' 'gijM-a
m?
K
rru
V
i
i
Butting In
Harper's Weekly, edited by Colonel George
Harvey, prints under tlio headline, "Mr. Bryan's
Butting In," the following editorial:
'"Wo can not but wonder what Mr. Bryan
thinks ho gains for his -party or for himself by
constantly butting his head against a stone
wall. It is hardly conceivable that lie did not
know that the house democrats would turn down
Mr. Henry's muckraking enterprise. How could
they have done anything else without stultify
ing their own organization? The regular com
mittees are their committees selected to do the
very work outlined by the Henry resolutions.
To have deprived them of their rightful juris
diction would have Implied confession of in
competency, if not, indeed, of self distrust.
And yet Mr. Bryan telegraphed that there were
'many objections' to the regular procedure, and
added: 'But it is enough to know that Wall
street' prefers regular committee.' Consequently
ho regarded tho caucus as a 'crisis,' whose re
sult would 'largely affect our chances in tho
coming campaign.'
"What the many objections are is left wholly
to conjecture. Our own opinion is that Mr.
Bryan did not set them forth, because they do
not exist. And what does it matter to a house
of congress what Wall street prefers or doesn't
prefer? That sort of back action reasoning
is as innocuous as it has become tiresome.
Equally discreditable to our mind is tho avowed
purpose of jockeying with our vast and intri
cate Industrial and financial organism for mere
partisan advantage. Mr. Bryan was in wrong
from tho beginning, and came out, of course,
at tho little end of tho horn.
"What wo should like to know is, why does
he do such things? Can ho feed upon nothing
but deserved defeats? Such butting-in, as ho
must know, seems only to stir up internecine
strife and to weaken tho party to which he owes
moro than any other living man.
"Doesn't Mr. Bryan want to win? Or is ho
just pig headed? Or what?" -
It is just as natural for Harper's Weekly
to condemn Mr. Bryan for giving his sup
port to Mr. Henry's effort to have a real investi
gation of tho money trust as it was for certain
members of congress to place obstacles in the
way of Mr. Henry's good efforts.
Harper's Weekly, like other defenders of the
money trust, wanted the investigation committed
to what it calls the regular committee that be
ing the banking committee. Harper's Weekly
says "to havo deprived them (the banking com
mittee) of their rightful jurisdiction would havo
implied confession of incompetency, if not in
deed, of self distrust." But what reason is there
for saying that the banking committee has
rightful jurisdiction" over this investigation.
The Johnstown (Pa.) Democrat, in an editorial
printed in a recent issue of Tho Commoner,
answered this point so completely that the perti
nent paragraph is reproduced. Pointing out
that the banking committee was charged with
certain general duties relating to banking and
currency conditions, the Democrat said:
"But tho probo of the Money trust sought
by Chairman Henry and urged by Mr. Bryan
was a very different proposition. It was aimed
at tho development of relations in tho financial
world which have little if anything to do with
tho currency or with legitimate banking or with
the sort of legislation the banking and curroncy
committee would havo occasion or opportunitv
to recommend. And evidently it was with a
distinct understanding of the attitude the bank
ing and currency committee would take in tho
matter that impelled Wall street to exert all its
powerful influences in having tho "investiga
tion" committed to such friendly hands as those
fittingly represented by the Louisiana democrat
who has most froquently distinguished himself
in tho house by voting on important questions
with tho standpat republicans." 'isuons
Harper's Weekly is greatly disturbed, asking
"Can he (Mr. Bryan) feed upon nothing but de
served defeats." , Well if a defeat be deserved
Mr. Bryan surely can profit by it but majorities
--particularly in congress and in legislatures-!
have not always been right. So far as B aT
is concerned he conceives it to be his duty tS
form opinion with respect to a public measure
The Commoner,
and champion it or oppose it without considera
tf on as to1 Us probable success in tho immediate
contest. ; .
o one ever heard Harper's Weekly protesting
whist tho -"butting in" in the affaire of con
gre or of state legislatures by tho emissaries
of special interests. Not one moment of time but
that a host of agents for special interestsand
the smoothest of them all are the agents foi
the money trust are on guard at tho national
capital "butting in" the affairs of the peon .le.
