Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, September 04, 1906, Image 1
*
VILLE ENQUIRER.
ISSUED SEMI-WEEKLY.
1. a. eusrs son. Pibiiiken. j ? jfatttilg ifiDsjajen ^or ljn ^romotion ojf th< foliliiial, goaial, ^griqaHuital and Commn;cial 3ntar<sts of ?h< gmgla. {
ESTABLISHED 1855. "YORKVILLE, 9. C., TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 19Q6. JSTQ. 71.
MR. BRYAN'S HOME COMING.
Retiming Political Here Gets Great
Trloniit).
SPEAKS TO MORE THAN 20,000 PEOPLE
Great Crowd Works Itsolf to Frenxy of
Enthusiasm?Mr. Bryan Affected to
Tsars?Tells How Observation
* Abroad 8hed Light on Problem at
Ui!iL AL._
nomt?9a l lined nun tira mvn?7
Question as Settled If ths Opposition
is Satisfied.
The welcome extended to Mr. W. J.
Bryan In Madison Square Garden,
New York, on his return from his trip
abroad last Thursday was one of the
most remarkable events of the kind
ever witnessed in this country. More
than twenty thousand people participated.
Every person in the great audience
was provided with a tiny American
flag, and the waving of the flags
was accentuated by cheering. So
touched was Mr. Bryan by the welcome
that as he stood waiting for the cheers
to subside his eyes filled with tears,
and as the band played "Hail to the
Chief," he strode nervously from side
to side of the narrow platform.
"How can I thank you for this welcome
home?" he said.
"My heart would be ungrateful if it
did not consecrate Itself to your service.
It was kind to prepare this reception.
It was kind of Governor
ifnlk to come here ail the way from
Missouri. It was kind of Tom Johnson.
that example of the moral courage
we so much need In this country,
to lend his presence here.
"It was kind in you to fully recompense
me In being absent so long from
my native land. I thank you. I return
t-> the land of my birth more
proud of my citizenship than ever before."
The address of welcome was dellverv
ed by Governor Folk of Missouri, and
Tom L. Johnson of Cleveland, Ohio, delivered
the introductory speech. Mr.
Bryan spoke as follows:
Like all travelers who have visited
other lands I return with delight to
the land of my birth, more proud of
its people, with more confidence in
its government and grateful to the
kind Providence that cast my lot in
the United States. My national pride
has been increased by abundant evidence
I have seen of the altruistic interest
taken by Americans in the people
of other countries. I return more
/IaavvIv imnrocoaH than PVPP hpfnpft
with the responsibility which rests
upon our nation as an exemplar
among: the nations and more solicitous
that we, avoiding the causes which
have ted other nations to decay, may
present a higher ideal than has ever
before been embodied in a national life
and carry human progress to a higher
plane than it has before reached.
Each nation can give lessons to every
other, and while our nation is in a
position to make the largest contribution,
as I believe to the education of
the world, it ought to remain in the
attitude of a pupil and be ever ready
to profit by the experience of others.
The first message that I bring from
the old world Is a message of peace.
The cause of arbitration is making real
progress in spite of the fact that the
nations most prominent In the establishment
of The Hague tribunal have
themselves been engaged in wars since
that court was organized. There is a
perceptible growth of the sentiment in
favor of the settlement of international
disputes by peaceful means.
It was my good fortune to be present
at the last session of the Interparliamentary
Union which convened
in London on the 23rd of July. I believe
that if our nation would propose
to make, with every other nation, a
treaty providing that all questions in
dispute between the parties should be
submitted to The Hague court or some
other impartial international tribunal
of investigation and report before any
declaration of war or commencement
of hostility it would And many nations
willing to enter into such a compact.
I am sure from the public utterances
of the present prime minister of Great
Britain. Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman,
that such a treaty could be made
between the two great English-speaking
nations and their example would
be followed until the danger of war
would be almost, if not entirely, removed.
To take the lead in such a
movement would establish our position
as a world power in the best sense
of the term. And what argument can
be advanced against such action on the
part of the United States? Shall we
yield to any other nation In the estimate
to be placed upon the value of
human life? I confess that my aversion
to killing increases with the years.
Surely the Creator did not so plan the
universe as to make the progress of
the race dependent upon wholesale
> blood letting. I prefer to believe that
war instead of being an agency for
good is rather an evidence of man's
surrender to his passions and that one
of the tests of civilization is man's
willingness to submit his controversies
to the arbitrament of reason rather
than force.
I venture to suggest that we may
not only promote peace but also advance
our commercial interests by announcing
as a national policy that our
navy will not be used for the collection
of private debts. While protecting
the lives of our citizens everywhere
and guaranteeing the personal safety
of all who owe allegiance to our flag,
we should. In my judgment, announce
that persons engaging in business and
holding property In other lands for
business purposes must be subject to
the laws of the countries in which they
engage in business enterprises. Many
profitable fields of Investment are now
closed because the people of the smaller
nations are afraid that an investment
of foreign capital will be made
an excuse for a foreign Invasion.
Our nation has lost prestige, rather
than gained it. by our experiment in
colonialism. We have given the monarchist
a chance to ridicule our Declaration
of Independence, and the scoffer
has twitted us with inconsistency. A
tour through the Philippine Islands
has deepened the conviction that we
should lose no time in announcing our
i purposes to deal with the Filipinos as
we dealt with the Cubans. Every consideration.
commercial and political,
leads to this conclusion. Such ground
as we may need for coaling stations
or for a naval base will be gladly conceded
by the Filipinos, who simply desire
an opportunity to work out their
own destiny, inspired by our example
and aided by our advice. In so far as
our efforts have been directed toward
the education of the Filipinos we have
rendered them a distinct service but
in educating them we must recognize
that we are making colonialism Impos.
sible. If we Intended to hold them as
subjects we would not dare to educate
them; self-government with ultimate
independence must be assumed if we
contemplate universal education in the
Philippines. As soon as opportunity
offers I shall discuss the Philippine
question more at length and I shall
also refer to English rule In India for
It throws light upon our own problems
In the Philippines but these subjects
must be reserved until I can speak of
that in detail.
