DECEMBER- 22, 1911.
A Weak
The Commoner.
Presidential Candidate an Injury
to the Party
In its issue of Friday, December 8th, the
Cincinnati 'Enquirer printed, under the head
line, "A Weak Presidential Candidate an In
jury to "the Party," the following editorial:
When the democratic voters begin their work
lor the campaign of 1912 they should bear in
mind . that it is not alone the presidency, the
executive branch of the federal government,
they should contend for, but that if they nomi
nate a candidate popular throughout the United
States they vill be able to control both branches
of congress and many of the states through the
strength of their presidential candidate.
Democratic candidates in townships, citie3,
counties, .congressional districts and states, will,
one and all, be injured if the democratic na
tional convention should nominate a candidate
for president who has not the complete confi-
dence of the voters in his devotion to their
interests'.
The campaign of 1912 it would now appear
will be largely based upon the enforcement of
the Sherman anti-trust law and its application
to monopolies and combines, and no man who
'in office was lax in executing it can expect to
be the candidate of the democratic party, how
ever much, out of office, he proclaims his attach
ment to the provisions of the statute.
The voters of today speedily become familiar
with the records of candidates. They discuss
them, analyze them, quickly appreciate their
importance and make application at the polls.
The democracy desires no candidate who, if
nominated, from start to finish will bo upon the
defensive through official failure to strenuously
enforce the Sherman anti-trust law.
That law has been upon the statute books
for twonty-one years.
It was put there to protect the interests of
the masses of the people, and the officials of
the department of justice were the persons
,directly in charge of its enforcement.
Is there a democratic congressman from the
.state of Ohio who believes ho can hold hla seat
in the next congress if the dembcratic candi
date , for president should be one who, while
in federal office charged with enforcement of
the Sherman anti-trust law, failed to make a
record of active work against violators of that
law?
Do they not know that the voters will take
no chances with any candidate who neglected
or failed to use that statute against all violators
or offenders?
Every democrat in the states of the union,
especially every man who expects to be a can
didate of the party for any office to be voted
'upon in 1912, must insist upon a democratic
'candidate for president whose actions and words
have ever been in accord, whose associations
are free from all suspicion that he will be con
' trolled by objectionable interests, and whose life
of fidelity to the organization and the candi
dates of the national party will guarantee to
'him the full party support.
The democratic party has many leaders who
have no flaws in their steadfast devotion to
party candidates, who have no records of errors
of omission or commission, men whose candi
' dacy would re-enforce our candidates for office
from the lowest to the highest positions, and
it is such a candidate that should be named
when the national convention assembles.
' ' -
PROGRESSIVE, ANYHOW
Wicliita (Kan.) -Beacon: Enemies of Wood
row WilBon are in high glee because the things
he now says are different from some things ho
wrote in 1893. Good Lord! can't a man grow
-in eighteen years? Why, its another century
now and conditions are vastly changed.
What would you have a man accumulate in
his brain between the ages of thirty-seven and
fifty-five ideas, experience and widened con
victions, or just moss?
" GET INTO POLITICS
The following from the Richmond Virginian
la applicable to all sections of the country:
. ; "Wo heartily indorse the following articles
'Which we have clipped from the editorial
columns of the Greenville Piedmont:
" 'A few days since the Manufacturers' Record
' r 'Fof many years the Manufacturers' Record
has urged' the south to cease to make politics
Its business, and, instead, to make business its
politics.' "
. "The Columbia Stato replies:
" 'The advice of the Manufacturers' Record
was long ago taken to the extent that the ablest
men of the south became so engrossed in busi
ness that the political field was given over, in
the main, to second-raters.'
"The Piedmont adds this comment:
" 'The Stato is correct. What South Carolina
most needs now is for some men to take enough
time from their business to study the political
situation. The commonwealth would bo much
better off.'
"We join with the Piedmont and the Stato
in the belief that the one thing that can savo
the political situation and result in permanent
purity and patriotism in politics is the intelli
gent and persistent activity of citizens in tho
game. When tho average good citizen Is In
different and inactive, by that very condition
Is created the opportunity of the professional
politician and so do corruption in politics and
graft in administration find their origin.
"Get in the game. When the citizenship
generally does get in tho game it will bo clean
and fair and the city and state and nation will
discover the difference."
Pass it along.
streot has dono business with tho republican
party for many yoars and it naturally vlowa
now associations with distrust. It prefers an
old customer, and Mr. Roosovolt Is Its logical
choice for president. Ho can fool tho western
radicals while Insuring to big buslnosa tho roally
important stakes for which It is playing.
Domocrats in congress and out of congross
can not ignore this situation. Thoy aro no
. longor dealing with a frank, good-naturod,
tactless Taft. Thoy aro dealing with tho moat
daring, audacious and practical political mani
pulator of his generation. Thoy must proparo
to beat Roosovelt.
- WHO CAN BEAT ROOSEVELT
Editorial in New York World: Who is tho
best man to beat Roosevelt and a third term
in 1912?
This is the question the democrats of tho
country must face, and they might as well meet
it first as last. They have nothing to gain and
much to lose by shutting their eyes to tho facts
that confront them.
We do not say that Mr. Roosevelt's nomina
. tlon next year is inevitable, but it is probable.
Luck is running with him and tho advantago
' of position is on his side,, thanks, to, Taft's mis
takes and Roosevelt's adroit disloyalty.