These uso all sorts of argument and all forms
of persuasion to havo tho men elected for a
public and a sacred duty employ the power
given by the people for tho advancement of
special interests; and such papers as Harper's
Weekly has never had ono word of protest for
this form of "butting in."
"Doesn't Mr. Bryan want to win," asked Har
per's Weekly. Surely Mr. Bryan wants to win.
Not, however, merely an office for himself or
for his friends, but ho wants to win for the
party and for every patriotic member of the
party tho glory of a real victory a victory for
popular government, a victory that will give the
pcoplo genuine relief from the impositions put
upon them by the very power for which such
publications as Harper's Weekly speaks.
Is it not about time that there be some "but
ting in" in behalf of the people all along the
line?
A RAILROAD ATTORNEY AT WORK
(From the Cincinnati Enquirer, Tuesday,
March 19th:)
DENIES IT VIOLATED LAW
The Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and St.
Louis Railway company yesterday, through its
attorneys, HARMON, COLSTON, GOLDSMITH
& HOADLY, filed answers to two of the govern
ment's suits against it for the alleged violation
of tho safety appliances act. The company ad
mits that it is a corporation doing business under
the laws of Ohio, and that the actions against
it were brought at the suggestion of the attorney-general
of the United States at the request
of the interstate commerce commission, but de
nies all other allegations made in the petitions.
(From the Cincinnati Enquirer, March 19th:)
UNITED STATES COURTS
At the beginning of the fourth week of the
trial of the suit in equity of the McKell heirs
against tho C. and O. Railway company, to re
cover over $3,000,000 alleged due as damages
for the failure of the company to carry out a
contract for the transportation of coal from
McKell's mines in West Virginia, it appears that
the case may get to the jury by Thursday. The
defense will probably place its last witness on
the stand for direct testimony today, and to
morrow it is expected that all of the rebuttal
testimony will be closed. Arguments will prob
ably begin Thursday morning.
THERE IS AN IMPOSING ARRAY OF COUN
SEL ON BOTH SIDES IN THIS CASE. GOVER
NOR HARMON, TOGETHER WITH HIS LAW
PARTNERS, Colston, Goldsmith and Hoadly,
W. H. Wadsworth, Maysville, Ky., and Sims &
Enslow, of Huntington, W. Va., represent the
C. and O., while Brown, Jackson & Knight and
John II. Holt, of Charleston, W. Va., and Pax
ton, Warrington & Seasongood, of Cincinnati,
represent the McKell heirs. During the hear
ing more than 50 witnesses have been examined
and depositions of half as many more have
been read.
(From tho Cincinnati Enquirer, March 24:)
HARMON AGAIN AT DESK
Columbus, Ohio, March 23. For the first time
lnlTthan a week GOVERNOR JUDSON
HARMON today was at his desk in the state
house, having returned to Columbus late yester
day from Cincinnati, WHERE HE HAS BEEN
INTERESTED IN A CASE IN THE FEDERAL
vU Uiv 1 ,
VOLUME 12, NUMBER 14
value is not large and tho amount could be
raised by public subscription. The Commoner
will undertake to raise its share. Let Monti
cello belong to the people.
That Monticcllo, tho homo of Thomas Jpfforson
in Albemarle county, bo purchased by tho United
States and established as a memorial open to the
people of the country, was the object of a r solu
tion introduced in the senato by Senator James
E. Martlne, of New Jersey. The resolution merely
provides for a joint committee jof Ave members
from each branclu of congress to "Inquire into the
wisdom and ascertain tho prjco of acquiring this
homo as tho property of the United States, that
it may be preserved for all time in its entirety for
tho American people."
There can bo rio doubt of tho wisdom of this
proposal. There is no spot of ground in the wholo
nation, outsldo of Mount Vernon, that is of moro
vital and permanent interest to tho people of the
United States. It should bo in tho true sense a
shrine to which pilgrims, not only from this coun
try, but from the world, might come to breathe
in the inspiration that will always dwell for men
in tho very air of tho earthly residence of a great
soul. Jefferson was a statesman of noble visions,
an educator beyond his day, a believer in democ
racy, in liberty of thought and action, and a con
structive social thinker, whoso message, after a
century, still bears tho stamp of living truth. How
great' a force in our life his beliefs arc today lias
just been attested by the will of a great journalist,
who gave $25,000 for a statue of Jefferson, to bo
erected in New York, and asked the people to join
with him in erecting a fitting memorial to this
wise servant of tho nation.
