The river press. [volume] (Fort Benton, Mont.) 1880-current, 1906-05-02
BIG CAMPAIGN \

uieS eCeutIv QuOteu W COu'
gresham Sulzer point to the con
clusiOu-but they do not establish it
that. in IL presidential contests. the
party wins which is equipped with the
biggest campaign fund. MIR. Sulzer
states that in 1884 the democratic fund
was a hundred thousand larger than
that of the republicans: that year Mr..
Cleveland was elected. Four years
later he was defeated, the democratic
fund that year was half a million less
than the republican. Then, four years
later, by about half a million, the
democrats had a fuller purse than the
republicans and Mr.. Cleveland won
his second term.
The public:will believe that, in these
years. the size of the campaign fund
was IN incident rather than a decisive
factor. Ones mind reverts easily to
incidents, say in the state of New
York, in each Of the presidential years
referred to, when the attitude of men
prominent insparty management had
more to do than hundreds Of thousands
in money could have accomplished.
towards victory for one side or defeat
for the other.
Vet it is claimed that the size of a
campaign fund is a sort OF a measure
OF the run of public opinion. That.
in turn, is not true: recent insurance
exposures show, rather, that the cam.
paign managers who can hit the big
corporations hardest are the fellows
who gather in the coin, and, time out
Of mind, as s~ponsorsifor tariff leyisla.
ton, alleged Irrational credit" and
the like. the republicans have been
acknowledged to have. ia this respect.
all the best Of it.
The astonishing truth appears to be
that. ia 1896, the Mckinley campaign
fund wassmore than Sic, 500, 900. That
year the Bryan campaign treasury
was miserably little: into it went hard.
ly more than half a million all told:
and it is generally known that a gen..
erOus percentage toward this total
went to Chicago from a private Office
in the Standards Anaconda building,
In generous response to the informa.
ton that; The national committee
hadn't moneySenough to pay the rent
for its headquarters or keep its speak.
ers in the field or pay for the printed
campaign literature.
According TO the published figures,
the Roosevelt campaign fund where.
with to beat Parker was 50, 500, 600.
AS much as:that really wasn't needed,
but the insurance exposures showed
how the great corporations had sim.
ply fallen into the habit nf chipping
in for the republicans. The fund for
the Parker campaigners vas $3.50,
600: and one might wonder where even
that much came 'front.' was q fund
three times larger than Bry an had for
either of:his campaigns. Parker was
a good deal worse whipped than Bry.
an. but the total popular vote in 1904
was not perceptibly larger than it vas
in 1896.
Applying arithmetic to Congress.
mar Suffers figures, the Wall Street
Journal adds up all the subscriptions
for a series Of years; and her it adds
up the total popular vote for all these
years: hen it performs a long division
problem, and it finds that the average
is eighty cents of campaign money
per vote. OF course these figures con-
Germ national committee operations,
taking no account Of state, county,
city and district funds. The item of
eighty cents per head is scand alously
large.
Comes how the federal senate. Two
days ago, its committee on privileges
and elections decided to report favor
able, with several alterations, a bill
that was introduced by Mr.. Tillman.
1t was an undertaking to legislate the
campaign subscriptions of the rich
corporations out of existence. II this
measure becomes law, probably it
won't amount to very much: in a jitfy
the managers Of the political machines
will find how to evade the law and get
the money.-Anaconda Stand ard.
pniutci nnrcvrunhS