The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-10-14
ANTAGoNIsTIc DEMOCRATIC
TENDENCIEs.


 The Democratic Party is really two parties united in the same political or ganism. One is individualistic, the other socialistie; one the Jeffersonian Democracy of America, the other the Social Democracy of Germany; one Is typified by AIr Cleveland, the other by Mir. Bryan. Both may be said to stand for a free Government. for an equali- zation of welfare and opportunity, for ideas and ideals, but by methods which lead in opposite directions. The one element would make men free by limit ing the power of government, the other by enlarging it's functions; the one seeks an equality of welfare and oppor- tEnity by leaving each individual free to find his own opportunity and seek his own welfare, the other by combin- jug all individuals in a common wealth; the ideals of the one are a community of free individuals, of the other. a brotherhood of man; the one in the be- glnning of the nineteenth century questioned whether the Government or private enterprise would better carry the malls, the other in 1904 desires to see the Government take over the tele- graphs and the railroads; the one would leave individual enterprise to provide and regulate the currency, the other would make the nation the bank CT for the community: the one would leave the control of industrial combi- nations among individuals to the ope- ration of natural laws, the other would put them under Governmental control; the one would limit the power of the people by written Constitution strictly construed, the other, impatient of any checks on popular control, would re construct the Supreme Court If it's decisions became a hindrdance to the immediate execution of the popular will.
 At St. Louis these two factions were both represented. It was clear that neither faction alone had any hope of carrying the next election. A com promise was effected by framing a platform which represented Social De- moeracy and nominating a candidate who represented Individualistic De- mocracy. The platform was signifi- cantly silent on the currency issue; the candidate dramatically declared him self gold Democrat. The platform denounced the tariff as robbery of the many to enrich the few, and de- lmanded a tariff for revenue only the Icandidate emphasized the fact that no lradical changes in the tariff could be made because of a Republican Senate, The platform demanded an enlargement lof the powers of the Interstate Com Imerce Commissions and radical legis- latiye measures to prevent nonopolies: the candidate declared that the com imon law affords a complete legal Iremedy against monopolies. Tn short, the platform represents, though imper- lfectly, a party whose watchword is Ifraternalism: the candidate, though lcautiously, party whose watchword lis indiyidualism.
 l It is said by the opponents of the Democratic Party that 1t is without iconvictions, is vacillating, is double llninded. But not MT. Roosevelt himself has been more explicit in the utterance of his convictions than such Democratic 
 leaders as MT. Cleveland and MT. Bryan, MT. Shepard and MT. Towne. These men are not double-minded not vacillating, not without convictions. If the party is so, 1t is because it's repre- sentative men are not agreed in their lconvictions. What Mir. Bryan proposes MT. Cleveland opposes, what MT. Towne demands MT. Shepard denies. The party appears to be double-minded be- cause now one leader speaks for the Party. now another leader; 1t appears to be vacillating as one or the other Is for the hour its spokesman. It Is true that in all parties there are differences of. opinion. But in the Populist, the Prohibition and the Republican Parties there are differences between men, all of whom are animated by a common purpose and are moving in the same direction; the two parties of which the |