Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The independent. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 24, 1904)
I I i Ti J K Mm mv 1 1 Vol. XVI. . LINCOLN, NEB., NOVEMBER 24, 1904. - No. 27 For a New Party Favors & New Party ." '-' Editor Independent: I am in re ceipt of your recent letter inviting an expression of my Jews on the ques tion of "What populists should do?" It is my belief -that, there should be a free expression of opinion by all who have taken an interest" in the move ment, and that along in the winter v there should be a national conference called of all who are interested in axe reforms, and then a determination as to what should be done. I do not think it best to assume any hard or fast at titude until we have fully discussed the question; and it is only for the pur pose of contributing my views for the consideration of others, the same as I Bhall consider theirs, that this letter is written. It is certain that an increasingly large number of the American people are at this time in favor of the follow ing progressive reforms: V 1. The national ownership and op eration of the railroads and telegraph lines of the country. . 2. The national ownership of enough coal and other mines, to prevent mo nopoly, and to accord independent citi zens an opportunity to acquire the raw material as advantageously as the trust acquires them. Y-' ; 3. Postal savings " banks. 4. A graduated income tax. 5. A graduated inheritance tax. 6. Local application in the states of the principles of initiative and refer endum, with a subsequent application to our national affairs should experi ence in the states prove such extension desirable. . , 7. The issue of all money by the fed eral government without the interven tion ofany bank. - , , 8. Compulsory primaries. - '-r The most important of these reforms and the one vhich is , securing , the greatest number of converts, is the na tional ownership and operation of the railroads and telegraph lines. Stu dents of our industrial system, includ ing business men of all classes, now understand that the very backbone of the trust system is the favoritism of the' private owners of the railroads This favoritism is exercised in many ways, such as securing rebates on freight; a delay in furnishing cars to the ordinary business man, while they are furnished the trusts promptly; a delay in forwarding the product of the ordinary business man, while sending the trust-made product to its destina tion speedily; the use of the right-of-way of the railroad company by fav ored interests for grain elevators and coal yards and other purposes, while to the , ordinary business man these privileges are denied. In my judgment this transportation question should be placed at the very forefront in the re form' movement; first, because it is right; and secondly, because it is con stantly gaining new adherents from -all ' classes of people. With a suflicient ownership of coal and other mines, the citizen who desired to engage in a new manufacturing enterprise would be as sured of being on an equal footing with the trust in the matter of secur ing raw material and transportation to his factory; and then through the na tional ownership of the' railroads he would be secure in getting equal terms In the distribution of his manufactured goods. . The question is, how to bring about these desired reforms, r and how best to unite the people who are in favor of them. My own judgment Is, that we can make the greatest progress through a new political party.- We need no party that is founded on mere wail of calamity, but the nation does need a party which stands for industrial prog ress without poverty. The present sys tem leads to progress r.nd poverty; it furnishes the multimillionaire and tie pauper. The aim of the new move ment should be to furnish all an equal opportunity, and make this a country where we have neither the plutocrat nor the pauper. In a new political par ty, men who have been populists, dem ocrats or republicans, could all unite The referendum taken by The Independent, at 12 o'clock noon, on Wednesday stood: For People's Party organization 1,872 For co-operation with Democrats 151 L on common ground. They could bury all past dinerences and join together in favor of those reforms on which they all agree. They would have no past political hatreds or. bitterness in their way. They would not only be on an equal footing, but what is just as important, they would all feel that they were on an equal footing. To those who are ambitious and desire to serve the . public in office, there is nothing deterrent in a riew party. In a new party, all would enter with an equal chance for political preferment The new party would be under no ob ligations, to- any man for past political services; there would be no party debts to pay; there would be no factions as a result of past party differences. Without this new party movement we will not get the full benefit of the support