Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-01-11
tcontinued From fifth PageD

I
hiving and the shameful work-done
because money was available to defeat
. candidate who hadn't pleased would
be bosses.
And when examining into these mat
tiers one could not help but be struck
by the determination of witnesses to
conceal rather than reveal facts which
the inQuiSitors were after. have OBJ
served men who stand high in their
communities, who would not lie, men
who would not deceive In the ordinary
course of business or associations with
mankind, do these very things in mat
tiers relating to politics. What does 1t
mean? It means just this, that we have
permitted our politics to be so conduct
ed for so long time that men of stand
ing feel that things which would be
unfair in business life are quite the
order in the conduct of political cam
patgns and in the concealment of what
has been done in such campaigns. Just
50 long as we permit money to play the
part in elections that 1t does play in
some States today that long are we 60
ing to find standards of conduct unbe-
coming to men. Large campaign ex-
pSnditures invite corruption. Corrup-
ton cannot exist without the money to
ezpend.
Ia Relation to Government.
p want to make more pointed my
argument that campaign contributions
and expenditures are expressly and di-
SeetIy related to the conduct of govern.
ment The records are filled with in
stances of favors accorded campaign
contributors. Men with selfish interests
to be served through legislation find it
profitable to contribute to the campaign
funds OF a party, and at times to both
parties. Investments in the form of
such contributions have been found to
be productive of certain and positive re-
ttrns-returns of such proportions as
make ordinary investments seem silly
Campaign contributions buy political
3aVors. To establish that this is true
may offer the very concrete evidence
AFFORDED through the record of cam
paign contributions in 1924 and legisla-
tive returns enjoyed by these same con-
trtbutors in 1926? In 1924, with a presi-
DENTAL and congressional election on,
John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon.
Payne Whitney, the Marshall Field es-
tate, George F. Baker, ST.; George F.
Baker, jr.; Vincent AStor, j. B. Duke,
julius Fleischmann, Cyrus Curtis and
joseph E. Widener, to name only a few
men, made contributions to party cam
paign funds ranging from $4,000 to
F-~sNNSH
they contributed became sponsors of a
tax-reduction bill which was whipped
through Congress by party leaders and
which saved to these men each and
every year sums ranging from S200. 900
to nearly $4,000, 600
Surely men would not make such ex-
cessive contributions as / have recited
without some genuine return in mind,
and so we are driven to know that cam
paign contributions are investments
and the contributors expect rewards,
That being so, isn't it high time we
stood unitedly in opposition to excess
sipe expenditures in the conduct of DO
Httcal campaigns? If the influence of
money in campaigns is not fairly stated.
then tell me why it is that from $780,
900 to 100000 or more viii be ex-
pended to elect men to positions that
pay salaries which never could return
in lifetime of service anything re-
sembling the amount expended to win
elections?
1t has been repeatedly asserted that
the primary system is making it i'm
possible for any except the very rich