democratic platform to explicitly indorse the single gold standard, to confess to the world that in the cam paigns of 1896 and of 1900 the demo-v cratic party was utterly wrong on that question in spite of the fact that its position has been completely Justi fied, at least to tho satisfaction of men who have become bimetallists after careful study and investigation? But having disposed of the money question, either by complete silence or by an unequivocal indorsement of the single gold standard, do you think it would be possible to retain for the platform of 1904 other important fea tures of the platforms of 1896 and of 3900? Shall the democrats abandon their position on the Philippine question wherein they promised not to make the Filipinos either citizens or sub jects and favored a declaration of the nation's purpose to give to these peo ple, first, a stable form of govern ment; second, independence; and, third, protection from outside inter ference? What change would you make in the democratic platform with respect to trusts? What alteration would you make in the plank relating to national bank currency? Would you declare in favor of the income tax? What would you say in regard to propositions involved in measures lll-.c tho asset curroncy bill and tho Aid rich bill? Would you strike from tho plat form tho protest against governmon' by injunction, tho condemnation of tho blacklist, tho declaration In favor of th9 election of senators by the people, and tho proviso relating to tho initiative and referendum? What would you advise as to the general tone of the platform? Should it be framed so that to one man it, might be interpreted in one way while to another man its interpreta tion would be quite different, a little deviccT with which democrats becamo quite familiar in 1892? I think democrats will very goner ally agree with you that tho presiden tial nominee should have behind him "a united and not a divided army." But even a united army must have something to fight for, and the sol diers must know what they are fight ing for; otherwise It would very soon become a divided army, its victories would bo few and far between, and those victories would bo of no im portance to Jhe people. When men like the editor of tho Times call for harmony, democrats must recognize the sincerity of tho de mand; and yet you will concede that harmony worth establishing and har mony worth having wiir be harmony that will endure until the closo of tho polls. It must be apparent to every one that no genuine progress has been made in the so-called effort at har monizing the democratic party. No progress can be made on that lino so long a3 the efforts relate solely to the Identity of tho candidate and ignore utterly the character of tho platform. To be sure, tho platform is to be MTitten by tho resolutions committo;, and yet when genuine harmony on l.latform and on candidate is so desir able, it "is important that democrats who choose delegates to the national convention be informed as to the character of tho platform that Is to be prepared In their namo, by those who say that they are willing to make con -cessions In order that "a united ani noi. a divided army" may do duty be hind the democratic nominee for the prehidency. The question, then, is how many of their principles must democrats sur render, permanently or temporarily, in order to avoid incurring the hostility of men who during two presidential campaigns deserted tho party with which they claimed allegiance and gave open and boastful aid to the enemy? Perhaps no better illustration of tho difficulties to be encountered when democrats undertake to avoid incur ring the hostility of Mr. Cleveland and his followers could be found than the well remembered second administra tion. Mr. Cleveland and his follow ers havo novor apologized for tho acts thbt niado his second administration odious in tho eyes of democrats gen erally. On tho contrary, thoy insist that the history that, according to republican authority, has vindicated njmblican policies has likowlso vindi cated the Cleveland policies. Do you think it would bo possible for tho democratic party to maintain Its dignity in this day, when men arc thinking and reading as they nover thought and read before, unless the party set its seal of disapproval In un mistakable terms not nocessarily upon tho second administration itself, but upon tho policies and tho methods, the intimacies between the representatives of tho government and the represen tatives of tho money power, and oth er evils that characterized tho Cleve land regime? Do you think that a democratic plat form which ignored or dealt apolo getically with thoso evils could pro vide serious attraction for the peo ple? Do you bellovo that a platform framed so that it would impress upon tho tariff baron and the trust mag nate, as well as upon the pcoplo, tho party's determination to give the people practical relief from tho Im positions under which they suffer to day impositions that emanate from the same powers that wielded more Influence at tho White house during Mr Cleveland's second administration than was exerted by tho entire dem ocracy of tho country do you think that a platform so framed could avoid incurring the hostility of Mr. Cleve land and his followers? I know you do not make tho mis take of thinking that democrats who may not entirely agree with you are any less desirous for tho termination of republican power than you aro. But will tho American people, requir ing and demanding relief, turn from the republican party to a party that gives them no right to believe that iti professions aro sincere and that it Is determined to re-establish popular government and to dethrone the tariff baron and the trust magnate? As enxious as you can possibly be for democratic victory, by "a united and not a divided army," I respect fully ask you to present for the benefit of democrats generally, and in tho Interests of genuine harmony, an ou Hne of what the democratic platform should bo In order that It may not In cur the hostility of Mr. Cleveland and his followers. I am sure that" In the preparation of these suggestions you will not overlook the fact that while it may be well to win back tho impenitent prodigal sons it Is somewhat import ant to remember that tho convictions of the faithful boys who remained at home are not entirely unworthy of consideration. Yours truly, RICHARD L. METCALFE, Editor World-Herald. I MR. MACK'S REPLY TO THE OPEN LETTER WRITTEN TO Hlfl BY flR. METCALFE Buffalo, N. Y., May 18, 1903.Mr. Richard X.. Metcalfe, Editor World Herald, Omaha Neb. Dear Sir: In Teply to your open letter, addressed to me through the columns of the World-Herald, I beg to acknowledge, first of all, the admirable spirit of frankness which animates its contents, and to assure you that, 1n response, I will endeavor to be guided by the same sentiment On the whole, it seems to me that we are not very far apart in the main , as you .say: "We must agree that i't' is not too, much to ask democrats to 'eliminate 'individual preferences' N if by this you refer to the candidate; and yet it will also be agreed that the candidate should be a man whose rec ord and character would justify pop ular confidence that he would honest ly endeavor to fulfill the platform pledges." It goes without saying, I trust, that I would counsel the nomination of no man who could not CQmmand that confidence. You ask if I would coun sel democrats to "become indifferent as to the character of the platform," though doing me the justice to add "I am sure you would be the last to give euch advice. A candidate ' must represent his party, and he can do so only by subscribing, honestly and sin cerely, to the tenets of that party as laid down in its national platform. As to that platform: You ask If I believe that a platform which made no reference to the money question would avoid incurring the hostility of Mr. Cleveland and his followers. I do not view the matter in that light Frank ly, I think it would be very unwise to construct a platform without a nhancial plank, for finance is the bone and sinew of the government as domestic virtue Is that of the na tion. Monetary conditions have changed vastly since tho adoption of the Chicago platform, thanks to en tirely natural causes, first and fore most among which must be counted the remarkable increase in the sup ply of old, by reason of the Klondike discoveries and other developments. This has brought about, practically, the same result which the democratic party sought to achieve through bi metallism, thereby fully sustaining the position of the platform of 189& How long this condition will last, no man can say. Should the natural sup ply of gold fall off to its former di ( Continued on Page 13 V --'-.C .-A.A.A-jL'LkjgHt j ., i,m--?: rLb.il. ,3a. .!W'',T .iSlU.I.jl-ii.iiLM,.-.L'i'i, EsTffllMffiB -k .ntf.M WjJysmm