L
OCTOBER '9, 1908
3
'
tho publication of contributions before the elec
tion, but postpones publication of expenditures
until after that time. I confess I see no reason
why, if contributions aro to bo published before
tho election, expenditures should not also bo
published. I think that tho character of ex
penditures is quite as important as the -character
and source of the contributions. I don't know
of any election law, either in this country or
abroad, which requires tho publication of contri
butions or expenditures before the election. The
law of -Nebraska on this subject pnly requires
thepublication of contributions and: expenditures
after the election, ffhis was the, law which, the
democratic .managers in 1504 in Nebraska, so
flagrantly violated by failing to return tho ro
cefpt of $15,000 from Mr. Thomas F. Ryan,
. "The most drastic law in this country-. on
the subject is that of New York-, which also .
makes the time for. publication after the election.
. "The proper object of a publicltylaw is -to
prevent the use of money- for bribery and other
improper purposes, in ejections-and. to enable- tho
law officers of tho government and the public,
to determine whether the -contributions mado.
wore, properly expended 'foe legitimate purposes .
. The requirement- that the 'names-and amounts,
of .tire persona contributing should, also b.e showa
is for the purpose, o enabling the- public-, aniL the .
prosecuting officers of tho government' to judge
whether subsequent official action 'has. been im
properly affected in favor of the contributors
by tho successful candidate. This can. all bo
accomplished by publication after the election.
The chief objection to the publication of cpn
tributions before tho election is that, it makes
certain that in tho heat of the controversy tho
motives of those who contribute to pay the
legitimate expenses of the -campaign will bo
misconstrued, perverted, and- misrepresented.
The candldates.in whose- behalf" the contributions
are mado will be charged, in a most unfair way
as being completely under the control of those
who make the contributions. It is entirely nat
ural and proper that men who aro able to con
tribute and who are deeply interested from patri
otic motives and from motives of a desire to con
tinue the general prosperity should contribute
to the party whose administration of governmen
tal, affairs is likely to bo in accord with their
views of proper government. It is not good
policy! to discourage thoso who desire to con
tribute to the legitimate purposes of the cam
paign from so contributing by exposing them to
tho bitter diatribes or unfair attacks or slander
ous condemnation of partisans in an electoral
fight. After the election is over and tho ex
penditures and contributions are published, the
temptation to misrepresent the motives of tho
donors will largely bo minimized, and-the public
may then arrive at a just conclusion with re
spect to the matter. Nothing could more for
cibly support this view than tho illustration fur
nished by the attacks now made on Mr. Hughes
in which he is charged. with being an agent and
creature of tho trusts and financial institutions
of Wall Street because among the contributors
to the fund expended in legitimate ways during
his election for governor were some wealthy
men prominent in Wall Street.
"There is no man in the country who has
demonstrated more completely his entire free
dom from corporate control than Governor
Hughes, by his administration .of state affairs;
and yet for partisan purposes and without the
' slightest evidence except tho contributions, Mr.
Bryan refers to him as being completely under
trust influence.
"A rigid law requiring tho publication in
detail of contributions and expenditures within
ten days after the election, so that the public
may know where the money came from, how
much came, how much was expended and for
what it was expended, is all that public policy
requires. The publication of such contributions
will make the successful candidate most careful
in deciding questions in which contributors may
subsequently have a personal interest, in order
to avoid 'any inference of improper influence
""thereby. Tho known publicity to be given to con
tributions after the election will greatly reduce
the probability that a contribution will be made
for the purpose of seeking privileges or favors
at tho hands of tho candidate and tends to se
cure practical purity of motive in the making
of such contributions.
