Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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.