Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (July 7, 1911)
WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR
VOL. 11, NO. 26
Lincoln, Nebraska, July 7, 1911
Whole Number 546
Badly Mixed Organ
i The ;New York. World which rushes to the de
fense of the supreme court decision in the
Standard Oil case prints a remarkable editorial
under the headline: "Mr. Bryan and the Su
preme court." The World says: "Once more
Mr. Bryan, has declared his distrust of the su
preme court and his disapproval of the decisions
in the Standard Oil and tobacco cases. 'We
may as well recognize he says, 'that we now
have no criminal law against the trusts.' He
. adds that if the justices of the Supreme court
are to be permitted to 'legislate' they should be
." made elective for fixed terms and not be ap
pointed for life.
"The cause of all this disapproval and de
nunciation is the decision of the court that the
statute must be construed reasonably. Mr.
Bryan says the 'reasonableness of the restraint'
is a mere matter of opinion. He asks: 'In the
light of this decision who is likely to be con
victed of a criminal violation of the anti-trust
. "All statutes must be construed reasonably.
Lord Coke said the common law of England is
like a stool that rests on three legs the leg
of precedent, the leg of justice and the leg of
reason. Did Mr. Bryan ever hear of a court
of any eminence that did not give ear to reason
in deciding any case before it? Did he ever
hear of a criminal case in which the jury was
not instructed to give the, prisoner the benefit
of any reasonable doubt?
. " "Nothing in the decision of the court can be
"- rightly construed, as invalidating the act as
"- --a criminal statute. In fact, the reasonable-con-
. struction of it strengthens it in that respect.
No criminal statute that Is unreasonable could
be enforced under our constitution."
The World has become badly mixed in its
efforts to support a false position. It asks:
"Did Mr. Bryan ever hear of a court of any
eminence that did not give ear to reason in
. deciding any case before it? Did he ever hear
of a criminal case in which the jury waB not
instructed to give the prisoner the benefit of
any reasonable doubt?"
No. But the court gave ear to reason with
respect to the evidence rather than with respect
to the law and the jury was instructed to give
the prisoner the benefit of any reasonable doubt
as to the guilt of the accused in accordance
with the explicit language of the law rather
than "reasonable doubt" as to the "reasonable"
violation of that law.
In other words: Did the editor of the New
York World ever hear of a court, high or low,
eminent or obscure, that would give ear to the
plea that the embezzlement charged against a
particular defendant was "reasonable" embezzle
ment? Did the editor of the World ever hear
of a criminal case in which the jury was in
structed to consider whether the burglary
charge was "reasonable" burglary?
BADLY MIXED ORGAN
WHO OWNS IT?
"SHARPENING THE SCYTHE"
SENATOR OLLIE JAMES
WHY FREE WOOL IS IMPORTANT AT
THIS TIME PINLY H. GRAY'S
ABSOLUTE POWER FOR MONEY TRUST
IN ALDRICH CURRENCY SCHEME
A REPUBLICAN NEWSPAPER ON
TAKING OVER THE EXPRESS
WHERE THE RANK AND FILE STAND
MUST NOT ATTACK PRIVILEGE
LETTERS TO CONGRESSMEN
WHETHER COMMON OR NOT
NEWS OF THE WEEK
SHARPENING THE SCYTHE"
Senator Gl&rk of Wyoming writes tho follow
"You are turning tho grindstone to sharpen
the scythe that will put the hide of protection
on tho fenco all over this country. You aro
opening the tent and tho camel's head will bo
In, and It will not be very long beforo the camel
will be In and you will be out, my republican
"I do not wonder that our democratic friends
are enthusiastically and almost unanimously in
favor of this pact. They have not been able to
do for fifty years what we are going to do horo
in thirty days. Wo are doing their work for
them. We aro wiping protection from the stat
ute books. We are using the club that will kill
our protected interests. We are doing It our
selves, and It is no wonder they feel pleasant
and are agreeable to join In the operation."
Senator Clark Is right; tho ratification of tho
reciprocity agreement will "sharpen tho
scythe" (the metaphor is a little mixed but the
meaning is clear.) It is the beginning of the
end of protection and that is why no democrat
should oppose it but Its defeat also would
sharpen the scythe. In fact, the scythe seems
likely to be sharpened no matter which way tho
vote goes. The republican party is DIVIDED
on the tariff and that division can not be healed.
The democratic party has only to stand firm
and it will win. But at this time when so many
republicans are sharpening scythes to use on
protection it is a mighty poor time for demo
crats to become tainted with protection.
