The representative., 1900-11-22

AHU AOW nc says uc duVIScS lueIu W
all turn Democrats. l. D.
HOW MAY REFORMERS WORK TO-
GETHERs
This is today a paramount issue be-
fore the mind of every thoughtful re-
former, and it's solution lies in being
consistent with professions.
Bryan was beaten because he was not
consistent. Bryan declared himself a
reformer. and then gave utterance to
this disgraceful expression: Great is
Tammany, and Croker is it's prophet"
When Hill, Cleveland, German, Croker,
Belmont and scores of other equally
prominent and corrupt men persisted in
calling themselves Democrats, Bryan
knew that all these men stood opposed
to every one of the planks of his plat
form. Bryan knew that not one of these
men stood for any reform, and in the
face Of these facts Bryan declared from
every stump that he, too, was Demo-
crat.
1t was a ridiculous spectacle to see
men holding views in all matters polit-
ical so at variance, yet all insisting that
they were Democrats. 1t was inconsist-
ency that should bring even to the face
of politician blush. Bryan was guilty
of this inconsistency, and those of his
reform followers who were honest, when
they saw the company they were getting
into, turned back and repudiated such
alliance.
This was the mistake made by all the
honest followers of Bryan. They should
have declared that if Hill and Cleve-
land were typical and representative
Democrats, that they must be hence
forth known by some other name. They
should have discarded the name Demo-
crat and allied themselves with Popu-
lists, Union Reform people and the Debs
following, and here are our reasons for
this assertion:
Populists, Social Democrats and Bry-
antics are unit in their support Of and
belief in majority rule. They all alike
claim to favor such reforms as the
masses want. These three reform ele-
ments, in language more or less SINH
lar, have declared for such practical
adoption of the principles of direct leg
islation as shall enact into law the will
of the masses
This fact alone, if all three of these
factions were honest and consistent
should insure their united action.
Let us now look step further for
points on which these reformers agree.
Debs' followers favor public ownership
OF all public utilities, and MANY things
commonly regarded as private or indi
vidual utilities. They believe that all
productive wealth should be owned in
common, or. in other words, they would
abolish private capitalism in all means
of production and distribution. Their
declarations are very sweeping in these
particulars. Notwithstanding their
views, they modify their platform de-
mands to such utilities or capital as
common. This practically refers the
whole question of public ownership to a
majority vote of the masses. Debs' fol-
lowers also want public ownership of all
lands, but are willing to leave this ques-
ton also to a majority rule
Now come the Populists with their
demand for public ownership of public
utilities, but they favor private owner
ship of the little home, and such means
OF production and distribution as do not
seem likely to become subjects of mo-
nopoly, but, like the Debsites, thew are
willing to tread the path of public own
ership as fast as the majority approve
Dy referendum vote. This WILLINGNESS
to arbitrate should certainly bring the
Debs people and Populists in pretty
close touch.
NOW, when We come to the Bryanites.
most of them believe in municipal own
ership. A large number of reform DEM
ocrats now favor public ownership Of
railroads. telegraphs and telephones.
put do not go as far on these lines as
Populists; but, like Socialists and Popu-
lists, they, too, say they are willing to
submit to majority rule; they champion
self-government; they put into their
platform direct legislation plank. and
II they honestly intend to stand upon it
such determination on their part should
make them practically one with Social
lists and Populists on the great issue of
public ownership.
The same reasoning can be used to
show that Bryan Democrats, Debs So
cialists and Populists should be one on
the questions of government money ver-
sus bankers money, since all profess to
be willing to arbitrate.
In conclusion, 1t may be said that
when all three of these great reform
parties have agreed to submit to popu-
lar vote the gist of the money question.
and the extent to which we shall 20 in
matters Of public ownership. and have
agreed upon speedy and effective svs-
tenn OF direct legislation that shall enact
into law the final decision Of a. popular
vcte.we have pretty nearly reached a ba-
sis upon which all reformers may unite
in one common cause and one common
party. Before such union can take place
Bryan and his followers must renoupce
Tammany and the Old-line Democrats