fit "
pr
,
TONE 29, 1006
The Commoner.
5
3p.5';T "W"1 " ' '," j -;!jpu"' t
Vote Buying by Good Men" And
This From The Washington Post!
The Washington Post says: "Public opinion is
the only force that can effectively legislate in this
behalf" (contributions by corporations to politi
cal funds). The Post adds:.
"Now there is no doubt that public opin
ion is very much opposed to vote-buying by
bad men. The difficulty is that public opin
ion not only condones, but approves, vote
buying by good men. There's the rub. If good
men would cease the practice we would soon
put a stop to it by bad men. And this we '
may be assured of bad men will buy votes
as long as, and no longer than, good men
set the example."
This Post editorial should have appeared in
the column "Something Doing in the Country."
the space used by the Post to poke fun at coun
try newspapers.
Public opinion has muph to do with legislation
and the enforcement of law; but public sentiment
alone will not provide the remedy for the evil
under discussion. W.hen it is known that rich
and influential men "who violate the law will be
punished even as the poor offender is punished;
when it is known that prison cells were built for
the rich and powerful, as well as for the poor and
helpless, who commit crimes, then influential
men will hesitate to do wrong.
It is not true that public opinion condones
"vote-buying by good men." Good men do not
buy votes. Good men do not set this vicious ex
ample. The trouble is that men who do buy
votes, men who persistently violate the laws of
God and man. are continually hold up by great
newspapers as models of good citizenship. The
people do not know that these men are engaged
In the work of "vote-buying." If they did know
the truth if the Washington Post and other news
papers would only tell them the truth these
men would lose caste very rapidly.
Take, for instanoe, the case of Chauncey M.
Depew. For years he was pointed out by the
great newspapers of the country as a model citi
zen. The editors of these newspapers knew that
Mr. Depew was elected to the United States sen
ate to represent a great railroad system, and that,
although he had taken an oath to protect public
interests, his sole concern was for the special in
terests of his corporation employers. While
many men knew of the- disagreeable facts with
respect to" Depew's service In the senate, the
masses remained in ignorance and simply
because the editors of the great newspapers of
the country were engaged in a systematic effort
to build up Depew, where they should have
barred his entrance into any office of honor and
trust. So Boon as Depew's insurance company
transactions were made public, his star began to
Notf There WW be "Some
thing Doing in the Country."
descend and now it has fallen. The explanation
is that the revelations concerning Depew came
under such circumstances and with such force
that the newspapers spread the revelations be
fore their readers, and the American public
found that Depew was not a "good man," but,
on the contrary, was entirely untrustworthy.
So in the case of former Senator Bur
ton of Kansas, When -his wrong doing was ox
posed by the press generally, Burton was
doomed. So with the late Senator Mitchell.
But what about the several men now serving
in the United States senate who, while posing
as representatives of the people, are known to bo
the tools of special interests? These mon are
known by newspaper editors generally. Occa
sionally we see in the funny columns of some
of these newspapers, humorous references to the
seriouB fact that this man is a Standard Oil sen
ator, or that man a railroad senator, or the other
man an express company senator. But where is
that unanimity of serious action on the part of
the American press so conspicuous in the cases
of Burton, Depew, Mitchell and others? Why
does not the press move against these haughty
and influential men, representatives of great cor
porations and unfaithful to the people they are
presumed to serve, with the same vigor employed
In the movement against Depew, Burton and Mit
chell? Note the respectful manner in which the
editors of some of our great newspapers treat
men who, in the senate and house, are known to
be more concerned for the protection of special
interests than for the public welfare. As a rule
these men are of ordinary intelligence. But be
cause of the attention paid them by the great
newspapers, their mental capacity is exaggerated;
in many cases the people come to regard these
men as rich in intellectual endowment and as de
serving of a place among the great minds and
true characters of history. In many instances
these representatives of special interests have
serious faults, though they are seldom heard of
in the public press. Many of them have eccentri
cities which, if made known, would not contrib
ute to their popularity. But these are not men
tioned. Note, on the other hand, how some eccen
trity or fault of the public man who seeks tp do
his duty to the people Is presented to the public
through the columns of somo of our great news
papers. Several years ago Mr, Baker, represent;
atlvo In congress from a Brooklyn district, ro
turnod to the railroad companies the passes that
had been sent to him, saying that ho did not bo
lievo he had a right to accept these passes,
Mr. Baker was derided and tho paragraphora in
the daily newspapers habitually poked fun at tho
Brooklyn representative. Tho very mon who
should have been tho -first to commend him for
his brave and courageous stand wore tho first
to make fun of him. Mr. Baker was an earnest
man and spoke with deep feeling. In tho contem
plation of corporate imposition upon the people,
ho did not have that magnificent poise so easily
maintained by mon who think that government
was created for the benefit of the fow at tho
expense of tho many. Ho spoke earnestly and
porhaps It seemed to somo that ho did not, at
all times, display dignity In his oratory. But
it seems that ho spoke truth, and that whonever.
his vote was recorded, it was on tho side of
tho public interests nB against tho special inter
ests. Yet in bis later days in congress tho
newspapers habitually poked fund at him, and
those of his associates, who were representa
tives of tho corporators rather than of tho peo
ple, were emboldened by these nowspaper gibes
to subject tho Brooklyn representative to open
sneers and insults on tho floor of the house.