"Mr. Bryan looks rather to the publication
of such contributions for platform purposes and
reference, than to the main purpose of a pub
licity law which is to securp the public against
bribery in election and the improper influencing
of official action-"
The Commoner;
2HR. BRYAN'S REPLY TO MR. TAFT
On Thursday evening, October 1, at Lin
coln, Neb., Mr. Bryan gavo out the following
statement:
I am surprised to find that Mr. Taft en
dorses tho president's views on tho subject of
publicity as to campaign contributions, but
since he holds these views, I am glad that ho
makes them known now. Wo now have pub
licity beforo tho election as to his opinion oven
if ho does not beliovo in publicity of contribu
tions until after- tho election. Ho fails to seo
the .difforenco between tho publication of con
tributions beforo election, nnd tho publication of
expenditures before-election. The publication of
expenditures is required to &how whether cor
rupt methods have been employed in tho elec
tion, and as tho expenditures continue up to
tho closo of tho polls, it would bo irapoEsiblo
tomako a complete publication until aftor tho
"election? tho main reason for tho publication,
of contributions bpforo tho election id to show
tho public tho source from which tho contribu
tions como in order that- tho public-may know
which party predatory interests-aro supporting.
lilverj' ona who knows-human1 nature knows .that
tho element, of gratitude must always be con
sidered in human, affairs: Ingratitudo has been,
described; as -a worsef sin: than revenge (or. in-
grat!tudo repays good- with' evil while revenge .
only repays ovij wltlr evil. Every disinterested
voter knows that largo contrioutions have been
used to secure mortgages upon officials. The
publication of contributions throws a great deal
moro light upon the influences at work in pol
itics than ,tho publication of expenditures, for
tho publication ot contributions. show3- to whom
tho party Is- indebted and to whom repayment
is-llkoly-to bo mado; while the publication of
expenditures shows .what has been paid out, and .
disbursements do- not create obligations that
affect' the course of tho administration.
Mr. Taft says that "the proper object of
a publicity law is to prevent tho use of money
for bribery and other improper purposes in
elections and to enable tho law oflltfers of tho
government and tho public to determine
whether tho contributions mado were properly
expended for legitimate purposes." And he
adds: "Tho requirement that tho names and
amounts of tho persons contributing should also
bo shown Is for tho purpose of enabling tho
public and tho prosecuting officers of the gov
ernment to jifdgo whether "subsequent? official
action has been Improperly affected in favor of
tho contributors by tho successful candidate."
This, lie says, Can all be accomplished by pub
lication after the election. Ho then proceeds to
indorse tho position taken by tho president, de
claring that "the chief objection to the publica
tion of contributions beforo the election Is that
it makes certain that in tho heat of- tho contro
versy the motives of those who contribute to
pay the legitimate expenses of tho campaign
will bo misconstrued, perverted and misrepre
sented." "Tho candidates," ho also Insists, "in whoso
behalf tho contributions aro mado will bo
charged in the most unfair way as boing com
pletely under tho control of those who make tho
contributions,"
Here he makes tho same charge that tho
president does, the astounding charge that the
voters are so liable to bo misled that the knowl
edge must be kept from them. I Insist that It
is an Insult to the Intelligence of the voter, and
it does little credit to Mr. Taft's judgment of
the men to whom ho Is making his appeal. Mr.
Roosevelt may have made his statement thought
lessly and on the impulse of the moment, but
Mr. Taft brings tho same indictment against tho
voters with deliberation and after ho has read
a criticism of tho president's views. Is it fair
to charge, therefore, that Mr. Taft is either ex
pecting to receive contributions which would
arouso just suspicion among an intelligent peo
ple, or contributions which, if known, would
arouse an unjust suspicion among a people too
ignorant to form a correct judgment upon the
facts. This Is an evasion which ho can neither
retract nor excuse. It can only be explained by
a consciousness that republican campaign meth
ods will not bear the light and that it would be
dangerous to bin party if tho public knew be
foro the election what ho promises to make
public after tho election.
His subsequent argument that tho publica
tion before election of the names and amounts
contributed would "discourage those who de
sire to contribute to the legitimate purposes of
tho campaign" by exposing . them to the bitter
diatribes or unfair attacks or slanderous con
demnation f partisans in An electoral flgbt"
ought to havo little woJght when It Is considered
that such publication will bo efficacious In dis
couraging those who now desire to contrlbuto
to illegitimate expenses and for tho purposo of
r,Mli!ng ofllcIaI ""dor obligations to them.
