Political deceptions and delusions

Front matter

^oV^

9^

*' 0^^ "^"^^ '

Preface

To write a preface for one's own mental product is like introducing one's self to a strange audience. If it give the work a good send off, it performs the office of an advertisement ; if it speak of the merits of the work with undue modesty, it is of no practical value, and the time taken to write, as well as that taken to read it, is wasted.

In our day a vast amount of fraud is practiced in every line of human activity. Clothes are made to sell, with little regard to their wearing qualities. Great factories are occupied by manufacturers of snide jewelry, which is advertised as so many carats solid gold. Makers of surgical appliances, like jackals pursuing a wounded horse, are on the trails of cripples, anxious to extort from them the last dollar, for contrivances at exhorbitant prices which soon break or fail to answer the purpose as advertised. Quacks prey on the sick and invalided by similar methods. People in cities, especially the poorer classes, are drained of their earnings in high prices for stale or non-nutritious foods, and poisoned with adulterated drugs.

But the most dangerous and harmful of all the cheats and imposters are self-serving politicians and bogus statesmen. These are also hardest to deal with, because you must find them out before you can punish them, and it is a large task to reach and dispose of a crook or weakling in high life, after he has so capitalized his opportunities as to make a creditable record, in one or more

PREFACE

matters of popular concern. The differences of opinion among, and inertia of, voters who are the trial jurors in such a case, must be reckoned with. Again, no one who is the mere writer of a book cares to attack in print the few who have been found out, because there are so many meriting exposure whose misdeeds are unknown. Such exposures would do little if any good, even if publishers could be found for them.

Therefore, this book is not an attack upon individuals. Few names are used in it, and these only where necessary to complete an intelligent recital of facts and public records. Anyhow, intelligent honest readers can make the proper application of what is said, and other kinds of readers could not be influenced or separated from their idols by any form of discourse, however personal.

If the author may properly refer to a particular merit of his effort, attention is called to the absence of vagueness, and the presence of directness and certainty. The reader is not left in doubt as to the meaning in any part or detail. Impractical schemes for ballot reform and primary elections are unsparingly criticized; the proper uses as well as abuses of party organizations are discussed in a positive direct way, and remedies not only suggested but formulated. Deceptions about railroad rate legislation and the work of the Interstate Commerce Commission are discussed with that freedom which a long deluded people should welcome. And when the Trust and Monopoly question is taken up the shams and subterfuges of political officeholders and lawmakers are unsparingly exposed. In full confirmation of all of which the body of the work itself is respectfully referred to. Thomas Carl Spelling.

New York, December, 1913.

VI

Table Of Contents

CHAPTER

I Party Organizations and Conventions.

II Ballot Laws.

Chapter I Party Organizations And Conventions

Almost every thoughtful free-spoken man finds fault with existing methods of party rule. Those prompted by a desire for purer and more democratic government are not alone, nor do they alone have cause for complaint. Reward for party service is an inseparable incident of partisan rule prevailing everywhere in the United States. No matter what the system under which candidates are chosen, whether at wide-open direct primaries with plurality nominations, with or without conventions, or at the old machine-made primaries and bossruled conventions, the successful candidate having the disposal of offices and governmental employments oftener than otherwise closes his mind to considerations of party promotion and treats the patronage at his disposal as a private perquisite. Of course few of them ignore entirely the claims of good government, but most of them find it easy to reconcile the claims of public justice to the claims and interests of bosses, personal friends and favorites.

And this system is as inimical to honest, courageous administration as it is to just and honorable partisanship.

Let those who doubt the existence and maintenance of an exclusive class, not accessible to the ordinary partisan who is not a member of the cUque on the inside, however faithful and influential, note for a time how appointive powers are exercised by those whom their votes, and the votes they have influenced, have elected to patronage offices. Often the choicest and most responsible positions are given to those defeated for posts of honor and profit at the polls; and when these have been taken care of, others of the professional office-holding class who have lost jobs by change of administration, or for any other reason short of embezzlement, are preferred. The author of an infamous cinch bill, with a record so bad that his boss dared not give him a renomination, is provided for, at a large salary. The corporation counsel resigns to become a candidate for a judgeship, failing in which, his successor gives him a position worth $25,000 a year. A judge is promoted to a higher judicial position carrying a large salary, and retains his status as an insider so as to place his son in a lucrative public office. A candidate is beaten for a purely political state office, and is immediatly appointed a supreme court justice. Through influences never made public, corporation lawyers become congressmen, and from these positions are transferred to the federal judiciary, and in time promoted to the supreme bench. The honest, but guileless supporter of a candidate may obtain special recommendations from friends of good repute, and endorsements from hundreds of good citzens, but it all avails him nothing as against the smug insider or handy tool of the boss.

