fTrrr f$
2' .
ovor the morgor decision, but what is there In it
to cause exultation among republicans? "Why
does not the president enforce the law if the law
is cood? Why are the numerous great trusts al
lowed to continue business? If the governor of a
state enforced the law against one horse thief in
ton or twenty or one hundred, could he excuse him
self for not enforcing it against the other nine or
nineteen or ninety-nine? The reason for the re
publican inaction is plain to bo seen. The party
receives campaign contributions from trusts. Trust
officials and financiers lend to the republican lead
ers their power to coerce employes and to intimi
date borrowers. Will the democratic party imi
tate republican methods and invite confidence only
to betray it, or will it take a Arm and strong stand
against the commercialism of the day and make a
resolute attempt to restore the government to Its
old foundations and to purify politics? The dem
ocratic party has two paths before it. It can fol
low the republican party upon the downward path
or it can take the path leading to higher ground.
In the last two campaigns the party has made a
strenuous fight for higher ideals, but its way has
beon obstructed and made hard by the perfidy of
men onco high in the party's councils and by the
betrayal of men of whom it had a right to expect
nought but fidelity. It must continue its strug
gle or forfeit its claim upon the conscience of
the country. There is every inducement to a
righteous course. It cannot only secure to its
members the satisfaction that comes from noble
offort, but it can lay the foundation for perma
nent and overwhelming success. Indications point
with increasing clearness to the control of the next
national convention by the democratic democrats
of the party, but to make tne certainty sure, every
boliever in democratic principles, every tearless
exponent of the rights of the people, ought to work
Incessantly until the convention meets. This is
no time for over-confidence or idleness. If the
party would realize the hopes of its founders and
prove an effective instrument for the improvement
of government and the betterment of political con
ditions, the order must be no compromise, con
cession or surrender, but forward, march!
Dropping the Mask.
It is impossible for the organs of the reorgan
izes to conceal their real purpose. Pretending
that their chief objection to the Kansas City' plat
form is on tho money plank, they cannot hide the
fact that they are just as vigorously opposed to
the democratic party's position on the trust ques
tion as they are to its position on the money
question.
The Brooklyn Eagle, recognized as one of the
leaders of the reorganizing element, boldly in
dorses the Foralcor bill, now pending In the sen
ate. Tho Forakor bill, in brief, nullifies the Sher
man anti-trust law; directly repeals the criminal
clause of that law; and, bluntly stated, provides
that tho trust magnates may conspire In restraint
of trade, provided they do so in a "reasonable"
degree.
ir, Mn in eaitorinl Panted in its issue of March
17, the Brooklyn Eagle maintains that "the power
Sn i ? A e ,aws of C0"Sress m restraint of
trade should not be held to be an intention to
violate them and should not, in itself, be a vio-i0"fttllcl-;;
The Eagle does not approve of
the opinion delivered by Justice Harlan in the
Northern Securities merger case. It says:
"It is therefore, desirable that the For
alcor bill should be passed by congiess as oon
ShC?8?10 J0r ? station of tnSoaSnlted
States, for the sake of justice, tor the nros
porlty of business and for the leconcniajfon
of law with logic, of construction of law with
sanity and of the administration of law w h
reason and with right." , ru
In tho opinion of the reorgaiwers -i wnii
stated by the Brooklyn Eagle, jSsUceB upheld
business prosperity is secured aw is reconcilofI
with logic, the construction of law Is mado !
sanity, the administration of law s in XdanS
with reason and with right, wheLver the S
magna es given the power to violate the iaV,J
the privilege of freedom from pun ishmSn J?
ho violation is "reasonable,-in Q S nW un
judge whom tho trust magnates m nnl,0f,a
sufficiently "conservative" to pasmZ nV
of a "trustee of God." pon the acvs
JJJ
Give Vs the Figures.
The chief argument advanced i, m,
advocate a protective tarlf Ms that ?ulft Vho
. wage-workers. But they are slow aWfll8 ,Ule
tng tangible proot'. 10w about Produc-
. Under the tariff on steel rails, American manu-
The Commoner
facturers charge home consumers $28 per ton., The
same rails are sold to Canada for $21 a .ton , and to
Great Britain or South Africa for $18 a ton, on
board the cars at the point of manufacture.
