r '" " r Br-5fS5
The Commoner.
WILLIAH J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR.
i
wwpiw
Vol. 3. No. 20.
Lincoln, tyebuska, June 5, 1903.
Whole No. 1.24.
MASKED BATTERIES
In discussing newspapers In a recent inter
view, Mr. Bryan mentioned some of the papers
which call themselves democratic, but which can
ho relied upon to support any republican policy in
which the financiers of tho country are interested.
Ho expressed tho wish that the law might compel
a disclosure of the names of tho men who really
dictate the editorial policy of papers. Among
these papers the New York Times was mentioned
.by name. Tie Times refers to this comment and
attempts to defend the papers which speak as cor
porations without a known personality behind the
corporation. It says:
"Wo regard that, and Mr. Bryan ought to
regard it, as a real negligible detail. The
vital question is, Do these papers toll tho
truth; do. they preach sound doctrine; and do
they, in their daily oxhortauons, seek to set
" 'the feet of the democracy into paths of
'safety? These are the important things; if
' a newspaper is sound, then Mr. Bryan may
-leave the supposed dictator of its policy to
his money grubbing in the dust-holes of Wall
street, for, though it may cause him dally
anguish, how the poor wretch suows his wis
dpm in committing to more competent hands
the filling of its columns!"
-" The Times, instead of disclosing its owner,
or tho dictator of Its policy, pfesentthl8'puerllo
defence of the newspaper whicu fires its daily
round from ambush. So it makes no difference
at all who controls the paper! Suppose it should
appear that the Times was owned by John 1).
Rockefeller (of course, this is only a supposi
tion), would its defence of trusts have as -much
weight as if it were owned by some one not at
all connected with the trusts? Suppose it were
owned by the officials of the National City Bank?
Would its defence of every Wall street scheme
have tho same woight as If it were owned by
some one who could view the subject disinter
estedly? Suppose (and this may not be a suppo
sition) It is owned by a man who habitually
votes the republican ticket and is in constant
communication with the repubi-can leaders, would
its advice to democrats have as much weight as
it would If it were owned by a man whose fidel
ity to democratic principles was unquestioned?
If the Times was a defendant in u suit at law,
would it consent to have tho witnesses against
it concealed in an adjoining room? Would it
allow the witnesses to talk to the court or jury
through a speaking tube, relieved from the scru
tiny of a cross-examination?
The Times says that the vital thing is, "Do
these newspapers tell the truth; do they preach
sound doctrine; do they, in their daily exhorta
tions, seek to set the feet of tho democracy into
the paths of safety?' The Times talks -as if tne
readers of the newspaper accepted its utterances
as if they were utterances of a voice from heaven,
whereas a more intimate acquaintance with that
editorial oracle light show that the voice was
anything but heavenly, and that tho inspiration
came from an entirely 'different direction.
The Time3 assumes that tho dictator may be
"money grubbing in tho dustrholes of Wall
street," while his agent, the editor, is filling the
columns of the paper with competent hands. But
suppose tho editor is numbered among those wno
boast that they can write as well on one side
of a question as on the other, and suppose he is
told to write' on the capitalists side of every
question to defend the gold standard and a bank
currency, to argue that trusts are a natural de
velopment and necessary to public welfare, to
justify imperialism and glorify government by
injunction hasn't the reader a right to know the
' influences which control and the interests that
guide the editorial pencil? The defence made"
by the Times is in itself a sufficient condemnation
of the so-called impersonal, but more often sul
sidized, newspaper representative of some pluto
cratic interest or group of interests.
A Southern Opinion.
The Times-Democrat of New Orleans may
-fairly bo considered the best representative of
democratic sentiment in tho south. Tho Courier
Journal formerly held the premiership in south
ern journalism, but it forfeited the place by its
apostacy in 1896. Tho honor thon fell to the
Atlanta Constitution, but that paper by its ad
vocacy of colonialism and by its surrender of the
democratic position on other questions "in tho
interest of harmony" is leaving tho leadership of
the southern press to tho Times-Democrat, and
this leadership is being well sustained. Its edi
torials are strong and clear, and they draw a
proper distinction between tho Hamiltonlan ideas,
whffch prevail among the republicans and gold
democrats, and the Jeffersonlan views which pre
vail among the believers in the Chicago and
Kansas City platforms. Its manner of dealing
with the present situation is well illustrated in its
recent editorial on "Tho Tou ostone of Democ
racy," which will bo found on another page. Its
summing up is accurate and comprehensive: "If
the country prefers republican policies the reins
of power should be intrusted to republican hands;
if democratic remedies are desired, a democratic
doctor should bejsalled, in. Let us have no more
quacks who giveTSread pills and poison by turns
without thought of the patient's disease. The
practitioner of this kidney is but tho undertaker's
advance agent"
JJJ
JOHN S. ROBINSON
The democrats and populists of Nebraska are
called upon to mourn the untimely demise of ex
Congressman Joun o. Robirson, who recently suc
cumbed to an attack of appendicitis Mr. Robin
son served two terms In congress, and was an
ideal representative, clean in private life, indus
trious, able, incorruptible and faithful to every
trust He leaves to his widow and children a
more valuable legacy than money.
