r .
i
r
A
I
"hi
JjANUATtY 18,-'1907---
The Commoner.
K-
5 -.
'
o
f!
r
K
roads are the teachers. The railroad magnates
are showing more and more clearly every day
that they regard the railroads as a private asset
to be used unscrupulously for the building up of
immense private fortunes. They limit competi
tion by combination- After combining the rail
roads they proceed to reach out for the -water
traffic. The larger these combinations become,
the more difficult it is for the government to
control them. Some imagine that the railroad
question is settled when rebates are stopped and
discrimination is prevented, but this is a very
superficial view of the subject. The railroads
are guilty of extortion in rates; they water their
stock, inflate their capital and then proceed to
prey upon the public through rates unnecessarily
high.
Mexico, in order to protect herself from tfie
grasping railroad magnates of the United States,
has taken control of her railroads, but in the
United States the molders of public opinion pro
ceed upon the theory that there is no limit to
the patience and forbearance of the masses.
When the rate bill was before the senate Senator
LaFollette endeavored to 'secure an amendment
authorizing the commission to ascertain the value
of the railroads, but this amendment was defeated
by a strict party vote, Senator LaFollette alone
voting with the democrats for the amendment.
Since that time the railroads have gone on issu
ing large blocks of new stock and enlarging their
capital. Each year their grip is becoming tighter.
How long will the people stand it? How long will
it be before they recognize that those .whose
patronage gives business to the railroads are
entitled to consideration?
JJJ
BUSINESS HONOR
Professor Jenks, in calling attention to busi
ness honor as now defined, said in,, a recent
speech: "The frequency of great fortunes, gath
ered ""perhaps legally but in ways felt to be un
just, through the power of monopoly, have tended
strongly to obscure the moral vision of many
well meaning men, who have been thereby led
to confound morality with social righteousness;
and their acts have formed the excuse for many
N others to break laws, which seem to them un
just, The profit from an unjust, though legal
stock watering may well prove more demoralizing
in business circles than the illegal freight rebate
which saves from ruin a grain shipper caught at
a disadvantage."
A large volume could be written on this sub
ject and many interesting instances could be
given to illustrate modern business honor. Pro
fessor Jenks calls attention to the monopoly.
Men who would blush to be called highwaymen,
will rob through monopoly and defend it although
their crime is grand larceny as compared with
the petty stealings of the highwaymen. Men
who break laws with impunity when those laws
stand in the way of their grasping methods, will
pose as friends of law and order when some small
crime is committed. We have recently seen a
man prominent in the financial world escape from
the charge of embezzlement on the ground that
he had no personal interest in diverting insurance
funds from the pockets of the policyholders to the
treasury of the republican campaign committee,
and now we see that same financier, Mr. Perkins,
indicted along with an ex-secretary of the treas
ury, Mr. Fairchild, for forgery, and their excuse
' is that they derived no pecuniary profit from their
violation of the law. They simply did it to de
ceive the authorities of a foreign nation in which
their company did business. Is it not time for
our preachers, our publicists and our moralists to
bo define crime as to take away fiom these busi
ness men the excuse that they sin ignorantly?
Is it not time that the public conscience was
turned upon these questions? The business men
themselves ought to see to it- that their class is
relieved from the odium that attaches to these
constant violations of statute and moral law.
The old story of the man who, upon seeing on a
tombstone the inscription: "Here lies a lawyer
and an honest man," expressed surprise that so
narrow a grave could hold two persons, will soon
be applied to th.e business man if a reform is not
instituted.
JJJ
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
In the discussion of laws respecting campaign
contributions, one point is-often overlooked, name
ly, that the publication of receipts and expendi
tures should precede, not follow the election. The
efforts thus far made to secure publicity have
been largely nullified by the fact that the publica
tion comes too late. The facts brought put after
the election, not being connected with the next
campaign, are of little service in that campaign.
The fear of a post-election publication will, of
course, deter some from corrupt contributions,
but a publication before election would still more
powerfully deter. Take the late New York elec
tion for instance. During the campaign republican-papers
asserted that Mr. Hearst was using
a large sum of money to advance his personal
ambition. His expenditures wore magnified, and
he was accused of attempting to buy the gover
norship. When the election was over and the
statements filed by the committees, it was found
that the republican committee spent more than
Mr. Hearst's committee, and it was also found
that several of the trust magnates in New York
were down on the republican list for large
amounts. J. Pierpont Morgan & Co., contributed
$20,000; Levi P. Morton & Co., $20,000; Andrew
Carnegie gave $5,000; tho younger Rockefeller
gave $5,000; Charles Schwab gave $5,000; Mr.
Mackey of the Postal telegraph gave $2,000; Mr.
Depew of the New York Central gave $2,500; Mr.
Gates of the Steel trust gave $2,500; Kuhn, Loeb
& Co., $2,000; Jacob Schiff, $2,000; Wells of the
Adams Express company, $5,000. The Copper
Trust and the Coal Trust also contributed through
their representatives. If these contributions had
been known before the election, the public could
have seen more clearly on which side predatory
wealth had arrayed itself.
The democrats in congress and in the various
states ought to see to it that the laws passed
upon this subject require the publication of con
tributions several days prior to the election.
Three publications might be made, one a month
before the election, one fifteen days before the
election, and one five days before the election, and
no contribution should be accepted after the last
publication. The public has a right to know not
only who contributes and how much but the in
formation ought to be given before the people
vote. Nothing will so tend to prevent the em
ployment of a large corruption fund as tho pub
lication of the fund before the election, for the
party that relies upon the trusts to finance its
campaign will find that the support of the trust
magnates will do the party more harm than the
contributions will do it good. Let the facts bo
known before the election.
