jtwawyT'Vy
i-fftwfr y( -
Biwrswg'- wiv-gti
" T W
?iP"-ff '
JUNE 12, 1903.
a
fcwrm.'i vmirmtye&
ia no force in this argument The state's repre
sentation has nothing wnatevor to do with tue
manner of election, and the state's equality in tno
senate is more lively to be made sure by an
amendment which would relievo senatorial elec
tion of the suspicion that no attaches to them
than by a blind disregard of present detects. Un
less a state is sometuing a ereut troni the peo
ple of the state, there is no reason wny the sov
ereignty of the state could not be represented by
senators elected by the peopie as well as by sena
tors cnosen by tne legislature.
'ihe Ohioan above reterred to then attempts
to answer tne cuarge of corruption by saying tuat
it is possibly true, but that "purchase of seats
in legislative bodies is not a new thing." Ho
quotes the corrupt election of members of parlia
ment and cites a case in 1831 where 489 members
out of U59 "were elected by 144 peers and 123
commons." He quotes Aiacauley as an autuorfiy
on tne corruption tbat existed, but ne neglects to
add that it was because of the rotten borough
sitom tnat the representation in parliament was
cnanged and that Aiacauley was one of the advo
cates of the change.
It is true that the election of senators by the
people would not absolutely prevent corruption,
but it would wonc a great improvement over tho
present method, it is easier to purchase an elec
tion from a few representatives to whom large
sums can be paid than to secure an election by
buying a majority of the people.
It is no answer to the almost universal de
mand for the popular election of senators to say
that the voter ought to be more careful about the
selection of representatives in the legislature.
Tnat is true, but there is no reason why thoso
who do use care in the selection of legislators
should bo left at the mercy of legislators who, al
though with a good private record, yield to the
temptations that beset a legislator when great
corporations are interested in selecting a sena
torial agent to carry out their purposes.
JJJ
Saved by the Elkins Law."
The New York American calls attention to
the testimony of Mr. Baer which casts some sus
picion upon tho good faith of the republican party
in the enactment of the Eluins law. Tho inter
state commerce law as it existed prior to February
19 last contained the following provision:
"Any person who shall neglect or refuse
to attend and testify, or to answer any law
ful inquiry, or to produce boons, papers, tar
iifs, contracts, agreements and documents, if
in his power to do so, in obedience to the
subpoena or lawful requirement of the com
mission, shall be guilty of an offense, and
upon conviction thereof by a court of com
petent jurisdiction shall be punished by a fine
of not less than one hundred dollars nor more
than live thousand dollars, or by imprisonment
for not more than one year, or by both such
fine and imprisonment"
The Elkins law which the president has
pointed to as a ..artial ful3"ment of his promise
of anti-trust , legislation contains the following:
"In all convictions occurring after the
passage of this act for offenses under said
acts to regulate commerce, whether committed
before or after the passage of this act, or for
offenses under this section, no penalty shall
be imposed en the guilty party other than
the fine prescribed by law, Imprisonment
wherever now prescribed as part of the pen
alty being hereby abolished."
A comparison of these extracts will show that
the Elkins law repealed so much of the interstate
commerce law as prescribed imprisonment as a
part of the penalty, and ... will be noticed that ic
is retroactive to the extent of relieving from im
prisonment even when tho criminal act com
mitted was committed prior to the passage of tbo
Elkins act This makes it possible for an official
to refuse to attend and testify, to answer any
lawful inquiry or to produce books, papers, tariff
contracts, agreements and documents, even though
It Is in his power to produce them. Tho .on;
punishment for such refusal is a fine of not less
than $100 nor more than $5,000. Under no cir
cumstances now can the official be Imprisoned.
What is a fine of ?5,000 to a corporation that may
make a hundred thousand or even a million by
violating tne law? It would seem that the real
purpose of tne Elkins law was not to prevent dis
crimination so much as to prevent tho punish
ment of officials who are guilty of violation of the
law.
