Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

PAGE TWO Public Opinion Throughout the Union BRYAN AND HEARST. When asked Saturday for his opin ion of Mr. Hearst’s Independence League, Mr. Bryan said: ‘‘lt looks now as though the re publican and democratic parlies would present the two sides of the coming contest. I judge that the dem ocratic party will be sufficiently dem ocratic to make a third party unnec essary from a democratic standpoint. Os course, from a socialist stand point there will be reason enough for a party of the kind.” Under the headline “What Chance Has Real Democracy?” Mr. Hearst's Sunday American printed a double column editorial in which it raised these questions: What life is there in a democratic party which does not dare advocate democracy ? What hope or honor is there in a party led by a band of political Molly Maguires, hired by ruffians of the trusts, always ready to do the trusts’ dirty work and to destroy any measure or assassinate any can didate that corrupt political specu lators have marked with their dis approval ? The editorial concludes that— The country demands a new party, a party of Independence, ore that will work today for the people as the democratic party of Jefferson worked in the past. • • • That independent party offers a field of legitimate activity to Jef fersonian democrats and to Lincoln republicans. The difference between Mr. Bryan and Mr. Hearst over the issue of a third party relate to matters of defi nition. If Mr. Hearst would refrain from calling his socialist Indepen dence League a democratic party he and Mr. Bryan would be in accord, for Mr. Bryan generously admits that “from a socialist standpoint theie will be reason enough for a party qf the kind” that Mr. Hearst has or ganized. There is really no dispute. Mr. Hearst secedes from the demo cratic party, and Mr. Bryan says, “Go in peace.” Nothing could be more generous or considerate. Mr. Bryan is an optimist and Mr. Hearst is a pessimist. The former believes the democratic organization can be purged and purified, in which we think he is right. The latter, who has done as ’much as any one man to debauch that organization, is c< n vinced that it is beyond redemption, in which we think he is wrong. Mr. Hearst knows from his own ex perience that in the wealthiest and most populous state of the union an ambitious millionaire can buy a dem ocratic nomination for governor; that he can bargain freely with a boss who, he said, should be in Sing Sing wearing stripes; that in part nership with this boss he can appoint judges to the bench; that the organ ization which sells him his stolen nomination will not insist that he support the democratic platform and will applaud his expenditure < f 000 to buy the election. Knowing all this and appreciating the success of WATSON’S WEEKLY JEFFERSONIAN. his own efforts to debauch democratic organizations, not only in New York but in Illinois and California, it is not strange that Mr. Hearst should be convinced that there is no hope of democratic reform. But there are two sides to the cloth. The democratic party is sloughing off Mr. Hearst. It will slough off its Murphys, McCarrens, Connerses, Tag* garts, Guffys, Ryans and the like. In the words of John Temple Graves, it “must be born again,” and it will be born again. There is important work for it to do. Its history, its traditions, its activities, are part of the heritage of personal liberty and self-government, and the sooner it is rid of both its plutocratic and social istic element the sooner it can resume its real mission.Nevv York World. SOME POLITICAL HISTORY. Leslie’s Weekly expresses the gen eral impression political history hrs made on the public mind in the fol lowing, but we cannot quite agree: “No persistent presi dein cy-see kier ever reached the presidency except Van Buren and Buchanan. Van Bu ren won through the idiocy of his democratic rivals and because of the stupidity of his and Jackson’s dem ocratic and whig enemies. Buchanan got the presidency because, being on duty abroad (he was minister to Eng land) when Douglas, in 1854 flung his dynamite bomb of a Kansas-Ne braska bill into congress, he saved himself from the necessity of taking sides on that disruptive issue, and thus was the only availability in 1856- When the presidency came to him in that year he had ceased to expect it or to aspire to it, and lie was too old to enjoy it or to rise adequately to its duties and responsibilities.” Jefferson and Jackson were both “persistent presidency-seekers,” and each was thrice a candidate and twice elected. With' the single exception of Taylor, no man since George Wash ington has reached the presidency by election who was not an ardent seek er of the distinction, and many of them persistent in the pursuit. John Q. Adams sought it as pertinaciously as either Van Buren or Buchanan, and so did William McKinley. When he was a lad at school, Theodore Roosevelt dreamed of the presidency. Douglas did not fling the dynamite into the Kansas-Nebraska bill, if by dynamite Leslie’s Weekly means the repeal of the Missouri restriction of 1820, erroneously called the “Mis souri Compromise.” Archibald Dixom a whig, the successor of Henry Clay in the United States senate, offered an amendment to Mr. Douglas’ plan, and, after consultation with the pres ident and cabinet, Douglas accepted the amendment that provided for the repeal of the “compromise,” which was a polite term politics invented for the surrender the south made of its rights in. 1820 in consideration of the admission of Missouri as a slave state. The speech Mr. Douglas made clos ing the debate on the Kansps-Nebrfis* ka bill has never been surpassed in the United States senate in a politi- cal discussion. He was the champion the great American doctrine of “home rule.” His enemies, too igno rant to perceive or too perverse to admit the great truth Douglas pro claimed, sought to discredit it with the sneer, • ‘squatter sovereignly,” as if home rule ever was or ever can be anything else but “squatter sover eignty.” Patrick Henry was. the greatest advocate of “squatter sovereignty” the world ever saw, and there is plenty of room in this country for two or three Patrick Henrys right now.