Tf t wm'f-'-'
-n -w ni"yy nr'y - 'l?,TSrww5P"iK'',el'Bri??W'
"TWjir . n luininpi..'
The Commoner.
WILLIAM J.- BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR
A.
VOL. 12, NO. 2
Lincoln, Nebraska, January 19 1912
Whole Number 574
Money Trust at Work
The Wall Street financiers are attempting to terrorize a democratic congress
in order to prevent an investigation. Some of the democratic members are
already working and expressing fear that an investigation will cause a panic.
What must be the rottenness if publicity will disturb business. The party i3
fortunate in having a courageous man like Robert L. Henry at the head of the
committee on rules. Strength to his arm. If he has difficulty in investigating
Wall Street he ought at least be able to smoke out the Wall Street democrats in
congress and enable their constituents to brand them. Turn on the light!
A Guffeyite National Committee
tr0n another pago -yill be found a report of the.
vote by which"1 Mr. Guffey of Pennsylvania was
given a place on the democratic national com
mittee. Mr. Bryan represented Nebraska At
tho committee meeting, holding" the proxy of
Dr. P. L. Hall. There were two contests, ono
from Tennessee, the other from Pennsylvania.
The Tennessee contest was decided in favor of
Mountcastle, the sitting member, without a roll
'call; and, in passing, it may be added that in
judging the action of Mr. Mountcastle and Sena
tor Lea, who held a proxy, in voting with the
Gjuffeyites, weight must be given to the fact
that the unseating of Guffey might have been
used as a precedent for unseating Mountcastle.
Neither of them could have any possible sym
pathy with Mr. Guffey or his methods.
When Alabama was" reached on roll call tho
secretary announced that Mr. Weatherly had
been selected by the democratic state committee
of Alabama to fill the vacancy caused by the
death of Mr. Tomlinson. Mr. Bryan moved that
the credentials be accepted and' that Mr.
CONTENTS
t.
MONEY TRUST AT WORK
A GUFFEYITE NATIONAL COMMITTEE
MR. BRYAN'S SPEECHES AT WASH
INGTON THE THIRD TERM
SENATOR HITCHCOCK'S SPEECH ON
THE ARBITRATION TREATIES
FALSE ECONOMY ,
"GATHER IN THE SCHOOL HOUSES"
THE SITUATION IN OHIO
MR. CARNEGIE'S TESTIMONY
HARMON'S RECORD THE DISBARMENT
OF THATCHER
HOME DEPARTMENT
WHETHER COMMON OR NOT
A PICTURE OF BROTHERHOOD
MR. BRYAN IN NORTH CAROLINA
NEWS OF THE WEEK
WASHINGTON NEWS
Weatherly bo declared a member. A point of
order was raised that no motion was necessary
because a resolution adopted at Denver gave
the state committee the power to fill vacancies.
The. chairman sustained the point. Mr. Bryan,
seeing that the point was raised as a part of
the Guffeyite program, appealed from the do
cision of the chair and insisted that while the
state committee had, and very wisely, too, been
given the power to fill vacancies the national
committee must take some affirmative action
in passing upon the credentials before the one
selected became a member, citing the case of
Senator Lorimer, whose right' to sit in the
senate is being investigated, although the state
of Illinois is not contesting his title to a Beat.
The committee, however, sustained the chair by
a vote of 33 to IS.
The reader can decide the merits of the case
for himself. Mr. Bryan regards the decision
as absurd and believes that it will be reversed
as soon as Mr. Guffey's retirement makes it
possible to consider the subject on its merits.
When the Pennsylvania contest was reached
the parties were given a half hour each to pro
Bent their respective sides. Mr. Palmer gave
the history of the contest. At the Denver'coii
ventlon Mr. Kerr was made national committee
man, as a result of the throwing out of a num
ber of Guffey delegates. After Mr. Kerr's death
the state committee, a Guffey organization,
selected Mr. Guffey to fill the vacancy and the
credentials were forwarded to the national com
mittee. No meeting had been held since then"
and the credentials had not been passed upon
by the committee, although the secretary had
entered Mr. Guffey's name on the roll. Later an
election was held in Pennsylvania and the
Guffey ticket polled 129,000 votes as against
nearly 400,000 for Mr. Berry, a democrat who
ran on an independent ticket put up by demo
crats in the belief that the Guffey ticket was
nominated and the campaign conducted in the
interest of the republican machine. The demo
crats of Pennsylvania were so indignant at the
conduct of Mr. Guffey and the state committee
the democratic vote having been reduced from
more than 400,000 in 1908 to 129,000 in 1910
that a movement began to reorganize the party.
As a result the state committee tho very com
mittee that selected Mr. Guffey to succeed Mr.
Kerr removed its chairman and rescinded its
action in selecting Mr. Guffey as national com
mitteeman. Tho reorganization represents
about two-thirds of the committee and is in
dorsed by all the democratic congressmen of
Pennsylvania, thirty-seven out of forty-five of
the democratic members of the Pennsylvania
legislature and, as shown by tho vote for Berry,
by some three-fourths of tho democratic voters
of .Pennsylvania.
Mr. Guffey's representative did not attempt
to deny that Mr. Guffey had been repudiated by
his party but contended that the committee, hav
ing selected him, could not rescind its action or
remove him. This was the issue presented.
On one side the undisputed desire of the party
to get rid of Mr. Guffey expressed in every
possible way and on the other side the desire
of Mr. Guffey to stand upon a technicality and
continue to misrepresent his state.
It will doubtless seem strange to the readers
that any body of men with any sense of responsi
bility for the party's welfare would decide the
issue in favor of Mr. Guffey and yet, on roll
call, the request of the democrats of Pennsyl
vania was refused and Mr. Guffey was seated
by a vote of 30 to 18.
When the reader calmly reviews the history
of this contest he will not bo surprised that the
party finds some difficulty in conducting a suc
cessful national campaign under the leadership
of a committee that can insult the democrats of
Pennsylvania by forcing upon them against
their expressed wishes such a man as Col.
Guffey. The democrats of each state should
examine the roll call and see how their members
voted. If they voted for Mr. Guffey their records
should be scrutinized with care and they should
be retired from the committee If their consti
tuents believe that they are in sympathy with
Mr. Guffey and his methods. There is no doubt
that some of the committeemen were misled by
tho arguments presented in support of a techni
cal case and some, like the Tennessee men, were
coerced by conditions, but some of Mr. Guffey's
strength came from members who represent
the same predatory influences that are back of
Mr. Guffey and these members are a menace to
the party's success.
r
'I
'H
..tmmiimtM
aiiAAJiiAMt 4u'XalfttJiWv!a. &' y