More than four months prior to the passage
of the ElKlns law Mr. Hearst called the attention
of the president to the fact that the coal tru3t
-was violating the interstate commerce law. and
urged the enforcement of the law.- Nothing has
The Commoner.
bcon done so far, and tho Elkins bill makes It
more difficult than beforo to enforce tho interstate
cominerco law. in tue hearing beforo tho Interstate
commerce commission on the 29th of April last
Mr. Clarence J. Shearri," attorney for Mr. Hearst,
called Mr. Baer's attention to an official bulletin
of the department of labor, In which a statement
made by Mr. Baer to Mr. Wright relative to tna
miners Btrlko In 1900 was quoted. Tho follow
ing is taken from tho American's report of tin
testimony.
Mr. buearn (to Mr. Baer). Did you Bay as
follows, referring to tho preceding strike,
that:
"Shortly after this strike was inaugurated,
Senator Hanna met a number of gentlemen
and insisted that if tho strike wero not set
tled it would extend to Ohio, Indiana and
Illinois, and the election of Mr. Mcxllnley and
Mr.- Roosevelt would bo onuangercd. He In
sisted that ho was authorized to sottic tho
strike, through r. Mitchell, if tho operators
would agree to a 10 per cent advanco in
wages. After a great deal of pressure had
been Brought to bear upon tho presidents of
the coal companies and positive assurances
wero given that the situation was really dan
gerous, President AlclCinloy sending mo per
sonally a gentleman to assure mo that Ohio
and Indiana were in danger unless somo ad
justment was made, we agreed to put up a
notice which was prepared, wo understood, at
Indianapolis and furnished by the unitod mino
workers. Tho private operators absolutely
refused to join in this advanco, and Instead
of the strike being ended as promised, it
continued on for some time, and it becamo
necessary, in order to relieve the situation,
to call a meeting of the private operators with
the presidents of the coal companies and to
- agree with them that If they would put up
notices to pay 10 per cent increase we would
meet a committee which they should appoint
and endeavor to increase, if possible, the
price of coal. They -agreed to this, a commit
tee was - appointed by the private operators,
and;we sat two or three days a month for
.three months to reach an agreement with
them. That agreement t Involved a heavy
compensation to the private operators from
the coal companies. Tho coal companies had
agreed to change tho basis of coal purchased
from the private operators from a basis of
40 per cent and 60 per cent to a basis of 35
per cent and 65 per cent In other words, wo
had to decrease 5 per cent and they increased
5 per cent"
Mr. Shearn: You stated that to Mr.
Wright?
Mr. Baer: I did, I assume; it sounds all
right if you have read it correctly.
Mr. Shearn: That is tho fact, is it not,
anyway?
Mr. Baer: Yes, sir. It is the fact
It seems from Mr. Baer's testimony that tho
republican candidate for tho presidency personally
sent word to Mr. Baer to assure him that Ohio
and Indiana wero in danger unless the strika
could be settled, and Mr. Baer and his associates,
desiring to help the republican ticket, agreed to
a settlement by which tho operators wero to
have 10 per cent increase in wages, and the coal
trust, In order to secure this, had to compensate
the private operators. Here we have it the re
publican candidate appealing to tho trusts to help
him at a heavy loss to themselves and now tno
administration that came .into power by the aid
of the trusts puts through a bill that relieves Mr,
Baer, among others, from tho possibility of im
prisonment for tho violation of tho law.
Does this not prove that tho aemocratb
charges against the republican party were well
sustained? Does it not prove that the republi
can party is in close affiliation with the truBts and
obligated to them? It will bo remembered that
Mr. Baer is the president of a railroad, besides tho
president of the trust How long will the re
publican farmers, laboring men and business men
be blind to their party's subserviency to the
trusts? How long will the rank and -le of the
democratic party be blind to the fact that the
reorganizes would, if possible, put the demo
cratic party in exactly tha same position that the
republican party now occupies In regard to the
trusts?
JJJ
Squeezed by the Trusts.
It seems that those makers of farm imple
ments who are outside of the implement combina
tion have petitioned President Roosevelt for relief
from more than thirty Institutions which are de
nounced as trusts. The petitioners make about
10 per cent of the farm machinery, but are sub
ject to extortion in tho purchase of raw ma-
tcrlal and other things that go' Into the manufac
ture of implements. Soveral of tho corporations
ao speclHcully named, among them tho Standard
Oil company, tho United States btcol company, ,
Tubo, Leathor, Whlto Lead and Pig Iron trusts.
