St. Paul daily globe., 1896-04-20

Even since Nasty made the Toledo
Blade the vehicle of his Confedrit
Cross Roads gibberish that paper has
been Unidentified with most ultra Re-
publicanism. 1t is rather surprising
now to read its frantic appeals, first
to the Ohio house, and, since that
body ignored its pleadings, to the SEN
ate, to defeat a bill, fathered by Mark
Hanna and championed by Senator
Foraker, which grants street railway
corporations franchises for fifty
years, with other provisions essential
to their prosperity. 1t upbraids Mark
Hanna, McKinleys advance agent, as
q proprietor Of city railways, and For
aker, their paid attorney for trying
to force the measure through as a
party measure, and for saying that
opposition to 1t is "disloyalty to Sena-
tor-elect Foraker" 1t says that these
promoters are using means to put the
bill through that have made the pub
lie suspicious" and that ''the lobbyists
who are clustering about the capitol
are trying to push the bill through
under the party LASH" It warns these
senators that it is expected that "you
will stand by the people and will defeat
any measure that seeks to give to
great corporations privileges that are
tnimical to the great interests Of the
people,"
This is surprising, we say. Surely
the Blade has been long enough in
touch with its party to know that,
whatever may be the views as to it's
purposes of the unsophisticated rank
and file, the leaders, the senators and
bosses and managers, the Forakers
and Hannas, the Platts and Ouays.
and the horde that shine by reflected
light from these, know better what
they are there for and what are the
real and essential purposes of their
party. Mr.. Hanna, as a steel rail
maker, knows that congress exists for
the purpose Of letting his pool fix the
price of rails. And what is there in
the long history of the alliance of cor
porations with that party in congress
and the states to warrant Senator
Foraker in thinking it anything but
legitimate for senator to enlist as a.
paid attorney of any corporation
seeking grants ininical to the public
interests? Did not a senator deem
1t consistent with his Office to hold a
block of the proprietary stock in the
Northern Pacific? Did not Senator AL
Hson, then in the house, take some Of
the Credit Mobilier stock when Cakes
Ames was putting it where it would
do the most good? Did not a Wiscon-
sin senator take good care that the
land-forfeiture act of 1889 contained
provision that made it innocuous to
the corporation he represented?
When Steve Elxins attacks the bond.
Ing privilege under which this North
west is benefited by the competition of
the Canadian Pacific, which the Chi
cago Eastern trunk lines are unable to
stlf1e, does the Blade not know that he
speaks as the attorney of the B. & O.?
Was it not the Union Pacific that was
elected to the senate from Nebraska.
under the guise of a certificate Of cleo
tion to Thurston? Does the Blade not
know that, in the evolution of profess
sional ethics among Republican sena-
tors, whose vocation is the law, that
they can accept retainers from and
advocate the cause of corpo-
rations when that cause antagonizes
not only the interests but the laws
of their states? And are these lobby
lists not quite right in urging that op-
position to Mr.. Hanna's scheme and
Senator Foraker's advocacy of it is
disloyalty to the party and the sena-
tor? Does not precedent after prece-
dent warrant them in this? We can
imagine the incredulous smile that
wreathes the faces Of Senator Foraker
and Mr. Hanna as they read the
Blades fine sentiments about public
interests" and their amused query:
What does the Blade think We are
here for?