How much of the $28 charged the domestic
consumer goes to the laborers who make, the
rails?
How much of the $21 charged the Canadian
government goes to the laborers who make the
rails?
How much of the $18 charged the Briton or
the Afrikander goes to the laborers who make
the rails?
Is it not true that the laborers who are en
gaged in making the $18 rails get just as much for
their work as the men who make the $28 rails?
And if the men who make the $2S rails get no
more than the men who make the $1S rails, who
'but the manufacturer is benefited by the tariff?
And if the tariff enables the manufacturer to
charge an exorbitant price for his product, upon
whom does the burden fall? Necessarily upon the
people, for the railroads who have to pay the
high domestic price shoulder it off upon the peo
ple in extortionate freight rates.
But let some advocate of the robber tariff
explain why, if the tariff is beneficial to labor,
the men who roll the $28 rails for American con
sumers get no more wages than the men who roll
rails for the foreign consumer. Advocates of ttie
tariff should be willing to let glittering generali
ties rest for a time and give a few plain facts.
Birds of ol Feather.
The Cincinnati Enquirer prints the following
"special dispatch" from New York:
"New York, March 17. According to an
interview credited to James J. Hill, president
of the Northern Securities company, and of the
Great Northern railroad, he is In favor of the
nomination of Grover Cleveland for the presi
dency. '"It is my belief,' said Mr. Hill, 'that Mr.
Cleveland would make a very strong candidate
with the people. They know hfm; they know
his ability. He has been in that office before
and he filled it in a manner that must have
impressed the people in general. He was con
servative in his administration and demon
strated unusual ability, not to say greatness.
" 'The people know what to expect of him,
which is more than can be said of the other'
candidates, and which, I believe, is a strong
point in his favor. I believe that his nomi
nation would be tho strongest that the demo
cratic party could make, and I think the peo
ple would indorse the selection at the polls.' "
"PrnCfUrfflMr-.H111.admires Mr- Cleveland.
Birds of a feather flock together." Mr. Cleveland
is doubtless a great admirer of Mr. HiH and it
might be interesting to know whether Mr. Cleve
land had any stock in the Northern Pacific when
wTgVaS Plann.ed aml whether he sold it or
Kept it. If some enterprising reporters will se-
clarinlrr1 S!atrent from the SSKldSt de
claring first, whether he held a block of Northern
Pacific just prior to the merger- second whSSn?
he sold it about that time and Uf so at "what nrcfi?
itTeatth' ioJStSS
Jfc r,eadinS an Mr. Cleveland's recent article on
the democratic opportunity. Or, if he doeJ iS
SS'm'A0118 phas of the ''money Ves
anS'say' e'tt aUe ? PUblic into hia confldSSi
ions of tho n if he, indorses th dissenting opin-
suprem com Hft i01? he stated to the
into n, S,and wnetner he would if "forced"
MSvHESS asain-appolnt !
the taitC!,7jigngte;.ntSItaw!',1a"orm "Iree (rom
tore ho , .oil , y- i u wU1 b0 sonie time be
ta , ft To'lSr Tlto. a ocratlc pla?
statement Z a Plaln
JJJ
The Kansas City Platform
CityaKrUufwS mucf, ? -
the gold and coloration anll laB beeu d
which they seem Vknow sc UttUe V"? ?bouL
well tor the friends of that platf0rm t. mlght be
Platform with them, and X, ? carry Ulls
jvho is opposed to the platform th!?y find a m
aWerh:e
guested to write JtffiS
W.2 -tress
tbe issu between
' V0LUME 4, NUMBER
the parties, and any attemnt. tn M ...
ly to make.it weaker rather thnl ?le u Is lik
reaffirmation of the TlatrSrm n8tronr. to
planks in it, and the old I nlntfL C0Vers all ft
in connection with JLtL ?SJform ull CuF
If the platform is not reaffirmed8 lTV be 3
not restated would be con& a?5
and what can we afford to renu lintA ml
Item wrong? If so, why noHjutoL ?