of those who believe alike in reforms. ... A new party would secure the active support of all reformers cur ing the next four years. But if no new movement is started, some will go into the democratic party, some into the socialist party and some into ihe prohibition party. Why any democrat should object to thus forming a new party, I can not understand. The democrats are prac tically without any national organi zation or standing. They retain con trbTof rTeVWIthiBTirstates wherenhe negro question is the controlling one in politics. But in the territory north of the Mason and Dixon line, which comprises the great bulk of industrial America, there is practically no demo cratic organization. True, there are many democratic voters, but they are a disorganized body. It seems to me that even under the leadership of Bry an and Hearst, republicans will not en ter the democratic party as they would enter a nev party that stood for re forms in which they believed. I be lieve that more than two-thirds of the republicans rf Nebraska believe in the government ownership of the rail roads, and a very large number of them would enter a new party. But it is quite plain that they have no J present intention of entering the dem ocratic party. They remember the fights of the past. In aeir own com munities they have been lined up in political battles on the republican side, and the way that their assistance can be most effectively secured for these reforms is in a new party where all meet on common ground. The people are all right. The vote for George W. Berge in Nebraska shows this. Except for the Roosevelt landslide, which ; was occasioned by disgust of Parker and the vcrowd around him, Berge would have re ceived an overwhelming, plurality. In saying what I have said here, it is not through any prejudice against the mere word "democrat." If the is sues were finally made up in the next presidential election solely between a democrat of the Bryan or Hearst kind and a rpublican, my vote would be cast for the democratic candidate. But the trouble is, that there is in the democratic party today, auite an ele ment which is justthe same as the crowd that controls the republican party in the nation and state. The republican party in both state and na tion is owned bodv, soul and pataloo-,3 by predatory wealth, and there is quite an element in the democratic party that belongs in the same class. In Ne braska, Jame? E. Boyd, Lee Herdman, James E. Kelly, Lee Spratlin and George L. Miller, still claim to be democrats, and I would no more think of co-oparating with .these ,men in politics than of co-operating with John H. Mickey, John Baldwin, Charles F. Manderson, B. T. White and J. H. Ager. . And, as it is in the state, so it is in the nation. For myself, I could never see : uch difference between Theodore Roosevelt and Alton B. bar ker. No doubt Judge Panter is still a democrat, and will be a democrat four years from now.. Then take the leaders: John D. Rockefeller, Henry H. Rogers and Jas. Stillmar of the Standard Oil trust; J. P. Morgan, An drew, Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, George Gould and E. H. Harriman, are all republicans and supported Roose velt. So did Armour and Swift and Morris of tto beef trust; so did Schnei der of the grain trust. On the other hand, August Belmont, Jas. J. Hill of the Great Northern, Ingalls of the Big Four railroad, Arthur Pue Gorman, David B. Hill and Grover Cleveland are still democrats and supported Par ker, and no doubt they expect to be democrats four years from now and will use their influence to nominate a corporation democrat tor president, and if they fail in that a genuine Jef ferson democrat is nominated, those corporation democrats will knife the ticket as they did in 1896 and 1900. The corporation democrats keep anti monopoly republicans out of the demo cratic party, and,, at the same time these corporation democrats always have and always will knife any presi dential nominee who stands for ihe great principles of government typified in the person of Thomas Jefferson. If these reforms are to be brought about, they will only be accomplished by a union cf the west and south. It is in the west and south that the real Jefferson sentiment exists. As a result of war prejudices, the west has not been voting its true sentiments. As a matter of fact, it has had no oppor tunity to vote its sentiments in a na tional election except in 189G and 1900. But the west, in sentiment, believes in the principles of Jefferson and not those of Alexander Hamilton. The vote for Berge in Nebraska', for Adams in Colorado and Toole in Montana shows that there is plenty of Jeffersonian sentiment 4n the west whenever it is aroused and united. Unless advantage is taken of this condition, the democrats will find an increased socialist vote. It is probably true that a large majority of those who voted for Debs are not socialists. They were protesting democrats or populists. In