6
f.
I,
V
"t
"
-
f
IW
&
A. '
!A
If
If. ,
&
:'.
f
,i
l1
'
fr
I'!?
.
F
.
IN
I.
6'
It.
4.
I,
8"; ,
y
The Commoner.
ISSUED WEEKLY
Entered at tho Postofllce at Lincoln, Nebraska,
rb second-class matter.
WlUAAM J. MnVAN
Kdltor and Proprietor
HICHAM) L. MWTCAIjrK
AuocUitu Editor
CHAIILK3 W. BnVAN
Publisher
Kdltorial Ttoomn nnd Uunliicc
Ofllco, 824-MO b'outh 12Lh Street
One Year fl.00
Six Mouthn .50
In Clubs of Five or
more, per year.. .715
Three Month....,. .25
Slncle Copy .OS
Samplo Copies Free
Foreign Post, '5c Extra.
SUI1SGIIIPTION8 can be sent direct to The Com
moner. They can also bo sent through newspapers
which have advertised a clubbing1 rate, or through
local agents, whoro sub-agents havo been ap
pointed. All remittances should be sent by post
fllco money order, express order, or by bank draft
on Now York or Chicago. Do not send individual
checks, stamps or money.
REUVIBWAIjS Tho dato on your wrapper shows
tho time to which your subscription Is Dald. Thus
January 21, '12 means that payment han been re
ceived to and including tho last Issue of January.
1912. Two weeks are required after monoy has
been received beforo the date on wrapper can b
changed.
OnANGIO OF ADDRESS Subscribers requesting
a chango of address must glvo old as well as new
address,
ADVERTISING: Rates will be furnished upoa
application.
Address all communications to
THE COMMONER, Lincoln. Neb.
tho presidency echoes this Roosevelt senti
ment. Tho people must wait until they havo
cast their votes for tho republican ticket be
fore they are to be told by tho republican man
agers of the interests by which the republican
campaign is being financed!
Do you think they can fool tho people again?
WHY THEY WERE AFRAID
Walter Wellman, tho republican correspon
dent for tho republican Chicago Record-Herald,
prints in the Record-Herald of Tuesday, October
20, 1908, an article from which the following
la taken:
"During tho past week the republican na
tional campaign fund has been enriched by con
tributions of several hundred thousand dollars,
and James J. Hill is tho man who has raised
the money. Mr. Hill has thus taken the place
In the Taft campaign which My Dear Mr. Har
riman' held In the Roosevelt campaign four
years ago. For the first time since the opening
of this year's battle the republican national com
mittee feels comfortable financially, and able to
push tho work with vigor during the last fort
night of the campaign. President Roosevelt's
Influence was enough to get a hundred thousand
dollars from Andrew Carnegie, and some one
Btirred up Mr. Hill. It was James J. Hill who
came to the rescue of Mark Hanna during tho
dark days of the first Bryan-McKinley fight,
when it looked as if tho west was going for
liver and the nation in danger of being plunged
down to the monetary basis of Mexico and
Gautemala, Mr. Hill used his personal influence
among the rich men of New York and procured
for Mr. Hanna a considerable part of the six
million dollar fund that was used in that cam
paign. Now ho has come to the rescue of Mr.
Hitchcock in a similar way. He has spoken
ttie words in the right ears in New York which
nave resulted in a surprising increase of tho
funds in tho war chest.
MR. TAFT AND CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
-Wnile Rt Llncoln. Neb., during September,
1908, Mr. ,Taft gave out tho following state
ment in reply to Mr. Bryan:
"Mr. Bryan challenges me to take the same
position that President Roosevelt takes with ref
renco to tho time when publicity Bhould be
made of campaign contributions, and I accept
the challenge. I take exactly the same position
tnat tho president takes. I have always been
to favor of a law which will require publicity
or both contributions and expenditures Imme
dately after election. Mr. Bryan seems to favor
the publication of contributions before the elec
tion, but postpones publication of expenditures
until after that, time. I confess I see no reason
why, If contributions are to be published before
the election, expenditures should not also bo
published. I think that the character of ex
penditures is quite as important as the character
and source of the contributions. I don't know
of any election law, either in this country or
abroad which requires the publication of con-
The Commoner.
tributions or expenditures before the election.