&dJLr5 fw .can the ny&
ii
ly, ana if right, how can the mrv- l ex
better atatpfl nn w L"?n vs Position C
edy proposed in that platform obiecSn?1.8 '
so, what better remedy for toe SD able?
propose? Thev not. oniv hnv. :bauers t
nroTxjse? Thev nnt nniv jmvn reorgi
their political idol, when presldenl T y.,kl
three judges who dissented from th ?n Th
.taininff the anti-trust iRW i VS i1?.
- - .. 4ll vm mciger case
Nobody need be ashamed of the Knna V,
platform. It wonirt i,nWv ,"1L iansas Cltt
shame if a great political party with morlV1
six million members could be frignenSv?
trust matrnatP.n nnr flnni 5 U1u b) lat
from so sound aiid democratic an utteranw J??
Kansas Cft.v nlat.form. u "trance as th
J J
"Sneers and Jeers."
In its issue of March 1G. t.iip Now vnri,
-printed an editorial entitled "Facts, ' as follows;
1. The anti-trust law was framed by a
republican, was passed by a repuolican house
and a republican senate, was signed by a
publican president.
- 2. The law remained a dead letter on the
statute books during the entire second term
of Grover Cleveland, a democratic president,
Through those four years of demonrntin ad.
ministration all appeals and all efforts of the.
World to have the law enforced were met
with sneers, jeers and open contempt from a
democratic attorney general, Richard Olney,
who pretended that tho law was unconstitu
tional, and who would do nothing toward
prosecuting violators of it.
3. The first effort to enforce the law was
made by Theodore Roosevelt, a republican
, president. The first attorney general to vig
orously prosecute offenders and to test the law
was a republican attorney general, Philander
C. Knox.
4. The decision of the supreme court of
the United States, given as a finality from
which there is no appeal, upholding the law
as perfectly constitutional and absolutely im
pregnable in every respect, as the World for
twelve years constantly insisted, was due to
five judges, every one of whom is a republican.
5. The dissenting Minority of the court
included every democratic judge of that trib
unal, to-wit: Chief Justice Fuller of Illinois,
Mr. Justice White of Louisiana, and Mr. Jus
tice Peckham of New York. All these distin
guished democrats not -only voted against the
constitutionality of the law, but denounced it
as a danger to the republic.
6. Under these circumstances it does not
seem probable that the democrats can make
great capital in seeking to monopolize the
anti-trust issue and charging tho republican
party with the crime of being owned body and
soul by the trusts.
It is just as well to record some plain
truths, however unpleasant or surprising.
The World has insisted that the democratic
party nominate for president Grover Cleveland or
some one in harmony with Mr. Cleveland's view
on public questions. '
Yet, that newspaper tells us that during tM
entire second term of Grover Cleveland, the an
trust law remained a' dead letter on the statute
hooks; that all efforts and appeals to have the la
enforced "were met with sneers, jeers and opj;
contempt from a democratic attorney eenew, j
w mill uao -justices wno tooic me uuai " .
Tho nnlt . ........ navMWi
"- uuuaiiun were appointees or urovui -"0,v' .
- iiivj luutJ ul iixcQU iiu;u Will " '
continue to insist that the only hdpe for the denj
vauc party is that It surrender itseit ww
hooping of those who meet "with sneers, jeers a
-- v-uuwumiju appeals inui mw iuwh b -
v. uoca ue eiuorceur ,.,
The World has already told its readers thalj'
poaa vjicy piatrorm must be ananaoiiuu, i--
fa uma us oojections are based on i,I0,TVi
Plank of that platform. Yet, In this editorial, '
World says that democrats cannot malco a
cessful fight on the trust issue. Are we to JJ
dorstand that tho World would have tne MJ
- .v, iiuiy uuuuuon mat issue t aio u -,,
dorstand that the 'World' Would have the PJ
Pretend to he against tho trusts, at v
IWrcysS