When the American people submit continu
ally to wrong, the press Is more to blame than
any other Influence. Whenever tho people are
placed In 'possession of the facto, they may bo
depended upon to move along tho lines of com
mon .honesty. They have never "condoned vote
buying," whether votes were bought by bad men
or. by tho Washington Post's Impossible "good
mon." They depend greaUy, however, upon tho
press for their information; and If, at times, they
seem to be giving their approval to "vote buying
by good men," it is because they have been kept
in ignorance of tho vote-buying or other wrong
doing perpetrated by thoso whom they have beon
taught by the press to regard as "good mon."
Bad mon will buy votes as long as thoro
are votes to be bought and immunity from pun
ishment to bo obtained. Good men have never
set an example of "vote-buying." The Amer
ican people vill learn to place the proper esti
mate upon the character of their public men
whenever the noblest of professions returns tp
the motto of the Salem Register:
"Hero shall the press the people's right maintain,
Unawed by Influence and unbrlbed by gain;
Hera patriot Truth her glorious precepts draw.
Pledged to Religion, Liberty and Law."
A TERRIBLE ARRAIGNMENT
M. Makeby, Edenton, North Carolina, writes:
"Enclosed you will find a piece of the Southern
Churchman, which has an article from an Eng
lish magazine, which, I think, shows very well
what we, as a nation, are drifting to. What we
need is to arouse the people to stop and consider.
When we can get them to do that we will come
out all right, but we often suffer before we do
that. I send you the slip, thinking that you may
not have seen it, and might make use of some
portions of it."
Below is an extract from the Southern
Churchman published at Richmond, Va., article:
"The alliance between organized wealth and
conscienceless political leadership is the deter
mining and constant factor of American public
life. From the smallest municipality in the coun
try up to the United States senate there is not
an elected body of any kin"d that does not con
tain some members who are the nominees and
representatives of one or other of the trusts,
and charged with the well-understood mission of
protecting its interests at any cost. The moral
lawlessness thus engendered engenders in its
turn physical lawlessness. Is it a small fact, for
instance, that 3,337 persons should have been
lynched in the United States between 1882 and
1903? Is it a small fact that the number of mur
ders and homicides should now be four and a
half times as great for each million of the pop
ulation as it was twenty years agothat between
eight and ten thousand Americans should bo an
nually murdered? Is it a small fact that tho
present -secretary of war, himself a lawyer and
an ex-judge, should feel Impelled to describe the
administration of criminal law in America as 'a
disgrace to our civilization,' and should be able
to prove his contention by an irrefutable appeal
to judicial records? Since 1885 there have been
in the United States 131,951 murders and homi
cides and 2,286 executions. In 1885 the number
of murders was 1,808. In 1904 it had increased
to 8,482. The number of executions in 1885 was
108. In 1904 the number was 110.
"These are terrible facts and they raise ter
rible problems. A debauched political system,
an atmosphere of private and public corruption
and lawlessness, an inefficient judiciary, and, sur
rounding and permeating everything else, a spirit
of materialism more crude, more grasping, more
pitiless than any the world has yet experienced
whither will so portentous a combination lead?
No one can pretend to say. Even Americans
do not attempt with any confidence to forecast
the future of their civilization; the data are per
haps too many, the conditions too novel and com
plex. The industrial future alone is full of mem
aclng possibilities. Labor in America, already
violent in its methods, is just becoming conscious
both of politics and economics; conscious, that
is to say; that by organization it may hope to
control the ballot box, and conscious, too, that
there is something for it to learn in the trusts
and in Wall Street. The new American unionism
Is deliberately preparing to fight monopoly with
monopoly. Its objective Is tho same as the
trusts' to crush competition. One drives the in
dependent company ruthlessly to the wall, the
other painfully discourages the blackleg. Tho.
union boycots, the trust blacklists; the unidn has
its pickets, the trust Its paid spies; each limits
output, each restricts membership; one fixes a
minimum price, tho other a minimum wage; both
clamor for sp'eclal legislation, and both in their
different spheres seek a complete monopoly tho
one of production, tho other of labor. Tho con
centration of wealth and management in a few
hands is gradually heading off opportunity, and
giving to the struggle with labor the aspects and
the ferocity of a class war; and labor, already
embittered by that very lack of natural distinc
tions between class and class that theoretically
should have softened the relations of employera
and employed, retaliates upon capital with dyna
mite, the rifle and the torch, feeling that force
alone can bring the high Toryism of America. to
its knees. No one can contemplate these phenom
ena without deep misgivings, deeper in the case
of America than In that of any other country be
cause of the absence of those ideals of social
welfare and conduct that elsewhere might miti
gate the harshness of materialism."
JJJ
NO UNREST?
In a newspaper interview, 'Speaker Cannon
said, "There is very little unrest in this country
just now." Mr. Cannon ought to take a peep
into the inner councils of Iowa"republicans or of
Pennsylvania republicans. Ho would conclude
that there Is.conslderable "unrest" to say nothing
of the demands from republicans in other states
that their party do something to justify its claim,
as "the party of the people."
.M&famM
f-Z&s
fcM 4' A '
'X t
, .-