PAGE 4
j ncLracZia, Independent
CEPTEMBEIt 28, 1SC3
oocoooooooooooooooor
o
a
Current
on Leading Topics
o
Comment
TRUST FUNDS FOR "SLUSH FUNDS'
The confessions of President MeCall and
Vice-president Perkins of the New York Life
that they contributed on their own responsibility
$150,000 of the company's funds to the repub
lican campaign funds of 1896, 1900 and 1904
arouses the indignation of democrats and inde
pendents. Here and there a republican paper
utters a mild criticism. President Roosevelt is
represented as being in a quandary as to whether
he ; should return the money to the Insurance
companies and as to whether he should appoint
Secretary Cortelvnn
when Shaw retires: -
But neither life insurance companies nor
. tneir policyholders belong to one political
party, and trustees and officers have no right
to use their funds to contribute to the ex
penses of political campaigns. Carry this ex- .
cuse to its logical consequences and our na
tlonal election would become a contest be
tween the money power and the people for
' the control of the government, and the presi
dency would be bought and sold like the
imperial crown of decadent Rome. These
contributions out of the trust funds of thou-
sands of voters of both parties were an in
famy the turpitude of which seems not to
touch the sensibilities of these hardened
omcers who were spending other people's
money in support of their own political judg
ment. New York Journal of Commerce.
'I thank God that Bryan and free silver
S attVnd that 1 had a " ta "their
defeat." This was the dramatic climax of
the sensational testimony given b? PrMMont
McCall Qf the New Tork S t' SSJ
investigation. What was McCall's "share
for which "I thank God?" Mr McCafrs
''share" consisted in authorizing a check
for a large sum of money belonging to other
people, nameiy the policyholder! of Us com
pany, which check was to be paid into the
Roosevelt campaign fund. If one has control
of other people's money this is a very inex-
K!8 VG wa7. 01 havlng a "share" Jnan ex
pensive achievement If some of those to
whom the money belongs, are opposed to the
alTtreem0nie1aChieVe?' 14 makes the met
levy on the bank accounts of the enemy
Waterbury American. enemy.
But what would John A. McCall tMnt
about it should the democrats of the sotith
S3 JfT? place where there arf
.policyholders in his company who are noT
democrats-say that it, hi has put his com "
pany n politics they will keep it there -that
f he is going to take their nVoney to defeat
o?,Sb555t,rttal"lt is Itoa
for democratic money; that they have been
betrayed and that they refuse again to sWe
John A. McCall this stick with which to kill
complam if in the south, where there are
nothing but democrats, and where democratic
principles are dearer to many of hi?Sy
Pt on the political sword In the south '-I
Charleston News and Courier. snth.-
if til ZUl bl a1god thinS r the country
growth ofWthI0rHnL1fe f XPSUres check SS
f a I tne insurance companies
and help those of moderate size. The Sant
companies are so big as to be dangerous
The control of $400,000,000 or $500?OOo!oOoTs
too much to he vested in one board whose
?h? tlSnH6 ?ly a Sma11 PersonaHnSest
The temptation to use the enormous money
Frr, 1Si to great Aether the companj
is mutual or controlled by stock makes little
difference-in the end a few great financiers
wm dominate it and use its assets inthe ?
schemes. The . concentration of wealth and
money power in this country has evidently
been achieved largely through these insur
ance giants who have been made to do the
bidding of the Morgans, Goulds, Harrimans
and Hills. Tor check the growth of these big
ones and promote the smaller ones will be
to check the growth of concentration. A
moderate sized company is just as safe as a
giant and more apt to have careful manage
ment It does not afford the temptation to
the financial plunderers. It will not breed
so many trusts. Omaha World-Herald.
Think of the moral obliquity of these
tainted contributions. Mr. Roosevelt's in
dignant letter last fall shawed that he knew
that corporations were contributing. Doubt
less Cortelyou of whose transactions Mr.
Roosevelt claimed knowledge enough to cer
tify publicly to their purity doubtless he at
least knew of these very New York Life con
tributions. And pray; where did either of
them suppose the officers of the company
got authority, legal or moral, to contribute
policyholders' money to the purposes for
which that money was contributed? Chicago
h i 1 be recaed that President Roose
ToJ; 8 annual message of. December 6,
1904, after the presidential election was
over, recommended legislation providing for
the publication of all contributions received
and expenditures made by political, commit
tees. Some of the contributions of the last
campaign are being made public earl&r than
perhaps he expected, but friends of reform
lme may reasonably expect his help
in the enactment of comprehensive legislation
this winter. Washington Star.
The great-majority of them may have
beeir democrats and may have , desired the
election of the democratic nominee for the
presidency, but Mr. Perkins decided that it
was Jntthe interest of their company that
the democrat be defeated and that the re-
inaU b(L elected' and so he took nearly
0,000 of the company's money and turned
it oyer to the National Republican commit-
LL he lse?.!n behalf of the republican
nominee. But it was all business, you know,
and that s where the danger comes in. If
the money power" can control elections and
can control legislation, what is to become of
the poor folks? Richmond Times-Dispatch.
