Newspaper Page Text
PAGE FOUR
BURLESON SCORES THOS. E.
WATSON
Postmaster General Tells Why
The Jeffersonian Has Been
Barred From Malls
Asserts Watson is Trying to
Discredit Government
Washington, August 22. —The Jeffersonian, a
* Thomson, Ga., weekly paper, of which Thomas
E. Watson is editor, and The Masses, a socialist
magazine, published in New York, were de
nounced by Postmaster-General Burleson in a
communication to the Senate today, as leaders
in organized propaganda to discourage enlist
nents, prevent subscriptions to the Liberty Loan
and obstruct the draft act.
Mr. Burleson declined to give more specific
reasons for barring The Masses from the mails,
- saying such information was incompatible with
the public interest.
In response to the Senate’s resolution of in
quiry, presented by Senator Hardwick, the post
master-general wrote to Chairman Bankhead, of
the postofflce committee, saying:
“From matter received by this department
from various sections of the country I find that
there is an organized propaganda to discredit
and handicap in every way the government in
the prosecution of this war, with the clear and
unmistakable purpose of defeating the objects
for which the government is spending millions
of dollars, and will probably be called upon to
sacrifice thousands of lives. The publications
forming a part of this propaganda in many cases
so guard their utterances as the editors think
will keep them out of prison. They are nveerthe
less united in publishing the same class of mat
ter, whether it be true or half true or wholly
false, and are daily accomplishing results clearly
in violation of the espionage law. Common
among these publications stand The-Masses and
The Jeffersonian. Their respective editors are
leaders in the movement. Their writings and
speeches are quoted with approval by the press
of this character throughout the country, as well
as in circular matter emanating from the same
source.
“Publications of this class have from week
to week contended that the so-called draft act
recently passed by Congress is unconstitutional,
and under the pretense of legitimate argument
have actually discouraged enlistments, obstructed
the execution of the draft act and pLrevented sub
scriptions to the bonds issued to raise money
to carry on the war.”
'T'HE above is taken from the Atlanta Con
•/■i * stitution of Thursday last.
If the position taken by Mr. Burleson is up
held, it logically follows that a declaration of
war suspends the Constitution, and estab
lishes an absolute authority in the P. O. De
partment to suppress publications which are
not in harmony with the Acts of a rubber
stamp Congress, a weather-vane President,
and a Dollar-crazed host of War-profiteers.
Parliamentary government presupposes
differences of opinion, just as religious liberty
does: and when we speak of civil and .re
ligious liberty, we have in mind those honest
disagreements which have always existed
where people were free to read, to think, and
to themselves.
At a time was universally believed
that the infamous press-gag clauses of the
Espionage Daw had been defeated, and when
the daily papers were announcing the sup
posed fact, The Jeffersonian outlined its plan
of opposition to the Conscript Act, and stated
that peaceable assemblages, petitions to the
Government, and a legal test in the United
States Courts, were the only remedies which
could be considered.
Inasmuch as the Constitution itself pre
serves these remedies, it cannot be held that
‘ an editor violates the law for advocating
?them, unless it is also held that a declaration
of war suspends the Constitution.
But every lawyer knows that a state of wur
does not suspend the Constitution. The
United States Supreme Court has so held,
again and again; and even the Writ of Ha
beas Corpus cannot be suspended on account
of what is. now called “our external war.”
d
THE JEFFERSONIAN
The Postmaster-General alleges that The
Jeffersonian has prevented subscriptions to.
the Liberty Bonds.
Surely he is mistaken. According to the
unchallenged statements published in the
jubilant dailies, the demand for the bonds ex
ceeded the supply.
The papers told us that the bonds were
“oversubscribed.”
Has any guilty stenographer, conductor,
engineer, or postmaster escaped ?
Didn’t the I. W. W. deportees of Arizona)
own Liberty Bonds?
The blackest eye given to those govern
mental securities was dealt in New York,
when a supercilious District Attorney refused
to accept them as collateral for Emma Gold
man’s bond.
When an official of the Government re
jected the Liberty Bonds, and the papers all
gave publicity to that deplorable fact, more
“discredit” was reflected upon the Govern
ment than has been inflicted upon it by any
act or utterance of mine.
Mr. Burleson speaks of an “organized
propaganda” against Liberty Bonds and Con
scription. I know nothing of such an or
ganization, nor do I believe in its existence.
My opposition to the Prussianizing of our
military system began in 1892, when General
Cutting of California first introduced it into
Congress.
I saw its terrible consequences then, and
started the fight on it, as the Congressional
Record will show.
