TT
The Commoner.
3
JANUARY 21, 1910
i?'
p
K
s
ion were sound. The bank invites deposits,
and it can only do so upon one theory, namely
that the deposits will be returned on demand.
It relies for its ciedlt largely upon the laws
made by the state and upon the regulations en
forced by law. It is certainly reasonable that
the bank, having drawn deposits into its vaults
through the presumption raised by the law,
ought to willingly submit to a law that compels
it to make this presumption good. While com
paratively few banks fail, still, as a matter of
fact, a bank, does not offer any absolute security
to the ordinary depositor, and to the mind of
the average man it will not appear unreason
able, unlawful or unconstitutional to compel a
bank to give security to its depositors. The
banks that oppose this law are not proposing
any other form of security; they are opposing
all propositions for additional security. It will
take an adverse decision of the court of last
resort to convince the plain, common man that
it is unjust or unfair to compel the bank to
protect its depositors.
The second reason given by the judge for his
decision is as weak as the first. The word
"bank" has come to have a technical meaning.
It suggests to the depositor that his money is
protected by laws requiring inspection, and a
certain legal reserve, besides imposing liability
upon stockholders. To say that a man can call
himself a banker and thus take advantage of
the name without submitting to the conditions
imposed by the law is to obliterate the line be
tween fraud and fair dealing.
The right to secure deposits without giving
security for them is not an inalienable, right. It
is not even a prescriptive right, and it is hard
to believe that the supreme court will endorse
such a proposition and give to it the sanction
of law. If the arguments advanced in the court
above are no more conclusive than the argu
ments upon which Judge Munger's decision is
based, the friends of the guarntee law have
reason to hope that the law will yet be sustained.
NEWSPAPER OPINION
f As a rule the newspapers of the country agree
that it was unfortunate for Mr. Taft that Mr.
Pinchot wrote the letter to Senator Dolliver.
Many of them say that the letter was a plain
bid for a discharge and out of self respect the
president had nothing else to do than to remove
the chief forester. Some newspapers taking this
view, however, say that Mr. Taft should have
Buspended Ballinger during tire investigation.
Most of the newspapers, however, distinctly take
sides with Pinchot, declaring that his has been
a' fight against special interests and that the
president has injured his administration beyond
repair by adhering to Ballinger.
The Denver News, a democratic paper, edited
by former Senator Patterson, appears not to
have great admiration for Mr. Pinchot. The
News not only approves Pinchot's discharge but
displays some glee over it and intimates that
the chief forester is considerable of a fakir.
The Chicago Inter-Ocean, republican, says
the republican party has become bewildered and
adds: "We all know what the Roosevelt idea
is but what's the Taft idea? Nobody knows."
The Chicago Tribune shows plainly that it is
not pleased with Mr. Taft, saying: "The sea of
republican politics has become a mad, seething,
swirling whirlpool."
The Indianapolis News, republican, says: "The
president can not realize too soon that the best
friends he has in congress are the insurgents
and the progressives that Is, if his policies aTe
what they are supposed to be and ought to be.
Of course if he has abandoned reform which,
no one believes he must look forfriends among
the reactionaries."
The Chicago News, republican, says that it is
now incumbent upon the administration to show
that Pinchot, Glavis and their associates are not
public spirited men.
The Des Moines (la.) Register and Leader,
republican, practically washes its hands of its
late candidate for the presidency. It says: "The
president himself has shifted his position on
every Important question, not only once but
several times in the one year of his administra
tion." The New York World calls upon Mr. Taft to
eay what he thinks of Governor Hughes' objec
tion to the income tax. The World says: "It
Governor Hughes' arguments go unanswered
by Mr. Taft the amendment is in grave danger
of rejection and the administration's reputation
for good faith will suffer accordingly." The
World approves Mr. Taft's suggestions for
amendment to the interstate commerce law, but
condemns his national incorporation plan.
The New York Times denounces national in
corporation and says that it will result in a fed
eral shelter "under which the trusts would bo
allowed to continue and perpetuate those re
straints of trade in the legal sense of which
they are now guilty under the strict interpreta
tion of the anti-trust act."
The Philadelphia North American, republican,
referring to the president's railroad recommend
ation, says: "We hope that President Taft will
obtain legislation on this subject even better than
he recommends. And none will be better pleased
than himself if such shbuld be the outcome. But
that is only our hope. Our fear is greater. For
Cannon and Aldrich are In congress solely to
serve the interests which the president desires
to restrict. And if his alliance with them per
sists, they will be the framers of legislation that
will prevent every one of his good recommenda
tions that they do not reject."
Referring to the patronage threat, the St.
Louis Post-Dispatch says: "Can the republican
congressmen submit to such dictation? If they
do, what will their constituents think of them?
Does tne president fully understand the import
jof his statement? It is incredible."
The Springfield (Mass.) Republican says:
"The announcement that insurgent congressmen
are to be discriminated against by the adminis
tration in the distribution of patronage is la
mentable if it is not erroneous. It is to be hoped
that an error has crept into the news of the day.
Tho president will never suppress what is known
as insurgency in the republican party by ped
dling postmasterships contrary to the desires of
unruly representatives."
Concerning the national incorporation plan,
the Atlanta (Ga.) Journal says that the plan
would be "essentially adverse to the principlo
in which the American government originated
that of a state's right to control its local affairs.