Mr. Taft is politically dead, and there is little
hope of a resurrection. He has succeeded in
alienating both radicals and conservatives, both
progressives and stand-patters. His candidacy
is without popular support and is sustained
largely by tho power of federal patronage.
Scarcely one republican In five believes that
the president can bo re-elected unless democratic
folly throws away the election. The president
himself is doubtful.
Opposing Mr. Taft for the nomination is Sena
tor La Follette, the most aggressive of the west
ern insurgents; but outside of a comparatively
small section of the. country tho Wisconsin sena
, tor makes no convincing appeal to tho rank and
file of the party. The east frankly distrusts
him, and the great debatable states of tho
middle west, like Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Mis
souri, display no enthusiasm for him.
If tho Issue of the nomination were to lio
between Taft and La Follette, Taft would un
questionably win; but here Theodore Roosevelt
enters the field. He still retains a largo meas
ure of his strength with the western Insurgents.
Most of the federal office-holders, who are tho
backbone of the Taft machino, are Roosevelt
appointees as well, eager and anxious to hold
their position. To them Taft's nomination
means defeat and the loss of their jobs. Roose
velt is at least a fighting chance.
Big business is against Taft, but Roosevelt
offers it a haven and a refuge, with the Whit
house doors wide open. His attack upon tho
Sherman law in last week's Outlook is Wall
street's attack. He offers big business the kind
of federal "supervision" that it is begging for,
but chiefly he offers tho destruction of the
Sherman anti-trust law. It is to the destruc
tion of tho Sherman act that Wall street Is
concentrating all its political power. If big
business could be sure that his election would
mean the repeal or amendment of that statute,
all of Its money and influence and .authority
would be Instantly arrayed on tho side of his
candidacy. In any event Wall street would
accept him rather than Taft or La Follette. It
has bargained with him la the past and knows
Sow to bargain with him in tho future.
Big business might consider a hidebound con
servative democrat to be more desirable than
Taft or La Follette or Roosevelt, but there Is
small chance of its obtaining such a candidate
and leas chance of electing him. Besides, Wall
BALLOT ON PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCES
Editorial in Washington (D. C.) Post: A
telegram from Clovoland, O., datod Dacombcr
4, states that tho results of a ballot on presi
dential preferences, taken by a Clovoland nown
papor and a Toledo nowspapor jointly, show
these views on tho part of democratic voters of
Ohio who Indicated preferences:
Mr. Bryan received 39 per cont of tho wholo
number of votes, Governor Harmon 28 por
cont, and Governor Wilson 23 por cont, with
tho other 9 per cent scattered between Speaker
Clark, Representative Underwood, nnd others.
This would Indicate that In tho stato of Ohio's
democratic camp no ono commands a nialority
of tho preferences -of tho voters as yet, and
what Is true of Ohio seems true of tho United
States.
It is plainly In ovidonco that democratic senti
ment is concentrated on no ono man or ovon
upon any two or threo of tho gentlemen whoso
names have been proposed for tho democratic
nomination for tho ofllco of chlof magistrate of
tho republic.
Tho coming six months may bring somo
leader's name to tho front in such a mannor as
will fix upon him tho attention of tho peoplo of
the union and give him a popularity that will
demand his nomination.
Tho mombors of tho congress, both those of
the senate and those of the houso, have, through
this present session, a great advantago in this
contest over persons that aro not so much In
the limelight of public notice.
At this writing tho democratic candidacy Is
in no man's keeping or control, but it Is per
fectly apparent that tho man who will be nomi
nated must be in full accord with tho views of
the masses of tho peoplo if ho would stand any
chanco for election. . ..
Tho campaign of 1904 gavo sufficient data
upon the impossibility of polling a full demo
cratic vote, If the electors of tho party aro not
enthused with the candidate, or pleased with
tho platform or tho candidate's interpretation
of it.
Situated as Ohio Is, In tho heart of tho coun
try, acted upon by sentiment of the east as well
as that of tho west and south, experienced In
political warfare as the voters of that stato aro
this tabulation of preferences carries with it
mofo than ordinary information to political
observers.
It Is evident that state pride has played no
part in tho voting.
GOVERNOR HARMON AND TOM JOHNSON
Editorial In Dubuque (Iowa) Telegraph
Herald: Supporters of Governor Harmon, of
Ohio, for tho democratic presidential nomina
tion, seeking to commend him to progressive
democrats, assert that Tom L. Johnson was his
warm supporter and that they worked together
in Ohio.
Perhaps no man In America is bettor quali
fied to substantiate this statement, if it is true,
and refute it if it is false, than Louis F. Post,
editor of "The Public," Chicago, who was John
ion's political confidant nnd friend. A corres
pondent in Nevada having apprised Mr. Post
that "some of our democratic democrats out
hero place Harmon in tho progressive column,"
and that tho correspondent had received a
pamphlet "which makes It appear that the pro
gressives of Cleveland Indorse Governor Har
mon," Mr. Post replied:
"Tom L. Johnson did understand Governor
Harmon's position; but ho was: aot satisfied
with It. There aro probably few men of presi
dential size with whom Tom L. Johnson would
have been less satisfied for the democratic can
didate than with Mr. Harmon. Harmon is a
reactionary, and has been such throughout the
whole period of the struggle between democ
racy and plutocracy within the, democratic
party. It Is not merely that he opposed Bryan
in 1896. Many democratic democrats did that,
npon the erroneous supposition that they were
m
Ml
111
HI
n
i
.
i
,!ij
I
91
4
.1
piH.p.aHUWTir.T-J
