The Columbus journal., 1910-12-21
NEW DEMOCRATIC LEADERS.

NEW DEMOCRATIC LEADERS.
With the democratic party in pros.
pective control of the national house,
with . degree of internal harmony NOT
previously attained in fifty years, and
with the prestige in he ascendent, the
question of party leadership is . matter
for interesting speculation. The indi.
vidual leadership will, of course, be
determined in the near future, but who
the leader will be no one can tell; in
the meantime the new governors, sen.
ators and representatives. recently
elected, who will supplement the pres.
ent official strength of the democracy,
constitute . new group Of leaders that
must be reckoned with.
Suoh men as Wilson of New Jersey,
Dix of New York, Plaisted of Maine,
Foss of Massachusetts,, Baldwin Of
Connecticut, Harmon of Ohio and
New York's progressive Mayor Gay.
nor, together with new democratic
senators from New York, New Jersey,
Maine, West Virginia. Ohio, Indiana,
Nebraska and Missouri, and new rep.
resentatives from q number of eastern
states. whose qualities and powers are
yet to be tested, collectively will have
much to dowith the future of the party.
The fortunes ofthe democratic party
have turned almost automatically.
The control of the house has been
gained and the membership of the
senate increased by default, so to speak.
There was no great political issue,
policy or personality in the democratic
campaign that resulted in q series of
democratic victories. Neither Bryan
nor Organism was q mentionable
factor. Indeed, at this time there
seems to be no division between the
old supportersof Bryan and these who
refused to follow his leadership. What
was left of the old sectionalism within
the party seems to have almost disap.
peared. And yet the condition of the
democracy at this time is precarious.
The gains made by the democracy
were almost wholly in the east, where
republican reactionism was strongest.
The defeated republicans are nearly
all eastern standpstters. Therefore,
the democratic party will be in the
control Of southern and eastern men.
Just how this may work out is prob.
lematical. The south has not always
been independent Of the east in demo.
cratic counsels. 1t permitted the east
to dictate the nomination of Parker in
1904. Just now the wits of the special
interests are employed to commit the
new and rising democracy to conserva.
tive policies as opposed to the pro.
gressive movement in both parties.
The east will be especially active in
this regard, and it will use every argu-
ment and influence it cab briDgto bear
on the south.
1t is already intimated that from
this time forward there will be no
between the democrats
and progressive republicans in con.
gress, such as there was in the last two
sessions; that the democrats will let
the republicans shift for themselves
until the new congress convenes, when
The democrats will be in a position to
initiate legislation. Such q policy, Of
course, would give the country the
east benefit of the verdict of the recent |
and it would do the party |
he least good. Fur such q policy |
would ignore the great truth that it
vas the progressive policies. led by
title band of republican, and backed |
lp by a majority of the democrats in
congress, that accomplished the defeat
# so many standpatters in the recent
lectiODs.
Furthermore. such policy would
'lienate the west more and more from
he democracy, for the west is the chief
ield of the insurgent movement. The
'arty that most clearly foresees that
his movement is to become nationally
and most intelligently
uy.rns itself with reference to that