In several of the nations of Europe,
the legislative department of govern*>
ment Is more quickly responsive to
public sentiment than Is our congress.
In England for Instance, where the
ministry is formed from the dominant
party, when an election is held upon
any important issue the government
proceeds to put into law the will of
the people expressed at the polls.
While our system is superior in many
respects it has one defect, viz., that
congress does not meet in regul&r
sesslon until thirteen months after
the election. During: this period
there is uncertainty, long: drawn out,
which to the business community is
often more damaging: than a change of
policy promptly carried into effect.
Would not the situation be improved
by a constitutional amendment convening
the session of congress within
a few months of the election and compelling
the second session to adjourn
several days before the following election?
Such a change would not only
serve legitimate business interests and
give the public the benefit of that
prompt relief through remedial legislation
but it would protect the people
from the jobs that are usually reserved
for the short session which is now
neia arter me eiecuun vuu ?nc? mati;
of the members feel less responsibility
because of defeat, at the polls.
I return more convinced than ever
before of the importance of a change
in the method of electing United
States senators. There Is noticeable
everywhere a distinct movement toward
democracy in its broadest sense.
In all the countries which I have visited
there is a demand that the government
be brought nearer to the people.
Throughout Europe the movement
manifests itself in various forms. In
the United States this trend toward
democracy has taken the form of a
growing demand for the election of
United States senators by a direct vote
of the people. It must be difficult to
overestimate the strategic advantage
of this reform. Since every bill must
receive the sanction of the senate as
well as the house of representatives before
it can become a law, no important
legislation of a national character is
possible until the senate is brought in|
to harmony with the people. I am
within the limits of the truth when I
say that the senate has been for some
years the bulwark of predatory wealth,
and that it even now contains some
men who owe their elections to favorseeking
corporations and are so subservient
to their masters as to prevent
needed legislation. The popular branch
of congress has four times declared in
i fnons nf fhn rafArm hv o tu'A.th 1 rHa
tatui vi nit +* j ? " ?? ww
vote and more than two-thirds of the
states have demanded it, and yet the
senate arrogantly and impudently
blocks the way.
The Income tax, which some in our
country have denounced as a socialistic
attack upon wealth, has, I am
pleased to report, the endorsement of
the most conservative countries in the
old world. It is a permanent part of
the fiscal system of most countries
of Europe and in many places it is
a graded tax, the rate being highest
upon the largest incomes. England
has long depended upon the income
tax for a considerable part of her
revenues, and an English commission
is now investigating the proposition
to change from a uniform to a graded
tax. I have been absent too long to
speak with any -authority on the public
sentiment in this country at this
time, but I am so convinced of the
justice of the income tax that I feel
sure that the people will sooner or
later demand an amendment to the
constitution which will specifically
prbvide for an Income tax and thus
make it possible for the burdens of
the Federal government to be apportioned
among the people in proportion
to their ability to bear them.
It is little short of a disgrace to our
country that while it is able to command
the lives of its citizens in the
times of war, it cannot, even in the
most extreme emergency, compel
wealth to bear Its share of the. exnan?u>a
nf tht> o-nvprnmont which nrn
tects It.
I have referred to the Investigation
of international controversies under a
system which does not bind the parties
to accept the findings of the court
of inquiry. This plan can be used in
disputes between labor and capital.
In fact, it was proposed as a means of
settling such disputes before it was
applied to international controversies.
It is as important that we shall have
peace at home as that we shall live
peaceably with foreign nations, and
peace is only possible when it rests
upon Justice. In advocating arbitration
of differences between large corporate
employers and their employees,
I believe we are defending the highest
interests of the three parties to
these disputes, viz, the employer, the
employees and the public. Employee
cannot be turned over to the employer
to be dealt with as the employer
may please. The question sometimes
asked: "Can I conduct my business
to suit myself?" is a plausible one,
but when a man in conducting his
business, attempts to arbitrarily fix
the conditions under which hundreds
of employees are to live and determine
the future of thousands of human beInpu
T anmvpr wltHrmt hpaitntlnn that
he has no right to conduct his business
In such a way as to deprive his
employees of their right to life, liberty
and the pursuit of happiness. To
support this position I need only to refer
to the laws regulating the safety
of mines, the factory laws fixing the
age at which children can be employed,
the usury laws establishing the
rate of Interest. The efTort of the employer
to settle differences without
arbitration has done much to embitter
him against those who work for
him and to estrange them from
him?a condition deplorable from
every standpoint. But if it is unwise
to make the employer the sole
custodian of the rights and interests
of the employees it Is equally unwise
to give to the employees uncontrolled
authority over the rights and Interests
of the employer. The employees are
no more to be trusted to act unselfishly
and disinterestedly than the employers.
In their zeal to secure a
present advantage they may not only
do injustice, but even forfeit a larger
future gain. The strike, the only
weapon of the employee at present, Is
a two-edged sword, and may injure
the workman as much as the employer.
and when wholly successful, it is
api 10 leave a ranKiing in me du?uiu
of the wage earner that should not be
there.
Society, moreover, has something at
stake as well as the employer and
employees, for there can be no considerable
strike without considerable loss
to the public. Society, therefore, is
justified In demanding that the differences
between capital and labor shall
be settled by peaceful means. If a
permanent, impartial board is created
to which either party of an Industrial
Mspute may appeal, or which can, of
its own motion, institute an inquiry,
public opinion may be relied upon to
enforce the finding. If there is a compulsory
submission to investigation, it
is not necessary that there shall be
compulsory acceptance of the decision
for a full and fair investigation will in
almost every case bring about a settlement.
No reference to the labor question
is complete that does not include
some mention of what is known as
government by Injunction. As the
main purpose of the writ is to evade
trial by jury, it is really an attack upon
the jury system, and ought to
arouse a unanimous protest. So long
as the meanest thief is guaranteed a
trial by jury, a jury ought not to be
denied to wage earners. However, as
the writ is usually invoked in case of
a strike, the evil of the subject would
be very much reduced by the adoption
of a system of arbitration, because
arbitration would very much reduce,
even if it did not entirely remove.
the probability of a strike.
