$r W"tft$mr W$
The Commoner,
. VOLUME 8, NUMBER 39
vim-
i
. courts. Those who make this argument might as well insist on the
abolition of the jury in all cases, for the jury system itself is just as
much a reflection upon the bench as is this demand for trial by jury
in these particular cases. But, as a matter of fact, the jury is the
bulwark of the court as well as of the accused, for the courts would
be very much more liable to criticism if juries were abolished than
they are today, for now the judge devotes himself mainly to the de
cision of points of law.
But there is another labor plank that Mr. Van Cleave probably
had in mind, namely, the plank that declares that parties to all
judicial proceedings should be treated with rigid impartiality and
that an injunction should not issue in any case in which an injunc
tion would not lie if no industrial dispute were involved. Do the
business men insist upon partiality in judiciay proceedings? Do
they insist that the mere fact that there is an industrial dispute
should justify an injunction? That plank does not attempt to inter
fere with the issue of an injunction where other conditions justify
it, but it does oppose the issue of an injunction merely for the pur
pose of bringing the court into the discussion of an industrial dis
pute. What proportion- of the real business men of the country find
a menace in this part or any other part of the labor plank of the
democratic platform?
Mr. Van Cleave asserts that this plank arouses a "class spirit"
"""and constitutes a demand for "class favors." But this is not true.
It is a declaration that the writ of injunction should not be used
for the purpose of creating a class or favoring a class. The labor
ing men resent an attempt to discriminate against them in favor of
any other class.
Now, as to the second question: Have the business men of the
country no concern in the other planks of our platform? Is the
labor question the only question in which business men feel a "vital
concern?" Whatffjboiit honesty in elections? Have business men
any interest in this subject? Are they riot vitally concerned in the
publication of campaign contributions before the election? Can
they be indifferent to the corruption which has followed the domina
tion of politics by the great corporate interests?
And the election of senators by the people ; is this not a matter
of importance to the business man? Is he not concerned in bring
ing the government nearer to the voter and making it more respon
sive to the will of the people? Is the tariff question entirely lost
sight of in the business man's agitation over labpj:? JDpes at make
no difference to the -business man whether his taxes are just or 'un.
just? It is hardly to lbe expected that a business man, who has
opposed a protective tariff all his life, will immediately forget the
- iniquities of a high tariff, whenever the labor question is mentioned.
And are there no trusts for the business man to fight? Does he
view with indifference the encroachment of the private monopoly
upon his own business? Are not the small merchants the victims
of the rigid rules which the trusts are laying down and enforcing?
Will the small manufacturer be reconciled to gradual extermination,
if he can only bury the democratic labor plank? Is not industrial
independence a matter of "vital concern" to the manufacturers who
are outside of the trusts, and to the merchants who must deal with
the trusts?
1 There, too, is the railroad question. Are not rates, rebates and
discriminations a matter of concern to the business man? Is he not
interested in knowing the value of the railroads and in stopping
the over issue of stocks and bonds?
The business man is a bank depositor, and he loses when a bank
become insolvent. He is also injuriously affected by a bank failure
in his community. Would he not be greatly benefited by a banking
system under which the banks would be compelled to contribute
to a guaranty fund and thus protect depositors?
The business man has an opinion upon the subject of govern
ment. He knows that imperialism is antagonistic to the doctrine
of self-government, and he knows what an expensive burden im
perialism has been.
Must he forget all these because, forsooth, the laboring man
asks for remedial legislation?
There are a number of other planks in the democratic platform
that present issues which concern the business man. Very few busi
ness men have swollen fortunes, and all of them are interested in
the reforms that have for their object a more equitable distribution
of the proceeds of human endeavor. The business man, the little
one as well as the big one, contributes to the country's welfare, and
he is vitally concerned in such a readjustment of conditions as will
secure to each man a reward proportionate to his work.
' Mr. Van Cleave is entirely too narrow in his definition of the
business man, and he does the business man an injustice in assuming
that his waking hours are filled with fears of the wage earners and
that his right's rest is broken by imaginary disputes with those who
toil. The business man is an important factor in society more than
that, he is a necessary factor, and the democratic party has not over
looked him. The democratic platform is broad enough for all to
stand upon. It breathes the spirit of reconciliation between labor and
. capital; it pleads for harmony between all elements of society and
, urges co-operation in the work of advancing civilition. The busir
,ness mantis one of the common people ; his interests are interwoven
with the interests of the, masses, and Mr. Van Cleave will fail in his
appeal to class spirit and in his effort to array the husiness men
against the reasonable and necessary reforms' to. which the demo
cratic party is pledged. ' . ' .;:.,.,
The Commoner will
be sent from now until
Election Day for Twen
r ty-five Cents.
