Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

transportation should be carried into effect, the Government abolishing national banks and private ownership of transportation lines, the rebate W’ould be impossible, discriminations would cease, equality would prevail, and there would be no collusion between the national banks and the railroads by which Trusts are made invincible. While the Socialists are claiming that the only way to escape the evils of the present sys tem of government is to overturn it, we Jef fersonians contend that Special Privilege is responsible for all our woes, and that the abol ition of Special Privilege would restore the reign of Equal Rights. With equality of Opportunity and of Rights under the law, we would have as perfect a system of government as is possible in this world. •ft It tft Farmers’ Union All Right. The reports put in circulation by Harvie Jordan to the effect that he and Charles S. Barrett had become allies, and that henceforth the Farmers’ Union would work in co-opera tion with Hoadley’s Southern Cotton Associa tion, turned out to be unfounded, just as we predicted that they would. Charles Barrett is an honest man; as to Harvie Jordan, he is just about as sleek a spy in the agricultural camp as the Manufactur ers’ Association could want. When the President of The Southern Cot ton Association has to rely upon Joe Hoadley for a certificate of character, it is high time for the farmers to catch on to the game. Jordan is nothing in the world but the tool of Wall Street cotton gamblers and the Spe cial Privilege manufacturers. The Farmers’ Union wants to steer clear of all entangling alliances. Least of all does it want a suspicious connection with a mongrel Association which Harvie Jordan has discred ited and demoralized. The Southern Cotton Association, properly led, might have been a power for good. Prostituted by Jordan, it is no more than a side-track movement of the Manufacturers’ Association. •ft »ft •! Fditorial Notes. The Special Privilege Corporations are de termined not to relax their grip on the U. S. Senate. They have it in the hollow of their hands, and they mean to keep it. Thus, in Mississippi, they are hustling for John Sharp Williams, their very useful tool. The Jeffersonian happens to remember three occasions upon which John Sharp *a* ned the gratitude of the robber corporations: 1. When he “called time’’ on the debate on the renewal of the Standard Oil Company’s shady “lease” of the Indian oil lands —thus shutting off those Congressmen who wanted to make speeches against the Standard Oil grab. 2. When he stood in with the Republicans of the House to defeat the Hearst Rate bill— the only effective measure that was pending at the time, and the only one that the robber corporations really feared. 3. When he allowed a minority in the House to sneak the Ship Subsidy bill through —thus giving to the Harrimans, H’lls, Mor gans afid Spreckles a donation out of the pub lic funds for sending their own ships to sea. John Sharp Williams was the leader of the Democrats in the House; on the Ship Sub sidy measure a majority of the House were with him; yet he so mismanaged the business that the minority defeated the majority! The railroads have what they call a “oarty rate,” which they give to amusement compa nies of ten, or more, members traveling to gether. The Inter-State Commerce Commission WATSON’S WEEKLY JEFFERSONIAN. could not see a good reason why any group of ten people, all traveling together from the same station to the same destination, shouldn’t look as good to the railroads as an “amuse ment company.” Therefore, the Commission has decided that the railroads shall give the benefit of the reduced “party rate” to the gen eral public. Now, let us see whether the corporations will obey, or will summon the railroad lawyers to interpose the plea of “confiscatory.” Why should a minstrel troupe be given a lower passenger rate than a baseball club, or a football team, or a picnic party, or a politi cal, educational or religious delegation? Why should a party of ten actors on their way to the theatre, be given a lower rate than ten mourners on their way to a funeral? There is no sense in the discrimination. Any party of ten should mean the same to a transporta tion company as any other, whether it is com posed of comedians or mourners, townmen or countrymen, professionals or amateurs, pleasure-seekers or business men. Therefore, the decision of the Commerce Commission would seem to be unquestionably right. •ft President W. W. Finley, of the Southern Rail-robber combine, is still being rolled around to banquets, where he reads his piece to Chambers of Commerce and Boards of Trade. Memphis got the last dose. As re ported in the newspapers, Finley told the ban queters at Memphis that “this whole question of