The Providence (R. I.) Journal says that the
scheme is "an entering wedge of grave impor
tance." The Chicago Inter Ocean says: "Think, if
you can, of anything that would be left under a
-federal incorporation act for tho American people
to do except err in public: 'O king, live for
ever!' and mourn in private for their bygone
liberties!"
The Boston Herald insists that the control of
business within the states must still remain with
in the province of state government.
"JUST REPUBLICAN"
John L. Wilson of Titusville, Pa., has written
to the editor of the Philadelphia North Ameri
can this interesting letter:
"To the Editor of the North American: Re
cently in your columns appeared an extract from
The Commoner, which declared the North Amer
ican to be 'a simple-minded republican sheet.'
That the latter part of the accusation is true,
is very apparent, but there is no evidence as to
its simplicity or ignorance, and because of this
its course is more vulnerable to criticism.
"The North American seems to possess the
idea that its readers are simple minded. Penn
sylvania is the keystone of the republican arch.
The Vares, McNichols, the ruling powers in the
"legislature, Penrose, Oliver, State Chairman An
drews and every part of tho corrupt grafting
gang of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania are allies
of the regular republican party.
"In a recent open editorial to President Taf,t,
you reminded him that it took two men and
two policies to defeat Bryan: Tho Roosevelt
policies in tho west. These policies wore stolen
from democratic platforms and tho financial
policies of tho cast.
"Tho North American was strident in Its sup
port of Taft, but not simple minded enough to
support openly either of these policies as it now
divides them. You are not as simplo as your
readers might infer when, in tho past, you tried
to excuse Roosevelt for his part in tho stool
merger. No, you woro just republican. You
were not simplo when you professod fear that
Aldrich and Cannon would betray, cajole and
hurt tho 'judicial-minded' Taft in tariff legisla
tion. When tho new. monstrosity was signed,
and when Taft publicly praised tho two North
American bogie men and tho bill as well, you
still have hope for him and tho conservation pol
icy, trust-busting, financial policy for tho people
as against Wall Street, and so forth.
"This is not simple; it Is republican. It Is
only when a man, or set of men, endeavord to
publish a democratic newspaper in a state over
whelmingly republican that the charge of
simplo mindednecs will stand, and tho only way
to catch the truly simplo minded is to shout
reform and support the republican national
ticket. JOHN L. WILSON.
"Titusville, Pa., January 10."
THE PARENT OP ALL
Judge Lindsay, In the third Installment of
"Beast and Jungle," printed In Everybody's
Magazine, says:
"I can not conclude this chapter without add
ing the final lesson I learned in our work with
the children the lesson that leads me back
again into the quarrel with tho beast. It is
this; criminals are born and criminals are bred,
but the conditions of which they are born and
under which they are bred in Denver are tho
same conditions that debauch our legislature,
our judiciary, our press, our business life, and
our poor. I found no 'problem of tho children'
that was not also tho problem of their parents.
The young bud was blighted by the same cor
ruption that infected tho twig, killed tho branch
and ate out the heart of the trunk. The. rule
of tho plutocracy in . Denver was tho cause of
three-quarters of the crime In Denver. The de
pendent and delinquent children who camo Into
my court came almost wholly from the homes
of dependent and delinquent parents who were
made such by the hopeless economic conditions
of their lives; and those conditions wore made
hopeless by the remorseless tyranny of
wealthy men who used their lawless power to
enslave and brutalize and kill their workmen.
Legislatures, corrupted by corporate wealth, re
fused to pass tho eight-hour law that would give
tho child's homo a parent ablo to fulfill his
parental duties refused to pass the employer's
liability law that would save tho widows from
starvation and the children from tho streets
refused to pass even a three-fourths jury law
that would allow the poor victim of corporate
greed to obtain a little pittance of justice in
tho courts. Tho saloons, protected by the po
litical power of the corporations, debauched tho
parents and destroyed the homes of our chil
dren, and the protected gambler hunted and
preyed with the protected saloon. I could not
do my duty toward the children without attack
ing the conditions that deformed tho lives of tho
children. And when I tried to do this as you
shall see tho beast replied: 'Then you shall
not be allowed to save even the little children!' "
Voters of the Sixth Missouri District,
Go to the Polls on February 1
The special election in the Sixth Missouri
congressional district to choose a successor in
congress to tho late David DeArmond, will 'take
place February 1. C. C. Dickinson of Clinton,
Mo., formerly a state senator, is the democratic
nominee. Mr. Dickinson comes highly recom
mended by those who know him intimately. His
publlb record is clean and his private life above
reproach,
Tho voters of the Sixth Missouri district
ought to go to the polls in full force and give
Mr. Dickinson that large majority to which
his good character and principles entitle him.
His opponent is not in sympathy with reform
measures and, if elected, may fairly be expected
to become a supporter of Cannon and Can-nonlsm.
Mr. Dickinson, unlike his opponent, is willing
to tell the people where ho stands on all public
questions. Unlike his opponent he may bo de
pended upon to labor for the public Interests.
In a letter recently written to Tho Commoner,
Mr. Dickinson says: "I concur with Hon. Wil
liam J. Bryan in his views upon the tariff, and
especially do I agree with him that a platform
is a' pledge, to be kept and not violated, and
that a consistent regard for party pledges Is
tho safest rule. I favor a law revising the
tariff downward in the interest of the west and
the masses everywhere. Cannonism must end
and a fair opportunity given for the enactment
of just laws. The republican party should go
out of power, and the trend toward centraliza
tion cease."