The law of Nebraska on this subject only re
quires the publication of contributions and ex
penditures after the election. This was the law
which tho democratic managers in 1904 in Ne
braska so flagrantly violated by failing to re
turn the receipt of $15,000 from Mr. Thomas
F. Ryan.
"Tho most drastic law in this country on the
subject is that of New York, which also makes
tho time for publication after the election.
"Tho proper object of a publicity law is to
prevent the use of money for bribery and other
improper purposes in elections and to enable the
law officers of the government and tho public
to determine whether tho contributions made
were properly expended for legitimate purposes.
Tho requirement that the names and amounts of
the persons contributing should also be shown
is for the purpose of enabling the public and tho
prosecuting officers of the government to judge
whether subsequent official action has been im
properly affected In favor of tho contributors
by the successful candidate. This can all be
accomplished by publication after the election.
The chief objection to the publication of con
tributions before-tho election is that it makes
certain that in the heat of the controversy the
motives of thoso who contribute to pay the
legitimate expenses of the campaign will be
misconstrued, perverted and misrepresented.
The candidates In whose behalf the contributions
are mado will be charged in a most unfair way
as being completely under the control of those
who make the contributions. It is entirely nat
ural and proper that men who are able to con
tribute and who are deeply interested from pa
triotic motives and from motives of a desire to
continue the general prosperity should con
tribute to the party whose administration of gov
ernmental affairs is likely to be in accord with
their views of proper government. It is not good
policy to discourage those who desire to con
tribute to the legitimate purposes of the cam
paign from so contributing by exposing them to
the bitter .diatribes or unfair ataclis or slander
ous condemnation of partisans in an electoral
fight. After the election ia over and the ex
penditures and contributions are published, tho
temptation to misrepresent the motives of the
donors will largely be minimized, and the public
may then arrive at a just conclusion with re
spect to the matter. Nothing could more for
cibly support this view than the illustration fur
nished by tho atacks now made on Mr. Hughes
in which he is charged with being an agent and
creature of the trusts and financial institutions
of Wall street because among the contributors
to the fund expended in legitimate ways during
his election for governor were some wealthy
men prominent in Wall street.
"There is no man in the country who has
demonstrated more completely his entire free
dom from corporate control than Governor
Hughes, by his administration of state affairs;
and yet for partisan purposes and without the
slightest evidence except the contributions, Mr.
Bryan refers to him as being completely under
trust influence.
"A rigid law requiring tho publication in de
tail of contributions and expenditures within
ten days after the election, so that the public
may know where the money came from, how
much came, how much was expended and for
what it was expended, is all that public policy
requires. The publication of such contributions
will make the successful candidate most careful
in deciding questions in which contributors may
subsequently have a personal interest, in order
I? aIoid I17 lnfenmce of improper influence
e!eSy,x. Tno known Publicity to bo given to
contributions after the election wll greatly re
duce the probability that a contribution will be
mado for the purpose of seeking privileges or
favors at the hands of the candidate and tends to
secure practical purity of motive in the makinc
of such contributions. b
"Mr Bryan looks rather to tho publication
of such contributions for platform purposes and
reference, than to the main purpose of a pub
licity law which is to secure tho public against
bribery in election and the improper influencing
or official action."