While publication after tho election may onnblo
us 'to Judgo whothor subsequent official aqllon
hns been Improperly affected In favor of tho
contributors by tho successful candidate," this
is of very small valuo compared with tho ben
efit to be derived from tho publication of con
tributions beforo election. Tho people havo a
right to form their own oplnton ns to tho In
fluences which aro at work. They do not need
a guardian to protect them from tho misuse of
tho knowledgo which Nicy may acquire, and
they ought not to bo required to employ do
tocllvcu to find out what tho- officials aro doing
aftor tho election. Mr. Taft knows that a groat
many matters como beforo executives and legis
lators whore it is difficult, If not impossible for
the average voter to investigate tho facts. 'Tho
people hove a right to know in- advance of- olec
tlon whether those with special interests to- look
aftor are- contributing sums larger than, public
spirit, patriotic motives- and general Interest
would explain. If, for instance, a candidate for
governor isJlkely to havo to pass upon railroad
legislation, the people havo a right to know
whether men largely interested In preventing
railroad' legislation have contributed libornllyto
his campaign fund. If a man aspires to an
offico In which, if elected, ho will havo to pass
upon anti-trust laws, it Is only right that tho
public should know to what extent tho tniBt
magnates are financing his campaign. And so
if 'innnn is a candidate for office which brings
him into official connection with tariff legisla
tion it is proper for the public to know whothor
ho will bo so obliged to tho beneIcfurJcH ot n
high- tariff as to- bo embarrassed when he at
tompta to protect? the consumer.-
Mr. Taft misrepresents what I havo said' In
regard to Mr. Hughes. I called attention to
some of tho contributions that wore made to
Mr. Hughes' fund, nnd in view of tho fact that
Mr. Hughes attacks the remedies without ad
vancing any remedies of his own, and In view
of tho furthor fact that this tostlmony was
quoted by the president agalrut mo I asked tho
president whether ho thought that these con
tributions by trust magnates would lesson or
increase tho weight of Mr. Hughes' testimony
qn thp subject of Jrusts it-will not dp for Mr.
Taft to put Mr, Hughes upon a pedestal -and
claim for him immunity from criticism. It is
not necessary for mo to pass -judgment upon
Mr. Hughes or upon what ho has dono in order
to pass judgment upon tho question under dis
cussion. He is only human and was ono of
"the allies" beforo the Chicago convention. Wo
assume that puhllc officials will be honest, and
yet wo require bonds of those who handle mon
ey, no matter of what character they may bo.
The law will not permit a judge, a juror or an
official to accept a gift, If tho gift is from one
who has an interest In the official action ot the
official, and in forbidding this the law does not
ask as to tho Character of the official. The law
Is based upon human nature and human exper
ience, and It Is not necessary to furnish specific
proof of special weakness in tho man who re
ceives the money, or to provo that his decision
was in any manner affected by tho gift. No
scales have yet been Invented for tho accurate
weighing of the reasons which enter into an
official's decision.
It is only fair, however, to assume that In
using Mr. Hughes' case as an argument, Mr.
Taft moans to say that he will not object to
contributions from trust magnates, railroad
magnates and tariff beneficiaries, no matter how
much those contributions, may be, even though
he may, if elected, bo compelled to pass upon
questions where their demands may be on tho
one side and the interests of the general public
on tho other. He must not complain if he finds
that many republicans of the rank and file will
differ from him on this subject, for tho average
man will judge aspirants for office by the rules
applied to average men. Common sense and
the universal judgment aro against Mr. Taft'a
position, and against the arguments which ho
advances In its support.
After giving out the above statement, Mr.
Bryan referred to Mr. Taft's statement that
Thomas P. Ryan contributed $15,000 to the
Nebraska campaign fund In 1904, and said;
"This has been denied, but I assume that he
has taken the statements of some of his repub
lican advisers without taking time to verify
those statements, Mr. Ryan did not contribute
Bjxy money to tho Nehraaka campaign fund. The
1
1!
il!
1 1
rl
ifjpiCl Hft'i'l ,-rcf
llitnV t f -rAwA'u1
- ...Vjmriifci.&r.ta'jtia. .jw--awaKMjhnttifcaMc
f gJiatfiU-r .bU &&, mniiAm.,.
