'I
MAY 10, 191-2
7
vention of 1896, and 1904, and during the last
campaign, served as chairman of the national
advisory committee.
Averse, to exploiting himself in the public
prints, the one criticism leveled at him is that
ho is over-cautious. It -is not deserved. Con
servative he is, with a dislike for constantly
airing his views upon immaterial issues. In
affairs of importance ho lays out no line of
action without careful and thorough considera
tion. Once determined upon, however, regard
less of personal consequences, with untiring
energy, steadfast -tenacity, and splendid re
sourcefulness, he follows it out. There is with
him then no vacillation, no swerving from the
straight course mapped out, no turning aside.
Even though temporarily defeated, he remains
alert and vigilant, ready and oftimes able to
turn defeat into victory.
This is the "Man Wanted," and these are
some of the deeds which establish his right to
become the Cincinnatus of the democratic
party; tlie Honorable Charles A. Culberson,
United States senator from Texas.
GEORGE B. FLEMING.
Washington, D. C. May 1.
DOOLEY ON JUDICIAL RECALL
Clothing them with inimitable humor, "Mr.
Dooley" puts forth conclusions grounded in
common sense. He discusses judicial recall in
his last article and Indicates that in his opinion
it is . a good club to hold over the heads of
judges who are likely to forget the existence
of the common people. He is talking with
Hennessey :
"An' do I -think th judges'll iver be re
called? Faith, I do not. Wud ye have anny
wan recall me if ye was a judge? I see mesilf
doin' it. Whin th' popylace thried to whistle
me back to practice law on th'' third fiure I'd
call th' bailiff over an' say: 'James, get out th'
handcuffs.' Ye can bet that th' first law re
callin' th' judges will be pronounced onconstitu
tional be th' entire joodicyary iv th' counthry be
a risin' vote an' with three hearty cheers. If I
was a judge I wud know that a law throwin'
me out iv a job was onconstitutional at wanst,
ex post facto, ex propria vigore, an' de juribus
non dispy.tandum, as Hogan says. An' I
wudden't have to get' th' constitution out iv
th safe' to decide it ayether. I'd decide it ac
cording to me grocery bill.
"No, sir, ye'll live a long time befure ye iver
see judges recalled. But it don't do anny harm
to scare thim. It don't do annybody anny harm
to scare thim wanst in a while. They've f'rgot
ten we're outside. We'll make a noise, an'
whin they say, 'Ar're they goin' to haul me out?
we'll yell, 'Judge, put ye're head out iv th'
window. There ar're people out here. That's
it people, not lawyers. We don't objick to
ye're makin' laws, but don't make thim on'y f'r
lawyers. Cut out a few pattherns that will fit
us, too. We don't want manny, but we'd like
a few simple wans that we can wear to keep off
th' cold. An' if ye haven't time f'r annything
excipt a harness that we ar're not iddycated
enough to put on, f'r hivens sake let us make
some laws f'r oursilves that plazes our low
tastes. We don't want laws to wear in court.
We want thim to wear outside. "
"What is this English common law I read
about?" asked Mr. Hennessy.
"It's th law I left Ireland to get away fr m,
said Mr. Dooley. "If it's pursood me over here
I'll go to Chiny."
The English .common law recognizes no dif
ference between a servant one who works for
another and a horse. As a horse could not
recover damages for personal injury neither
could a human, under it. Dooley considers that
if the law is sound, it ought to be justifiable in
law and morals to treat the human with a
broken leg as you'd treat the horse shoot him.
England long ago got away from the common
law, but we have been upwards of a century
trying, so far generally without success, to do so.
Telegraph-Herald, Dubuque, la.
TOM JOHNSON'S STORY
"My Story," by Tom L. Johnson, is one that
very progressive, whether he bo a democrat or
a republican, ought to see. It tells in simple
language the-story of a great struggle a story
of a life devoted during the later years to a
largo service and illustrating the dynamic force
of an altruistic purpose. No short review of
the book can give it justice. It should be read
in full. The book is edited by Elizabeth J.
Houaer and published by G. W. Heubsch, 22o
Fifth avenue, New York. Price, by mail, $2.20.
Bend for it.
The Commoner.
Practical Tariff Talks
Some one pretending to speak on behalf of
the cane sugar interests of the south, is bom
barding the newspapers with pamphlets contain
ing full data of the devastation that is to strike
that section of the country if sugar is over put
on the free list. There are details of the in
vestments in factories that will bo lost, the
number of men who will bo thrown into idleness
and the number of acres that will be turned
back into prosaic corn and oats. And the in
formation is freely given that it is the sugar
trust, which, has become a trust and grown
enormously wealthy and fat because sugar has
been taxed In the neighborhood of 2 cents a
pound for years, that alone will benefit by the
removal of that tariff.
Anyone with a desire to understand the closo
relations that exist between the cane sugar men
of Louisiana and the sugar trust would find
complete edification in reading the testimony
taken before the house ways and means com
mittee in 1909, given by D. D. Colcock, repre
senting the New Orleans sugar exchange. Mr.
Colcock was a very frank witness. He was
asked by a member of the committee: "Is not
the value of the cane sugar in Louisiana, the
price of it for refining purpose's, practically
fixed by the American Sugar Refining company
(the trust) and not by the markets of the
world?" To which Mr. Colcock responded: "I
should say absolutely; not practically, but abso
lutely." Mr. Colcock explained that because of
the fact that the sugar truBt is practically the
only buyer of cane sugar from his section, the
American cane grower receives only what tariff
benefit the trust chooses to give him.
