The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1899-03-08
A GREAT QUESTION.


A GREAT QUESTION.
We received some time since the fol
lowing important letter, but the pressure
on our columns has crowded out our re-
ply.
Mulhall, Okla, Feb. II, 1900.
Hon. Ignatius Donnelly,
Editor Representative,
Dear Sir
You are credited with having written
the preamble OF the Omaha platform.
Like the Declaration OF Independence,
the preamble was the essence OF the docu-
ment: those parts following being mere
counts in the Indictment, any one of
which might fall to the ground without
lnvalidating the former At least, this
was the view held by the hundreds OF
thousands of laborers, NOLAN as we'll as
rural, who rallied to its support in 'o2
and ga.
That preamble declares that wealth be-
longs to him who creates it," and that
every dollar taken from labor without an
equivalent is robbery
With all due respect do not think that
you really believed this when you wrote
it. Neither can l convince myself that
other Populist leaders held that idea in
fact. Why do l say this? Because the
remedies proposed do not seem calcu-
lated to produce the desired result
| may be wrong in this If So kindly
set me right. This is matter which
must be met satisfactorily before any
scheme of party reorganization can sue
coed
Party leaders and the press for the past
seven years have proposed plans without
number for the temporary relief OF some
present urgent need, but when they come
to the real essence OF the party charter,
they have seemed staggered by its i'm
menslty, and have ignored it rather than
dig down to first principles To my mind,
this party cowardice has been the real
cause of all our troubles But for it, fu-
sion would never have been; because fu-
sion only became possible after very
large proportion of the party supporters
had lost faith i'll the integrity of leaders.
AS one OF its authors, and now its
standard bearer. it devolves upon you to
throw light upon this matter If wealth
does belong to its creator, how do you
propose to make it possible for him to
retain that wealth? AT every turn in the
road travelled through life by the produc-
er OF wealth there are stationed CONNER
cial bandits whose stand and deliver is
not to be ignored if the traveller would
live. The landlord, the merchant, the
banker. and the countless combinations
OF capital which control LIES necessities
stand across his path, exacting tribute OF
his every need How do you propose to
rid him Of these freebooters? Railroad
control, free coinage, maximum interest
rates, forfeiture of land grants, all seem
like saving at the spigot while wasting at
the bung.
Again, if every dollar taken from
labor without an equivalent is robbery"
how would you give the laborer his due?
When | hire man for dollar, expect
him to produce more than dollars
worth of wealth. else | make nothing by
hiring him. Now, the equivalent OF dol
lar is not twenty, fifty or even ninety
nine. but one hundred cents.
No man could grow rich off the labor
OF Others if he paid wages equivalent to
the wealth they produced. Yet we have
III our land millions OF middle aged and
old men who have spent lifetime piling
up wealth for others, and receiving wages
that are only twenty to fifty per cent OF
the wealth SO created, and this miserable
dole has subsequently been taken from
them by tribute which commerce levies
on the user OF every necessity of life To-
day these millions are poor-many in dis
tress. How would you prevent this can
nlbalism from continuing to the end OF
time?
Answer correctly the two general ques-
tons above propounded, and no power
on earth can prevail against the party es-
pousing them. Fail to answer them
rightly, Or attempt to dodge them by any
rhetorical play of words, and such party
may as well hang its harp upon the will
low. The people will have nothing of it.
Sincerely
EFT. TUCKER.
We are glad to receive Mr. fuckers
letter, and glad to perceive that he rec
ognizes that which is the central core of
the Omaha platform.
The principle therein avowed-that
wealth belongs to him who creates it, and
every dollar, taken from labor without an
equivalent is robbery" is fully as import
ant as any utterance OF the Declaration of
Independence of 1876
But we do not think our correspondent
fully understand that pronouncement
1t does not mean that if farmer raise
lot Of wheat he is entitled to live upon
it, and not divide it with any one else.
His first want will be, we will say,
clothing. Now he has no right to hold
his wheat and take the clothes, from the
merchant; without paying for them. The
labor invested in the clothes is just as sa-
cred and has just the same and as many
rights as the labor invested in the raising
of his wheat. He can boil his wheat and
go naked; but he will not find such
course comfortable when the thermom-
meter is below zero, and stiff gale blow
ing. He will prefer to exchange part Of
9..