yfiPWifilMf 'W'1"'!? rw-
AUGUST 14, 190
j
-
a
direct conflict with tlie testimony of officers who
had served on the frontier at the time Colonel
"Woodruff was there. General Miles always car
ried a herd of cattle with his troops and in the
fall of 1876, the Indians stampeded 275 of Miles'
cattle up tho Tongue river and the general sent
a detachment of cavalry to recapture them. The
World correspondent says that at the time Col
onel Woodruff's testimony was given, tho man
who had charge of General Miles' herd and tho
man who slaughtered the cdttle were in the Sol
diers' home at Washington, but they were not
called although the commission was requested to
summon them.
No serious effort has been made to question
the accuracy of any of General Miles' reports.
Every possiuie effort has been made, however, to
humiliate him. Many people find it difficult to
understand how Ut happens that Mr. Roosevelt
has so readily inherited the antipathy toward the
commanding general wnen they remember tho
part Mr. Roosevelt played In the famous "round
robin," during tho Spanish-American war. But
whatever the mystery may be, It is clear that Mr.
Roosevelt does share the prejudice against Gen
eral Miles. The method he employs of displaying
that prejudice is in keeping with the method
chosen by the preceding administration and these
persistent efforts to humiliate a faithful army
officer are just as discreditable to tho Roosevelt
administration as they were to the precediug ad
ministrations. Long ago Mr. Roosevelt told us that "words
are good when backed up by deeds, and only so."
If tho people were to rely upon Mr. Roosevelt's
wods, they would not expect him to promote
Colonel Woodruff under the circumstances; but
long ago many people learned, and sooner or
later the American people very generally must
learn, that it is a far cry from Mr. Roosevelt's
words to Mr. Roosevelt's deeds.
JJJ
Argument.
The Brooklyn Eagle, ona of tho organs of the
reorganizes, says: "Here it is straight from tho
Atlanta Journal:- Bryan can" bring about har
mony in the democratic party by keeping his
mouth shut' If he did, he couldn't eat. If ho
couldn't eat ho would become too weak to talk.
If he couldn't talk, he would die. The Journal
might as well tell him to commit suicide."
Tho above is' reproduced as a fair sample of
tho tone of the organs of those who intlst that
they have a monopoly upon Intelligence so far as
democrats are concerned.
Surely the readers of the Atlanta Journal and
tho readers of the Brooklyn Eagle must be im
pressed with the idea that all the arguments that
appeal to intelligent men are witli the cause rep
resented by those publications.
JJJ
Making the Issue Plain.
The decisions rendered in the two merger
cases present the issue very clearly. Judge Thayer
in deciding tho case in which the United States
government was prosecuting said that the
merger
"Destroyed every motive for competition
between two roads which were natural com
petitors for business by pooling the earnings
of the two roads for the common benefit of
the stockholders of both companies, and, ac
cording to the familiar rule that every one is
presumed to intend what are the necessary
consequences of his own acts, when done will
fully and deliberately, we must conclude that
those who conceived and executed the plan
aforesaid intended, among other things, to ac
complish these objects."
In the case -n which the state of Minnesota
was plaintiff, Judge Lochren said:
"I am compelled to reject the doctrine
that any person can be held to have com
mitted or to "be purposing arl about to com
mit a highly penal offense merely because It
can be shown that his pecuniary interests will
be thereby advanced and that he has the
power either directly by himself or indirectly
, through persuasion or coercion of his agents
to compass the commission of the offense."
It will be noticed that in the Thayer decision
a monopoly is condemned because tho influence of
selfishness was recognized, while in the Lochren
decision the cour4; refused o recognize the bias
Wuich one naturally has in favor of his own in
terests. The democrats take the view expressed
by Judge Thayer and say that "a private monop
oly is indefensible and intolerable," while the re
publicans insist that there an good trusts and
had truBts and that only the bad ones should be
disturbed. This is the point on which the fight
The Commoner.
will tup and tho people might as well acquaint
themselves with the Issue. To make It plain,
let us tako a familiar case. Suppose Judge Loch
ren was trying a jury caso, and suppose a juror
admitted that ho had a large pecuniary Interest
in tho rosult of tho suit, would tho judge say:
1 rofuso to believo that tho juror will disre
gard his oath moroly because it can bo shown
that his pecuniary intorests will bo thereby ad
vanced." There would bo just as much sense in
allowing a biased Juror to sorvo rnd then put ou
the Injured party tho burden of proving hte in
jury as to permit the trusts to be formed and
then throw upon the victim tho burden of pro
tecting himself from trust exactions. A private
monopoly is a highwayman and it is not suffic
ient to say that it shall bo moderate in its ox
actions It must bo exterminated. Extermination
of trusts does not mean that all corporations
should bo attacked or that all combinations of
capital should be prohibited, but it does mean that
the line should be drawn against every attempt
tc monopolize any articlo of merchandise. It
means that the fight must bo made against all
private monopolies everywhere.
JJJ
Describe the Policy.
The Atlanta Constitution appears to bo very
hopeful of democratic success in 1904. Tho Con
stitution says that "tho trend of all tho active
factors In the party aro saying is that there is
democratic life In tho old land yet and If tho
followersof Jefferson will only got together upon
a platform adjusted to the people's national needs,
no more and no less, there is an oven chance to
win next year."
Then, perhaps by way of describing a plat
form "adjusted to tho people's national needs, no
more and no less," the Constitution says:
"Discussions of tho future platform all
point in ono direction. Tho country Is suf
fering today tho dread of accumulating evils
from tho Dlngley tariff schedules and tho
trusts they have saddled upon tho backs of
tho people. Whatever expansion of currency
has occurred by the coinai of our silver bul
lion without warrant of law and by tho en
largement of our gold stock has been over
balanced by tho absorption and locking up of
vast amounts of money in inflated stocks and
bonds. Liquidation and losses from that peril
of prosperity are already raising tho specter
of panic.
