The Commoner.
MARCH 17, 1911
mont can take the son from tho mother; tho
husband from the wife, the father from tho
child, and stand them up in front of an enemy's
guns; but in an hour of danger it cannot lay
its hand upon the accumulated wealth and make
that wealth boar the expenses of the government
that protects it. Why? Because it puts tho
dollar above the man. (A member: "It is a'
shame') Mr. Bryan: -It fs a shame, but it
will not be long. In New York it came near
being ratified. The senate ratified it by a large
majority, but in the house it was defeated by
one vote, and that one vote was secured against
it by the promise that a contested seat would
be decided in his favor if a man would violate
tho promise of his platform and vote against it.
That is how near it came to passing in the state
of New York, where there is the largest con
centration of wealth, and if that amendment can
be ratified, as it will bo in the state of New
York, what other state can justify delay in
ratifying it? I believe it is only a question of
time when this almost universal sense of justice
among the people will find expression in this
amendment to the constitution, and when that
amendment becomes a port of our organic law,
then congress can levy and collect an income
tax, and neither one judge or nine judges can
build a legal bulwark around the fortunes of
the great and throw the burden of government
upon the backs of the struggling poor of this
country.
ELECTION OF SENATORS
Another reform that has grown is that which
has for its' object the election of senators by
direct vote of the people. I remember that this
fight began eighteen years ago. Not the fight
the fight began earlier than that. It was a
citizen of Tennessee who, if my information is
correct, was the first prominent public man to
suggest this amendment to the constitution.
Andrew Johnson, in one of his messages to
congress, suggested this amendment to the con
stitution, but that was away back yonder, and
very few paid any attention to it. And then
Mr. Weaver of Iowa introduced, ten or fifteen
years later, a. resolution proposing the amend
ment,, but. they did not pay much attention to It.
w JTorr-tdna. hundred and three years after the
adoption of our constitution the people .sub
mitted td the'present method of electing sena
tors without a protest that arose to the dignify
of a resolution passed by congress. But in 1892
tho house, by an almost unanimous vote passed
"a resolution proposing the necessary amend
ment and the senate pigeonholed it. The next
house did the same thing the senate refused
to report it. And since that time three other
houses have followed the example of the fifty
second congress and that resolution five times
has been presented to the senate, and five times
it' has not been reported. This year, for the
first time, it has been reported favorably in the
senate and there have been test votes that indi
cate a majority of the members of the senate
in favor of that resolution. That is the first
time in the eighteen years' fight when wo have
on record a majority apparently in favor of
the adoption of the resolution. And the man in
charge, Senator Borah, of Idaho, has given
notice that it will be pressed, and if possible,
a vote secured upon it before this ses
sion closes. It requires two-thirds of both
houses to submit an amendment to the
constitution. I do not know whether they have
two-thirds now or not. I think it is going to be
pretty close. But I don't feel so much con
cerned, because after this senate there is an
other, and if this senate does not submit it
Senator Lea will have the privilege of voting
lor it in the next senate. I think there is no
doubt that the next senate will submit it, and
then, after a struggle of twenty years wo will
see this amendment submitted to the states, and
state after state will ratify it and it will not be
long until the necessary three-fourths will have
gpoken and then the constitution will be
changed, and then the people will have the right
to put upon the ballot the name of the man who
Is to represent them in what ought to be the
highest legislative body in the' world. The gate
will be opened and remedial legislation will be
possible. And If, in the twenty years during
which this fight has been made, if in that twenty
years nothing else 'had been accomplished except
this change In this method of electing senators,
the result will justify all the effort expended.
In times past it has required war, bloodshed,
lives of thousands to Becuro a reform less im
portant than this, but wo are making progress,
wo are substituting agitation and parliamentary
reform for those reforms won upon the battle
field. During the last eighteen years the people
Lave been increasing their demand and making
it more urgent until two-thirds of tho states
of tho union havo demanded it and their voice
has at last reached tho senate.
NEARER THE PEOPLE
This Is an evidence that tho government is
being brought nearer the people and that tho
democratic idea of government, that representa
tives are to speak for tho people and say what
the people want said, that this Is the growing
doctrine in this Country.
Wo have also had growth in tho public senti
ment in tho matter of railroad regulations. I
can recollect how, twenty years ago, thoro wero
respectable people who resented tho idea that tho
voters, speaking through their legislatures,
should have any right of control over railroads.
Wo were told that people did not havo sehso
enough to deal with these intricate problems;
that they must leave these questions to those,
who, while they had plenty of sense, had a
pecuniary interest that made it impossible for
them to use their sense for anybody but them
selves. But sentiment grew and state after state
demanded regulation. I remember that for, ton
years, yes, for moro than ten years, tho United
States interstate commerce commission asked
for legislation enlarging the scope of that com
mission. But year after year the railroad lobby
in Washington was more potent than tho wishes
of the people who sent senators and repre
sentatives to congress, and year after year the
house and senate adjourned without doing any
thing. And I remember one day seeing a rail
road president, who had just been elected to
congress, coming and occupying his position there
under the privilege of the house and directing
a railroad fight on tho floor of the house. But
those days have gone, and today the people of
this country understand that there are no cor
porations created by law so big that they shall
not be regulated by law. Our people are'a Bible
reading people, and I think that they are pre
pared now to say that every corporation, rail
roads among others, ought to havo a motto
upon the wall, a Bible motto, "Remember Now
Thy Creator in the Days of Thy Youth."