MR. TAFT AND GUARANTEED DEPOSITS
In his speech of acceptance Mr. Taft puts
himself squarely on record as being opposed to
guaranteed deposits. He says: "The democratic
platform recommends a tax upon national banks
and upon such state banks as may como in, in
the nature of enforced insurance to raise a
guaranty fund to pay the depository of any bank
which fails. The proposal is wholly impracti
cable unless it is to be accompanied by a com
plete revolution in our banking system, with a
auporvislon so close as practically to create a
government bank. If the proposal were adopted
exactly as the democratic platform suggests, It
would bring the whole banking system of the
country down in ruin."
Why seek to confuse the people on a simple .
proposition? We are supposed to have govern
ment supervision, of national banks now. Su
pervision does 'not mean a government bank; it
simply means that the national bank inspectors
will do just as. they are expected to do under
existing law mako their examination of banks
thorough and make prompt and effective correc
tion of any irregularities discovered, So It will
bo difficult to frighten the people by, the gialm
that guaranteed deposits means, thorough super
vision or banks. That's just, exactly what the
people want. '
It Is absurd' to say that guaranteed deposits
. i - i '
would "bring the whole bankinc system of the
country, down to ruin.". ,
What does "guaranteed deposits"- mean?
It means that the savings of the masses shall
be secured so that when men and women de
posit their hard-earned money in banking in
stitutions, they need not worry for fear it will
be lost through the recklessness and dishonesty
of bank officials. The federal government de
mands of these banks security for the money it
deposits. As a rule state governments and
county governments and municipal governments
make similar requirements. But now that it is
proposed that depositors generally shall have
some such assurance for the safe keeping of
their wealth, we are told- b the republican can
didate for the presidency that the adoption of
such a plan "would bring the whole banking
system of the country down to ruin."
It is to save the banking business and to
save the people's money that the plan of guar
anteed deposits is advocated by democrats. It
is strange that Mr. Taft and the big bankers
for whom he speaks can. not see that the guar
anteed deposits system is absolutely necessary
for the prevention of, panics, for thesafq keep
ing of the mpn,e,pf the masses and for the
preservation of th. banking business ,iri , the
hands" of individuals. ; .. , .,
. ' . w to v t v .
. . (i
", Mr. Taft concludes, his weak attack upon
tfye jury trial plank in the democratic platform
w;th this exceptionally weak paragraph :
M, "Those whQ, advocate this Intervention of
a1ury in such ,casps, seem to suppose that Jhis
change In some yt,ay will inure pnly to the
benefit of the poor, workingman. As a, matter
o fact the person, who will secure chief, , advan
tage from it Is th,e wealthy and Unscrupulous
uuieuuuut, mv. iu(lfjinpioy astute,, and. cunning
counsel and anxious tq avoid justfcW'" ,
.! That beiiHr.tr.ua 'hnw Ann if ' innnon timf
i , r tv --- u w v- v isj& illicit
Mr. Taft's attack upon the trial by jury plan
finds its, most enthusiastic supporters among
"the wealthy and unscrupulous?" How does it
happen, that the representatives of special in
terests ,the men who seek favors at the handg
of legislatures and undue privileges from courts
are the strongest defenders of "government by
injunction" and the most fitter opponents of
the simple American plan of giving a man,
charged with an offense committed outside of
the court's presence, a jury trial?
, , &&&&' '
NOT FOR THE INCOME TAX
.
Let no one be misled on the theory that
Mr. Taft has declared for the income tax. The
following is from Mr. Taft's speech of accept
ance: "I believe that an income tax, when the
protective system of customs and the internal
revenue tax will not furnish income enough for
governmental needs, can and should be devised."
In other words Mr. Taft is for an income
tax conditionally. Wheneyer the government
caa not secure enough revenue through a sys
tem of taxing men according to what they eat
and wear, then he -would' be fn favor of taxing
them according to their Income.
That's all! ,' :
'FAITH OF THE INTERESTS, TOO
Referring to Mr. Taft's speech of accept-.
anc$,, the Chicago Record-iHerald (rep.) saysi
"The ; speech justifies thq faith of the republic
canvasses, who believe,,, gs' .we have said, that
the.candidate Is more progressive than his platn
form. It stamps him as. a, sincere progressive
who "heartily approves ani who would carry forn
ward, the Roosevelt policies; and who at thei
same time would Illus.trafce in his acts his'
thought that the chief function of the nqxti.adrt
ministration 'is distinct -from and a progressive
doYejRpnient of that wh.ich has been performed!
lWpPrqsident Roosev.et'i ; T"e, character .thafc
shines through the speech is" that of the blg,f
W
wtm
MijMiMlrtiBMIfliiyiiMiri