"" v ""' "
"fwwrw -rp.. t
1 ff)j-T" -3T3Tiflirsr
HWfff
The Commo
WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR
VOL. 12, NO. 9
Lincoln, Nebraska, March 8, 1912
Whole Number 581
'FP''tsspF'jwfrga-"? "iyw if ww-y-n j,r,p'o
ner.
A Dictator
Representatives of special interests have met
Mr. Bryan's plea that the democratic party re
main democratic with the charge that ho is &
"dictator." This was the charge made against
Mr. Bryan in the early part of 1904 when he
urged democrats to turn deaf ear to the pleas of
the reorganizers of that day. The following
editorial is reproduced from The Commoner of
February 19, 1904:
The reorganizers are with one voice accusing
Mr. Bryan of trying to "dictate" to the demo
cratic party. What has Mr. Bryan done to justi
fy the charge? He has expressed it as his
opinion that the Kansas City platform should
be reaffirmed, and for this he is now being cen
sured by the bolters and by those who are try
ing to put the bolters in control of the organiza
tion. If Mr. Bryan had declared himself in
favor of abandoning the Kansas City, platform
would they have accused him of dictating? Not
at all. He would have been praised by the gold
organs and they would have abused any one
who dissented from him. "Dictating," it would
seem, is defined, not as tbe offering of sugges
tions , but as the offering of suggestions objec
tionable to the men and newspapers to whose
opposition the party owes its recent defeats. Mr.
Bryan has a right to agree with them, but no
right, they think, to differ from them.
Mr. Cleveland has been offering advice; he
has .declared that the party ought to return to
what he calls "sanity" and yet none of these
organs have denounced Mr. Cleveland as a dic
tator. They have not even questioned the pro
priety of his expressing an opinion on party
policy. The fact that Mr. Bryan has twice been
the candidate of his party would, according to
their logic, compel him to keep silent, while the
fact that Mr. Cleveland has twice thrown his
influence to the republican party gives him a
right to speak. Even republican papers can
seriously counsel the democratio party without
arousing a protest from those editors who mask
their plutocratic designs under a democratic
name, but it is regarded as utterly reprehensible
that a former candidate should confer with
those who voted for him.
What is the explanation of this bitter and
unreasonable criticism? Simply that the re
organizers are attempting to deceive the public
and it makes them angry to have their plans
exposed. Mr. Bryan has not sought to force his
opinion on any one. He has expressed himself,
as every citizen has a right to do, and he has
no desire to influence his co-workers except In
sofar as his arguments are found to be sound.
It is not Mr. Bryan that they have to meet, but
CONTENTS
A DICTATOR
.. THE COFFEE HABIT
OKLAHOMA SETS AN EXAMPLE
THE1 STORY OF BRYAN"
JUDGING A JUDGE BY HIS FRIENDS
MR. BRYAN'S MEETINGS IN THE WEST
FOOD FOR SERIOUS THOUGHT
WATCH THE COMMONER'S CIRCULA
TION GROW
INDIVIDUALISM VS. SOCIALISM
HARMON'S RECORD
FREE SU.GAR AND A TAX ON INCOMES
HOME DEPARTMENT
NEWS OF THE WEEK
WASHINGTON NEWS
WHETHER COMMON OR NOT
the honest convictions of the millions of demo
crats who have maintained their integrity in
spite of threats and bribes. A littlo child can,
by quoting the commandment, "Thou shalt not
steal," throw a crowd of would-be burglars into
confusion. They would fear not the child, but
the doctrine ho proolaims. And it would seem
that Mr. Bryan's suggestion of an honest plat
form has brought similar consternation
among the men who are plotting a betrayal
of the people. If theirs was an open and
an honest work they would not abuse Mr. Bryan
they would bo content to announce their plat
form, give their reasons for It and appeal to
the voters of the party, but Instead of that, they
fly into a passion and deny the right of any ono
to differ -from them. They may as well know
that their scheme will be opposed and that they
will bo compelled to come from under cover.
For seven years the corporation newspapers
and the leaders of the reorganization movement
have been working for the most part under
ground they have lauded every tool of or
ganized wealth and attempted to assassinate the
character of every ono who would not join
them. They have made a constant assault on
democratic principles and were expecting to
complete their plans at St. Louis, but they now
realize that they must face the indignation which
their repeated perfidy has aroused.
Their chief argument is that they can point
the way to victory and they have impressed a
few who have forgotton the disastrous defeat
of 1894 when the reorganizers last led and the
rout of the Palmer and Buckner ticket which
they supported. They have won over a few
whose hunger for spQlls fs stronger than desire
for reform, and promising a large corruption
fund, they, of course, attract those who want
to handle the money, but they have not reached
the incorruptible mass that furnishes the votes.