Just another word in regard to the
laboring man. The struggle for an
eight-hour day is an international
struggle and it is sure to be settled
in favor of the workingmen's contention.
The benefits of the labor saving
machine have not been distributed with
equity. The producer has enormously
multiplied his capacity, but so far the
owner of the machine has received too
mnf>h nf thf incrcasp ;irn1 the laborer
ton little. Those who oppose the eighthour
day. I am convinced, do so more
because of ignorance of the conditions
than for lack of sympathy for those
who toll. The removal of the work
from the house to the factory has separated
the husband from his wife and
the father from his children while the
growth of our cities has put an Increased
distance between the home
and the workshop. Then. too. more is
demanded of the laboring man now
than formerly. He Is a citizen as well
as a laborer, and must have time for
the study of public questions, if he
is to be an Intelligent sovereign. To
drive him from his bed to his task and
from his task back to his bed is to deprive
the family of his companionship,
society of his service and politics of
his influence.
Thus far I have dwelt upon subjects
which may not be regarded as strictly
partisan, but I am sure that you will
pardon me if in this presence I betray
my Interest in those policies for which
the Democratic party stands. I have
not had an opportunity to make a
Democratic speech for almost a year
and no one, not even a political enemy,
could be so cruel as to forbid me to
speak of those policies on this occasion.
Our opponents have derived not
only partisan pleasure, but also partisan
advantage from the division
caused in our party by the money
question. They ought not, therefore,
begrudge us the satisfaction that we
Tina in me iaci initi unexpeuieu auditions
have removed the cause of our
differences and permitted us to present
a united front on present issues. The
unlooked for and unprecedented increase
in the production of gold has
brought a victory to both the advocates
of gold and the advocates of bl-metallism,
the former keeping the gold
standard, which they wanted, and the
latter securing the larger volume of
money, for which they contended. We
who favor by-metallism are satisfied
with our victory if friends of monometallism
are satisfied with theirs,
and we can invite them to a contest
of zeal and endurance in the effort to
restore to the people the rights which
have been gradually taken from them
by the trusts. The investigations
which have been in progress during the
past year have disclosed the business
methods of those who a few years ago
resented any inspection of their
schemes and hid their rascality under
high sour ding phrases. These investigations
have also disclosed the source
of the enormous campaign funds which
have been used to debauch elections
and corrupt the ballot. The people see
now what they should have seen before,
namely, that no party can exterminate
the trust so long as It owes
its political success to campaign contributions
secured from the trusts.
The great corporations do not contribute
their money to any party except
lor immunity expressly promisea ur
clearly implied. The president has recommended
legislation on this subject
but so far his party has failed to respond.
No important advance can be
made until this baneful influence is
eliminated and I hope that the Democratic
party will not only challenge the
Republican party to bring forward effective
legislation on this subject but
will set an example by refusing to receive
campaign contributions from
corporations and by opening the books
so that every contributor of any considerable
sum may be known to the
public before the election. The great
majority of corporations are engaged
in legitimate business and have nothing
to fear from hostile legislation and
the officers should not be permitted to
use the money of the stockholders to
advance their own political opinions.
Contributions should be individual, not
corporate, and no party can afford to
receive , contributions even from individuals
when the acceptance of these
contributions secretly pledge th.? party
to a course which it cannot openly
avow. In other words, politics should
be honest and I mistake political conditions
in America if they do not presage
Improvement in the conduct of
campaigns.
While men may differ as to the relative
Importance of Issues, and while
the next congress will largely shape the
lines upon which the coming presl
dential campaign will be fought, I think
it is safe to say that at present the
paramount issue in the_ minds of a
large majority of the people is the trust
Issue. I congratulate President Roosevelt
upon the steps which he has taken
to enforce the anti-trust law and my
gratification is not lessened by the fact
that he has followed the Democratic
rather than the Republican platform, In
every advance he has made. It has
been a great embarrassment to him that
the platform upon which he was elected
was filled with praise of the Republican
party's record rather than
with promises of reform. Even the enthusiastic
support given him by the
Democrats has enabled the champions
of the trusts to taunt him with following
Democratic leadership. He has
probably gone as far as he could without
incurring the hostility of leaders
of his own party. The trouble is that
the Republican party is not in a position
to apply effective and thoroughgoing
reforms because it has built up,
through special legislation, the very
abuses which need to be eradicated.
Before any intelligent action can be
taken against the trusts we must have
definition of a trust. Because no corporation
has an absolute and complete
monopoly of any important product,
me apoiogisis lor me irusis seem iu
insist that there are in reality no trust.
Others insist that it is impossible to
legislate against such trusts as may
exist without doing injury to legitimate
business. For the purpose of
this discussion it is sufficient to draw
the line at a point where competition
ceases to be effective and to designate
as a trust any corporation which controls
so much of the product of any
article that it can fix the terms and
condition of a sale.
Legislation which prevents a monopoly
not only does not injure legitimate
business but actually protects
legitimate business from injury. We
are indebted to the younger Rockefeller
for an illustration which makes
this distinction clear. In defending
the trust system he is quoted as saying
that as the Amferican Beauty rose
cannot be brought to perfection without
pinching the ninety-nine buds so
that the one hundredth bud can receive
the full strength of the bush, so
great industrial organizations are impossible
without the elimination of the
smaller ones. It is a cruel illustration,
but presents a perfectly accurate
description of trust methods. The
nomncMtir nnrtv chamoions the cause
of the 99 enterprises which are menaced;
they must not be sacrificed that
one great combination may flourish.
There must be no mistaking of the
issue and no confusing of the line of
battle. The trust as an institution
will have few open defenders. The
policy of the trust magnates will be
to insist upon "reasonable legislation"
and then they will depend upon their
power to corrupt legislatures and Intimidate
executives to prevent the application
of any remedies which will
interfere with the trusts. Our motto
must be "a private monopoly Is indefensible
and Intolerable," and our
plan of attack must contemplate the
total and complete overthrow of the
monopoly principle in Industry.
We need not quarrel over remedies.
We must show ourselves willing to
support any remedy which promises
substantial advantage to the people in
their warfare against monopoly.
