The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923, April 01, 1916, Page 9, Image 11
'w(Hpjj, The Commoner APRIL, 1916 Vs1"f 'If' "Wif!)"" -"ruwj" tcfFw 5, rptyi- Dunn Scores Special Interests i Extracts from address of Hon. I. J. Dunn, democratic candidate for United States senator, at Neligh, Nebraska, March 28, 19 IS. Prior to any filing on the democratic ticket for the nomination for governor, Hhose wlui speak for tho corporation-liquor interests de clared that tho liquor question must be kept out of the primary campaign; and that whether a candidate was "wet" or "dry" ought not to be considered. This demand was made with some insolence, notwithstanding tho fact that for years a large element of tho "wets" hare made political subserviency to tho corporation liquor interests the test of democracy at the primaries and the elections for state, county and legislative offices. But when these gentlemen selected their can didate for the nomination for governor to rep resent the liquor and its allied political inter ests, it speedily .developed that their cry that the liquor question should be kept out of pol itics was mere sham and pretense. Their can didate promptly declared against prohibition, thus electing to plunge into tho liquor question up to his ears. The interests he represents have had no in tention of making the campaign upon any other issue. Their purpose is to lino up their forces behind their candidate, while shouting that the liquor question must not bo made an issue, and thus secure all of the "dry" votes possible. Tho real cause of their complaint against the candi dacy of Charles W. Bryan is not that he stands for the "dry" side, but because he has com pelled them to get out in the open and show their colors so that the voters may know who and where they are. FIGHT AGAINST SPECIAL PRIVILEGE The fight is on in the democratic party in Nebraska, between those who are opposed to the domination of special privilego and their oppon ents. For a number- of years, the spokesmen for these interests have sought to control the or ganization. They tried to take the management of the state campaign out of the hands of Chairman Thompson two years ago, and ceased their efforts In that regard only when it became apparent that there would be an open revolt against the entire state ticket if they did not take their hands off. At tho last session of the legislature the house of representatives passed a bill providing for the submission to the peo ple, a call for a constitutional convention. There wore only nine rotes against it. This bill was killed in the senate. When a motion was made to take it from tho sifting committee and bring it before the senate for action, the motion was voted down, securing only three democratic votes, those of Beal, Bygland and Quinby. It was notorious that the corporation-liquor inter ests were opposed to giving the people an oppor tunity to vote on the question of calling a con stitutional convention, and they killed the bill with democratic votes. When the bill to give Omaha the right to erect an electric light plant in connection with its water system was passed, a majority of the democrats in the senate signed a petition asking the governor to veto it. Some of them had voted for the bill and had pledged themselves prior to the election so to do. The bill had been bitterly opposed in the house by the lobbyists of 'the Omaha Electric Light and Power Company, but Charles W. Bryan gave valuable assistance in securing its passage. Now who are these men who are the spokesmen for that element within the demo cratic party, in this state, who represent the allied corporation-liquor interests, and what relation have they to the present campaign? I am speaking of tho interests that demand the defeat of Charles W. Bryan as the democratic candidate for governor, and who are giving their undivided support to his opponent. This con fpst ought to be fought out in the open, and the situation should be clearly understood by the democratic voters. Chiet among those who represent the influences that are behind tho candidate of the "interests," as principal direct or and campaign manager, is Arthur F. Mullen of Omaha, formerly attorney-sreneral of tho state, and candidate for national committee man. Mr. Mullen, during the last session of the legislature was the chief representative for the Omaha Electric Light & Power Comnany, in its efforts to defeat the bill to give Omahhe right to build an electric light plant In connection with its water system. This corporation by a decision of the supreme court of the United States has obtained a perpetual franchise to use the streets of Omaha. It is owned by the Gen eral Electric Company, a Standard Oil corpora tion. It has collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from the people of Omaha in excessive rates and is still doln o, consequently it Is able to pay handsome fees and bonuses for ser vices to defeat legislation affecting its interests. The bill referred to was passed by both branches of the legislature. The effort to defeat the bill having failed senators and members of the house claiming to be democrats wore induced to petition tho governor to veto it. A bill similar to the one defeated will bo introduced at the coming session of the legislature, and the Elec tric Light Company will again endeavor to de feat it. WHY INTERESTS OPPOSE CHAS. W. BRYAN It will bo ploasing to the special-interest cor porations, if the democrats shall nominate and the people elect to the state senate, men who are "right" on questions in which these interests are concerned. If tho democrats will select candidates for state and legislative offices upon tho recommendation of Mr. Mullen and his as sociates,, these interests will feel secure. One of Mullen's associates in the pleasant occupation of running the democratic party, is chief lobby ist for the Union Pacific Railroad Company. Ho spends his time in the congenial atmosphere of Lincoln while the legislature is in session, and gives such attention as is necessary in tho va rious state senatorial districts to see that the right kind of men are nominated on tho demo cratic ticket. A third member of this interest ing group of "leaders" spent a considerable por tion of his time during the last session of tho legislature at Lincoln in the interest of a bill in which the old line fire insurance companies were interested. Ho too has been active in tho past, and is now, in seeing that the democrats make no mistake in their selection of men to represent them in the senate at tho coming session of the legislature. But the chief purpose of this group to whom I have referred, ably as sisted by the