The news will go echoing over the coun
try. The farmers of Nebraska, the fruit
growers of California, the lumberman, - the
rancher, the storekeeper the plain man every
where will read of the disgraceful transac
tlons and will. say: "There, what we told
you all the time, you now see to be true "
There Is a malignant money power. Between
the men in charge of these vast accumula
tions of treasure the railroads, the banks, ,
the life Insurance companies there is a per- '
feet jmderstanding. They play into each
other's hands. They combine to cheat the
humble consumer and producer out of his
rights; and as is now plain, they give trust
funds to one political party when they fear
that the people may make use of the other
to thwart some of their schemes." This is
what millions of indignant Americans will be
saying for weeks to come. They do not need
yellow journalism to Inflame them, The
facts are inflammatory enough by themselves.
. Yellow journalism is bad, but yellow life in
surance is worse. New York Evening Post.
Newspaper dispatches from Oyster Bay
ffnn ial JKSidenLRosevelt' after; consulta
Ja Qe0rgf,B' Cortelyou, his postmaster
general and national chairman, has decided
wh2SnJ?d life durance trust funds
Ii, G rePublican national committee ac
Sl l 6 turned, to the companies that .
f!f ?einLJ? tnat event what will the presi
dent do with Mr. Cortelyou? Will he de
nounce the wrong while continuing to honor
of tSt Mr- Cortelyou,as chairman
of the national committee, is responsible for
the acceptance of the trust funds. Mr. Roose
velt made him chairman, and is therefore
responsible for Mr. Cortelyou. Can he dodge
Si nflTnSiJ ity directinS a return of
the money while at the same time retaining
in his cabinet and perhaps promoting him. to
be secretary of the treasury.-Omaha World-
HIS hEART FAILS HIM
The sincerity and value of reform in repub
lican ranks may well be questioned in view"' of
the attitude on the pass question taken by some
who were delegates to the republican state con-
vention but who refuse to uphold the anti-pass
plank of the platform. One of the delegates to
that convention was Roy R. Barnard, editor of
the Loup Valley Queen, who takes occasion in
his paper to speak out boldly in defense of the
free pass system. Mr. Barnard in the Loup
Valley. Queen of September 21, writes:
While we may not be deep enough to
see the evil of the pass, yet we will have to
be shown that the use of the pass is such
a very bad sin, or such a dreadful drawback
to the welfare of the people. From a busi
ness point of view it appears to us that a '
law abolishing the use of the pass by the
state officials is going to be a dear law to
the people of the state, inasmuch as an ap
propriation will have to be made to pay the
railroad fare of the various state officials, and
the citizens of the-state pay this appropria
tion by an increased taxation. As far as a
pass being a bribe is concerned, we can hard
ly believe that the man who has the brains
to hold a state office of any kind can be in
fluenced to work against the interests of
the people he represents by the gift of a
small bit of pasteboard. If he can, he is a
safe man to leave at home. We candidly be
lieve that by the issuance of the pass, and "
7the saying of this expense, the railroads are
doing the taxpayers of the state a much
greater favor than detriment. We may be
wrone. hut wo nii i
WAGE-EARNERS AND PROSPERITY
The Springfield Republican is not certain
that the present prosperity has brought to the
wage-earner that amount of good which is claimed
in many republican journals. After comparing
average prices and average earnings for a period
fourteen years the Republican says:
It would appear from this table that so
far as actual earnings per hour or weekly
earnings per employe , are concerned, the
position of othe wage-earner is no better than
it was m 1896, for example, before the advent
of prosperity. . Hourly wages, for illustra
tlon, are much higher, over 17 per cent hieh
er, in 1904 than in 1896, but the cost of food
has risen about to an equal extent, and the
. present higher earnings per hour go no fur
ther than the lower earnings of the - "hard
times" The purchasing power in the one'
case is 104.7 and in the other' 104.4. If we
take the weekly earnings per employe the
purchasing - power of toe workingman has
been reduced, being now 100.4 per cent
against 100.6 r-er cent in 1896. He does not
work quite as long per week as he did then
but his earnings are much improved; still the
rise of prices has more than overcome that
advantage. Comparisons, with years prior to
1896 are better for him, but it is to be noted
that they include years of "republican pros
perity" (1890-2) as well - as years of "demo
cratic hard times" (1893-6). In one particular
only or chiefly has there been distinct abso
lute Improvement Employment is much more
general, and thousands who could not get r
work back in 1894-6 now find it in abundance.
"Prosperity" has thus been a great thing for
surplus labor; but for those who had work
in the hard times, and they include the great
mass of the people, there has been no mate
rial improvement in the power to acquire
wealth. The advance in wages has been off
set by the advance in what the working man
must buy to sustain himself. It is to be no
ticed that the occupations chosen for the
above comparisons are those in which labor
unionism is strongest; and hence those in
which, we must conclude, the wage increase