JJJ
Democracy Defined.
Mr. William O. McDowell, of New York,
president of the Cuban-American league, was
asked at the close of one of his lectures: "What
is the correct conception of democracy?" He re
plied: "It is an aspiration a determined pur
posehoping for, struggling for, fighting to the
death for, Liberty the equal well-being of all
men. It is a religion Uiilt upon a creed that
asserts the natural dignity and birthright equal
ity of aU men. It is the golden rule, the ten com
mandments, the Sermon on the Mount, and the
American Declaration expressed in a single
word."
Tho word "democracy," it will be seen, has a
meaning deep and broad. It is derived from tho
Greek and means the rule of the people, and the
rule of the people, resting as it does upon tho
doctrines set forth in the Declaration of Indepen
dence, can only be preserved "t)y the cultivation
of a profound and universal respect for human
rights.
Both aristocracy and plutocracy are constant
ly at war with democracy and the democrat must
be not only vigilant and active, but he must
know that his own security rests upon the pro
tection of the equal rights of all.
JOSEPH W. FOLK
Tho following skotch has been sent in by a
friend of Hon. Joseph W. Polk, city attorney of
St Louis, whoso porslstont prosecution of boodlera
has doveloped an astonishing amount of corrup
tion and given him a place in the confidence and
esteem of an increasing number of people:
"Josoph W. Folk was born In Brownsville,
Tenn., on October 28, 1809. Ho comes of a distin
guished southern family, always democratic Af
ter graduating at Vandorbllt university ho en
gaged in tho practice of law for threo years in
his homo town, Brownsville; thon in 1893 ho re
moved to St Louis, where he entered into the ac
tive practice of his profession. Ho took a lively
interest in political affairs as a public-spirited
citizen, and was a warm supporter of tho demo
cratc national ticket In 1896. In Septomber, 1900,
a committee of prominent aoraoci-ts waited upon
him with a request that he accept the democratic
nomination for circuit attorney. Mr. Folk re
plied that his practice was confined to tho civil
branch of tho law, and that ho could not accept
When tho committee reported this, it was in
structed to return and say to tyr. Folk that the
convention would nominate him any way and that
if ho declined it would havo to bo before the con
vention. Of course, under these circumstances, n
second declination was impossible, but Mr. Folk
cautionedvthe old-time ''lx)S8es'L$JUp,partythat
he recognized no politics in criminals. "Ho who
violates the law," said Mr. Folk, "Is not a demo
crat, neither is ho a republican he is a criminal
and must be treated as such." Tho "bosses" re
garded this as mere political buncombe at any
rate, It did not deter them from giving Folk a
unanimous nomination, and from then doing what
they could to elect him. In November, 1898, St
Louis had cast a republican majority of nearly
10,000 and It was not supposed in November, 1900,
that Folk could bo elected. In this, however,
both friends and foes were surprised; he was
elected by a handsome majority, and immediately
upon taking office in January, 190L, he gave evi
dence of his sincerity by prosecuting election
crooks and repeaters, regardless of the political
party in whose interests their frauds had been
committed. When certain notorious aemocratlc
"Indians" were given penitentiary sentences a
great outcry was made by an element of "practi
cal" politicians, and a demand was made upon
Mr Folk to confine his prosecutions of election
fraud cases to republican "Indians." A refusal to
comply with this demand aroused against the cir
cuit attorney tho bitterest animosity of some of
the most potent politicians in the St Louis dem
ocracy, an animosity which became Intensified
a hundred-fold when later on Mr. Folk actually
prosecuted and convicted the head boss of the
party, the man without whose support few men
In St Louis during the last quarter of a century
have dared aspire to a democratic nomination.
Corruption had been rampant in tho city for
many years, but so prominent and powerful wer
the beneficiaries of that corruption, no circuit at
torney had dared assail them. Mr. Folk has shat
tered this stronghold of corruption, and has laid
bare more official bribery than was ever be
fore disclosed in the history of the world. It
was freely predicted, when u'olk secured a three
year penitentiary sentence for the millionaire
head of tho democratic "machine" In St Louis,
that tho powerful influences back of the million
aire boodler would crush the daring official. It la
said now by the incensed followers of the "boss."
that the prediction has been verified and that Mr.
Folk can never receive another nomination, how
ever humble, from a democratic convention. A
different view is held by others, but however this
may be, it is certain that outside the ranks of
''practical" politicians, among the great mass of
honest citizens, republicans as well as demo
- 4