Newspaper Page Text
I The Future of the Democratic Party.
■ [COXTINT'F.D FROM PAGE 2. ] Hi coinage will effect and maintain a parity between «old and silver at ^Bof 1« to 1, we declare a pledge of onr sincerity that, if auch coinage ■ to effect sneh l*anty within one year from its enactment by law such B^imll thereni*on be snsiiendcd. He he says, in hisFormn article, it was the "height of folly to declare for ^Lsge " ( a precise ratio." why did he ask the convention to do so? And ■ he affirm that his "advocacy of indejiendent free coinage of silver at a ■io was based on the belief that such coinage would 'effect" and "main ^ftarity, etc., at the ratio of 1 ft to 1? These glaring inconsistencies are cit Hr the purpose of discrediting the senator s [lowers of discrimination, lmt ■ice his insensate animosity against the convention and all of its works, ■ implacable purpose to destroy the influence of those now in control of ■is ratic party. ^Bould seem that a public utterance by one occupying such a high station ■n a subject so alistract and philosophical as "the future of the democrat ■ization," might have been made free from the aspersions and resentments ■ to disappointed ambition, and yet the senator takes a gloomy view of ■re of his party because, as he says, speaking of the convention, "fair ■democrats who had learned tores|iect the time-honored ■rere astonished at the revolutionary proceedings of that body in arbitra ■ unnecessarily rejecting, contrary to every democratic precedent, the se ■if the national committee for temporary chairmni." ■n thus selected was Senator David B. Hill himself. Here, then, is the ■ion of the passionate prejudice and the infinite unfairness of this prodne ■ title of which justified the expectation that it would be impartial, dis ■ting and doctrinal. lone ever questioned the right of the convention to adopt or reject the re ■he national committee. Mr. McDermott of New Jersey, the first speak ■port of the committee's report, freely coneeded the riîiht of the conven ■ow, then, can a matter of this kind become u factor in the question of lure of the democratic organization, whose chief corner-stone is "abso Iniescence in the decisions of the decisions of majorities?" With which ■ principles of Jefferson would Senator Hill contrast this act of the con i'/ Can he find in any of these lti principles any sanction for his nttack le income tax? Nay! If he will consult the father of American democ Ittle more closely, he will find that Jefferson is on record in favor of an ■ax. In a letter to Madison dated "Paris, Dee. 8, 1784," he says: les should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by the indi H * * * The simplest system of taxation yet adopted is that of levying Ind nnd the laborer. But it would be better to levy the same sums on luce of that labor when collected in the bam of tire farmer, Ist'anso then, Kh the badness of the year he made little, he would pay little. Ihnt time agriculture was almost the only source of income. Can the dis led senator from New York find in any of the 16 principles or in any of lings of Jefferson, any justification for his criticism of what he is pleased ■ "the attack upon the supreme court"? Will he invoke principle number 111 declares in favor of "arraignment of all abuses at the bar of public rea IVquld Jefferson, if, it living, agree with the senator or with the conven ■tauld Jefferson explain that, when he declared in favor of all abuses at If public reason, he did not mean abuses by the supreme court? In Senator Hill says, as he does, that "the true democratic theory is that I has no constitutional power to issue any more legal-tender paper money ■id not issue any whatever, does lie attack the supreme court ! ■fferson were living, and were reduced to a choice between paper money ■ government and paper money issued by banks, would he hesitate for a ■ to declare fur the former, as did the convention? Or would he make an Bil defense of the national banks, as did Senator Hill? ■in. the senator says: ■ declaration that "We are opposed to the issuing of interest-hearing ■ the United States in time of peace," was vicious as well as unfortunate. I Jefferson ever favor the issuance of such bonds? Would Jefferson, if lave defended those in oharge of the government when they violated the It of the United States, and made this nation the pliant instrument of n Ite, which enriched itself while looting the treasury and saddling upon the Bin interest-bearing, 80-year debt of #262,000,000? Did Jefferson refer to Jactlces when he declared for "economy in the public expense, that labor ■lie lightly burdened' V Would Senator Hill