As the fight progresses it will become more and
more apparent that it Is a battle royal betwoon
the money power and the common people. The
line will be drawn between those who want to
make the party the defender of monopolies and
those who desire to keep it the champion of
popular rights. We lost some of our leaders in
3,896 and some went over into the republican
party. We shall lose some more this year, but
we shall obtain recruits from among those who
recognize the demoralization wrought by com
mercialism and desire the restoration of higher
ideals. If to urge the democratic party to be
true to its principles and honest in its methods
is to subject Mr. Bryan to the charge of trying
to diotate, he will bear the accusation with
fortitude.
OKLAHOMA SETS AN EXAMPLE
Oklahoma sets an example to progressives.
Mr. Harmon's supporters were active in their
efforts to secure the state but Oklahoma Is pro
gressive and the fight finally narrowed down to
Wilson and Clark, and their friends had the good
sense to agree upon a decision of the delegation
half and half. Whenever either withdraws
the whole delegation will go to the other. This
was an admirable settlement of the controversy
and may well serve as an example to other states.
The contest between progressives should be an
amicable one and it will very much strengthen
our party's chances after the convention if the
friends of Governor Wilson and Speaker Clark
can so conduct their campaign as to unite their
forces in states where the sentiment Is evenly
divided. Some months ago Mr. Bryan urged the
progressives to get together in each state and
support the progressive strongest in that state.
The Oklahoma plan works toward the same end.
No one but a progressive can lead the democratic
party to victory and a progressive's chances
will be improved by harmony among progres
sive aspirants.
THEY ELIMINATE EACH OTHER
Mr. Roosevelt says that Mr. Taft ought not
to be president again and Mr. Taft thinks that
Mr. Roosevelt ought not bo president again,
and democrats believe that they are both right
in this respect and will try to prevent either's
re-election.
The Coffee Habit
In an editorial, of which It will not soon hear
the last, Tho Outlook attempts to explain away
tho inconsistency between ex-President Roose
velt's declarations against a third term and his
present willingness to accept a third term. It
will bo remembered that in 1904, after being
assured of his election, Mr. Roosevelt issued tho
following statement:
"On the 4th of March next I shall have served
three and a half years, and this three and a
half years constitute my first term. Tho wiso
custom which limits tho president to two terms
regards tho substance and not tho form, and
under no circumstances will I bo a candidate for
or accept another nomination."
Three days later Mr. Roosevelt said: "I have
not changed, and shall not change, that decision
thus announced."
Tho renunciation of tho third term is now
embarassing and Mr. Roosevelt's spokesman, tho
Outlook, has undertaken to dissolve tho incon
sistency in coffee. It says:
" 'In Mr. Roosevelt's specific case it is some
times said that his statement in 1904 and 1907
that ho would not accept another nomination
would make his acceptance of a nomination this
year inconsistent. What Mr. Roosevelt said in
1904 and 1907 roferred, of course, to a conse
cutive third term. Mr. Roosovelt believes, al
though wo do not share his belief, that the
settled policy of this country makes a third
consecutive presidential term for any man Im
politic, if not improper; but tho Outlook has a
better appreciation of his intelligence than to
suppose that he had in 1904 or has now the
slightest idea of defining a third term except In
the way in which wo have here donfled it. Tho
situation may perhaps; bo made dear by a home
ly illustration. When a man says at breakfast
in the morning, 'No, thank you, I will not take
any more coffee,' it does not mean that he will
not take any more coffee tomorrow morning, or
next week, or next month, or next year.'
To call this piece of pettifogging ingenious
would dignify it. It Is about as absurd an ex
cuse as was ever advanced In defense -of an in
excusable proposition, but tho coffee illustra
tion Ib tho most exquisite part of this intellec
tual morsel.
Would it not bo well for the Outlook to go a
step further and tell us how many cups of coffee
Mr. Roosevelt needs for his second meal. If a
cup and seven-eighths (one term and three and
onehalf years) satisfied him for breakfast how
many cups will he regard as sufficient for din
ner? And is there a supper still ahead of him?
If Mr. Roosevelt takes two more terms now
ho Is not so old but that he might take another
recess and then demand two more cups for sup
per. Possibly the Outlook may be able to
reason out (to Its own satisfaction) that tho
two term precedent only applies to the first meal
and that one is free to drink coffee without
limit even to the extent of consuming the
entire pot at a subsequent meal. Since this
great governmental question has been reduced
to level of coffee drinking tho Outlook ought to
tell its readers to what extent the coffee habit
has taken hold upon the ex-president. Is it
possible that it has affected his nerves?
A GOOD MEASURE
Tho Income tax measure and free sugar bill
indorsed by the democratic caucus is good. It
ought to pass not only the democratic house but
it should pass the senate and receive tho in
dorsement of the president. These measures
taken together transfer somo $50,000,000 in
taxes from consumption to income thus reliev
ing the over-burdened masses.
TO ARIZONA AND NEW MEXICO
The incomo tax amendment to the federal
constitution lacks a fow of the needed thirty
six ratifications; can't you give it two? It will
be a good beginning for new states.
4ij&mHU ' -
j.jJA - i4tja&JLrJti:u
L. '&JiL H h. ' ,.pt'-.WJ4iM-&' g-
Ai.f..) ' K