JJJ
DESTINY
Whenever a statesman is unable to defend a
thing which he wants to have done, he usually
hides behind the plea that it is destiny. That
the readers of The Commoner may be able to
answer this destiny argument the following quo
tation is given from the "Last of the Barons" by
Bulwer. William of Hastings is described as
laying his;sins at the door of destiny, and the
author makes this comment: "It is destiny!
phrase of the weak human heart! It is destiny!
Dark apology for every error! The strong and
virtuous admit no destiny! On earth guides con
science in heaven, watches God. And destiny
is but the phantom we invoke to silence the one,
to dethrone the other!"
Each man's destiny is in his own hands so
far as his moral progress is concerned. If a man
is going to be a thief, circumstances may deter
mine whether it is his destiny to escape punish
ment or to be caught, but the man decides for
himself the all important question whether he
will be a thief. And so circumstances may de
termine how much profit or how little profit a
country can find in a policy of imperialism, but
the country itself must decide the people or those
whom the people permit to speak for them what
the policy of the country will be. Destiny is in
deed the dark apology for many national errors.
JJJ
CONNECTICUT WHEELS INTO LINE
The purification of politics was once described
by Senator Ingalls as an iridescent dream, but
during tho last few years several successful efforts
have been put forth for the purification of poli
tics. It is doubtful whether in any state the
corruption of the individual voter has been car
ried farther than in Connecticut, and yet, even
in this state the light is beginning to break. A
commission appointed last July by special act
of the legislature "to take into consideration the
existing laws relating to primaries and the laws
prohibiting corrupt practices at elections, both
in this state and elsewhere, and to report to the
general assembly of 1907, such bill or bills, or
such proposed legislation as in their opinion are
required" and are best calculated to secure fair
nominations and elections, and to prevent cor
rupt practices at primaries and elections "' Is re
ported to have agredd unanimously 'upon ten
changes in the present corrupt' practices law.
Among the more important changes proposed are
those prohibiting corporations from contributing
to campaign funds and prohibiting all judges ex
cept probate judges from making contributions
to campaign funds; limiting the number of paid
workers at tho pollseach political organization
is limited to five workers for a voting district
and one additional for each two hundred regis
tered voters requiring returns and sworn state
ments for nominations as well as for elections;
requiring delegates to nominating conventions
to state whether anyone paid their traveling or
other expenses., in advance of the convention or
reimbursed them afterwards; prohibiting the em
ployment of conveyances on' election day except
thoso necessary for bringing tho sick and tho in
firm, and then only when the conveyances are
volunteered; limiting the amount of monoy which
a candidate can expend to fifteen dollars for each
one thousand voters; making the offering as well
as the receiving of a bribe a criminal offense.
The wave of reform is sweeping on, and those
who hope for honest elections have reason to
feel encouraged. With honest elections will come
representatives who will support the reforms nec
essary for the remedying of overy evil.
JJJ
IGNORANCE
President Ripley of tho Santa Fo Railroad
company testified before tho interstate com
merce commission: "I did not know, until I
read it In the newspapers, that Mr. Ilarrlman
owned stock In the Santa Fo." Yetrit developed
that Mr. Harrlman controls $10,000,000 in Santa
Fo stock.
Is it necessary that the president of a rail
road be informed on the affairs entrusted to
him? Or are we to have railroad presidents who
don't preside like bank and other corporation
directors who don't direct? The result of such
negligence is, in the case of railroads, wrecked
trains and jobbing In railroad stocks; in the case
of banks, misappropriated funds; and in the case
of other corporations manipulation of the com
pany affairs not only to tho detriment of public
interests, but to the detriment of many of those
directly interested in the company itself.
JJJ
STRANGE? '
A Washington dispatch to a New York paper
says. "It is to be noted that Senator Aldrich
wont to New York tonight. He will have an
opportunity of hearing for himself just what
those representing the great financial interests,
especially the Standard Oil, in which he is vitally
concerned, think of Mr. Cortelyou's abilities as a
secretary of the treasury."
Is it strange that a United States senator
should take advice on public questions from "the
great financial interests, especially the Standard
Oil, in which he is vitally concerned?" Certain
ly not. But it is strange that the people would
permit such men to misrepresent them in the
United States senate.
JJJ
SOME RAILROAD COMPARISONS
Ridgway's claims that tho ontire government
owned railroad systems of Europe has been con
ducted twelve consecutive months without the
loss of a single passenger's life. On the govern
ment owned railroads of Switzerland only three
"people were killed during 1906, and of these three
two were trespassers wilfully violating the law,
and the other one was drunk. In the same year
10,000 people were killed on the privately owned
railroads of the United States. In 1900 American
railroads killed more people than were killed on
either side in any one battle of the civil war.
There is food for thought in the above simple
statement of facts.
JJJ
WOULDN'T IT?
The Chicago Inter-Ocean says that George
B. Cortelyou is opposed by the Rockefeller-Har-riman
interests because Mr. Cortelyou is "credit
ed with being a Morgan-Hill man." Wouldn't it
be gratifying if the alleged opposition by the
Rockefeller-Harriman interests was based on the
ground that Mr. Cortelyou is "credited with being
the American people's man."
The army regulations now require that all
officers and enlisted men stand at "attention"
when a band plays "Star Spangled Banner." This
is as it should be. The star spangled banner has
compelled a lot of people to pay attention.
J. jtlMt J Xsat. -- l-1.' itX
O , ft
!