Something is to be expected from the
enforcement of the criminal clause of
the Sherman anti-trust law, but this
law must be enforced, not against a
few trusts, as at present, but against
all trusts, and the aim must be to Imprison
the guilty, not merely to recover
a fine. If the criminal clause is
not going to be enforced it ought to
be repealed. If imprisonment is too
severe a punishment for the eminent
epntlemen who rob eighty millions of
people of hundreds of millions of dollars
annually, the language of the
statute ought to be changed, for nothing
is more calculated to breed anarchy
than the failure to enforce the
law against rich criminals while it is
rigidly enforced against petty offenders.
But it is not sufficient to enforce
existing laws. If ten corporations
conspiring together in restraint of
trade are threatened with punishment.
all they have to do now is to
dissolve their separate corporations
and turn their property over to a new
corporation. The new corporation
can proceed to do the same thing that
the separate corporations attempted
and yet not violate the law. We need,
therefore, new legislation, and the Republican
party not only falls to enact
such legislation but fails even to
promise it. The Democratic party
must be prepared to propose new and
efficient legislation.
Recent Investigations have brought
to light the fact that nearly all the
crookedness revealed in the management
of our large corporations has
been due to the duplication of directorates.
A group of men organized or
obtained control of several corporations
doing business with each other,
and then proceeded to swindle the
stockholders of the various corporations
for which they acted.
Many of the trusts control prices by
the same methods?the same group of
men secure control of several competing
corporations and the management
is thus consolidated. It is worth
while to consider whether a blow may
not be struck at the trusts by a law
making it illegal for the same person
to act as director or officer of two cor?
- ?? ? ? ? ? >1?i?L A am! **?! V? Ann V* Af K_ I
purnuons WHICH ucai nun catii uv..- i
er, or are engaged in the same general
business.
A still more far-reaching remedy
was proposed by the Democratic platform
of 1900, namely, the requiring
of corporations to take out a Federal
llcenf? before engaging in inter-state
commerce. This remedy is simple,
easily applied and comprehensive. If
corporations were required to take
out a Federal license, the Federal government
could then issue a license upon
terms and conditions which would
protect .the public. A corporation differs
from a human being in that it
has no natural rights, and as all of its,
rights are derived from the statutes
it can be limited or restrained, according
as the public welfare may require.
The control which congress has over
inter-state commerce is complete. No
party can long be credited with sincerity
if it condemns the trusts with
words only and then permits the trusts
to employ all the instrumentalities of
inter-state commerce in the carrying
out of their nefarious plans. It is far
easier to prevent a monopoly than to
watch it and punish it, and this prevention
can be accomplished in a
practical way by refusing a license to
any corporation which controls more ,
than a certain proportion of the total <
product?this proportion 'to be arbl- ,
a.? ii? a? ?* * ?Aiwi tiiK Is* Vi urlll (Hva i
irarny nxeu ai a iiuun nmv>i .....
free operation to competition.
The tariff question is very closely
allied to the trust question and the
reduction of the tariff furnishes an
easy means of limiting the extortion
which the trusts can practice.
While free trade would not necessarily
make a trust absolutely Impossible,
still it is probable that few
manufacturing establishments would
dare to enter into a trust if the president
were empowered to put upon
the free list articles competing with
those controlled by a trust. I cannot
permit this opportunity to pass without
expressing the opinion that the
principles embodied in the protective
tariff have been the fruitful source of
a great deal of political corruption as
well as the support of many of our
most Iniquitous trusts.
It Is difficult to condemn the manufacturers
for uniting to take advantage
of a high tariff schedule when the
schedule is framed on the theory that
the industries need all the protection
given and It is not likely that the beneficiaries
of these schedules will consent
to their reduction so long as the public
waits for the tariff to be reformed by
Its friends.
But one of the worst features of a
tariff, levied not for revenue but for
the avowed purpose of protection, Is
that it fosters the Idea that men should
use their votes to advance their own
financial interests. For a generation the
'fat" has been fried out of the manufacturers
by the Republican campaign
committee, and then the manufacturers
have been reimbursed by legislation.
With the public conscience educated to
believe that this open purchase of legislation
was entirely proper, no wonder
that insurance companies have used the
money of their policy-holders to carry
elections?no wonder that trusts have
hastened to purchase immunity from
punishment with liberal donations.
How can we draw a moral line, between
the senator and congressman
elected by the trusts to prevent hostile
legislation and the senator or con
gressman kept in congress Dy me manufacturers
to secure friendly legislation?
The party which Justifies the
one form of bribery cannot be relied
upon to condemn the other.
There never was a time when tariff
reform could be more easily entered
upon, for the manufacturers, by selling
abroad cheaper than at home, as
many of them do, have not only shown
their ingratitude toward those who
built the tariff wall for them, but they
have demonstrated their ability to sell
in competition with the world.
The railroad question is also interwoven
with the trust question. Nearly
all the private monopolies have received
rebates or secured other advantages
over competitors. Absolutely
equality of treatment at the hands of
the railroads would go far toward the
crippling of the trusts and I rejoice
that the president has had the courage
to press this question upon congress.
While the law, as it was finally distorted
by the senate, is not all that
could be wished, it deserves a fair
trial. ,
Rate regulation was absolutely necessary
and it furnishes some relief from
the unbearable conditions which preovlatert
hut we must not for
get that the vesting of this enormous
power In the hands of a commission
appointed by the president introduces
a new danger. If an appointive board
has the power to fix rates, and can by
the exercise of that power increase
or decrease by hundreds of millions of
dollars the annual revenues of the railroads,
will not the railroads feel that
they have large pecuniary interest in
the election of a president friendly to
the railroads? Experience has demontrated
that municipal corruption is
largely traceable to the fact that franchise
corporations desire to control the
city council and thus increase their
dividends. If the railroad managers
adopt the same policy the sentiment
in favor of the ownership of the railroads
by the government is likely to
increase throughout the country as
the sentiment In favor of municipal
ownership has increased in the cities.
I have already reached the conclusion
that railroads partake so much of the
nature of a monopoly that they must
ultimately become public officials in
the interest of the whole community
in accordance with the well defined
theory that public ownership is necessary
where competition Is Impossible.
