The Lexington intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1901-1949, 1916-10-13
Judge NOtOni Refused to Be Led Back Into
the Republican Party After U~nspaingIy Con-
demning and Crldcsing 1t as a Member
. Of the National Progressive Plat
form Committee in 1912.

appear to be Progressive in order to {
consUmmate the plan so manifestly
pre-arranged to destroy the Progress
sive party and seize, almost as by (
force, its membership to be utilized in
rehabilitating the old Republican or
ganization to the end that the invisi-
Bile government may again be secure
in Its place and the army of office
holders once more be triumphantly in
stalled in authority. In this view, Mr..
Hughes was introduced with much ac-
claim, not as a progressive, but as an
anti-boss candidate. Is 1t thought for
a moment that Barnes, Penrose, Crane,
Smoot and others, who controlled the
Republican convention this summer,
would accept a Progressive? If so,
then why did not Cummins OF some
others Of that school fare better?
Everyone who meditates upon it
knows that these men understand the
fundamental distinction lies in the
mental attitude in respect to the
rights of property and the rights Of
men. The ProgressiYes believe in the
principle declared in the Declaration
of Independence to the effect that all
men are created free and equal, and
as such are possessed of certain in
alienable rights, among which are
those of life, liberty and the pursuit
Of happiness, and that 1t is the chief
office of government to secure and
protect these. The other school Of
thought adheres to the old Tory doc
trine or aristocratic view that prop
erty and wealth accord a special priv
ilege to the owner and a special right.
Emanating from this fundamental dis
tinction in the two schools Of thought,
there arises every day and hour of our
existence a conflict between the rights
of humanity on the one hand and
those of property on the other. Mr..
Lincoln, whose spirit dominated the
Republican party at one time, stood
for the rights Of humanity as against
those of property; and this, too, was
the doctrine Of Thomas Jefferson. So
1t was the Progressive platform Of
1912 employed the names Of these
two great friends of the people con-
junctively in declaring our doctrine.
Such alone was the great fundamental
of the Progressive movement, and the
matter of the opposition to bosses and
boss control was but a mere incident
in the fight for human rights, and this
because the crooked special interests
which seek to control the govern
mental agencies in the interests Of
: property first and relegate human
: rights to the second place usually at
tain their ends through the activity Of
I Ahn k1ernr urho an0Nsfro Pn1tfipol rnuu1N
: for the purpose Of financial reward.
+ Concede that Gov. Hughes opposed
: Boss Barnes, and still he appears as a
reactionary rather than as a Progress.
e sive. Gov. Hughes vetoed the two
l. cent fare law in the populous state OF
/ New York, where more persons ride
on the railroads than in any other
four states in the Union. And this
too, on mere opinion that 1t was con
fiseatory in that II diminished the
{ earnings Of property, and without an
e investigation as to the fact, though
the rights Of men and women who
paid the railroad fares were involved
as well. He also vetoed the law fix
/ ing the salary Of women teachers who
o performed the like services rs men
8 although the matter Of human rights
II was involved and the elemental pre-
u cepts Of social Justice called aloud fol
v~indication. Likewise, he vetoed the
d fullcrew bill in the interests Of The
+ railroad properties, though It's opera
n ton lessened the burden OF the toileri
and rendered more secure the lives o
Y those in transportation.
= In the view that It is the office o
Il government to protect property, tn
10 enlightened opinion of the country hal
,e long since settled upon the PROPOSE
ID ton in favor Of an income tax, for 1t 1
m proper that one who possesses a larg
income, say representing a million
70 whether in property or genius, shoulO
m contribute more to the support Of tn
q. government which protects him in IL
90 enjoyment than the man OF Jesse
means who really enjoys but a Sigh
h. measure Of protection regarded wit
reference to his meager portion. Tn
n. Congress passed and submitted to tn
I'd state legislatures for ratification tn
income tax amendment and Coz
a Hughes sent a message to the legisli
ture of his state in opposition to
Il and in this he advanced reasons con
"a monty put forward by the big bushes
and reactionary crowd, William Barne
and others. The position thus a
~ sumed was in favor Of property an
al inimical to the rights Of humanity
- large. from whom the proposal Wa
,s designed to lift a considerable burde
ND of taxation. So II is, we see, that M
'ar Hughes, as said recently in flami1
av headlines In the Chicago Tribune, u
~ leading standpat Republican organ
the west, is satisfactory to We
"a street. Far be 1t from me to eve
,re suggest that Mr.. Hughes is not 8
,at honest man. The point Of the matt
is that, even though honest, he is
creature Of the environment in whit
ali he developed. A typical New Yol
LAWYER, who won his way in the ma
~ Of big business, he lives and NOV
a. and has his being as big business liv
On and moves and has its being. III
re same is true, on the other hand,
one who comes from the slums. He
a creature Of his environment, and
its mental attitude partakes from tho
sources and is fixed by the circul
stances and customs surrounding !
development. How frequently In I
history Of the country have we Sc
honest men who have served the "a
roads. for instance, for 20 years
, oounsel been elevated to the fedei