The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1908-03-25
BRYAN WRITES
And Thanks The State For Fight
Against Misrepresentation
WANTS A FREE PRESS

pie in Every State Should Have
Voice, Not the Wishes of q Few
Rule or Ruin Newspapers. Shows
Up the New York World and it,
Editorials.
Lincoln, Neb.. March 10, 1908.
Mr.. VIM. E. Gonzales, Columbia, s. G.
My Dear Mr.. Gonzales. Il appre-
ciate the fight which you are making
against the Misrepresentation in
dulged in by the New York World
and those who echo their editorials.
1t Is not for me to discuss the Ques-
ton of availability Of candidates. ]
have never stated that I was the
most available candidate or that
could poll the most votes. That Is
not a question upon which my judge
ment ought to be ventured OF &C.
copied. l have simply stated that 1t
is q question for the voters of the
party to determine.
AS a Democrat l have resented the
claim that a few editors should de-
eide this question for the people. l
am q believer in free press and ]
recognize the right Of any editor,
whether his circulation be large or
small, to state his opinion and his
reason for it, but those who read his
opinion have a right to give it such
weight as they think it deserves. l
have insisted that the readers ought
to know what p%ecuniary interest the
editor has in the questions under
discussion.
For instance, I asked The World
to state editorially what financial In
terests it's owner, Mr.. Pulitzer has
in the stocks or bonds OF railroads
and in the stocks and bonds Of cor
poratioas commonly known as trusts.
The World has not een fit to an
swer the question. He Is reputed to
be interested in q number OF cor
porations which are affected by leg
i%slation, and his readers are entitled
to know what his interests are. II
he has interests adverse to the In
terest of the public, he Is not a dis
interested judge as to candidates or
platform.
If he has interests that would be
injuriously affected by legislation
needed by the people, then his opin-
ions are worth 10 more than h eopin-
ons Of Mr.. Hartman or Mr.. Rookie
Teller. l do not deny the right OF
Hartman, or Morgan, or Rockefel-
ler, Of Pulitzer, to own a paper and
present their views to the public, but
I do contend .Aat in the interest OF
honesty and fair dealing, the owner
Of the paper should be known n
the interest Of the owner in the Ques-
lions frankly stated.
The Worlds unfairness Is evidenc-
ed In every editorial. In n hrst
place it ignores entirely the election
Of 1894, when the Democratic party
was overwhelmingly defeated. This
election occurred before l had any
influence in national politics. 1t oc-
Cured when the party was being con-
Quoted along the lines laid down by
The World. 1t is deliberately unfair
in ignoring this election and charg-
Ing the defeats of 1896 and 1900 to
me, Just as 1t is unfair in ignoring
the still worse defeat Of 1904, when
1t was again the Jarty's adviser.
1t is simply p~rophesying when IT
says that l can not carry any States
that l lost before. and that some
other Democrat can. How does 1t
know? What gift of prophecy has
it? 1t thought in 1904 that Judge
Parker would prove a popular canol'
date. 1t demanded his nomination
and it advised him each day az t.
what he should a and do. VIVA
evidence a it furnish that it ha:
more intelligence today than it had
then, or that its prophecies rest on
a frmer foundation?
There are several papers in your
State which were against me in 1895
and have been against me ever since
/ do not know whether it is because
of a difference Of opinion as to what
ought to be done, or whether they
are connected with interests that are
hostile to the things which I have
been advocating. There are severa.
papers in the United States which
are known to be owned, in whole OIL
in part, by the corporate interests
which they defend, but I would moi
make such a charge against the pap
ers of your State, because / have nc
knowledge as to the ownership or a:
to the corporate interests with which
the owners may be connected, and
prefer to assume that the difference:
are honest differences unless a
evidence to the contrary.
However, it is only fair to sa!
that these unfriendly editors. howev
er honest they may be, are only 81
many individuals, and according tt
the Democratic theory. they are en-
titled to such influence only AS thei
fellow-citizens may voluntarily Civ
to their opinions. If the voters diffe
from these editors it must be remem
bered that they have a right to diff
fer, and if 1t should prove that tn
voters are mistaken in judgment
they can console themselves with tn
rahectinn that the editors unfriendl