Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1908-04-03
EDITORIAL UNFAlRNEss
Mr.. BRYAN EXPLAINS HIS POSI-
TON AS TO THE PARTY.
Misrepresentation Of the New York
World Unworthy of Consideration
Nomination in the Hands of
Democratic Voters.
(From The commoner.)

fight which you are making against
the Misrepresentation INDUCED in by
the New York World and those who
echo its editorials. 1t is not for me
to discuss the question of availability
of candidates. have never stated
that was the most available candi-
date or that could poll the most
votes. That is not a question upon
which my judgment ought to be ven
tured or accepted. / have simply
stated that it is question for the
voters of the party to determine.
AS Democrat I have resented the
claim that few editors should de-
side this question for the people. !
am believer in free speech and in a
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 1t de-
serves. / have insisted that the read
ers ought to know what pecuniary in
terest the editor has in the questions
under discussion. For instance,
asked the World to state editorially
what financial interests its owner, Mr..
Pulitzer, has in the stocks or bonds of
railroads and in the stocks and bonds
of corporations commonly known as
trusts. The World has not yet seen
at to answer the question. He is
reputed to be interested in number
bf corporations which are affected by
legislation, and his readers are en-
kitled to know what his interests are.
II he has interests adverse to the in
kerests of the public, he is not "a
disinterested judge as to candidates or
platform. If he has interests that
would be injuriously affected by legis-
aation needed by the people, then his
opinions are worth no more than the
opinions Of Mr. Hartman or Mr.
Rockefeller. do not deny the right
OF Hartman, or Morgan, or Rookie
Teller, or Pulitzer to own paper and
present their views to the public, but
4 do contend that in the interest of
honesty and fair dealing, the owner Of
the paper should be known and the in
terest of the owner in the questions
frankly stated.
The Worlds unfairness is evidenced
in every editorial. In the first place,
1T ignores entirely the election of 1894
when the Democratic party was over
whelmingly defeated. This election oc-
curred before had any influence in
national politics. 1t occurred when
the party was being conducted along
the lines laid down by the World. 1t
As deliberately unfair in ignoring this
election and charging the defeats of
1896 and 1900 to me, just as it Is un-
fair in ignoring the still worse defeat
of 1904 when it was again the party's
adviser.
1t is prophesying when 1t says that
cannot 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 pop
nlar candidate. 1t demanded his
nomination, and 1t advised him each
day as to what he should say and
do. What evidence can 1t furnish that
1t has more intelligence to-day than
then, or that it's prophecies rest on a
frmer foundation?
There are several papers in your
state which were against me in 1896
and have been against me ever since
4 a do not know whether it is because
of difference of opinion as to what
ought to be done, or whether they are
connected with interests that are hos
tile to the things which have been
advocating. There are several papers
In the United States which are known
TO be owned in whole or In part by the
corporate interests which they de
fend, but / would not make such a
charge against the papers Of your
state, because / have no knowledge
as to the ownership or as to the cor
porate interests with which the own
ers may be connected, and 1 prefer tc
assume that the differences are hon
est differences unless have evidence
to the contrary.
However, 1t is only fair to say thai
these unfriendly editors, however hon
/ est they may be, are only SO many in
diyiduals and according to the Demo
& cratic theory, they are entitled tc
such influence only as their fellow-citi
zens may voluntarily give to theil
opinions. If the voters differ from
these editors, it 1aust be remembered
that they have right to differ, and II
1t should prove that the voters are
mistaken in Judgment, they can con.
sole themselves with the reflection
that the editors unfriendly to me have
also been mistaken in judgment, as is
shown by the defeat of 1904
/ am not asking for any honor a
the hands of the Democratic party;
have been honored far beyond any
thing that can claim as matter O
merit, and especially appreciate the
generous support that has come to me
from the southern states. 1t ha.
been gratifying to me to know that III.
democracy has been satisfactory tt
the rank and fle Of the Democrats o
the south as well as to the rank aHt
file of the Democrats Of the north
If the Democratic voters believe
that can assist the party by being g
candidate, why should refuse? And
why should take the advice of few
editors who have never been friendly,