I do not know that the country is ready
for this change. I do not know that
a majority of my own party favor it,
but I believe that an Increasing number
of the members of all parties see
in public ownership the sure remedy
for discrimination between persons and
places and for the extortionate rates
for the carrying of freight and passengers.
Believing, however, that the operation
of all the railroads by the Federal
government would result in a centralization
which would all but obliterate
states lines, I prefer to see only the
trunk lines operated by the Federal
government and the local lines by the
several states governments.
Some have opposed this dual ownership
as impracticable but investigation
in Europe has convinced me that it is
entirely practicable. Nearly all the
railroads of Germany are owned by
the several states, the Empire not
even owning the trunk lines, and yet
the inter-state traffic is in no wise obstructed.
The ownership and operation
of the local lines by the several states
governments is not only feasible but it
suits Itself to the conditions existing
in the various states. In those stales
where people are ripe for change, the
local lines can be purchased or new
lines be built at once, while private
ownership can continue in those states
In which the people still prefer private
v V> I1CI nm^j.
As to the right of the governments, :
Federal and state, to own and operate
railroads there can be no doubt. If we ]
can deepen the water in the lakes and
build connecting canals in order to ;
cheapen railroad transportation during
half of the year, we can build a ,
railroad and cheapen rates the whole
year. If we can spend several hundred ]
millions on the Panama canal to lower
trans-continental rates, we can build 1
a railroad from New York to San
Francisco to lower both trans-conti- .
nental and local rates. The United
States mail is increasing so rapidly .
that we shall soon be able to pay inter
est on the cost of trunk lines out of the
money which we now pay railroads
for carrying through mails.
If any of you question the propriety
of my mentioning this subject, I
beg to remind you that the president
could not have secured the passage of
the rate bill had he not appealed to the
fear of the more radical remedy of
jjorvernment ownership, arid nothing
will so restrain the railroad magnates
from attempting to capture the interstate
commerce commission as the
same fear. The high handed manner
Ln which they have violated law and
Ignored authority, together with the
corruption discovered in high places,
has done more to create sentiment in
favor of public ownership than all the
speeches and arguments of the opponents
of private ownership.
Just a word more In regard to the
uuBis. some ueienu inein un uie
ground that they are an economic development
and that they cannot be
prevented without great Injury to our
Industrial system. This may be answered
In two ways: First, trusts are
1 political development rather than
in economic one; and, second, the
trjost system cannot be permitted to
?(jnlinue even though It did result in
i net economic gain. It is political bemuse
It rests upon the corporation,
ind the corporation rests upon a statutory
foundation. The trust, Instead
if teing a natural development, is a
form of legalized larceny and can exist
only so long as the law permits It
to' eilst. That there is an economic
advantage in production on a large
scale may be admitted, but there is a
point beyond which the economic advantage
of large production ceases,
rhfe moment an industry approaches
the position of a monopoly it begins to
lose in economic efficiency, for a monppoly
discourages Invention, invites deterioration
in quality, and destroys a
most potent factor in production, "iz:
individual ambition.
But the political objections to a trust
>vercome any economic advantage
which It can possibly have. No economic
advantage can justify an industrial
despotism or compensate a nation
For the loss of independence among Its
producers. Political liberty could not
long endure under an industrial rystim
which permitted a few powerful magnates
to control the means of livelihood
if the rest of the people.
Landlordism, the curse of Europe,
Is an innocent institution in comparison
with the trust, when the trust is
carried to its logical conclusion. The
man who argues that there is an economic
advantage In private monopoly
Is aiding socialism. The Socialist, as*erting
the economic superiority of
the monopoly, insists that its benefits
shall accrue to the whole people, and
his conclusion cannot be denied if the
superiority of monopoly is admitted.
The Democratic party, If I understand
its position, denies the economic as
(veil as the political advantage of private
monopoly and promises to oppose
t wherever It manifests Itself. It offer*
as an alternative, competition,
A'here competition is possible and
public monopoly wherever circumstances
are such as to prevent competition.
Socialism presents a consistent theory,
but a theory which, in my judgment,
does not take human nature Into
account. Its strength is in its attack
upon evils, the existence of which
is confessed. Its weakness is that it
tvpuld substitute a new disease?if not
tt worse one?for the disease from
ivhich we suffer. The Socialist is
honest in the belief that he has found
i remedy for human Ills, and he must
he answered with argument, not with
ibuse. The best way to oppose socialism
is to remedy the abuses which
frave grown up under individualism,
hut which are not a necessary part of
ndivlAualiem, and the sooner the remedy
is applied the better. As T was
eavlng home, I set forth my reasons
fer opposing the socialist doctrine,
:hat the government should own and
iperate all the means of production
ind transportation; my observations
i urine the oast year have strengthen
;d my convictions on the subject. Because
I am anxious to preserve individualism,
I am earnest in my desire
;o see the trusts exterminated root
md branch, that the door of opporunlty
may be open to every American
.itlzen.
On another occasion I shall call atention
to the rapidly growing expeniitures
of the Federal government,
jut at this time I desire to center your
houghts upon the overshadowing evil
)f the day?the trust?with the pluiccracy
tendencies that result there'tom.
Its demands are immediate,
md the people are preparing to administer
heroic treatment. The Demjcratlc
party offers a solution which
s both reasonable and adequate, a caution
in which time honored prlncljles
are applied to new conditions.