capitalization” is the business of the capi talists who hold the securities, and not of the general public. To everybody, excepting the owners of rail road stocks and bonds. Finley virtually says. “The question of capitalization is none of your business”! This is a polite, up-to-date rendition of the Vanderbilt doctrine of “the people be damned.” Now, if the arrogant, self-sufficient Lawton —-Lieutenant Lawton, of Savannah—had made a speech of that supercilious sort, The Jeffer sonian would have thought it nothing strange. But we are surprised to find Finley, of the illegal Southern combine, holding his head so haughtily high. •ft “None of your business how much we over capitalize our railroads!” Thus in effect, did Finley break in upon the wine and the wassail at Memphis. The champagne must have flown to his head early in the evening, and Finley must have extemporized a little. Such talk is mere madness. It is a dare to indignant public opinion. Every citizen who knows anything at all is thoroughly aware of the fact that railroad securities can not be unloaded upon the market unless there is confidence in their capacity to earn divi dends. Consequently, issues of new stocks and bonds are always based upon what is claimed to be the earning capacity of the roads. This being so. the self-interest of the manip ulators of the railroad securities in having the property so managed as to add value to ar bitrary issues of new stock, is apparent to all. To claim the right to set up the plea of “Confiscatory” because they are not earning a net income on capitalization, and then to claim that the public generally has no interest in the question of capitalization, is a proof of the brazen effrontery of the inconsistent cor poration managers who are now robbing the public in the interest of the Northern million aires. Tn other words, Finley and his corporation lawyers are trying to make good two different propositions, one of which is the reverse of the other. Either that, or they are claiming to be above the law. If it be conceded that the State can impose no burden on the rail road which will make it impossible for the company to earn dividends on its capitaliza tion, it certainly follows that the State has a right to know what is the actual, bona fide capitalization. The Stat?, representing the public, is vitally interested in the question of capitalization, for the reason that the corpora tions claim exemptions based upon capitaliza tion. Either this must be admitted, or the corpor ations must boldly claim to be above all State control. In that case, they are consistent— but they will find “Jordan a hard road to travel.” •ft The Southern Express Company charged me $2.70 for the carriage of a box of oranges, worth $2, from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., to Thomson, Ga. Nothing '“confiscatory” in that, you see. I am sorry that the charges were paid and the oranges taken out of the express office. It would have been a sight seeing to have had the express agent and the depot agent get together and eat the oranges, while seated on that eight dollar pile of lumber for which the railroad company charged me $57.40 freight, from Thomson to Fort Lauder dale. Poor, down-trodden corporations ! Mr. Cleveland says they are having a hard time. •ft Jake Schiff, the Wall Street banker who managed the scoop operations which took the Union Pacific Railroad away from the receiv ers of the U. S. Government, has been indulg ing in oratory. When men like Jake Schiff “drap” into oratory, the results are generally interesting. Jake says he is “filled with admiration for men like Rockefeller and Morgan.” Why so, Jake? Because “their wealth is like a reservoir into which run little streams from the mountains which, of themselves, would be of no use to mankind.” Little mountain streams running into Rock efellers and ( Morgans, and thus creating a great, useful store of water, would be a beau tiful simile were it not for the fact that when the mountain streams —the small men of busi ness—flow into the big pond of Monopoly, that is the last of the mountain streams. Ten thousand mountain streams dried up forever by Rockefeller’s monopoly, is a pro cess of accumulation not good for the moun tain streams nor for the people whose wants were supplied by these independent rivulets. (Editorials continued on page 12.) Watson’s Jeffersonian Magazine Edited by THOS. E. WATSON Published Monthly at Atlanta, Ga. Price, $1.50 Per Year. This is a high-class monthly, beautifully il lustrated and printed, carrying Mr. Watson’s most brilliant editorials and his splendid se rial, “The Life and Times of Andrew Jack son.’’ It is filled with the most excellent lit erary and historical contributions. The press of the nation pronounces it “one of the best” of the monthlies. You should read it. 9