The independent. [volume] (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907, 1903-07-16

guided only by the revenue paying ca
racity of the land or the cupidity of
others desiring to reap and enjoy
where others had sown? Would he no.
be content with the most primitive and
inexpensive improvements to enable
him to make the most out of the land
with the least possible expense? Would
that be progress or retrogression?
If l. now toll and deny my luxuries
in improving and identifying a farm
home, the benefits of which improve
ments will not fully enjoy before my
death, would it be unnatural for me
to wish to bestow on my children, who
have helped me to produce this. the
full benefits Of my labor and saving
rather than have them go to society
which did nothing to produce them?
Would the case Of man improving a
city lot be any different?
Igrepeat now what have said be-
fore, that the philosophy of the two
parties, socialists and single takers.
will never find many followers among
the farmers of the United States. =
Now the democratic party is in the
unfortunate position that the over
whelming majority of it is handi
capped by wealthy and powerful mi
nority id whose hands is the political
machinery for the manipulation of
state conventions, whereby free and
complete expression of the masses can
he prevented.
The Chicago and Kansas City plat
forms contained. If not all, at least
great many of the demands that ali
formers desire. II the majority OF the
democratic party at the next national
convention can have full and un-
trammeled expression of its real wants
and dominates men who are living i'm
presentations of it's platform, then will
its overwhelming numbers make an
other reform party unnecessary; yes,
In the nature OF things, an impossi
bility.
If they fail in doing this, the party
will split forever. The progressive
democrats will never retrCgress.
Whether they will form a new party
or join some other reform party, time
slOne can tell.
The tendencies of the republican par
ty are SO well known that a discus
sion of its aims are superfuous. 1t is.
the party of the plutocrats, the party
Of special privileges and does not de-
serve the consideration of any lover
of humanity or liberty.
There now remains to be considered
the peoples party.
Born as living protest agar st the
shortcomings of the republican ami
democratic parties, and the direct le-
gal heir of the grange and greenback
Earties, its existence was natural ana
vital necessity. Up to 1896 the only
reform party worth mentioning.
Its first national platform adopted
at Omaha in 1892 is the most states
manlike document issued by any party
in the United States since the revolu-
tionary war. l saw it born on that
Fourth of July. l was there, not as a
pOpulist, but as looker-on in Venice
saw some Of the fuglemen on the
stage, very noisy, some ludicrous, some
dramatic, as is usual in such gather
ings, and they did not impress me
very favorably; and time has demon
strated that my Judgment then did
not deceive me: they are no longer
populists; they have proven renegades
and traitors.
The real statesmen, who drew up
this memorable document, were not
seen On the stage much; the real act
ors in this political drama were be-
hind the scenes. knew them then
and know a good many yet They
have my love and respect. This pop
ulist party has been a great educa-
tional factor in the United States and
is yet. The principles laid down in its
Omaha platform are being more and
more adopted by various localities of
the country, proving the far seeing
craftsmanship of its authors.
This party has laid it's foundation
broad and deep; it has recognized the
laws of nature and conformed to them.
1t does not seek visionary or impract--
icable things.
1t insists on the public ownership
of public utilities, that is, utilities
which in the very nature of things are
mOnopolistic. 1t insists on the gov
eminent alone exercising the sover-
eign power of issuing all money. II
insists on equal rights for all and
snnnia1 priviloroc 10 pOpo IL ;pc;ctc