The Democratic party is not the en;my
of property or of property rights;
t Is, on the contrary, the best de'ender
of both because it defends human
rights, and human rights are the
)nly foundation upon which property
ind property rights can rest securely,
rhe Democratic party does not menice
a single dollar legitimately accumulated;
on the contrary, it insists
ipon the protection of rich and poor
ilike In the enjoyment of that which
:hey have honestly earned. The Dem>cratlc
party does not discourage
:hrift, but, on the contrary, stimulates
?ach individual to the highest ena
noei.wlwcr him that Ha will
jtravui uy aooui nig mm ?.
iot be deprived of the fruits of his
toll. If we can but repeal the laws
vhich enable men to reap where they
lave not sown?laws which enable
:hem to garner into their overflowing
tarns the harvests that belong to others?no
one will be able to accumuate
enough to make his fortune danjerous
to the country. Special privieges
and the use of the taxing power
for private gain?these are the twin
pillars upon which plutocracy rests,
ro take away these supports and to
;levate the beneficiaries of special legslation
to the path of honest effort
>ught to be the purpose of our party.
non on ff or Ininrv hv lust
avatton, Imrartlal laws and tlm application
of the Jeffersonlan doctrine
)f equal rights to all and special privleges
to none? Only those whose accumulations
are stained with dishonesty
and whose Immoral methods have
riven them a distorted view of business,
society and government. Accunulatlng
by conscious fraud more
money than they can profitably use
apon themselves, wisely distribute or
safely leave to their children, these
lenounce as public enemies all who
luestlon their methods or throw light
jpon their crimes.
Plutocracy is abhorrent as a repubic;
it is more despotic than anarchy,
more heartless than aristocracy, more
selfish than bureaucracy. It prays
jpon the nation in time of peace and
conspires against It in the hour of its
'alamity. Conscienceless, compassionless
and devoid of wisdom, it enervates
its votaries while it impoverishes
its victims. It is already sapping
the strength of the nation, vulgarizing
social life and making a mockery of
morals. The time is ripe for Its overthrow.
Let us attack it boldly, making
our appeal to the awakened conscience
of the nation in the name of
the counting room which it has defiled,
In the name of business honor
vhich It has sullied, In the name of
the people it has oppressed, in the
name of the homes which it has despoiled,
and in the name of religion,
upon which It has placed tne stigma
f hypocrisy.
And. if I may be permitted to suggest
a battle hymn, I propose a stanza
but slightly changed from one of the
stropgest of the poems of Scotland's
Semocratlc bard:
'Columbia! My dear, my native soil!
For whom my warmest wish to heaven
is sent!
Long may thy hardy sons of rustic
toil,
Be blest with health and peace and
sweet content!
And O, may Heaven their simple lives
prevent
From Luxury's contagion, weak and
vile;
Then, tho' unearned wealth to wickedness
be lent,
A virtuous populace may rise and
stand,
A wall of fire around their much loved
land."
SOUTH CHROiM
_Tj
How the Spirit of Liberty
Unconquera
Dy REV. ROBER1
From the Torkvllle Enquirer of 1871.
INSTALLMENT XVIIL
Battle of Fiehdam Ford.
When. In September 1780, the British
commenced to advance into North
Carolina, Colonel (afterwards general)
Sumter, with the remnant <tf his troops
which had escaped Tarleton at Fishing
creek on the 18th of August, was encamped
on Clem's Branch. On the approach
of the Qrltlsh, Sumter found
ii necessary 10 move ins camp. ne
was not able to resist the onward
movement of the enemy and wisdom
dictated to get out of his way as soon '
as possible.
Before the movement from Clem's
Branch commenced. Colonel James 1
Williams with a small force which he
had collected in North Carolna, Joined
Sumter. Williams it is said, had but
a short time previous, received a brigadier
general's commission from Governor
Rutledge of South Carolina.
Williams claimed the right to command
the whole force, but the men under
Sumter refused to submit to him.
The whole force notwithstanding the
bad state of feeling which existed
among them on account of the claim
set up by Williams, marched together
and crossed the Catawba at Wright's
ferry. Rawdon and Tarleton were '
pressing them closely. So near were
the two armies together, that the
Americans had scarcely effected the
crossing of the river when the British
appeared on the other side and commenced
firing. To settle the dispute
between Sumter and Wllliama. a convention
of- officers, with Col. William
Hill as chairman, was called.
The convention decided to send
Wchard Winn, Henry Hampton, John '
Thrmas and John Mlddleton. as commissioners
to Governor Rutledge. who '
was at that time some where In the
neighborhood of Salisbury. North Carolina.
These commissioners were In-,
structed to lay the facts before Gov- J
ernor Rutledge and report his decision.
In the meantime Sumter was to re- '
tire from the army and the command of
all the troops, except those brought by
Williams from North Carolina, devolved
ui>on Hill and Lacey.
What decision Governor Rutledge
made, If any at all, never so far as 1
we know, was made public. The battle '
of King's Mountain occurred soon af- '
ter and Williams was mortally 1
wounded. At King's Mountain we hear 1
nothing of any claim set up by Williams
as an officer of higher rank than
Campbell or any one else. On the contrary,
if any one was first In command
at King's Mountain that one was by
the consent of all, William Campbell 1
of Virginia.
After the battle(of King's Mountain, 1
the troops from western North Carolina
and Virginia returned beyond the 1
mountains. Hill and Lacey led the 1
remainder of the a:*my down to what 1
was then Wright's (now Wm. Burrls') '
mill on Turkey creek. Here the pa- 1
triots lay encamped, when Tarleton :
who had been sent by Cornwallls to '
look after Ferguson, lay encamped for 1
twn d?vs on the hill west of Ross' '
(now Robert Carnes') mill. On the
16th of October, Tarleton was ordered 1
to join Cornwallls at the National ford '
on Catawba.
Sometime about the first ,of November
or last of October, 1780, Sumter 1
joined Hill and Lacey, then encamped (
at what Is now Burrls' mill. The brave '
and patriotic Williams was dead and 1
all cause of dispute among both offl- '
cers and men was removed. Sumter 1
by general consent, took the command
and led the troops against the British '
and Tories on the west side of Broad 1
river. In order to keep open commu- 1
nicatlon between Camden and Ninety- 1
Six, the British had erected small 1
stockade forts at several points in the
counties of Union and Spartanburg. 1
These posts Sumter and his men annoyed
greatly. They gave the British 1
and Tories j>o rest. The heroic Elijah
Clark. John- Twiggs and Andrew Pickens,
with small parties of Georgians,
were In the same region operating In a
way similar to that pursued by Sum- J
ter. On meeting Clark and Twiggs, It
was determined to unite the South
Carolina forces, under Sumter, with
the Georgians, under Clark and
?*?? - -J ?? ottonlr itnnn '
1 W18KS ttiiu maac an anavi> _r...
Ninety-Six.