The genesis of a thousand appointments would be a repetition of these, with slight variations. And so, generally, a vacancy occurring any where or from any cause, we find that some relative or favorite of some one already holding a lucrative office, or standing near a boss, or who has ''made good" on some political work of questionable character is boosted into place, and expected to pervert his official functions for the benefit of his sponsor, to the verge of, or beyond, legal limits, regardless of the public

interest.

When another election approaches, nominations are almost invariably made by both leading parties from the ranks of this same politically professional class, and these and some of the outsiders with "hopes deferred" go out to bamboozle the credulous partisan electorate with false pretense and gush.

The people at large have but a faint conception of the far-reaching influence of the "corporation" lawyer in matters of legislation, procuring appointments to public office, in the administration of the laws, and in the conduct of political campaigns. Usually the citizen of ordinary intelligence knows the name and personal appearance of the bosses of both the leading parties. If he is a partisan and takes an interest in political action he usually comes in contact with the boss. But in the infamous schemes of party politics, made respectable by professions of loyalty to some so-called party principle, there is a power beyond and above the boss, to wit: the public service corporation — usually several forms of it. Its visible representative — and there are usually one or more for each pubhc service corporation in each State or city — is the corporation lawyer. There are various methods by which he obtains admittance behind the screen of corporation vilUany and gets his name added to the payroll. He may happen to be related to, or intimate with, a judge who is a successful politician and an adept in covering his tracks. He may have adroitly managed some piece of boodling legislation as a member of the Legislature, or successfully done some crooked job before a court, the benefits of which accrued to a public service corporation. In that case he has won his spurs, that is, has estabhshed the proper character and won favor, and is entitled to standing as a corporation tool — a corporation lawyer. It is not to be supposed that such real "character" will alone entitle him to high rank or pay or permanent employment. These are reserved for the rascal of smooth deportment, oily tongue, respectable connections, moral, even religious, pretensions, with brains. Sad to relate, but true it is, that while not all the lawyers of great ability who are appointed to cabinet positions become the advisers and servants of monopolistic corporations, it must be conceded that such is often the case. Then look at the Icng list of senators elected by subservient and corrupt legislatures at the dictation of railroads and trusts, who, pretending to represent the people of the States in that body where sat such men as Clay, Webster, Benton, Thurman, Blaine and Hoar, simply guarded, for bribe money, called fees, the interests of the masters who had them elected.

There was a time when some attention was paid to the declarations and promises contained in party platforms, but we have now reached an era when the platform becomes functus officio at the closing of the polls on the night of election. At that time policy entirely supercedes party principle ; and party policy is simply the fiscal policy or programme prepared before those elected have been installed by those who have financed, acting in concert with those who have successfully managed, the campaign. The measures enacted pursuant to the programme are advocated as expedient, patriotic, even benevolent, though perchance inconsistent with the promises in reliance upon which the necessary votes to elect were obtained. In the next campaign a new set of declarations are platformed,

"4 based upon more recent performances, claimed and plausibly reasoned out to be promotive of public interests. In other words, a new set of promises are made, to be again disregarded, and pledges made to others than the electorate — pledges made in secret in consideration of campaign corruption funds, or upon even baser considerations — are substituted and fulfilled.

Between elections, vast monopolies and aggregations of millionaires, called syndicates, conspire together and extract from toil and from every line of business hundreds of millions of dollars, keeping the people so busy barring the wolf of starvation from the door that they have little time to study political and economic questions. They only realize that they are being mercilessly taxed with the cost of living, utter an occasional complaint and go on enduring and guessing what the next turn of the screws will be, until the next election. Then one or both of the leading parties collects millions of dollars, hires the best talent in the land to go forth and orate upon non-esssentials, and an army of secret-service men to ascertain who and how many in each precinct, county, and State can be bribed, and how many can be cajoled, shamed, or browbeaten with a threat of party ostracism and how many recalcitrants can be coerced by threats of discharge from employment, or loss of business, into voting the party ticket. The same corruption in office, the same betrayal of party promises, the same infamous methods of carrying elections are witnessed from year to year and repeated at one election after another.

And many voters, who either know the facts or refuse to be enlightened, go on submitting and participating, voting the same old party ticket because their fathers voted it, or for some cheap bribe, or upon some other absurd pretext.

