The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-09-25
EDITING THE REPRESENTA-
TIVE.
THE TIMES AS A TUTOR.


The Minneapolis Times (Democrat),
tries to dodge our charge that its
owners are also the owners of the
Evening Journal, (Republican). thus:
"Instead of deyoting all it's energy
and ability to the work of defeating
this conspiracy to override the laws OF
the state and to enSlave the industries
of the Northwest, The REPRESENTA-
TIVE seeks to discredit and belittle
the efforts of The Times in that direc-
ton, by declaring that this paper is
corrupt and untrustwOrthy because it
is printed on the presses OF the Jour
nal company. The charge is too silly
for serious notice, and is manifeSUly
made only to cover the venality and
cowardice of The REPRESENTATIVE
itself. How long ago was it that the
type-setting and press work OF The
REPRESENTATIVE were all done by
the Tribune" a Republican paper?
Yet it never occurred to The Times to
charge that The REPRESENTATIVE
was, for that reason, hypocritical and
corrupt. No decent paper would stoop
to such pettiness and Stiffness as
that"
This is foxy. We never alleged that
the Times was Enthusiastically "be-
cause it is printed on the presses Of
the Journal company but beca use it
Is oaUned by the same capitalists that oaOn
the Journal; and because that capital
talks Republicanism out Of one corner
of its mouth, and, on the same day,
squeaks Democracy out of the other
corner. No one charged that when
The REPRESENTATIVE had it's press
work done by The Tribune's presses,
it was owned by the same men who
owned The Tribune. Ownership is
vital and goes to the core of thought
and action; press-work is a purely me-
chanical business, performed prin +.
cipally by steam. Nor is it true that
the type-setting CT THE REPRESENTA-
TIVE were ever call done by the Tri-
bune" we had our own printers and
performed a great deal of our work
ourselves.
And then The Times is kind enough
to suggest course of action for this
paper. 1t says:
"For example, as the organ of Popu-
lism it should have called attention GO
Mr.. HIPS recent gift Of three-quar-
tiers of a million dollars for the found
ing of theological seminary at St.
Paul. The Times heartily approved
Mr.. HIPS act as one of great liber-
ality and benefcience. But The REP
RESENTATIVE, as consistent hater
OF mOnopOlieS and of greedy Pluto
Gratis, should have asked Mr.. Hill
where he got the money for his NUM-
ticient donaton? 1t should have in
sisted, in a general way, that he could
not have got it honestly. For it is fun
damental dogma of Popuiism that no
man can honestly accumulate in one
life time a thousand thousand dollars,
the equivalent of Thousand days
work by q thousand men. Its bust.
ness was to demons trate that this
could not be done except by taking
more than is due from others or with
holding what is due to others. The
REPRESENTATIVE should have point
eel out that there are over $4,000, 900
people in this country, and that Mr..
Hill has found cut way to take from
several millions of them dollar or
so moro than is due him. That it is
by doing this that he has been able to
afford the luxury Of becoming a phil
anthropist and public benefactOr. At
the same time THE REPRESENTA-
TIVE, in it's own peculiar way Of deal
ing with QueS tiOnS of this sort, ought
to declare that il even and exact JUS
tice were possible in this world, Mr..
Hill'S possession of SO many millions