The Green Forest tribune., 1908-08-14


 taken as guide, the Republican party will be so obligated by campaign con tributions from the beneficiaries of pro- tection, as to make that party powerless to bring to the country any material re- lief from the present tariff burdens.
 Why No Railroad Legislation?
 For ten years the Interstate Commerce Commission has been asking for an en- largement of its powers, that it might prevent rebates and discrimina tions, but a Republican senate and a Republican house of representatives were unmoved by it's entreaties. In 1900 the Republican national convention was urged to indGrse the demand for railway legislation, but its platform. was silent on the subject. Even in 1904, the convention gave no pledge to remedy these abuses. When the president finally asked for legislation, he drew his inspiration from three Demo- cratic national platforms and he received more cordial support from the Democrats than from the Republicans. The Republi- cans in the senate deliberately defeated several amendments offered by Senator LaFollette and supported by the Demo- crats-amendments embodying legislation asked by the Interstate Commerce Com mission. One of these amendments au- thorized the entertainment of the val ue of railroads. This amendment was not only defeated by the senate, but it was OVerWne1InlnSly TeJSclSu DN lne recent Republican national convention and the Republican candidate has sought to res cue his party from the disastrous results of this act by expressing himself. in a qualified way, in favor of ascertaining the value of tle railroads.
 MT. Taft complains of the over-issue of stocks and bonds of railroads, for the unlawful enriching of directors and for the purpose of concentrating the control of the railroads under one man. agement," and the complaint is well founded. But, with a president to point out the evil, and a Republican congress to correct it, we find nothing done for the protection of the public. Why? My honorable opponent has, by his confes- sion, relieved me of the necessity of fur nishing proof; he admits the condition and he can not avoid the logical conclusion that must be drawn from the admission.
 Publicity as to Campaign Contrbu
 tions.
 An effort has been made to secure legis- lation requiring publicity as to campaign contributions and expenditures; but the Republican leaders, even in the face of an indignant public. refused to consent to a law which would compel honesty in elections. When the matter was brought up in the recent Republican national convention, the plank was repudiated by a vote of SS0 to 9. Here, too, MT. Taft has been driven to apologize for his con- vention and to declare himself in favor of a publicity law; and yet if you will read what he says upon this subject, you will find that his promise falls far short of the requirements of the situation. He says:
 ''If I am elected president. I shall urge upon congress, with every hope of suc- cess, that a law be passed requiring the filing in federal office of statement of ha VI hv mittees and candidates in elections for members of congress, and in such other elections as are constitutionally within the control of congress-"
 How can the people hope to rule, if they are not able to learn until after the cleo ton what the predatory interests are do- ing? The Democratic party meets the issue honestly and courageously. It says:
 We pledge the Democratic party to the enactment of a law prohibiting any corporation from contributing to a cam paign fund, and any individual from con tributing an amount above reasonable maximum, and providing for the publi- cation, before election, of all such con- tributions above a reasonable minimum" :"
 The Democratic national committee inn medately proceeded to interpret and ap- ply this plank, announcing that no con- tributions would be received from cor porations, that no individual would be al-
 
 that all contributions above Sl0O would be made public before the election-those received before October b to be made public on before that day, those re- ceived afterward to be made public on the day when received, and no such con- tributions to be accepted within three days of the election. The expenditures are to be published after the election. Here is a plan which is complete and effective.
 Popular Election of Senators.
 Next to the corrupt use of money the present method of electing United States senators is most responsible for the ob struction of reforms. For 100 years after the adoption of the constitution, the de- mand for the popular election of senators. while finding increased expression. did not become a dominant sentiment. A constitutional amendment had from time to time been suggested and the matter had been more or less discussed in a few of the states, but the movement had not reached a point where it manifested it. self through congressional action. In the Fifty-second congress. however. a reso- lution was reported from a house com mittee proposing the necessary constitu- tional amendment and this resolution passed the house of representatives by a vote which was practically unanimous. In the Fifty-third congress a similar res olution was reported to. and adopted by the house of representatives. Both the Fifty-second and Ffty-third congresses were Democratic. The Republicans gained control of the house as a result of the election of 1894 and in the Fifty-f fourth congress the proposition died in commit tee. As time went on, however the sen timent grew among the people, until it forced a Republican congress to follow the example set by the Democrats, and then another and another Republican congress acted favorably. State after state has indorsed this reform until near ly two-thirds of the states have recorded themselves in its favor. The United States senate, however, impudently and arrogantly obstructs the passage of the resolution, notwithstanding the fact that the voters of the United States, by an overwhelming majority, demand it. And this refusal is the more significant when it is remembered that a number of sen ators owe their elections to great corpor- ate interests. Three Democratic nation al platforms-the platforms of 19O0 1904 and 190S-specifically call for a change in the constitution which will put the cleo tion of senators in the hands of the vo- ters. and the proposition has been in dorsed by number of the smaller par ties, but no Republican national con- vention has been willing to champion the cause of the people on this subject. The subject was ignored by the Repubi can national convention in 1900 1t was ig- nored in 1904 and the proposition was explicitly repudiated in 19OS for the cent Republican national convention, by a vote of S66 to IA. rejected the plank indorsing the popular election of sen ators-and this was done in the conven- tior which nominated MT. Taft, few dele and and @ ''''' VSsi V'llIi voting for the lere &O W]