But all political action in this country has taken the form of great leading parties against each other. One might no more hope to get rid of one or the other, or all of these parties than to dispense with the tides of the ocean. So long as there are winds and solar and lunar forces there will be rising and receding tides. Likewise so long as there are prejudices local, class, racial and sectional, and clashing passion and interests, leaderships and followings, the present party system, with partisan alignments of voters, will continue. The duty and interest of each voter is to become identified with one or the other of the leading parties, according to his fancy or belief, and seek to bring about a more honest and truly representative method of party government. The real misfortune that has befallen the people of this country, of which most other things complained of are the direct or indirect results, is a loss through party action of the means of self government.

The insincerity noted in political leaders characterizes many influential organs of publicity. There are too many men and newspapers that condemn, in words indicating much heat and anger, the evil practices of money lords and corporations, but refuse when a measure of relief is offered to aid in securing its enactment and oppose all candidates who favor any such reforms. Where will one find better expressions of righteous wrath concerning wild speculations in Wall Street, encouraged and financed by the banks, or of the piracies of the monoplies in coal, ice and other necessities, or of rebating and discriminations by the railroads, or of the delinquencies and extortions of public service corporations, than in the editorial columns of certain great newspapers? But when did any measure designed and adequate to afford a remedy, or any candidate, who, if elected could be relied upon to bring about a genuine reform, receive their support? A true advocate of reform cannot be at the same time an apologist, any more than a trustworthy surgeon can be a mere palliator of symptoms. When Patrick Henry made his famous speech before the Virginia convention, he did not attempt to minimize dangers or postpone the disclosure of true conditions. He warned his copatriots that "the enemy are already landed on our shores," and avowed that he was willing "to know the worst and provide for it."

The party leader fears to stand for a radical reform which the other leaders of his party do not endorse, lest the latter take advantage of his temerity to outrun him in the race for office, or to unhorse him if he be already in the political saddle. So the owls, the trimmers and time servers of party take the measure of popular credulity and patience and enunciate platforms of non-essentials — called party doctrines or principles — and the so-called leaders, who are really mere camp followers, rehearse the song as it is set down to them and declaim speeches to fit and support these deceptive time-serving and votegetting declarations.

There are few republicans but will admit that some tariff reductions ought to be made, nor are there many democrats who will not admit that the total elimination of the protective principle from duties on imports would cause serious derangement to our industrial system. It is impossible to pin the spokesmen of either party down to any definite permanent tariff legislation which they would approve. Between the extremes there is much debatable ground — much room for debate about items and particular rates of duty, not one of which standing alone would materially affect the general interests of the people, whether the one or the other was adopted.

The tariff is therefore made the principle theme of political discussion for two reasons: (.1) because, being an historical issue between parties and one which, from its inherent character, never can be permanently settled, its discussion causes no widespread panic in any quarter, and (2) because the great public service corporations which, in the last analysis control the nominations of the dominant parties — the Republican party in the North and West and the Democratic party in the South — are not alienated from the support of candidates by such discussion.

Observing the drift of partisan professions — a thing entirely different from party policies — and noting the utterances of the leaders, it is very difficult to find any proposition embodying a principle of national import distinctly urged on the one side and opposed on the other.

Political parties, though not factors in original schemes of representative government, are institutional in all republics and in many limited monarchies ; and the party in ascendency is, or may be, for all practical uses, the government itself. Such being the case, in order that the representative phase and function of the government may be preserved, it is essential that the same phases and functions be preserved to parties. The office of a convention is to permit individual views of party policy, constituting for the time state policy, to be welded into a party platform or creed. Such is the generally approved method for governing voluntary associations, whether political, social or benevolent. Even religious organizations find periodical assemblages of delegates representing the laity essential to their well being and permanency. Even these liave found it necessary to occasionally make changes in their declarations of doctrine at such meetings.

And though party conventions, as they have been heretofore conducted, are open to just criticisms, their evil practices do not justify their entire abolition. Their objectionable methods can be gotten rid of without the substitution of something not only more ob-" jectionable but totally destructive of government by representation. If the convention is to be abolished, then it were just as well that every statute giving status and sanction to political parties be repealed ; because, without the convention, the disruption of parties is inevitable. Party organization becomes coherent and effective because of similar ideals, policies and principles among its membership.