Tho present owner of Monticello has fulnllcrt
what should havo been a public trust with pa
triotism and devotion. He has done, well to pre
serve the beauty of this estate, and doubtless, as
far as was possible, he has opened his private
residence to tho demands of visitors, who have
come to pay tribute and to honor the memory of
ono whose life made their lives richer and freer.
But the time has como when he should bo relieved
of his stewardship and Monticello belong to all tho
people, to be cared for by them, and to be opened
to them at all times. If tho national government
does not see fit to purchase this heritage, the state
of Virginia should assume it as her duty, not so
much to honor Jefferson, whoso fame is fixed be
yond all material recognition, but as an honor to
herself. She should offer it to the world as a
visible symbol of her constant faith in the' prin
ciples for which her son labored.
This mountain, from which Jefferson looked
down upon that other lasting memorial of his
wisdom, tho University of Virginia, would be ono
of tho most beautiful parks in any land. Tho
view from its top covers miles of hills to the Blue
Ridge, and meadowland almost to Richmond. And
it adds to tho charm of Scenery tlio molding in
fluence of historical tradition. Tho national gov
ernment has already built a road part way to the
gates, and tho rest should be completed. Tho house
itself is a miniature of tho Colonial-Grecian stylo
of architecture, and could be converted into a
museum of priceless souvenirs. If the people of
tho wholo nation demand it, lot thorn take wjmt
is part of their glorious past; if not, let the stato
preservo it as the resting-place in time of ono sbo
gave to serve tho cause of truth forever.
A MINIMUM WAGE WHY NOT?
The British house of lords has passed, and
the king has signed, the house of commons' bill
providing for a minimum wage. It is a justi
fiable protection to the wage earning class. But
s whether the public is ready for such a law,
applying to all industries, what objection can
there be to applying it to protected industries.
The employers have been demanding aid in the
form of a tariff duty and "they have been de
manding it on the ground that they must pay
their employes more here than is paid abroad
to those engaged in similar industries, but the
employes have no way of securing their rhare of
the beneilts voted. Why not fix a minimum wage
for those engaged in industries protected by a
tariff? Why not provide if not for a fixed
minimum wage for wages as much above the
highest foreign wages as the rate levied on
competing imports?
MONTICELLO -A NATION'S PRIDE
Hereinafter will he found an editorial which
recently appeared in the Times Dispatch, of
Richmond, Va. It is right. Monticello should
belong to the nation. Senator Martine's bill
looking to this end ought to pass. If the na
tion does not purchase it, Virginia should; if
Virginia does not, the state university or tho
city of Charlottesville should. mveislty or tue
Congressman Levy, the present owner is n.
man of wealth he could afford to give Monti
cello to the nation, state, city or university
reserving, if he desires to do so, a life estate
If he will not do this, the nation should buy It
or f sale is refused should condemn it for
public use Pnd pay what It is worth. The money
THE COAL TRUST '
"Price of coal in 1898 and hefore, f. o. b.,
Manitowoc, Wis., was $6.10 per ton to con
sumer, and tho lake carrying charges from
Buffalo docks to Wisconsin docks was 75c to
$1.00 a ton. The unloading was then about 25c
a ton, and was mostly unloaded by hand at
that time.
''In 1911 coal sold to consumer in Manitowoc
at $8.00 a ton. Lake carrying charges are from
30c to 40c a ton. As now the unloading is
done by modern machinery it is costing them
from 5c to 10c a ton, making a difference of
profit to the coal trust of over $2.00 a ton,
and they make a price to the retail dealers all
over the country which nets them a profit of
pnly a dollar a ton. The miners, according
to reports, are receiving a little advance in
wages, which will probably not exceed 5c a ton,
but these figures can be secured accurately at
the bureau of commerce and labor."
The above information is furnished Tho Com
moner to support the charge that there is a trust
in anthracite coal, and it supports it. Why not
have an investigation of the coal trust.