Each of the three officers agreed to 1
furnish a certain number of men.
Sumter foupd that before he could
meet his engagement with Clark and
Twiggs, he must raise at least one
hundred and fifty men. On consulta- '
tlon with the officers of his command,
it was determined to send a 1
number of individuals on a recruiting i
expedition into what is now the coun- 1
ties of York and Chester. The inhabl- 1
tants of this region of country were '
known to be true patriots, who neither 1
asked for British protection nor ac- '
cepted it when offered them. As the '
settlers were all or nearly all, ScotchfHsh
dpscpnt four native born Irish- 1
men and Edward Lacey were sent out
to beat up the needed recruits. The
names of the four Scotch-Irish recruiting
officers were Billy Wylie, grandfather
of Dr. A. P. Wylie of Chester;
Jimmy Johnson, the grand-father of
James E. Johnson of Blackstock, Chester
county, S. C.; Patrick McGrlff and
James Martin. The selection was made
with great wisdom. Billy Wylie was
a man of great good sense, joined with
a droll manner; Jimmy Johnson was
a witty Irishman who took everything
easy; Patrick McGriff was brave to a
fault; and James Martin was prudent.
Edward Lacey was one of those impetuous
creatures who never do anything
by halves. Whatever he undertook,
he did with all his might; daringly
reckless but admirably suited
for the kind of warfare In which he
? * ^ - * *?
was engaged, un me om ui nuvcm
ber, 1780, these five recruiting officers 1
set out to raise one hundred and fifty '
men. They were given three days to '
accomplish the work. The arrange- 1
ment was that, In the mean time, Sumter
would act as if he were about to 1
advance In the direction of Camden, '
but would In fact, camp at Flshdam 1
ford on Broad river. 1
I
ft HI
IKREVOUmM
r Wan Kept Aliye By an
ble People.
r LATHANi I>. r>.
At this time, Comwallis with the
main body of the British army In the
south, lay at Winnsboro. On hearing
of the operations of Sumter, he determined
to send out a detachment to cut
him off. The individual chosen to put
this determination into execution was
Major Wemyss. The troops put under
his command for the capture of Sumter.
were the 83rd r?iHm#nt nf tnnt
soldiers and forty of T&rleton's cavalry.
All were mounted, and on the
evening of the 8th of November, 1780,
the detachment set out for Sumter's
camp on Broad river. The Intention
of Wemyss was to make the attack upon
Sumter at dawn of day on the 9th,
but having procured good guides and
his horses being fresh, he arrived at
Flshdam ford about one o'clock.
Late In the afternoon of the same
day on which Wemyss left WInnsboro,
the recruiting officers sent out by
Sumter, returned according to previous
appointment. As the new recruits
were on their way to camp, It was ascertained
that there was a barrel of
whisky a few miles west of. the
oresent site of Chester. Men and
and officers all agreed that they were
entitled to their share of this whisky.
Their course was sootl turned In that
direction and on arriving the barrel
was, without any great deal of ceremony,
rolled out; and to expedite matters,
It was raised up on one end and
the head knocked out of the other end.
Every man was Instructed to help himself
liberally as he saw flt. A halt of
only some thirty minutes was made,
but many of the men were full. The
order was given to mount This was
promptly obeyed and men and officers
dashed off at a brisk canter for Fishdam
ford. A few miles before reaching
the camp, a squad of British scouts
was discovered. No one knew how
many British there were or anything
about them. So far as either the men
or officers knew, the whole of a British
brigade might be In the neighborhood.
It made no difference whether there
were many or few. The men and officers
too, no doubt, all felt the effects of
the whisky they had recently drank,
and no sooner were the British scouts
seen, than a deafening shout was raised
and away all dashed in the utmost
confusion. The British took to flight
at once and no doubt thought they
were ruined. Farm horses were urged
by their spirited riders, over the Sandy
river hills, at such a fearful gait, that
It was not long till they were completely
exhausted. The British scouts
got out of sight and the new recruits
reached Sumter's camp without a
scratch and flushed with victory.
By some means Sumter had received
Intimation that he would probably be
attacked on the night of the 8th. Colonel
Thomas Taylor, who after the fall
it Charleston had joined Sumter at
Clem's Branch, was connected with
Sumter's army. To Taylor's vigilance
Is mainly due the repulse of Wemyss.
Sumter had no Inclination to lay plans
by which he might entrap his enemy.
He was a brave man and dashing sollier,
but not remarkable for strategy.
So soon as it became probable that
Sumter's camp would be attacked, Col.
Taylor began to make preparations for
Its defence. The horses were all sadiled
and tied some distance in rear of
the camp. An order was made to have
the guns all freshly primed. Taylor
was placed in command in an advanced
?uard oi twenty-eight men. At a
short distance from the camp of Sumter
was a small field. On the border of
11113 neiu, I njiui iiou utigc mca acyi
burning from an early hour In the
evening. Behind the fence and at gun
shot distance from the fence, the vigilant
Taylor placed his picket of twentyeight
men. Sumter lay near the river
with his horses bridled and saddled,
ready for whatever might be required
in the event the British made an -attack.
All was silence. Sumter's men
were waiting with sleepless anxiety.
Vbout midnight the sound of horses
feet in the distance, were heard.
Taylor's pickets were wide awake.
Their commander ordered them not to
fire until the signal was given. When
Major Wemyss came in sight of the
ramp fires, he saw that his plans of
>peration could not be carried out. He
expected to come upon Sumter off his
Tuard, as Tarleton had come upon him
it Fishing creek two months before.
Rut for the sleepless vigilance of
Thomas Taylor, this no doubt would
have been the case.
So soon as Wemyss discovered that
the Americans were apprised of his approach,
he determined to make the attack
at once, and not wait as had
been previously arranged, until daylight.
He feared that by postponing
the attack, Sumter would cross the river
during: the night and by morning be
put of his reach. At one o'clock Major
Wemyss, at the head of his detachment,
charged the pickets under Taylor.
An order had been given not to
fire until the enemy came in full view.
