The log cabin Democrat. [volume] (Conway, Ark.) 1901-1982, 1908-08-13

Republican success. II the past can be
taken as a guide, the Republican party
will be so obligated by campaign con-
tributons from the beneficiaries of pro-
lection, 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 IL might
prevent rebates and Determinations, but
a Republican senate and Republican
house of representatives were unmoved
by its entreaties. In 1900 the Republican
national convention was urged to ind9rse
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 ascertainment of the val
ue of railroads. This amendment was not
only defeated by the senate, but it was
overwhelmingly rejected by the 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
qualified way, in favor of ascertaning
the value of the railroads.
Mr. 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 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 confess
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 Contribu-
tons.
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
convention, the plank was repudiated by
a vote of $50 to "a. Here. too, Mr.. Taft
has been driven to apologize for his con-
yention and to declare himself in favor
of a publicity law; and yet, If you VIII
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 am elected president. l shall urge
upon congress, with every hope of sue
cess, that a law be passed requiring the
filing. in a federal office, of a statement
of the contributions received by COM
mttees 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. 1t says:
1--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 a reasonable
maximum. and providing for the publ
cation, before election, of all such con-
tributions above a reasonable minimum.
The Democratic national committee i'm
mediately proceeded to interpret and APP
ply this plank, announcing that no con-
tributions would be received from cor
porations, that no individual would be al
lowed to contribute more than $10.O and
that all contributions above 500 would
be made public before the election-thoSe
received before October Is to be made
public on or 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 OBJ
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 few
of the states but the movement had not
reached point where it manifested it
self through congressional action. In the
Fifty-second congress, however, reso-
luton 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 Fifty-third congresses
were Democratic. The Republicans gained
control of the house as a result of the
election of 1894 and in the Fifty-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 Endorsed this reform, until near
" 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 1900, 1904
and 19CS-specifcally call for change in