The independent. [volume] (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907, 1905-02-02


dOre Dresser.
OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS Wallace
Irwin, Tom P. Morgan and Alex
Ricketts,
The growth of sentiment in favor OF
public ownership of railroads and kin
dred utilities is marked. Here in New
York it overshadows all other ques-
tions. You will hear references made
to 1t in all kinds of meetings.
| dropped in at a Thomas Paine
meeting Of the Manhattan Liberal club
Friday night, in company with j. A.
Edgerton and J. B. Keim of Jersey
City. Hugh Pentecost was the princi-
pal speaker. His address was in the
nature of a rebuke to liberals for max
ing god of Paine, while denying the
right Of others to worship some other
man. Incidentally he made it plain
that he is heartily in accord with the
progressive movement. Personally, l
believe, Pentacost calls himself phil
osophic anarchist-but is ready to help
any reform that has life and movement
in it, whether it be called socialism,
populism, or what not.
Last night the New York Journal
printed a double column editorial on
"How to Talk About Government Own
ership," an excellent thing, because it
omitted confusing statistics and placed
the subject on the high plane of JUS
tice. Of course, it is not remarkable
for the Journal to print such editorials
but it is significant that the editorial
was inspired by the following letter:
Editor Evening Journal, Dear Sir:
Some time ago we saw an editorial in
the Evening Journal about the govern
ment owning and controlling the rail-
roads of the United States. We are de-
batting on that subject February I'd,
1905. We have the affirmative and I
wish you would let us know something
about it, or let us know the days the
editorials were published.
"ELWOOD WILLIAMS,
President Arcadian Club.
mo. 248 East Thirty-fourth street,
New York, CITY,"
That shows the drift of things.
The Journal is having some fun at
the expense of John Sharp Williams,
who decided to resign his leadership
in the house and then reconsidered it.
Williams, in an Interview with the
New York Sun suggested that at would
be for it's own good if the
democratic membership Of the house
should introduce dual system of
leadership" AMI the Journal retorted
with on editorial that 1.-TWO Leaders
Would Be Better Than Half Leader
or no leader at all. The concluding
of that editorial are worth
quoting herr:
Democrats in the nation sit help
lessly by watching Roosevelt making
an admirable struggle to 90 the things
that the people want. The railroads ,
apparently own the democratic leader
ship and wont let that leadership take
any part in the fight aginst railroad
extortion And the leadership doesn't
ry very hard to take any part in the +,
light.
"The democratic party. when it as
;embled in convention at st. Louis, |
that 1T was the party against s
he trusts, the party that wanted to a
urb monopoly, the party of the people, t
ut is little puzzled now to under /
tand the situation. The trusts, with
he railroads at their head, evidently
onsider that the democratic party y
o far as its leadership represents it t
s THEIRS. They don't worry about f
hat at all. They are only bothering d
bout the republican president Roose- :
man that represents the So
allied TRUST PARTY.
THE trust managers are able to go q
. their bosom friends in the republican 4
arty and say to them-"If you help .
S to fight Roosevelt, YOU WILL. q
LAVE THE LEADERS OF THE DEM =
CRATIC PARTY WITH YOU-THEY s
RE WITH U.s."
And the democratic party, as led .
n the floor of the house, iustifies this
tatement
Mr.. Williams is wrong in his idea
nat the democratic party wants two
saders. Two leaders would not work Ell
ell together. They would be better. n
course, than HALF a leader, or no is
,ader at all O.