The Commoner.
NOVEMBER 27, 10X
3
AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION
A reader of The Commoner requests the re
production of an Interesting discussion brought
about when, a New Yorker who signed himself
"Northern Democrat' wrote a letter to the New
Orleans Times-Democrat.
The discussion will he so interesting to demo
crats that The Commoner reproduces both the
"Northern Democrat's" letter and the Times
Democrat's editorial.
"New York, July 28, 1893. To the Editor of
the Times-Democrat: As a northern democrat
who has no 'axes to grind,' and no favors to ask,
and who seeks for nothing but the highest wel
fare of his party, and the triumph of its prin
ciples, as laid down by Jefferson, Jackson and Til
den, I take the liberty of addressing you these
lines. I am directly led to do this by an extract
from your paper that recently came to my notice.
In this extract you made a bitter attack on Grover
Cleveland and' upon that 'section of his party
which failed to support Mr. Bryan in the two re
cent campaigns. You stated that It was needless
to discuss the question of Mr. Cleveland's party
loyalty, as that was something which 'does not
exist.' As I take It for granted that the Times
Democrat is desirous of -the success of the demo
cratic party at the approaching national contest,
and, unlike Mr. Bryan, not asking to see that
event indefinitely postponed, there are a few
questions I should like to submit to its considera
tion. "1. What right has Mr. Bryan, or any set of
individuals, to claim that'tho Chicago platform
of 1896 was the true declaration of democratic"
principles to which failure to subscribe meant
party treason, and failure to support the candi
date named by the convention of that ; ear meant
failure to remain a democrat? Why should the
Chicago platform of 1896 be the standard of true
democracy rather than the platforms adopted by
the party at the conventions which nominated
Tilden, Hancock and Cleveland the last named
three tines in succession? If democratic prin
ciples have any real substance, and if a man
believes in them heart and soul, he cannot cast
them aside at the behest of any body of men, and
support men and measures which represent exact
ly the reverse of those principles. I presume the
Times-Democrat will not deny that the Chicago
platform of 1896 was a complete reversal of the
platforms adopted by the party at its previous na
tional conventionssimply because a declaration
in recent years is surely no reason why it should
be binding it-it is false to all that has preceded it
"2. Now that the silver question Is as dead
an issue as the slavery question, is it not evident
that if the democratic party Is to succeed in the
future it must bring back to its ranks the men
who opposed free silver, just as thirty years ago
it brought back to its ranks the men who op
posed slavery? Mr. Bryan's old allies, the pop
ulists, have returned to their first love, the re
publican party the recent elections in the former
Bryan states of the west prove that So tha If
there is to be any hore of democratic success in
the future it 'is only to be secured by getting the
support of those democrats who twice elected
Grover Cleveland to the presidency, aid all of
vhom have not yet returned to their party's
lanks.
"3. Is it not plain that to secure such spp
Port the continued personal abuse of Mr. Cleve
land is a ioot way to go about it? Does not the
Times-DeiL'Qcrat .believe that the success of the
party is of far greater moment than the success
f any n-ere Individual? Does .the Times-Democrat
regard the continuous stream' of personal
abuse, which Mr. Bryan has been pouring forth.
ion Grover Cleveland, either dignified or states-
manlike, or conducive to the welfare of the party?
Mr. Bryan, according to his own admission, voted
against Mr. Cleveland in 1892. Why is Mr. Clove
land's sin in refusing some years later to vote
for Mr. Bryan the more unpardonable of the two?
That the Times-Democrat will in the future de
vote its splendid energies and abilities to the re
uniting and uplifting of its party rather than to
the discussion of Issues and Individuals that are
alike politically dead is the sincere hopo of a
"NORTHERN DEMOCRAT."
Under the headline, "Mr. Cleveland and pem
ocracy," the Times-Democrat replied as follows:
"Under this caption wo print today a letter
over the signature 'Northern Democrat which re
lates to an editorial that appeared in the Times
Democrat a week or two ago, and which was In
part widely copied in tho pipers of the United
States. 'Northern Democrat' appears to have read
an extract from that, e'ditorial, and declares it a
bitter attack upon 'that section of the party which
failed to support Mr. Bryan in tho two recent
canvasses.'
. "The editorial in question criticised Mr. Cleve
land alone, because his peculiar connection with
and obligations to the party should have had upon
him a more binding force than any claims that
existed upon the merem rank and file, many of
whom in their defection simply followed him as
the putative party leader, thoughtlessly believing
he must be right by virtue of that position. The
editorial In question made no reference to 'that
section of the party which failed to support Mr.