"It will be the opportunity of its life next
year for tho democracy to go to tho country
squarely with candidates and a platform guar
anteeing honest American tariff reform and
'a financial policy for the benefit of business
Instead of by and lor Wall street gamblers."
Democrats have a fairly accurate idea as to
what is meant by "honest American tariff re
form," but how may they interpret "a financial
policy for the benefit of business Instead of by
and for Wall street gamblers?"
Does this sentence provide a hint as to the
language-to bo employed in describing that finan
cial policy?
Is the proposed policy to bo so described In
the platform that, as In 1892, it may bo inter
preted in Wall street to suit the financiers and
among the masses to suit tho people?
Advocates of monometallism tell us that a
financial policy for the benefit of business" means
the single gold standard; tho advocates of bimet
allism say that it means bimetallism and no sur
render to tho banks of the money issuing func
tions of tho government
The readers of the Constitution might be in
terested in having that newspaper explain just
what It means by "a financial policy for the ben
efit of business instead of by and for Wall street
gamblers." By itself that sentence resembles tho
famous declaration made In the Iowa republican
state convention for 1903 wherein it was declared
that "duties that are too high should be reduced
and duties that are too low should bo increased."
JJJ
General Miles Retires,
At noon, August 8, Lieutenant General Nelson
A. Miles ceased active connection with the reg
ular array and went upon the retired list As a
soldier General Miles has served his country well
and faithfully. He won his way from the ranks
.to tho position of lieutenant general by force of
his ability as a leader and his prowess as a sol
dier. He enlisted as a private In the Fifty-first
Massachusetts volunteers, and was successively
promoted until Le became a major general of
volunteers. At the close of tho civil war he
was made a colonel in the regular army. As an
Indian campaigner he attracted the attention and
won tho admiration of the whole peoplo, and wan
promoted through dlfforent ran.ts until ho became
senior major general. Upon the death of Lieu
tenant General Schofleld ho was promoted to the
highest rnnk In the army. During the later yearn
of his active scrvlco General Miles was bitterly
assailed by many who clthor could not or did
not caro to conceal their ulterior motives, but ho
gave his attention to tho duties of his high office
and deported himsolf as a gentleman and a sol
dier. Hla fnrcwrii address to tho army Is pub
lished elsowhero In this Issue, and tho attention
of Commoner readers Is called to It The address
is characteristic of General Miles and bears evi
dence of his regard for the army over which ho
so long exercised command, and of his loyalty
as a citizen of this great republic.
JJJ
The Producers' Club.
On anothor page will bo found an Interview
which appeared rccontly In tho Carroll (la.) Her
ald describing a practical work which ha3 been
undertaken by Prof. W. P. Johnson and his
pupils. It Is so laudablo an offort that Tho Com
moner Is glad to call attention to It and to com
mend It Tno occupation c Uic boy during life
vacation is a problem not easy of solution a
problem which has long vexed both parents and
teachers.
Professor Johnson's experiment has worked
well this summer and if after tho "now" wears
off ho is able to keop up tho interest and en
thusiasm his oxamplo Is auro to bo widely fol
lowed. Tho editor of Tho Commoner had tho
pleasure of Inspecting tho co-operative garden and
found It a model In Its way.
Govornor Hogg of Texas once advised the
boys of his state to organize hoeing clubs in
stead of ball clu's and tako caro of tho gardens
of tho widows in their respective towns,
but tho advice -vas not generally followed. Pro
fessor Johnson has put tho Idea Into use and tho
prospect of a little profit has helped to make the
work popular ar ong tho boys.
The pupils will return to their books in tho
fall tho bettor for their experience In agriculture'
and tho habit of Industry formed will enable
them to mako good use of their intellectual
training.
JJJ
The Honey Question.
In its Issue of Friday, July 31, thn Wall
Street Journal said:
"As It was in the beginning of tho year.
Is now, and is likely to continue to be during
all of 1903, tho money question is tho one of
most vital Importance. The ) is nothing In
tho business situation as It presents itself at
this time, to prevent a continuance of our na
tional prosperity, except the congestion of tho
money market, due to Its inability to expand
as rapidly as tho trade and industries of tho
country."
Tho Journal addresses tho bankers when it
' reminds them that "the money question Is the one
of most vital importance."
When other representat'ves of Wall street ad
dress the people, the peoplo ar assured that tho
money question is a dead Issuo.
From the standpoint of these men tho people
should not tamper with the money question. They
should not discuss It. They should not Insist up
on having a part in the arrangement of our mone
tary system.
But with the bankers it la different They
aro to be reminded that "the money question Is
the one of most vital importance," and they are
to be counseled to urge senator! and representa
tives in congress to sen that this question is
disposed of entirely in line with the vital Inter
ests of tho financiers.
But when the Wall street Journal admits that
"the money question Is tho ono of most vital im
portance," with what reason does it assume to
draw the line where the discussion of tnls ques
tion may terminate?
Does it object to the bimetalllsts urging their
method ot providing the country with what they
believe to no a sound monetary system? Or does
It insist that all discussion with respect to this
question of "most vital importance" be limited to
a consideration of the currency system proposed
by the financiers and that participation In that
discussion be confined to the financiers themselves?
The Wall Street Journal has made a most In
teresting confession. Whatever men may say
about the "dead and burled past," whatever men
may say about "worn-out Issues," Vie Indisput
able fact remains that in the discussion of our
financial system tho "mone.- question" cannot b
separated from the money question.
4
(I
9 I I
II
i
J
i
I
i(
M