Fort Worth weekly gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-10-09
COLONEL FLANAGAN'S OPENING
BLAST.
Turn on the calcium.

COLONEL FLANAGAN'S OPENING
BLAST.
| Col. Flanagan opened the campaign
on the Republican side at Tyler the other
day in rather breezy fashion for one In
whose breast there is no trace of polit-
ical hope. He is on the outside with no
earthly hope of getting in, but does not
suffer the consciousness of that fact 10
mar the habitual serenity and rollickins
good nature with which, philosopher
like, he views life in Texas. There does
stnot appear to be in the colonel's moral
make up as much of the sordid and
seyery practical as was indicated by
the famoy. swhat are we here
foF' 's@sVahe oonttTy' quite the re-
verse@&s'it he shoulf pr9saasa,.1g ;ssssss,,p--
s|sssrrogatory to rs No. ansTss
ssskse of stamental fHther than 4
practieA6$atlre As the leader otNa
forloruahSpe, he embodies mere eft,
ment only, patriotic or other, Ss'
so with as much cheeriness &fevivacity
as though golden honorsssM him.
There is always something pleasing and
attractive in such Astounding good ma
ture, and enjoying il as it does, THE
GAZETTE hastens to express its apprecia-
ton, and renew to the colonel the as
surauce of Its distinguished consiuera-
ton.
In his speech the colonel was pleased
to charge the Democrats of Texas with
attempting to foist "paternalism upon
the hapless people of the state by de-
claring for o railroad commission. The
colonel-any colonel, major or high
private-ought to know better than that.
In the first place q man who sanctions
and approves as he does the rank and
outrageous paternalism of the Mckinley
bill and the tariff legislation of his party
generally is ipSo IactO, estopped from
Directing to anything having the nature
or semblance of paternalism. On the
contrary, that quality alone should
recommend it to his good opinion aud his
favor. And, therefore, the very fact
that he objects SO strenuously TO the
railway commission is of itself prima
facla evidence that there Is no more
paternalism in 1t than there is in tariff
reform, to which he is likewise strongly
opposed.
Again, the Republican party upholds
q
stitution to that contemplated in Texas.
Is that commission paternalistic? If it
is why does not the gallant colonel say
80, and denouuce his party for not abol-
ishing it instanter? If paternalism IN q
small way, within the bounds of state,
is SO terribly awful, what must it be on q
grand scale, and when national in char
acter2
But there Is a large number of North
ern, as we'll as Southern states that have |
railroad commissions. Are they all |
Injurious? Take Kansas tor example, |
the Kingdom wherein ingalls, disports |
himself, and reigns like an oriental |
pacha, the banner Republican State of
the Union, that has had a commission
for eleven years, during hich time more
miles of railroad have been built than
in any other state of the Union, and
W here no known harm has been inflicted
by 1t on railroads or people, and where
neither have any complaint against it
Is that too paternalIsticI If SO, pater-
nalism is just what the people want, and
will have, and no amount Of windy dec
amation or stump oratory can awe them
rom the career OF their humor, or de-
teat their aims in that particular.
But it is not paternalism; far from 1t,
Ind did not party exigencies demand
buster OF that sort the
colonel would cheerfully admit it, and
merely for the sake Of consistency, would
lgree that there is as little paternalism
a O railway com mission as there Is in
he Decalogus. If, indeed, the railroads
observed rigidly the requirements of the
dosaio law, there would never be o COM
MISSION thought of.