dare, lief on the people, to I defend those scandalous bond-syndicate transactions? Shall the party of lipje overlook such crimes? Did net Washington, in his farewell address, L that "one method of preserving it. |public oredit| is to use it as sparing lossible"? "Not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden whicli »■selves ought to bear"? And yet, because the democratic national conven Uopted this very sentiment, Senator Hill charges it with "repudiation and t on our national credit." The convention did not deny the legal validity bo bonds; it assumed that they must be paid, fraudulent and corrupt as they and denounced the placing of such needless burdens upon the people for the be of maintaining the policy of gold monometallism. Does "the future of mocratic organization" lie in the direction of anathematizing such just and Lome sentiments as this uttered by the convention? (liator Hill also objects to that resolution of the convention which declares: fe denounce arbitrary interference by the federal authorities in local affairs lolation of the constitution of the United States and a crime against free in ions: anil we especially object to government by injunction as a new and dangerous form of oppression by which federal judges, in contempt of the if the states and rights of citizens, become at once legislators, judges and tioners: and we approve of the bill passed by the last session of the United senate and now pending in the house of representatives, relative to eon in federal courts and providing for trial by jury in certain cases of con usages of the The temporary Senator Hill point ont wherein this conflicts with any of the 16 princi If Jefferson? Was Jefferson in favor of government by injunction? Did he Iclare for the "freedom of person under the protection of the habeas cor ! and "trial by juries impartially selected"? Did he not declare for "the pt of the state governments in all their rights, as the most competent ail »rations for onr domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against anti-re Ian tendencies"? I Senator Hill had repudiated Jefferson, he would have been at least consis I But to denounce the convention while adhering to Jefferson is the very I of absnrdity, for aside from those legislatures which adopted the fanions Irions of 1798 and 1799. no assemblage on earth ever resolved so completely Imony witli the teachings of Jefferson as did the Chicago democratic eon In of 1896. If the senator believed, therefore, that its platform should not Itntc the fnture doctrine of the party, he should have frankly declared that Ison s doctrines are obsolete. Inator Hill is horrified at the spectacle of the discontented and distressed fits of the population flocking to the democratic standard. What and I would the democratic party be without them? Did he seriously suppose |t could any longer compete with the republican party for the favor of the |nnd powerfnl, the capitalistic classes, as it did during the Cleveland as |ncy? Has it occurred to the senator that but for economic oppression and |istress, which doom three millions of men to idleness and millions of peo I penury, suffering, nnd starvation, there would be no "crowd of populists, I republicans, single-tax men, old greenbackers, professional labor agitators, lists, nnd Adnllamites generally"? If he rejects all these, and all whom the linionship of pain and the instincts of justice and humanity cast with them, jll reject the entire American people save the immensely rich and the vicious Inks of our metropolitan populace. [gain he says: I is neither good politics nor is it honest to teach the people to expect the piment to provide a living for them. 'me, hut did the Chicago convention do so? Does the reformed and regen d democracy, the restored and reclaimed democracy of 1896, teach any sncli in to lead them to believe that all the ills to which the body politic is natu nbject, can be cured by legislation. hen and where did the democracy of 1896 ever say they could be ! But the assertion of the senator is pregnant with apostasy to popular rights. It « that it is useless to attempt to right existing wrongs by legislation. I is saying in effect that the democratic iiarty. as Senator Hill would have uld, in its platforms and public utterances, and in its acts, if in power, T ignore existing evils. What sort of democracy would this be? Ah! It lie the kind described by Mr. Carnegie in that mockery of democracy n by him some ten years ago and entitled "Triumphant Democracy. On 70 he quotes with approval from Mr. Dicey, an English writer, as follows: ie plain troth is that educated Englishmen are slowly learning