South Omaha, the dem ocratic stronghold In Nebraska, Debs was as strong as Parker. In Milwau kee, Debs received two thousand more votes than Parker. In the democratic strongholds in Chicago, the vote lor Debs took the breath from the demo cratic leaders. It all shows that you can't fool the people. The vote for Roosevelt was not a republican vote. Of cour-e all republicans voted for him, but democrats and populists by the tens of thousands all over the country voted for him as a protest against the political domination of the Belmonts, Germans and Clevelands. I fully recognize that it is hard work to build up a new organization with out the assistance , of Mr. Bryan and Mr. Hearst; and my hope is that those gentlemen may finally realize that re form can best be accomplished through a new organization. . If we had in this new movement, Bryan, Hearst, Folk and LaFollette., its ultimate success would not be in doubt. LaFollette .ias accomplished a great work In Wiscon sin In the matter of railroad taxes and a primary election law. Ho has now probably secured the necessary power In the legislature to secure a reduction in freight rates. This la the end of the state reforms for which ta been contending,, and when these are secured the agitation will cease very largely. Mr. LaFollette will find that his freight rate law will be fought and largely defied by the railroads and that tue railroads will be protected by the republican courts; and he will further find that the only .solution of the great transportation problem is the public ownership and operation of the rail roads, and to secure this, he will hV2 to leave the republican party. Lal lette will finally have to leave the t publicans or abandon Ills fight for re forms, and ' surrender to the vicious and organized garrison that he has fought so well. v - In a new party, such as I have out lined, LaFollette and all men like him would find a congenial home. M. F. HARRINGTON. O'Neill, Neb. A New Petrty . Editor Independent: It seems evi dent to me that the followers of Bryan as well as -of Watson can never win single handed and alone. The trusts and banking power with their hirelings of the press as well as those of the pulpit whose large salaried ministers are but satellites that revolve around the Rockefeller, Cleveland, Hill and Belmont gang. S'uch animals with woolly back as with sanctimous mien kneel before their altars and with pa thetic words plead with their God to bless the widows and the orphans, the poor and oppressed, while at any mo ment they are eager to grasp their ex orbitant salaries and huge donatioa.:; blood money that has been wrung from the oppresed and illy fed poor. With such a united nolitica.1 fiihraltar to combat I see no hope for the leaders of Jeffersonian democracy, marshalled under Bryan and Watson to conquer Uwt-jcommflji enemies whilgL divided. Why can not. our two giants in oratory, whose pathetic and burning words have rang like the clarion of immortality through jthe hearts of vast assemblies and awakened new life and. hope of millions of deceived and wan dering toilers. The political enemies ot Bryan or Watson can Ld no tar nish or filth upon their escutcheons. They stand as torchlights high in the political heavens to beckon mankind to a higher sense of justice. Crushing defeat that would sink the most of men to oblivion, has only made them stronger. The words of the slander ers the filth thrown upon their gar ments has left them unsullied. Why can not those two grand agents of re form together with that grand old vet eran, Tibbies, whose able pen and ringing voice inspired by the love of justice for e enslaved toilers, togeth er with Hearst, whose . millions have not created within him . that fire cf greed which has consumed the con sciences of many, and with many oth ers devoted to the same reform, why, I ask, can iney not, why will they not unite their forces in one grand army, discarding old party names, form a new party with a new name agreeable to them all and under the banner of Jackson and Jefferson em blazoned with- the motto "United we stand, divided we fall," attempt to col lect the scattered and wandering c e ments of reform with the slogan, "Principle before party." Let aU true patriots lend their united efforts to all those who believe in the reforms advo cated by Bryan and Watson and join them in one solid phalanx to combat their common enemy. With such a union and' with such choice spirits z Bryan and Watson we can see in ir the flag of liberty. unfurled over a i--deemed nation above tne dome of cur national capital when a universal jubi lee of rejoicing arising from the toiling millions over their emancipation from the shackles of cunning greed and ab ject slavery, would ascend a volume o? grateful incense to le God of Liberty . J; S. G. "Th Jffetsonlan" Editor Independent: Apropos of your referendum ballot question, I can not answer fully on the form of ballot sub mitted. Ever since our Denver rc