Ono of the republican papers, in epeaking of the
petition, anyB, if thoro is any ground for gov- .
eminent Interference tho attorney gcnoral will
undoubtedly take action," but it insists that tho
enso of every trust must be tried separately, and
that a "long tlmo must necessarily elapse before
relief can bo given, If any is needed." Tho Inter
national HaneBtor company, It Ib stated, manu -factures
90 per cont of tho farm Implements used,
and It is ablo to avoid tho hardships from which
the Independent manufacturers sutler. Tho clr
cumBtant'CB in this case, and tho arguments mado
by tho republican papers, show that tho republi
can position is not ono of opposition to tho trusts
In general, but to particular features of the trusts.
In other words, the republicans do not denounce
the private monopoly as a bad thing, but assert
ltto bo tho duty of tho government to intcrfcro
In caso a monopoly misuses Its power, but as It
takes a long time for investigation and a long tlmo
for action. It will bo seen tuat this remedy is
really no remody at all.
JJJ
Rooscvelt-Hanna Incident
The papers are discussing the Roosovelt-Han-na
Incident and the comments are colored some
what by tho leanings of tho paper. Tho friends
of Senator Hanna represent him as graciously of
fering Ohio's indorsement to tho president, the
relations between them being tho moat agreeable.
The anti-Hanna element represents tho president
as giving tho distinguished Ohio senator a good
drubbing and forcing him to very reluctantly
yield up tho Ohio indorsement
It is difficult for any ono to really commend
the senator's action In tbo matter. If he was
willing to have the president Indorsed ho ought
not to havo said anything against it; if he was
not willing to have him Indorsed ho ought not to
have surrendered his convictions on tho subject
merely to gratify the president
The incident, however, mado an issue, and it
was quickly sottled in favor of tho president The
way 1b now probably clear to a rcnomlnation, but
it is possible that Mr. Hanna was not ready for
a final struggle. If ho and the money magnates
decide that they prefer somo other candidate they
can still make it Interesting before tho convon
tion is held.
JJJ
Complacent Egotism.
Our more or less esteemed contemporary, the
Washington Post, Is a great hand to pick up
news in the hotel lobbies, and it always happens
to be the news tnat tho Post wants to pick up.
In its issue of May 23 it quotes a "leading citi
zen and banker" of Vlcksburg as saying that the
state of Mississippi was strongly for tho plat
forms of lb90 and 19oo, but that the state has un
dergone a big change of heart The next sen
tence, however, destroys the force of this testi
mony, for tho "leading citizen" says: "In truth,
the best intelligence of Mississippi was never on
the Nebrasi an's side. Our rubstantial and think
ing men indorsed tho theories of Cleveland and
John G. Carlisle." Tho "beat intelligence" is good.
There is a complacent egotism about the reorgan
izers that never falls to manifest Itself. Thi
"leading citizen" speaks of "tho wool hat crowJ
from tho forks of the creek" and of the "gran
gers" In such a way as to show that he has not
yet recovered from his indignation at the fact that
the rank and file have insisted on having some
thing to say in recent campaigns.
J
An Impossible Choice.
Hon. John H. Regan, the only surviving mem
ber of the confederate cabinet, and ono of the
veteran democrats of Texas, is quoted as saying
that he "would rather vote for the blackest kind
of a republican than vote for Cleveland,1' giving
as his reason that Cleveland "betrayed his party
into the hands of the money power." Mr. Regan
will never be called upon to make the choice, for
Mr. Cleveland has no possible chance of securing
a democratic nomination. He could secure mora
votes in a republican primary for the republican,
nomination than he could In a democratic pri
mary for the democratic nomination. The Com
moner has called attention to the things said m
hiB favor, not because he h d any chance of se
curing the nomination, but In rder that the
readers of The Commoner might know the real
influence behind the reorganizes, and under
stand that the candidate favored by the reorgan
izers will be controlled by the same Influence tlial
controlled Mr. Cleveland, e7ea though the fan4
may not be so well known to the public.
t
1