Now, it is wholly impracticable to establish direct primaries in any state without allowing plurality nominations. There would be only one alternative, and that would be a second primary in case of the failure of the voters at the first primary to register a majority for any candidate for every office. A second primary to decide a single contest would be just as troublesome and expensive as if there had been a failure, at the first primary, to return a majority vote on every office contested for. Inasmuch as the great expense incident to official primaries conducted by the state, without reference to the possibility of a second or third primary for the same year, is strongly objected to, it is clear that the taxpayers would not tolerate the latter, and that a direct primary without the intervention of a state convention involves plurality nominations.

We are now at a stage of the discussion to inquire as to the meaning and practical workings of selections for party candidates of those who succeed in obtaining few or many more votes than either of their competitors; that is to say, secure nominations by a bare plurality, and of depending on candidates so nominated to meet and construct a platform of principles. We will first suppose that the voters en masse have chosen wisely and that the nominees are all men of honesty and intelligence. In the first place, each one would know by what arguments and entertained or professed beliefs he secured his nomination. Coming from different sections of the State or belonging to different business classes, it might be that no two would agree on any proposition of party policy. And it would rarely happen that the candidate for Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, and on down, would all agree on all questions. Either they would hopelessly and finally disagree and each make his own fight in his own way, or they would adopt a colorless, ambiguous platform. In either event party organization and discipline would end. Either the party would be torn to tatters by clashes of individual opinions, or, in the absence of a definite statement of principles, would die of inanition.

But what of the candidates so nominated? Even if we suppose the voters to act without passion, without sectional bias, without personal favoritism or prejudice, to exercise their best judgments, and to be uninfluenced by evil practices or suggestions, still they must proceed without accurate and satisfactory knowledge as to the character and fitness of all except — and this only in cases of a minority of them — one or two, or, at any rate, part of those asking their votes at the primary. So proceeding, to expect that a ticket of the best or even of average material available to the party to be nominated, is to expect a miracle. It would be as unreasonable as to expect a rifleman blindfolded to hit the bull's eye at the first fire.

Some advocates of the direct primary, pure and undefiled, strive to impart the impression that the direct primary guarantees regularity, strict official supervision and the provision of safeguards against sinister practices. But the fact must not be overlooked that what is proposed when such a measure is offered, is that the statute shall provide merely the formal parts which relate to calling the primary, giving notice, filing certificates, printing ballots, providing election officers, ascertaining results, etc. As to the vital parts, such as procuring signatures to petitions, reaching and appealing to voters and obtaining votes for particular candidates, these are all left to the voluntary untrammelled, unsupervised, unregulated action of individuals and groups of individuals. From the nature of the case, it could not be otherwise.

Then we would have a primary which is, to use the language of the street, "wide open." Has the millenium arrived, or would every conceivable subterfuge, device and fraud be practiced by rich demagogues and plausible fakers to mislead, deceive and win the confidence of voters? As a rule, to which the exceptions have been rare, the people, having time to reflect, analyze and judge of men's characters, between nominations and elections, have avoided serious mistakes in the election of men to fill the most important offices. In this they were immensely aided by two facts or conditions; first, the voting strength of the State was nearly equally divided between leading parties, so that the choice was limited to two, or at most three, candidates ; and, secondly, the party convention system has almost invariably evolved as candidates

II men of prominence whose records, public and private, were already well known to the public, or might be easily ascertained and divulged during the campaign.

The citation of experiments in western and southern States is misleading. In the States where conventions have been abolished, there are no large cities, nor any considerable friction between avocations and industries. The agricultural class in South Carolina and Nebraska is so predominating and controlling that a statute beneficial to that class must almost necessarily inure to the benefit of the merchant, manufacturer and laborer. But the larger and more populous States contain many commercial and industrial classes so that sharp conflicts of interest on vital issues, the wrong settlement of which may immensely injure particular interests, are constantly arising; and when they do arise a spirit of concession and compromise must be invoked. An outline of the method proposed for their settlement must be indicated by bodies authorized to speak for political parties, else the disagreements, jealousies and rival ambitions of individuals elected to constitute the State government will cause a fatal counterbalance and breakdown, more surely when the necessity for action is great than at any other time. Is this mere speculation? An historical dissertation would be here out of place; but decay and death overtook the Athenian and other ancient democracies from that sole cause. The New England provinces had to abandon the town meeting system for the solution of merely local problems.

It could hardly be expected that a greater percentage of voters would participate at primary elections under the direct system than under existing systems; and it is well known that those who at present vote at primaries have little interest in the administration of public office beyond the distribution of patronage. Suppose, having separate ballot boxes for the respective parties, a public party test is required, the business element and the labor element will largely refuse to participate, and the nominations will be made by the same voters who now punctually attend primaries to carry out the orders of the boss in the election of delegates.