—Washington Post. We consider the coming conference of reformers the most important meet ing of third party men since the mem" orable 1896 populist national con vention. A new element is knocking at the door for admission into the party of Peter Goopelri. Tens of thousands of voters in the great cities, who have been organized for political action in their local elections, independent of the old parties, are seeking to become a part of the national reform move ment. Possibly, from their stand point, they are seeking to have the populists bi come a part of their move ment. If they look at it that way, it makes no difference. The national reform party that ran Peter Cooper for president thirty years ago is the reform party of today and will con tinue to be the reform party until the nation is redeemed or the spirit of liberty is crushed from the heaits of the people.—Missouri World. CAKE OF SOAP—VALUE 5 CENTS. An aged scrubwoman has been sent to the Tombs for taking a small cake of soap valued at five cents from the United States Express Company, of which Thomas C. Plat is the head. Upon complaint of this corporation she was arrested. When the magis trate, who learned that the woman had taken the soap to wash her hands after completing her morning’s work of scrubbing floors, was inclined to dismiss the ease, the announcement was made that the Platt corporation was determined to prosecute the case against the prisoner and she was re manded to the Tombs. It is wrong to take by theft even the smallest article, and the fact that the express trust has multiplied its fortune by bribery and graft would not justify a scrubwoman in abstract ing a piece of soap. Nevertheless, with Senator Platt out of the penirentiary, etcinal jus tice seems to be traversed in this woman’s arrest. Some time ago theie was national exposure of a conspiracy engineered by Senator Flatt’s company aid al lied interests which had been netting an illicit revenue of five hundred thousand dollars a year from the United Stages treasury. Through col lusion and fraud extortionate rates had been secured for years for trans porting coin, currency and bullion be* tween banks and the government of fices in Washington. That annual theft of five hundred thousand dollars of public money would enable the States Ex press Company to purchase ten mil lion cakes of soap at the value set forth in the complaint which has sent one of Senator Platt’s humble em ployes to the Tombs. In the case against this woman the United States Express representa tives set forth that they desired to make an example of her for the pur pose of instilling the principles of integrity among the many employes of the company. Inasmuch as the company exists solely by reason of a corrupt ar rangement with the United States government, and inasmuch as its whole operation is essentially of the nature of graft, the work of instill ing principles of honesty would seem to be undertaken on adequate grounds. But we suggest that to be quite fair the cells adjoining that occupied tonight by the dishonest scrubwo man should be filled by some of the men that have engineered express company frauds. That would tend to instill principles of integrity and also to raise the spirits of the com munity.—The New York American. THE “STAND PAT” RAILS. The vice president of the South ern Pacific railroad notified Mr. Har riman that 449 rails on the line had broken in the month of February, and that of these 179 had been in service less than six months. The same defect in rails furnished by the United States Steel Corporation has caused many smash-ups and other ac cidents involving the killing of scores of passengers on other lines. As a result of this experience the American Railway Association ap pointed a committee of nine of its members to demand of the steel com pany a better and more reliable rail. Mr. Harriman gave an order to practically the one independent plant in the country, for 150,000 tons of rails, saying: “The lives of the pas sengers on the Southern Pacific are more valuable than the necessity for dividends on Steel stocks.” Various causes are assigned for the inferior rails now supplied by the trusts, but the bottom reason is that which has lowered the quality and raised the price of nearly all goods manufactured by a monopoly—name ly, greed encouraged snd protected by a prohibitory tariff. The exe cutive head of one of the greatest trunk lines in the country, in reply to a question by a reporter of the New York American, as to the rem edy said: Revise the tariff. As long as the Steel Corporation is able to control the market, deliver the rails that it thinks good enough, and the railroad is helpless to go elsewhere, the trou ble cannot be eradicated unless the railroads, acting as a unit, demand a change and refuse to accept rails un satisfactory, and that is hardly prob able. And this is the sort of thing that the republican party “stands pat” for! —Boston Herald.