The Commoner.
WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AND PROPRIETOR
VOL. 13, NO. 20
Lincoln, Nebraska, May 23, 1913
Whole Number 644
THE NEW DREADN AUGHT
v
"Ever since the earliest days men have been building ships. They are still building them,
but the ship we are planning is different from the others. Its compass is the heart; its shells carry
good will; its missiles are projected by the smokeless powder of love; ils captain is the Prince of
Peace. I ask you all to drink with me to this new battleship the ship of friendship. No
target can withstand the shots that friendship sends abroad." Mr. Bryan's toast to the "Ship of
Friendship," in bidding good-bye to the foreign peace delegates at the John A. Stewart break
fast given in Washington, May 13.
Sugar in the State of Colorado
It is not often that Tho Commoner has
occasion to differ from its esteemed friend, ex
Senator Patterson, of Colorado, but it feels it
its duty to dissent from him in tho matter of
tho sugar schedule.
It is outside of the purpose of this comment
to enter into an argument upon the merits of
the case. It is enough at this time to say that
tho arguments which Senator Patterson presents
are, from beginning to end, a reproduction of
the arguments that have been made for a
hundred years in behalf of every industry for
which protection has been asked. For a cen
tury each industry that asks for tho privilege
of taxing the rest of the people, has been accus
tomed to marshal figures to show that a- failure
to comply with its demand would mean the sure
destruction of the industry and ultimate suffer
ing to the country.
Mr. Patterson's argument follows the protec
tionist line even to the final warning that tho
reduction may only be temporary, and that "if"
favored industry is destroyed, the consumer
will become the victim of higher prices. Ho
says:
"That putting sugar on the free list will mako
sugar cheaper in the end, is justly open to chal
lenge; for should free sugar destroy or seriously
cripple tho American sugar industry, the last
condition of the consumer may bo worse than
tho first."
And then he adds:
"But I make no issue on this point only tho
future can determine it."
This saving clause does not save. If it is not
intended as an argument, it ought not to bo
advanced. It is merely a speculation, and indi
cates the extent to which Mr. Patterson has
allowed his advocacy of this particular industry
to lead him into the language employed by the
protectionist.
The purpose of this editorial, however, is to
combat the conclusion which he presses upon
tho senators from Colorado. Mr. Patterson
Bays:
"Our senators should, it seems to me, stand
side by side with the two democratic senators
from Louisiana. They should insist that the
sugar schedule be taken up and disposed of
by itself."
He then proceeds to say that the tariff is
being revised "in a lump," "to intimidate the
weak." This Is an unfair impeachment of tho
purposes of the party and of tho motives of tho
president. Ho concludes:
"United States senators are now elected by
tho people. They must even be nominated in an
open primary. Patronage and Whito House
favor will not take the place of services patrio
tically and faithfully performed."
This Is an injustice to Senators Thomas and
Shaffroth. Ho does a wrong to the senators in
suggesting that their support of tho bill will bo
due to "patronage and Whito House favor." It
is, in effect, an attempt to impose a different
course of action upon them under tho threat
that they will not bo considered as patriotic
or faithful In tho performance of their duties
as senators unless they tako Mr. Patterson's
view of tho subject.
The Commoner is sure that its distinguished
and beloved friend does not mean to set him
self up as a final Judge In this matter, or to
demand acquiescence in his opinion as tho
price of his confidence and good will.
Senators Thomas and Shaffroth were elected
as democrats and they will bo justified in con
sidering themselves as democrats, not merely
as representatives of a particular industry. Com
paratively few of the voters of Colorado aro
personally interested in tho production of sugar.
Why should the senators from Colorado con
sider the wishes of sugar producers only? Havo
not those who pay ffie tax as much right to be
regarded as those who receive the benefit of tho
tax?
And does not Mr. Patterson know that Sena
tors Thomas and Shaffroth must act WITH tho
tariff reformers or against the tariff reformers?
The Louisiana' senators may be willing to join
with the republicans and defeat a tariff law
and thus deny to the people of tho country tho
reform for which they have labored for so many
years, but will tho senators from Colorado bo
performing a "patriotic and faithful" service
if they cast in their lot with those who make
everything subordinate to sugar? -
If Mr. Patterson desires to consider the effect
of the votes on their political future, why not
remember that Congressman Keating of Colo
rado was elected to tho house of representa
tives after boldly taking his stand in favor of
free sugar? Would this not be some indica
tion of the temper of the people of Colorado?
Can Mr. Patterson give bond that tho voters ot
his state will applaud Its senators If they bo
come responsible for tho defeat of tariff reduc
tion? Would It not bo well also for him to re
call the fate of tho democratic senators who In
tho past have put the Interests of special indus
tries above the demand of the nation?
Tho Commoner commends tho spirit in which
Colorado's senators havo addressed themselves
to tho work of fulfilling tho pledges of tho party,
and is glad to believe that they will consult their
democratic colleagues who aro striving to assist
the president In tho carrying out of his high pur
pose rather than senators who aro willing to
jeopardizo tho party's fato merely becauso they
believe that some industry in which they aro
specially intersted may suffer Injustice. The in
justice which tho tariff has wrought for so many
years still exists and that injustice will contlnuo
until tho rates are materially lowered. The
senators from tho sugar-producing states can
not afford to make all tariff reform dependent
on what they regard as fair rates to a 'single
industry.
efficiency:
Tho bureau of foreign and domestic commerce
has made a report that a comparison of seven
teen industries in Great Britain and tho United
States shows that the manufacturing establish
ments in this country havo higher efficiency,
and that two and a half times as many wage
earners and one-sixth more power aro needed
in the United Kingdom than in tho United States
to produce a net output of equal value.
Plainly the people of tho United States havo
nothing to fear in tho department of commer
cial effort.
SLMPLE .JUSTICE
Tho Sacramento Bpe, referring to tho attitude
of the United States with respect to tho contro
versy between tho syndicates and South Ameri
can republics, says:
"What the United States should seek to do
in such matters is simple justice. It should
not aid any American corporation to rob a
friendly government."
That is just tho attitude of the United State3
under tho Wilson administration.
"ONLY IN ALCOHOL"
Speaking of tho wlneless dinner, the Mon
treal Star says: "Tho peace of tho world that
can be preserved only in alcohol may not, after
all, bo the peace of the world for which we aro
all looking."
.