editors of the Omaha World-Herald and the Lincoln Daily Star, is the defeat of Charles W. Bryan for the nomination for gov ernor. And why this effort? For twenty years Bryan has been active in the ranks of the dem ocratic party in state and national politics. He has been on the people's side in every contest. He has been a progressive and always opposed to special privilege. Ho is clean, capable, ag gressive. The real cause of the opposition to him is that he is in favor of putting the special privilege element out of tho government busi ness in Nebraska. He is opposed to the corporation-liquor interests dominating the democrat ic party or controlling the state government. Ho is against the liquor traffic and its allies. His election as governor would have an injurious ef fect upon the market value of the services of the professional lobbyist. He is capab'c of big things, and has shown his capacity to do them. It -was Charles W. Bryan who conceived and suggested the famous resolution introduced by W. J. Bryan in the Baltimore convention, de nouncing Ryan and Belmont, and demanding their withdrawal from the convention. The In troduction of that resolution was the masfer stroke which finally resulted in tho nomination of Woodrow Wilson, and placed the democratic party before the country in the attitude which enabled it to win the national election in tho fall of 1912. A FRIEND OF PRESIDENT WILSON Charles W. Bryan supported Woodrow Wilson when support was needed, and his support con sisted of something more than mouthing plati tudes. He was for Wilson in fact and in per son in the turmoil and struggle at Baltimore, where support or opposition counted, and when those fellows who are now opposing him in this state, and shouting themselves black in the face for Wilson (when nobody is opposing his. candidacy) were following the band wagon of .Ryan, Belmont & Company, Including the distinguished editors of the Omaha World-Herald and Lincoln Star. And Just remember that during that convention these gentlemen who are now loud in their support of President Wil son were denouncing Candidate Wilson and making every effort. In their power to defeat Mm" ' They are the same gentlemen who from every cross-road In Nobraska, during the primary campaign oi lvlz, anu whlio tho Baltimore eo vention was in session, donounccd Wilson aai The work that such men as Charles W. Bryart J ui uw jjtnuiuuiu huu uuhuk mo campaign ins vr..v.f. u, wmuiu iu uuuujjui ii&uk wucuiur law i self-constituted guardians of President Wilson's' political rortunes in Nobraska are for or against him. Thoy opposed tho President and his pol icies as long as their opposition promised an results. They opposed him on tho tariff ques tion as to froo raw material; they opposed him on tho banking and currency question; they op posed him on tho question as to placing an em bargo on tho shipment of arras and munitions of war, after ho had declared that such a law would bo a violation of neutrality on the part of this government, and now, having failed la tho'r efforts, in each Instance, and realizing that Presidont Wilson's nomination is assured, ant that their opposition in 1916 would bo as fruit less as it was In 1912, they are beating the tom toms and proclaiming their allegiance. PROGRESSIVE AND CONSERVATIVE DEM OCRATS In submitting my name to the democrat! voters or Nebraska as a candidato for tho nom ination for United States senator, I consider It proper to state tho grounds upon which I Invite support. Whether I represent those principles of democracy which appeal to tho Individual voter, more nearly than does my opponent, should bo considered; and whether I am better fitted to represent the people of this state la tho national senate in carrying out those prin ciples. Wo have in the democratic party in "Ne braska what wo term progressive democrats, and conservative democrats. Wo may not agree as to whether these terms are Justly applied to in dividuals, but it is for tho voters to decide to which class a candidate belongs. I expect to be judged by my attitude and record on publie questions, covering a period of more than twenty years of political activity. Tho way to determine whether a candidato is a progress ive or conservative, and where he stands on pub lic questions, is by his record and not by what ho or his friends say about It while ho is a can didate. There is a real difference of opinion on state and national issues between my opponent and myself in my Judgment, 'and tho democrats of this state are entitled to an opportunity to de termine at the primaries whether they approve his causes or mine. I submit that since his election to the senate, and even before that time, my opponent hatf been out of harmony with pro gressive democrats on important issues. Now bear In mind I do not claim the right to deter mine who Is and who Is not a progressive; nor ac to what consti tutes progressive or conservative principles; I de claim the right, however, to present what I con ceive to bo progressive principles, and to urge what in my Judgment determines whether a man is a progressive or a conservative. I may be mistaken, and what I call progressive prin ciples, my opponent and his fr'onds may look upon as conservative. So I shall present my own views and point out why, In my Judgment, I should be classed as a progressive, while on the other hand my opponent has been, on im portant issues, In full sympathy with the con servative element, not only in the state of Ne braska, but In the nation. SOUGHT TO CRUSH BRYAN INFLUENCE As above stated, a man's attitude can not well be determined by what he says during a political campaign. We are therefore entitled to consid er the public and political record of one who seeks office. The lines of demarkation between the progressive and conservative elements with in the democratic party have been sharply and clearly defined for a great many years. When in 1896 the progressive elements of the demo cratic party under the leadership of W. J. Bryan overthrew the old conservative faction, it faced a new situation, and the nation a new alignment of political forces. Shortly after Bryan's de feat In 1900 the reactionary element under the leadership of Senator Hill of New York, and his associates whose forces were beaten at Chicago in 1896, started what was known as the reor ganize' movement. Tho purpose of this move ment was to repudiate practically all tho dem ocratic party had stood for in 1896 and 1900 under Bryan's leadership, and to crush Bryan and his Influence and following everywhere in the nation, and especially in Nebraska, and It was so announced. In 1903, the Brooklyn Eagle, one of the spokesmen for the reorgan-