The moment the British came within
?unshot distance, the order was given
to fire. The keen crack of five rifles
was heard echoing among the Sandy
river hills. The aim had been unerring.
One ball entered the arm and anather
the knee of Wemyss. The British
were thrown into confusion and dashed
In among the blazing flres of Taylor's
pickets. This brought them into full
liew and volley after volley was poured
In by the picket? conceited behind the
fence. The British could only discover
the hiding place of thi Americans by
the flash of their guns. They fired in
the direction of the blrze but only killed
one man. Wemyss having counted
certainly on victory had not communicated
his plans to any of his subalterns.
When he fell the command
pf the detachment devolved upon a
lieutenant, who ordered a precipitate
retreat and hastened with the party
back to Winnsboro is fast as possible.
The British left oa the field twentythree
men killed and wounded; two officers
wounded?Major Wemyss and
Lieutenant Hoverden. The Americans
lost but one man. Wemyss was not
found until the next morning. He was
greatly exhausted from the loss of
blood. In his pocket was found a list
0/ the patriots he bad hanged and the
bouses he had burned. Notwithstanding
his notoriously brutal conduct on
a multitude of occasions, his bleeding
wounds were bound up and at his own
request, the document which contained
an enumeration of his Infamous deeds
was destroyed.
About the time that the British after
having been disordered by the lire of
the Americans, were preparing for a
second charge, an accident took place
which contributed to the advantage of
the patrlota By some accident a cart
load of cartridges became Ignited. The
burning cartridges kept up a continual
cracking which the British mistook for
platoons of Americans. They could
hear nothing but a continual roar, and
could see nothing but a continual blase.
The cart load of ignited cartridges
frightened some of the new recruits
among the Americans. These fled to
the river and concealed themselves he.
neath Ita banks. Making a similar
mistake with the British they concluded
the battle was still raging when it
was only the exploding of burning
cartridges.
This little fight threw the British
camp in Winnsboro all in .confusion.
Cornwallls wrote Immediately to Tarleton,
who was in the low country looking
after Marion, to return. In his letter
which is dated Winnsboro, November
9th, 1780, he begs Tarleton "to return
immediate1/." Evidently he began
to fear not only for the post at
Ninety-Six, but for the no less important
at Winnsboro. He began to feel
that his own cu"riss was in danger.
TO BE CONTINUED.
COMMERCIAL MOTOR WAQON8.
Their Growing Use For Agricultural
and Other Purposes In England.
In many rural districts the agricultural
communities are looking to
the motor wagon as a panacea for
their troubles, and there is no doubt,
where railway facilities are few or
rates high, that the motor wagon
will enable them to get their produce
tn mflrkflt wtrh tha laoaf Ac lav anil
at a low cost.
One of the many such projects under
consideration Is that at Essex.
In this case arrangements are being
made to supply London with agricultural
produce by means of an organization
which Is to collect the various
goods at centres situated In
Chelmsford, Bralntree, Dunmow, Epplng,
Ongar, Wltham and many other
towns. These collecting centres are
to be furnished with slaughter- .
houses, chilling rooms, creameries
and grading and selecting departments
to deal with the produce
brought to them from the surrounding
country by motor or otherwise,
and thence It will be forwarded to
London by motor wagon. A somewhat
similar system of collecting is
meeting with success In Berkshire.
Another promising outlook for the
Industry Is the rumor that the colliery
owners are comtemplating a
system of direct deliveries of coal
from pit mouth to consumer by
steam lorry. It is remarkable that
such a system has not been more in
vogue where coal fields are within
easy reach of industrial- centres as,
for example, in Lancashire. The
mode of procedure at present is for
the colliery owners to load trucks on
viit? ituiwuy, nave inein imuieu iruu
twenty to twenty-five miles by rail,
unloaded to carts and eventually delivered
to the consumer, sometimes
three or four days being occupied in
this manner, when by employing
steam wagons as many hours would
probably be occupied and the cost
reduced to a minimum.
The present solution of the traffic
problem in London apd provincial
towns no doubt lies greatly in the
employment of motor goods vehicles
in. conjunction with motor omnibuses,
and it has been predicted that
in London in ten years time not a
horse will be employed in traction
work. Whether this is too sanguine
a view or not cannot be determined,
but that the fact that the supply of
horses will soon cease to be available
owing to the Increase of self-propelled
vehicles has occurtod to the war
office authorities is evident by their
letter recently addressed to the Motor
Van and Wagon -Users' associa
tion desiring to Know wnetner tney
would support a scheme for registering
heavy motor cars for the service
of the country in time ol war in
the same manner in which horses
have hitherto been subsidised.?
Cassier's Magazine.
A WOMAN'S* INVENTION.
How the Wife of an English Manufacturer
Discovered Blue Paper.
"A woman," said a paper maker, 'Invented
blue paper. It was by accident
that she did It, though. Before her ,
time all paper was white.
"She was the wife of William Eastea,
one of the leading paper makers of
England In the eighteenth century. In
passing through the paper plant one
day she dropped a big blue bag Into
a vat of pulp. Eastes was a stern
chap, and so, since no one had seen the
accident, Mrs. Eastes decided to say
nothing about It
"The paper In the vat which should
have been white, came out blue. The
workmen were mysterlfled. Eastes
raged, while Mrs. Eastes kept quiet.
The upshot was that the paper was
sent to London, marked "damaged,"
to be sold for whatever It would bring.
"The selling agent In London was
shrewd. He saw that this blue tinted
paper was attractive. He declared It
to be a wonderful new invention, and
he sold It off like hot cakes at double
the white paper's price.
"Eastes soon received an order for ,
more of the blue paper?an order that
he and his men wasted several days In
trying vainly to fill.
"Then Mrs. Eastes came forward and
told the story of the blue cloth bag.
There was no difficulty after that In
making the blue paper. This paper's
price remained very high, Eastes having
a monopoly in making it"?St
Louis Globe-Democrat
tar "What are you going to call
your verses?" asked Joakley.
" 'A Broken Vase," " replied Rimer.
"Ah! that reminds me of a little
thing a servant girl of ours dashed %
off the other day."