The great lawyers of the House —Cul
bertson, Oates, Turner, &c., saw that I was
right, and ‘ they quickly swung the Demo
crats to my support.
The Republicans were not solid for the in
novation, and we killed it, for the time; but
it came back under the name of the Dick bill,
a few years later. '
The Gutting bill proposed to fuse the State
militia with the Regular Army,'depriving
’the Governors of their Constitutional power
over the State troops; and that revolutionary
feature was retained in the Dick bill.
'. - ' * 1
' The Conscript Law of May, 1917, not only
extends this revolutionary feature, but ; places
the- entire civil establishment of the States
under the military orders of the President.
I do not believe that this subversion of the
State governments has been generally un
derstood, and I frankly admit that the full
scope of Section * of the Act was not appar
ent to me until a few hours before the hear-*
ing before Judge Speer.
My conviction is strong, that when the
thinking people realize how Section 6 places
the whole civil establishment of the States
under military commands issued from Wash
ington, there will be an irresistible demand
for its repeal.
That section reverses our system of gov-
by puttting the military authority
above the civil, not only in camps, arsenals,
armies, &c., ib#t throughout the Union.
In other words, Section G conscripts into
military service every civil officer of every
4 State,
If that is not unconstitutional, nothing
could be. But if I am not allowed to say .so
in The Jeffersonian, what good to my coun
try could I do?
Truths hidden under bushels enlighten no
body ; and if those who are in authority pen
alize honest criticism, what would be the dif
ference between Prussian autocracy and
American democracy?
Mr. Burleson charges The Jeffersonian
with publishing matter which, whether true
or false, interferes with the operation pf the
Conscript law.
Apparently, this statement is not correct.
As I understand it, the Government has en
rolled a million volunteers, and brought its
Regular Army up to its full quota.
One rash act, like that which cost Private
Meyers his life at Harper’s Ferry, does more
to discourage recruiting than all the editorials
The Jeffersonian has published.
If General Crowder did not issue so many
proclamations; Shooting those who fail
to appear fear examination, perhaps fewer
would be hiding out.
If the Government. had not assumed such
a hostile attitude toward the young men of
the country, and had dealt more in persuasion
and less in threats, the general results would
have been far different.
And if President Wilson and his able lieu
tenants this includes Mr. Burleson could
get together and agree on a brief, clear, con
sistent statement as to why millions of our
best men are to be sent across the ocean to
take part in the land-war, the common folks
would be better satisfied.
Everybody now knows that Germany has
not declared war upon us.
Everybody knows that the Germans have
not interfered with a single right of ours
on land.
Even as to the atrocities we suffered at sea,
everybody knows that President Wilson, in
the early part of this year, wanted the war
ring nations to let bye-gones be bye-gones,
and to make peace without victory for either
side, and without leaving bitter memories to
rankle, fester, and break out in future war£!
Are the labors of fen years to be confis
cated, my business ruined, my property de
stroyed, because the President has changed
his mind?
For two years, I denounced the German
atrocities, and advocated the severance of
friendly relations with Germany, together
with the armed enforcement of our rights
upon the high seas.
Mr. Burleson and the President intensely
disliked my attitude during those two years,
and no secret was made of that bitter ani
mosity.
But when on February 26,. 1917, the Presi
dent went before Congress—Replying to Ger
many’s month-old notice of ruthless U-Boat
warfare on blockade-runners —I promptly en
dorsed the President’s position.
The only thing The Jeffersonian demurred
to was, his astounding demand for a Dictator
ship.
While'„ the frenzied multitude was de
nouncing the eleven “wilful men” who had
defeated the President in the Senate, I held
my peace, awaiting developments.
At. that time, there was no proposition
pending to conscript millions of free Amer
icans for trench-slaughter in Europe, nor did
any one intimate that the State militia would
be fused with the Regular Army, and the
State officials be made subject to military
power.
These revolutionary measures were sprung
on the country with the suddenness of a
scene-shift at a theatre.
Am I not allowed to say that the Consti
tution is our supreme test of patriotism and
~law?
Is it a crime to appeal to the letter of the
organic act of Union?
Can therqbe an issue more, “paramount” in
the Congressional elections now approach
ing?
It takes two to make a debate, and we Have
always been told that there are two sides to
every question.
Since when, did Truth become afraid of
fair discussion ?
Since when, did the righteous cause shrink
from the light?
To suppress my paper, destroy my prop
erty, and lynch me in sdn>e distant court se-
Thursday, August 30, 1917.