NO TURNING BACK
This progress in the matter of railroad legis
lation is in the interest of the people and thore
will be no turning back of this reform. When
you once establish a truth it stands. Truth is
tho only omnipotent thing, and there is truth
back of tho demand Of the people that no. ficti
tious person called a' corporation shall be per
mitted to trample upon the God-made man, who
was placed here to carry out the will of his
Creator.
. I remember, a few years ago, it was thought
entirely proper for great corporations to con
tribute to campaign funds. As recently as four
teen years ago last fall quite largo contributions
were made.. Investigation showed that even in
surance companies became deeply 'interested in
politics, and some of them contributed as much
as fifty thousand dollars per year of money
that did not belong to the man who contributed
It money taken from the policy-holders, from
the widows and the orphans and it was "turned
into a campaign fund. But an awakened public
sentiment demanded that there should be no
more contributions, and we now have a law mak
ing it a real offense for any corporation to con
tribute to a national campaign fund. These
respectable men who stand high in business and
and in society,, and even in the church, who,
thought it was' not only perfectly proper, but
highly patriotic to use other people's money for
the advancement of their political views will
find punishment awaiting them If they exercise
now what they thought was their right.
BOTH FOR PUBLICITY
But tho nubile was not satisfied with the
passage of these laws. There was a demand
for publicity as to individual contributions, and
that demand grew until, in tho last campaign,
the two leading parties stood for publicity; one
party demanding publicity before the election,
and the other party demanding publicity after
the election, and when the election was over,
the house of representatives passed a bill pro
viding for publicity before and the senate passed
a bill providing for publicity afterwards, and the
house had to concede that point' to the senate
in order to got any kind of publicity. But we
have that much now, and I am rejoicing' that
there Is a public sentiment that is sufficient to
compel publicity even after tho election. Hav
ing secured that reform I believe the people will
go forward now to secure that reform in a larger
measure by providing that there shall be publi
cation before the election, as well as after, 'so
the voter may know who is taking a deep
financial interest- in the election of party or
candidato.
And on this subject I want to nay to you that
I beliovo that thoro Is progress In forrotlng
out corruption, I bollevo that publfc sentiment
today is stronger againBt corruption than It has
over been boforo, and I congratulate the senator
from this state, who prcsontod a minority report
protesting against corruption in tho election of
a United States senator. I think that Senator
Frazler represented tho awakened conscience of
tho American peoplo and I think ho compli
mented tho senate, too. Wo cannot toll yet
whether ho compllmontod tho senate moro
highly than it deserved when ho said a man, in
order to bo a senator, ought to havo a titlo
above suspicion. Wo can't toll yot what tho
vlow of tho scnato will be as to tho height
necessary for a man to reach before ho shall
bo a senator.
This fight against corruption is a' very im
portant fight, for wo havo no representative
government If tho representative is not really
tho choice of tho people.
ELECTION LAWS
I do not know what your election laws are,
and possibly it Is just as well I do not, because
I am careful when I do know not to say any
thing that might seem like criticising tho senti
ment that is strong In a body that invites mo.
I do not know what your laws aro, but it seoms
to mo that this is a very opportuno time for
you to amend your election laws, if they need
amendment. You have tt situation hero which I
think rather lends itself to the establishment
of things that aro just in a highor than party
sense. You aro so mixed up and divided
that possibly anything you can agree upon
would bo unquestionably accepted as just by
the people. (Applause.)
Possibly you may not havo so good a chance
again to combine all elements in favor of honesty
of elections. If a republican governor and a
legislature whose position I havo been unablo
to define (applause) if they can agred upon an
election law, I am euro that it would bo one
that would commend itself to the people. I say
I do not know what your election law may
be, but I know that sometimes the dominant
party in a state insists that the election board,
although nominally partisan, shall bo made up
of people who aro appointed by one party. Now
I am speaking as an individual. I havo no
party authority for what I say, and nobody needs
to believe mo unless he wants to, but my obser
vation Is that a partisan board, where all mom
bers are appointed by one side, is more or less
of a' fraud. And, while tho conscientious ap
pointing power may make it better In some cases
than in others, still it is too frequently the
case that tho representatives of tho minority
have been selected either because they havo be
trayed their party or are willing to do It under
proper persuasion. There Is only one way to
secure an honest election board, and that is to
make it not only representative of both parties
or all parties, but that the minority shall select
the people who represent it, and that they shall
not be under obligations to the majority for their
appointment upon the board.
PARTIES SHOULD CHOOSE
And I say here, in this democratic or republl-.
can or democratic-republican or republican
democratic state, what I would say in any state
that was democratic or republican, namely, that
we shall never build our election laws upon a
sound foundation until wo recognize human
nature to the extent of giving to the parties tho
choice of tho people who are to represent them
pn the board, and when, throughout this union,
in all of the states, republicans and democrats
alike shall insist that election boards shall be
composed of peoplo representing really, and not
simply ostensibly, the different parties, so that
fraud will be uncovered and never concealed
not until then will we have elections that will
bo' above suspicion, not until then will those
elected to office have tire respect officials are
entitled to when they are known to be the
choice of the people of their state.
BUt there are so many of these questions that
I must hasten on. I have spoken of the ten
dency toward popular government. I cannot
pass over the great victory 'that has already
been won for the doctrine of representative
government, the victory in the hdtfse of repre
sentatives. The first skirmish occurred some
thing like a year ago, and it was a fight won
by a union of members of two parties. The
democrats and Insurgent republicans insisted
that the committee on rules should he mad
larger.
That was a good move, but it was not the
most important part of it. They insisted that
4
fl
1
'1
lttk .Ht'll'J!lji
-A..sfi '
'