Now one of two things is true: Either
the cane sugar men of Louisiana are compelled,
by self-interest, to aid the sugar trust in any
tariff fight it is engaged in, or they need the
continuance of the present tariff to prevent the
sugar trust from more completely robbing them.
Mr. Colcock said, in his testimony, that he
objected to the removal of the refiner's differen
tial because it would destroy the business of
the American sugar refiners and place the
growers at the mercy of the foreign refiner, who
might not be as liberal as the sugar trust. Ho
also said the trust dictates now the price at
which the growers shall sell their sugar. This
indicates a tie that is of considerable strength
in binding together the interest of the trust and
the growers. If you were engaged in raising
something for market and there waB but one
man, under present conditions, to whom you
could sell, you would not be out fighting against
something he wanted. The trust, taking ad
vantage of the fact that it is the only buyer,
takes away from the grower part of the tariff
given for his protection and .sticks it in his
pocket. What protection then is there for the
grower in a continuance of the present tariff?
While taking testimony on the question of
whether or not the sugar trust desires free
sugar, let us hear from Claus Spreckles. He
says: "In view of the heavy burden imposed
on all of the people of the country by the heavy
sugar tariff, the question naturally arises: 'Who
receives the benefit from this excessive duty?'
When the subject is carefully analyzed it is
found that the sugar trust is the chief benefici
ary of the present system, and that the practi
cal results of the sugar tariff is to make abnor
mal profits for the trust at the expense of the
consuming public."
If any further testimony is needed as to
whether the trust is In favor of free sugar or
not read this, submitted in a statement to the
ways and means committee in 1909 by Charles
A Heike secretary of the American Sugar Re
fining Co.: "Any legislation hostile to the in
dustry will bo keenly felt by many. A careful
consideration of the accompanying statements,
will we believe, convince your committee that
the protection at present afforded the industry
is very small, but indispensable." C. Q. D.
THE DEATH KNELL OF PRIVILEGE
They tell us that back in the 'fifties, slavery
sat in the White house and made laws in the
cani tol; that courts of justice were its ministers-
that senators and legislators were Its
lS'evs- that it controlled the professor in his
ecture-room the editor In his sanctum the
nreacher In his pulpit; that it swaggered in the
drawm-room; that It ruled at the clubs; that
it dominated with iron hand all the affairs of
socioty; that every year enlarged Its powor,
every move increased its dominion; that tho
men and tho women who darod to oven ques
tion the divinity of that Institution woro ostra
cized, wore persecuted, were vilified aye, were
hanged.
But the great clock In the chamber of tho
Omnipotent never stands still. It ticked away
the years as it had onco ticked away the cen
turies. Finally it struck tho hour and tho
world hoard the tread of a million armed men,
and sla'vcry vanlshod from AmorJca forever.
Note tho parallel. Today commercialism rules
at the White house and makes laws at tho Capi
tol; courts of justice are its ministers; senators
and legislators arc its lackeys. It controls tho
preacher in his pulpit, tho professor In his
lecture room, the editor In his sanctum; It
swaggers In the drawing room; It rules 'at tho
clubs; it dominates with a rod of Iron tho
affairs of society. Every year onlurgcs Its
power; and the men and women who protest
against tho crimes that are being committed
by organized greed In this country who talk
of protecting tho American people are ostra
cized, are vilified, are hounded and imprisoned.
It seems madness to even question the divinity
of big business. But, my friends, that great
clock is still ticking still ticking. Soon it
will again strike the hour and the World will
see not 1,000,000 but 10,000,000 free men rise
up, armod not with muskets, but with free
men's ballots, and the sway of commercialism
will vanish from America forever. John Peter
Altgeld.
IS THIS THE POEM?
32 Academy Btreet, Westerfield, New York.
Editor The Commoner: Is this the poem asked
for recently by a reader of your paper?
MRS. N. M. E. IRWIN.
liJSVT ON THE BATTLEFIELD
What, was it a dream? And I all alone
In the dreary night and tho drizzling rain?
Iliat! Oh, it was only the river's moan;
They have loft mo behind with the mangled
slain.
Yes, now I remember it all too well!
We met from the battling ranks apart;
Together our weapons flashed and fell,
And mine was sheathed -in his quivering heart.
In tho cypress gloom, where the deed was done,
It was all too dark to see his face;
But I heard his death-groans, one by one,
And he holds me still in his cold embrace.
Ho spoke but once, and I could not hear
The wordB he said for the cannon's roar;
But my heart grow cold with a deadly fear '.
0 God! I had heard that voice before.
Had heard, it before at our mother's knee,
When we lisped tho words, of our evening
prayer;
My brother! would I had died for thee
This burden is more than my soul can bear!
1 pressed my lips to his death-cold cheek.
And bogged him to show mo, by word or sign,
That ho know and forgave me; ho could not
speak.
But he nestled his poor cold faco to mine.
The blood flowed fast from my wounded sido,
And then for awhilo I forgot my pain,
And over the lakelet we seemed to glido
In our little boat, two boys again.
And then in my dream, wo stood alone
On a forest path where the shadows fell;
And I heard again tho tremulous tone,
And tho tender words of his last farewell.
But that parting was years, long years ago,
He wandered to a foreign land;
And our dear old mother will never know
That he died tonight by his brother's hand.
The soldiers who buried the dead away,
Disturbed not tho qlasp of that last embrace.
But laid them to sleep till tho judgment day.
Heart folded to heart, and faco to faco.
1863.
THIRTY
R. P. Fitzgerald, Iowa: Please find my
check for $1.00 to pay for tho two subscriptions
enclosed at the campaign rato of 50c a year.
This makes 30 subscribers I havo sent you
within the last month.
i
J
r
.ki&ttcaUir?