that the can republic affords the best example of s conservative democracy: and tat England is becoming democratic, respectable Englishmen are begim to consider whether the constitution of the United States ma> not afford ! by which under new democratic forms may be preserved the t Kihlicul <im iwn (loir ilnd hiibitiuil In Ihr gnrernlnÿ Wusses of hnjhtml. ie italics are my own. And Mr. Carnegie adds: le laws are perfect. These being settled as desired by all, H follows that a inestion can ariae lmt seldom. The "outs" are left to insist that they could onld administer existing laws better than the "ins. A politician may be challenged to state wherein the democratic and republican parties of today ich fs the democracy of Carnegie and Senator Senator Hill. It tstbedem r of plutocracy. It is not the democracy of the people. In fact, it is not mtev at all, bnt the vilest counterfeit that ever dared to masquerade in a y historic name. Since the paasing of Tilden and the coming of Cleveland has not been, nor is there now, collectively, any real democracy east of the lanr mountains and north of the Potomac and Ohio livers. Aa the shores » yro - n , under republican forms became the eent of tyranny, nnd or DON'T FAIL TO STOP TREADWELL'S **************** ****** **** ** everything, and will save you money on everything He sells you buy. GET HIS PRICES ON F STORE. Two carloads coming in this week. at these prices, on Look GROCERIES. and DRY GOODS 50c. 47 8. 17 lbs Best Flour Choice Y.C Sugar Good Coffee Better Coffee Best Coffee Good Molasses Best open kettle La. Mol. 5c. Standard Prints Heaviest Domestic Cotton Flannels Heavy Bed Ticking Best Cotton Plaid Best Mississippi Mill Jeans, Jean Pants, 50c and up. 5c. 10c. 5c. 12 l-2c. 5c. 15c. 5c. 20c. 40c. 40c. fine chew, 27c, or 4 lbs for $1.00. Little Rosebud Tobacco, a and Clothing at "'most any old price. AND DON'T FORGET THAT WE MAKE A SPECIALTY OF SHOES. Hats liberty fonnd her home beyond the Alps amid the dense forest« of central and northern Enrol«., «0 the north Atlantic coast, under republican form«, has «nr-, rendered to the rule of mammon; while manhood, ami all that manhood can cherish, must find an asylum upon the farms of the central north, and upon the j wide plains and indomitable mountains, and in the sunlit valleys of the west and to er south. Again, the senator, after enumerating a score or more of things which, lie done by the convention, claims should not have been done, not one of which w naively observes: Honest agitation for the correction of governmental abuses is legitimate, and deserves encouragement, bnt agitation for the mere sake of agitation may no come mischievous and dangerous. in strict conformity with Granted. Bnt the action of the convention wt the above rnle as to agitation. There was no agitation "for the mere sake of ag lorrect "governmental itation." The entire effort of the convention was to abuses," and was. therefore, according to the senator himself, "legitimate. ' 11 Says the senator: If success is to crown the future efforts of the party, certain agrarian and cialistic tendencies developed in the recent campaign, for which the denn«' is ostensibly responsible, must tie promptly checked: •rimy is If lie means that it was niis In what sense does he use the word "agrarian ? proposed to arbitrarily distribute lands, or to limit holdings by law, lie i taken. If he means that it was proposed to "ease the people," to redistribute public burdens, and to equalize opportunities so bh to do justice to farmers, la borers, and agriculturists, he is correct; tint in thnt case he writes himself down I, the enemy of agriculture, which has always Is'cn the object of the first nnd greatest solicitude of democracy. The eleventh of the III principles of Jefferson is, ''Encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce, its handmaid. Even Mr. Carnegie, in his spurious ' Triumphant Democracy," quotes Isaiah And they shall beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into raning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation. Neither shall they M it earn war any more. And the Scotch parvenu, the pampered child of protection adds: Ceres is the prime divinity in the republic. To her the American makes his most profound obeisance, npon him her sweetest smiles nre lavished in return. Even Mr. Carnegie, the pliinderer of Ores, felt that while posing in the garb of democracy he must at least make ots-isance to Ceres, hollow and hypocritical though it might tie. Bnt Senator David B. Hill makes no obeisance to Ceres. He has not a word for the oppressed and rapidly vanishing farmer. idea that there are "wrongs" and "oppressions." He pleads for what he terms "vested rights." He pleads for "property." He sneers at "poverty." He depre cates the arraying of "class against class," thereby admitting the existence of nn tngonistic classes. He hurls the most scornful anathemas nt the poor and nnfor tnnate. and exalts the rich and powerfnl, defending their right to Immunity from any change in law or procedure which will check their remorseless career of pil läge and conquest, while bitterly inveighing against that just criticism of courts which is as essential to an honest administration of the laws as criticism can ever f*a< He scout* «ittli« he for nny purpose whatever. Agrarian tendencies! Who but patricians, nobles, and aristocrat* « ver fear ed them? Is onr law limiting and eqnalizlng the amount of /»«Mir land which a person may acquire by homestead or pre-emption wrong? Why wer» its homely limitations established? Is it wrong to advocate policies which tend to the own erahip of tends by the many instead of the few ? Is it wrong to support measures which will save from annihilation thst remnant of proprietary farmers which still remains with ns, or shall we go on "checking" and oppressing the agrari ," and licensing the vnltnres of trade, till the tends are all owned by nrlmn Was not the maintenance of the Was not the A ans landlords and tilled by n tenant peasantry? agrarian tew coincident with the maintenance of Roman liberty? Hebrew jubilee redemption "agrarian"? Did not Aristotle declare that "the best republics were those in which the citizens themselves tilled the lands ? Were the martyrs Canins and Gracchi wrong? Or were their arrogant, inhuman, pane-proud asnnins wrong? Is the democratic party to be democratic, or is it to be aristocratic? Shall "the future of the democratic organization" be limited to aa act of self-dot ruction, namely, proclaiming absolute enmity to all things n I in I-.-iii.l H.-rvil.-1 diomtiVC? nil thing« plebeian, nil thing.« popular, nil Ihi "agrarian, . proclamai. on of cruel «eon. ol poverty. he...' 1 •*■ • submission to presumptuous an. l.eartle« iliilo r... >' . 1 j and its future power and glory be nssuns by « -rave re. urn to Urn .ignmai, ^ ^ Ui0 .. lor .«Id.., er dre it y h I I Hu n .. the j |,iH nev t 1 i' I dense !pt ill ind 0 ed that it could lie fi dor, dell lieber V population«, where poverty and crime. tion, arc the companions of cruel greed, merciless avarice und i Shall the démocratie party in the fnture to the 1 'eternal principles." and with •rat"? or «hall it 'I' ordinate wealth •mitent itself with reili r.itin - [Is 11 ip! y and chanting parrot like tie nllii.iin •I' the ealize the lull ling vapid sophism, ' I am a do "eternal principles," and Hint their benefice stantly e/.p/od tothe changing conditions dorsement of the most sacred pri ce is wholly lost it they are not eon uere formal in ,l„ il In, mul nun h \ That the if MICH? Inin II" I" h" 'ri' *'•■' "I'l ■iplc. ijh , tile affairs of men, is the verleid mockery ' •d for use, and that, :t | ml prinei Thai :? 11 jirrnlln Ihr [des, like other gisid things, are desig prates of principles, but never reduces its principles to use to existing conditions, will be repudiated by a disappointed and disgusted rty offers to apply iver Him people.' /,•■ of I lie restored before the, experiencedgi socialism. ' and of the h It is not In vain may Senator Hill summ' democracy the stale and antiquated ogre of is thoroughly conscious of its own identity. oeruey ;ilii to inarch). It ii not leialiHio. It is not the Jeffersonian inheritance. It is not lnwles It comes as Tilde its wings," It Is apt, sympathetic, receptive. It lias no IP It listens with intero-i I. it w iili caution It is not licentious, it is not prednt came, with Reform on its banners and irlwjn It is nry. [ilit toe racy, not destructive. "healing corpusH«** in its strong healthy blood. It If'RrnH from th«* Individualist that •vifH v li<*s in nnd rritieisiii to nil until. And not only government. lmt also tin* power «»1 property distrust, of power, it is admonished by the growth, solidarity, and 1>< that inonojjolies must he govered, checked, and controlled by nnumt ocracy recognizes the indiuidual as the unit in tin The greatest good t< « p»"p<>ty. h«*m pact, and iber the gi I test nt lias, therefore, regard for numbers. being the desideratum, and the presentation of the rights a,el opport ■h individual being the effectual protection of all. D'-iiio -racy , * pl.