In some of the southern States such a system is in operation and is found to give general, though not universal, satisfaction. It is tolerated there simply because practically all the voters belong to one overmastering party, the minority party having but slight interest in the results of elections at any time. But great inconveniences are there observable. The whole stress of the campaign comes prior to the date fixed for nominations to be made, and the election that occurs months afterward is simply perfunctory. The cost of conducting the ante-primary, ante-convention, campaign is as great as that of holding the general election, and these expenses are therefore duplicated. The machinery for voting and counting and making returns from the primary are just as complicated, and the labor on the part of election and county officers is just as arduous as at a general election — and even more so, because at the latter there are fewer candidates. The candidates for office in a given year must enter upon the campaign several months prior to the general election and at a most unseasonable time for both candidates and voters. These inconveniences and drawbacks would be intensified and multiplied in any State or other political division where elections are contested between parties of nearly equal strength.

The difficulty and liability to make mistakes in voting under the direct nomination scheme suggest themselves but need not be farther noticed. All that is said in the next chapter by way of objection to the Australian ballot is applicable here. Nothing has been or can be proposed superior to the plan of electing delegates at primaries held for all parties at the same time and place, the delegates to meet in conventions and make nominations, which, being duly certified, are accepted by the officer whose duty it is to prepare and print the ballot.

On the State party convention, composed of delegates properly and regularly chosen is cast, and such convention feels a responsibility equal to that imposed upon the law-making body. Under a wise and just primary system the party convention will be composed of a very high type of honesty and intelligence. But in a direct primary at which no limitation upon the number and character of candidates would be possible, honesty and intelligence would have no chance to afifect the result in the slightest degree. Without stopping to argue the proposition, the proponents of any suggested direct primary measure may well be challenged to point out any way therein provided, or possible, for the more intelligent and honest men in the State to come together and act in concert in the choice of a candidate for any office.

Now, it must be admitted by all reasonable minds that no primary election law found in any State is entirely satisfactory. The form of a bill hereinafter given and explained ought to satisfy all who realize that a crisis has been reached on this subject which can only be passed in a spirit of reason and concession. (See Chapter III.)

Some claim that the specific thing desired is publicity of party expenditures. Others suggest that all we need and what is most needed is direct voting for candidates at party primaries, which was above discussed. Some of the alleged reforms are of trivial importance, while others are positively objectionable. Some of them are based upon assent to the doctrine that all the powers and special privileges now given by law to party bosses and professional politicians belong to them beyond question or dispute, and others upon the impracticable design of overthrowing political parties, or defeating party candidates by independent voting, without taking away the enormous advantages given them by law. Another proposition is to limit expenditures for campaign purposes, the proponents forgetting that excessive expenditures, if an evil in other than a purely moral sense, is one that cannot be reached by laws, any more than other common vices of men can be so reached.

The remedy of limiting expenditures and penalizing excesses, would, if enforced, merely aggravate and increase the evil aimed at. Conscientious candidates would scrupulously conform to such laws, thus giving every advantage to the old and corrupt practice of those who do not hesitate to make the purpose to win justify the means of winning. There should be no limit to legitimate expenditure for campaign purposes, while as to immoral or illegal expenditures, ways to make them will be found in spite of the most stringent laws, even if it be found necessary to commit perjury for their concealment.

Chapter II Ballot Laws

The registration, ballot boxes, ballots, casting up and making returns, etc., constitute the mechanism for selecting persons to hold and exercise governmental powers. Those selected become, for all practical uses, the government itself. Obviously, when the machinery is being run by unscrupulous or indifferent employees, more highly paid for turning out a poor than for a good article, we need not be surprised at evil results. Nor can such employees, who find the use of the old so profitable, be expected to propose or welcome the substitution of new machinery. Beneficial changes must be brought about by other than those who make a business of practical politics and officeholding.

We read in the newspapers the proceedings of various assemblages of citizens, and either read or hear many speeches, all having for their object to teach the duty of giving more attention to public questions and of exercising an independent judgment upon them. But few of them ever come down to specifications or consent to co-operate with any one proposing a definite plan of procedure. The party orators are fond of speaking of the "sturdy, patriotic, independent voter" as the salvation of the country. Under present conditions, they do not speak truly. The country is not saved by them, for they are unorganized, divided, and