The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-10-14
WAR A CERTAINTY
AMONG DEMOCRATS
Conservatives and Radicals Will
Fight for Party Control
After Election.
BRYAN AND HEARST
AGAINST PRAKERITES
South Seems Likely to Lend It's
Support to the Rad
icals.
By w. w. Jermane.

New York, Oct. l4.-Both the conser-
vative and the radical elements of the
democracy are at present coquettlng
with the south, with a view to soliciting
it's active support after the campaign
is over and the time has come for an
other struggle for party control. Eight
and four years, ago the south went over
to Bryan. This year it swung from
Bryan to Parker. If Parker should, be
defeated next month, and the leader
ship of the party, as the result Of that
defeat, again be unsettled, the south,
having the balance of power, would be
called upon, as in 1896 and 1900, to
choose between the conservatives, who
are in the east, and. the radicals, who
are in the west. This explains why so
many southern statesmen are called into
conference at democratic national head
quarters, and why, further, Bryan and
his friends are prof essing loyalty to the
ticket. It was the south which IN
1896 made Organism possible, and IN
Bryan control. This year it was the
south which turned the leadership of
the party over to the conservatives.
Between now and 1908 it will be the
south which will decide whether the
party is to remain conservative or re-
vert to radicalism.
Southern democratic leaders appre-
ciate the fact that the struggle OF the
early months Of this year, which was
not closed until the st. Louis conven'
ton had nominated Parker, is to be re-
newed almost Immediately following
the close of the campaign. If Parker
could be elected, this would not be the
lease, but an untoward fate has decreed
his defeat.
Bryan and Hearst Regular.
| If BRYAN and Hearst and, the other
radical leaders were to abandon Parker
they could not hope to exercised any In
fuence in the work Of reorganization, sc
they are exceedingly Irregular. y Hears
day, picturing some far;aTaay phase o:
the trust question, and holding the re
publican party, vaguely and in genera
terms, up to criticism as fostering tn
trusts. This ism IT very hot support
but it is "hot'' enough to proven
Hearst from being. counted out OF tn
democracy WITH very faint praise
Neither is this very "hot' support
Bryan within the zone of regularity
Both of these gentlemen confidently eS
pect that Parker will be defeated.
Aside from it's populistic and socla!!
istic tendencies, the radical democracy
most pronounced tenet is opposition. t
the trusts. Hearst made his campaig
for the democratic nomination almos
exclusively on that issue, and it is on
of the cardinal features of the Brya
platform. Whatever the democracy Q
this campaign may or may not be, it
not antitrust. The Belmonts, tn
= Sheehans, the Taggarts, the Murphy
the McCarrers' and the Hills of tn
Hsafe and sane democracy are farthe
away from opposition to the trusts tina
, any campaign managers, in either part,
have ever been since the trusts came
be political issue. AS bearing Q
this question, it will be recalled that tn
' democratic campaign this year does ne
; embrace, on the democratic side, any a.
y termined attack on the republican part
:, for it's alleged friendliness to trusts.
Democracy's Schism.
I call attention to this matter in o
der to emphasize the statement that tt
radical and the conservative democrat
have absolutely nothing in common, an
that their antagonisms, based on prime
pie, are certain to break out in rioto'
y discord as soon as it becomes know
! that the conservative candidate for tt
e presidency has been defeated.
s Other things being equal, it looks
n if the south would be inclined to sit
+ with the radicals. 1t will hardly a
Z cept the Bryan or the Hearst platform
a as they now stand, but these gentleme
Continued on Second Page.