-ilged I, y its onopolie-,. which having lilies of f*a< very genius to abolish, remove, and destroy the great vanquished competition, rule commerce, trade, and industry with lute and exclusive. In its choice of means, Democracy, resort to restriction, w?gi only of incomes, but <*f undue accumulations. «way abxo vI il«* k«*«*ping in vi«*w tin* j»* riU <.f juitiT lti«« I, and Hup|)r«*Hri«»n. vill m*vertli«*k*f JIM nalinm. «I by lilfwise taxation, not amendment of the constitution where necessary. it must make railways public highways in fact as they an must not falter nt nny step neccesaary to aeomplish tlii < tion and monometallism, disincorporate ordinary emancipate lalior, and restore to the people their lost right to live The [»reservation of human rights, the sole aim of ilemoera,-; requires that prop» ii'l must Is* kept under control iiy mill roi 'J'"'' r for the barons: the Bill of Bights in our constitution I ml it name. i-t banish [irotee i-ommeree. it trad»' -liseiitlnal .. imp'Talively lot j)ro;i«Ttv Kin" J-> 1 ji> 1 » v 11 hi The M/ipm Cliort«*r «*xt«>rt« "l froi rotin ■nt. vas ilc igiK d to limit, was official action nnd prevent official encroachments upon the i i:;lit new lull of right«, must lie proclaimed of the people. A charter can A new magnn charter, will he found in the eternal principles" of democracy, it only negative, re nnd suggestive, which will leach, treat strictive. and prohibitive, but aflinnnti and dispose of wrongs which have grown up in the very shadow of the republic, out of industrial, commercial, nnd economic conditions wholly unforeseen by tin Liberty is (he goal; character is lie- end virtue the founders of onr institutions. To the possession, enjoyment and development, "f ihc ie pendence. or at least comfort, is indispensable, inordinate accumulations of property impossible, and which tei l to the dissolu tion and diffusion of existing aggregations of wealth, nr» iin[>< ni t i-.-dy denn mied bv every consideration which could move a wise, just ami Immune [., epic. Civilization rests u)mn property. Pro|s-rty is at mice the prod of rivilizetion. He who has It esn live ns he will, lie who he it not. must live as he can. It quenches all thirst. It appeases all hunger. It mini iter.« to every ideal ii-mler liich Law«. Hi ■iff..,-»-. I IIml puli lit •very impulse. taste, mqiondu tci plies every want, satisfies every desire. imbition, cruelly, greed, mid up tentation join like a ravening pack in Except lit j tierce pursuit of property. intervals the world has been unable to withstand them. We have reached that stage in our development ns a nation where we are faee to face with the question whether ours shall lit* nny ex eeption to the fate of other nations. If we are incapable of Selfgovernment If we are too voluptuous to lie humane,too sordid to lie [intrioHc, too selfish to Is* cowardly to lie free; if we are to go the way of all other nations, Hie sooner we siiocninli and sink Into the inertia of hopelessness, the iHdtcr But in that ease let usât least not pollute onr souls by any false and puerile protesta lions in the name of tltmnrnirg. If our IsisnniH no longer hold the ce lestial flame, if on the altar of onr hearts no longer Intros the Promethean tire, if cupidity and canning have sup planted courage, justice, and compas «ion then indeed were It idle to discuss I hi- future of the democratic organisa tion. Lils-rty, equality, fraternity were ttie watchwords of the old as they nre of the iimiml democracy. Has Senator Hill the hardihood to assail them? In Jefferson's day the preservation of [Mipnlar rights depended npon sneeess fill resistance to authoritative preten slim and the invasive instincts official \ just, ti In our flay it depend* upon mu* j tower. rcHMful renUfcanoe to a power more nub ile, more jmddionn, und vnatly more ex tonnive; a |»ower whom* activitie* and potent.inliticH extend to every home and touch with a nilent hut awful ndtuoni ■very individual the power of oney, the [siwer of capital, the power of property. If we prnv. quai to this unparalleled occasion, if we rise to the height of this stupendous era, it must he through the power of »democracy as pnri nnd ns constant son, nnd ns mncli more bold, adventur ous, and comprehensive, ns lunch more defiant, direct, nnd concrete, ss Hie I lower of mammon is more hostile, more tenacious, more cruel, more able, far reaching, and determined than the l*ower of mere political ambition. The future of the denua-ratie organi zation de|iends npon its being sble to realize the presence of the most pro found issues thst have confronted man kind since the dawn of history. Failure means democratic extinction, national chaos, and revolution. Effi ciency in this supreme honr means democratic ascendancy, peaceable evo Intion, prosperity, justice, liberty. The Hepteiiiher Arena. tio that of .Teller