Bryan in the two recent elections;' and Mr. Cleve
land himself might have escaped that particular
criticism but for the fact tha.. the zeal of many of
his admirers outran their discretion, and they
have' been busily engaged In grooming him for a
fourth nomination as the democratic candidate
'for the presidency. Aside from the fact that there
exists a strong public prejudice a sort of un
written law against a third presidential term
which would make his nomination ill-advised and
undesirable, there are other and sufficient reasons
why ho, who ha3 done so much to impair the con
fidence of tho democratic voters in his good faith,
should never wgaln bo entrusted with tho party
leadership.
rt "And now we will answer tho queries of
Northern Democrat':
"1. The Chicago convention of 1896 was duly
called by the proper authorities of the national
democratic party for the purpose of formulating
a platform of party principles for the canvass then
Impending, and to nominate a presidential and
vice presidential canaiuate to make the race on
the platform there and then adopted. That con
vention performed its allotted work; the prin
ciples enunciated in that platform voiced tho sen
timent of the great mass of tho democrats
throughout the union, and the nominees of that
convention comprised the only democratic candi
dates in that national contest If party organi
zation, discipline and 'nity bo desirable (as
Northern Democrat' appearr. now to bdleve),
they were just as important to the success of tho
democratic party in 1896 as they possibly can be
in 1904. But in 1896 there were some defections
from the ranks of democracy notably ex-President
Grover Cleveland. Today the majority of
the democrats who stood by the platform In that
contest are told most modestly, in substance: 'We
helped the republicans lick you in 1896 and in
1900; we trampled upon and broke the principal
plank in the democratic plat'form and that party
tenet is no longer an issue. Now you fellows who
stuck by the party principle in those two elec
tions go away back and sit down, wuile we who
helped to beat you, with Mr. Cleveland at our head,
will take charge of the party organization and
run the old machine to suit tho views of'
"Whom? There is an old saying about a cer
tain tail that was supposed to have wagged the '
dog that owned it, but the Times-Democrat novor
placed implicit rcllanco in that story.
"2. Tho silver question Is no longer an lssuo,
nor is it likely to bo for many years to como.
Tho question now I'gitnting tho democratic mind
is not whother tho position of the party on that
question in 1896 and 1900 was wise or otherwise.
What tho democrats are asking themselves is,
whethor any good reason exists for again trust
ing as a leader ono who, in tho years I&'ja to 1896
inclusive, exerted all his influonco and powers aa
chief executive to break down and destroy ono of
the planks In the democratic platform on which
ho was nominated and elected, and which declared
as a party principle for tho c".ago of both gold
and silver without chargo for mintage? That
plank was construed before the election as a frco
silver plank that was in lino w th democratic pol
icy since 1875. How did Mr. Cleveland construo
it after ho was elected? Ho interpreted it to
mean that gold should bo coined frco of mintage
and silver not at all. Mr. Cleveland's acceptance
of tho nomination on that platform was tho
strongest sort of pledge that ho would, when
elected, use his best efforts to ceo the party policy
carried out. If he could so pervert tho meaning
of a party plank after election In ono Instance,
why might ho not warp and annul a party prin
ciple in another Instance? Tho democrats of the
country are unwilling to place themselves at tho
mercy of ono who is given to such frco and uii;
warranted interpretations of party doctrines,
There is an old proverb to the effect that he who
in deceived once may blamo tho deceiver; but if
ho bo deceived a second time by the same Indi
vidual, ho can censure nd one but himself. Demoj
crats do not care to incur self-blame.
"3. The election of Mr. Cleveland would en
tail upon the party four years of suspense p.nd anx
iety, because until tho expiration of his term it
would be a matter of doubt whether he would
endeavor to carry out tho tenets of his own party
or BupptJrt tho theories of r. Cleveland himself,
which are sometimes greatly at variance with Che
enunciated doctrines of democracy. Therefore, it
would be a four years' riddle to understand
whether, in electing him, tho democratic party
or Mr. Cleveland himself had achieved a success.
In 1892 we fondly believed wo had won a victory
for democracy. We found to our sorrow that wo
had assisted Mr. Cleveland to win a triumph for
himself and for those who opposed democratic
tenets.
"Tho Times-Democrat Is sincerely anxious to
aid in securing a victory for the democratic party;
but it will rupture no blood vessel to promote the
individual views and ambition of Grover Cleve
land, or to place him where ho can again stifle the
voice of democracy."
JJJ
Having escaped punishment by threatening to
pull down a few pillars of the republican temple,
Mr. Estes G. Rathbone seems now a tcrmined to
achieve a little notoriety by kicking holes in a
few military bastions.
If Mr. Chamberlain wants a good object les
son in his protective tariff campaign, let him
point to tho Laird of Skibo, who made several
hundred millions of money by tariff favor. But
let not 'the Honorable Joseph make the mlstaka
of mentioning Homestead when referring to An
drew. Elder Dowle and President Roosevelt met tha
other day and New York was one of the subject
discussed. Not being a mind reader it la im
posible to tell what Elder Dowle thought, but.it
Is safe to say that he thought a great deal Ilka
the president must have taiKed when he read .thi
returns, '
. - &
fl
f . j