1 i
MR. BRYAN'S REPLY TO MR. TAFT
On Thursday evening, October lf 19Q8, .at
Lincoln, Neb., Mr. Bryan gaye out the follow
ing statement:
.! S?rp5,Bei t0 flnd that Mr " indorses
the president's views on the subject of publicity
as to campaign contributions, but since he holds
these views, I am glad that he makes them
known now. We now have publicity before the
election as to his opinion even if. he does not
VOLUME 12, NUMBER ft
believe in publicity of contributions until after
the election. He fails to see tho difference be
tween the publication of contributions beforo
election, and the publication of expenditures
after election. The publication of expenditures
is required to show whether corrupt methods
have been employed in the election, and as tho
expenditures continue up to the close of tho
polls, it would bo impossible to make a complete
publication until after the election; the main
reason for tho publication of contributions be
fore the election is to show the public the sources
from which the contributions come in order that
the public may know which party predatory in
terests are supporting. Every one who knows
human nature knows that the element of grati
tude must always be considered in human
affairs. Ingratitude has been described as a
worse sin than revenge, for ingratitude repays
good with evil while revenge only repays evil
with evil. Every disinterested voter knows that
large contributions, have been used to secure
mortgages upon officials. The publication of
contributions throws a great deal more light
upon the influences at work in politics than tho
publication of expenditures, for the publication
of contributions shows to whom the party is in
debted and to whom repayment is likely to be
made, while the publication of expenditures
shows what has been paid out, and disburse
ments do not create obligations that affect tho
course of the administration.
Mr. Taft says that "the proper object of
a publicity law is to prevent the use of money
for bribery and other improper purposes in elec
tions and to enable the law officers of the gov
ernment and the public to determine whether
the contributions made were properly expended
for legitimate purposes." And he adds: "The
requirement that the names and amounts of tho
persons contributing should also be shown is for
the purpose of enabling the public and the prose
cuting officers of tho government to judge
whether subsequent official action has been im
properly affected in favor of the contributors by
the successful candidate." This, he says, can
all be accomplished by publication after the elec
tion. He then proceeds to indorse the position
taken by the president, declaring that "the
chief objection to tho publication of contribu
tions before tho election is that'it makes cer
tain that in the heat of the controversy the mo
tives of those who contribute to pay the legiti
mate expenses of the campaign will be mis
construed, perverted and misrepresented."
"The candidates," he also insists, "in whose
behalf the contributions are made will be
charged in the most unfair way as being com
pletely under the control of those who make
the contributions."
Here he makes the same charge that the presi
dent does, the astounding charge that the
voters are so liable to be misled that the knowl
edge must be kept from them. I insist that it
is an insult to the intelligence of the voter, and
it does little credit to Mr. Taft's judgment of
the mon to whom he is making his appeal. Mr.
Roosevelt may have made his statement thought
lessly and on the impulse of the moment, but
Mr. Taft brings the same indictment against the
voters with deliberation and after he has read
a criticism of the president's views. It is fair
to charge, therefore, that Mr. Taft is either ex
pecting to receive contributions which would
arouse just suspicion among an intelligent
people, or contributions which, if known, would
arouso an unjust suspicion among a people too
Ignorant to form a correct judgment upon the
facts. This is an evasion which he can neither
retract nor excuse. It can only be explained by
a consciousness that republican campaign
methods will not bear the light and that it would
bo dangerous to his party if the public knew
before the election what he promises to make
public after the election.
His subsequent argument that the publica
tion before election of the names and amounts
contributed would "discourage those who de
sire to contribute to the legitimate purposes of
the campaign" by exposing them to the bitter
diatribes or unfair attacks or slanderous con
demnation of partisans in an electoral fight"
ought to have little weight when it is considered
that such publication will be efficacious in dis
couraging those who now desire to contribute
to illegitimate expenses and for the purpose of
StUiing offlcIals under obligations to them.
While publication after the election may enable
us to judge whether subsequent official action
A,en lmPr(Perly affected in favor of the
contributors by the successful candidate," this
is of very small value compared with tho benefit
to bo derived from the publication of contribu
tions before election. The people have a right
-to - form their own opinion as to tho influences
afC
J..hit(
il'iWHlMii) --