PROTECTION IS DOOMED and those demo
crats who attach themselves to it will go down
with it. "ProtelStioTiwlswrohwgbutwe wnnt-otir"
share" will be found as unpopular as it is
"THE HEART IS SOUND"
United States Senate, Washington, D. C,
June 17, 1911. Editor The Commoner: I
congratulate you on your editorial answering
the protectionist democrats, who are charging
Mr. Bryan with an attempt at dictation. Your
reply is an overwhelming answer.
In the democratic party, there aro protec
tionists and corruptlonists, for that matter
who will violently abuse Mr. Bryan and those
who stand with him; but what you say Is
absolutely true. Tho heart of the democratic
party is sound, and the rank and file are true,
and they comprise the very great body of tho
democracy, which is now marching forward to
a splendid victory.
Nearly half of tho republican party is now
in sympathy with true democracy, and if tho
leaders of our party appreciate and move for
ward on the lines of genuine democracy, guided
by the general welfare and opposing selfishness
and special privilege, the democrats will assume
control of the nation and retain it as long as
they are true to these principles. Yours very
truly, ROBERT L. OWEN.
OLLIE JAMES SENATOR
The withdrawal of Senator Pr.ynter from the
senatorial race left Congressman Ollie Jame3
victor without a contest. Tho Commoner con
gratulates James. He deserves the place. He
has brains, conscience and courage. He can
not be fooled; he can not be bribed and he can
not be frightened. He is just the kind of a man
needed in the senate to oppose the schemes of
the undemocratic democrats who have been
robbing the party of its vitality in the senate.
James came Into national prominence in 1896
and has grown ever since. The democratic party
of the nation can afford to run up the flag and
celebrate for several days when James enters
the senate. Here's to Senator James strength
to his arm.
Senator Paynter is a follower of Senator
Bailey; he voted for Lorimer; ho was a candi
date for re-election. He retired from the race
before the primary. Next!
"Who Owns It?"
Harper's Weekly edited, as many people know,
by Mr. Gcorgo Harvey, severely criticizes Mr.
Bryan for his attitudo on free wool. Tho public
would bo better able to understand this criti
cism If they could obtain accurato informatloa
as to tho ownership of Harper's Weekly.
That publication has habitually attacked Mr.
Bryan, the reason being that tho publication has
been under tho control of special Interests whose
political plans Mr. Bryan has earnestly sought
In the same Issue In which Mr. Bryan Is at
tacked Harper's Weekly approves tho tobacco
trust decision and denies that the supremo court
undertook to road tho word "reasonable" into
In the same Issue Harper's Weekly seeks to
justify tho gobbling up by tho steel trust of
tho Tennesseo Coal and Iron company.
In the same issue Harper's Weekly approves
tho Gary-of-Stecl-trust fame suggestion for
In the same issuo Harper's Weo.kly favors
the regulation rather than destruction of tho
In tho same Issue Harper's Weekly pokes fun
at Justice Harlan for his dissenting opinion in
the oil trust case.
Of course Mr. Bryan has been unable to win
tho approval of Harper's Weekly.
But who owns Harper's Weekly? That's tho
question and it is plain that the gentleman who
poses as the editor of Harper's Weekly does not
dare to have the real truth told about the
ownership of his publication. ,. ,
Tho editor of the Houston Post Is mad. That's
very evident. The editor of tho Memphis
News-Scimltar Is responsible for it. Tho Post
'Our esteemed and honored contem
porary, the Memphis News-Scimitar, observes:
'The Houston Post has dug such a chasm be
tween itself and Mr. Bryan that it is liable to
tumble in any day and never bo heard of after
ward.' It is unnecessary to say more than this:
Tho Houston Post was here long before any
body outside of a small town had heard of Mr.
Bryan. It expects to bo hero long after men
much older and just as famous as Mr. Bryan
are dead and forgotten. We trust that our
Memphis friend will Interpret this to mean that
the Houston Post brought its knitting with it
when it came and is prepared to stay quito
Of course the Post "brought its knitting with
it" and it has been knitting away day after day
and year after year and it will continue to knit
for years and years to come. The special In
terests served so faithfully by the Post need
the services of that great newspaper now more
than at any other time in all of the Post's
Many democrats believe that a 20 per
cent duty Is yet necessary on wool in order
that tho necessary $15,000,000 revenue
may be derived for the benefit of tho
government. But those same peoplo
forget that raw silk and raw rubber are
admitted absolutely free to this country,
that they are rather luxuries and that
a 20 per cent duty on those two Imports
would more than make up for the
revenue loss should wool be put on the
free list. More people use wool than use
silk and rubber, and moro people would
be benefited by putting wool on the free
list while the rich would pay for the silk
and rubber. Why the cry? Paplllion
. JMtt f ?jL .
Powered by Open ONI