| Skinning a Skunk       The reason why Hearst’s Chicago 
              American is a constant hell-broth of vituperation and lies spewed 
              out all over the land is because that loathsome sewer sheet is owned 
              and directed by William Randolph Hearst, to whose greed for dirty 
              dollars is due the fact that to-day there is a grave at Canton, 
              a widow whose grief is shared by the world, and the flag of our 
              country is floating at half mast from the Pacific to the Atlantic, 
              on every American ship. What sort of reptile is this W. R. Hearst? 
              Well, I would skin the skunk for you myself were it not that a United 
              States Congressman has anticipated me. For on January 8th, 1897, 
              the Hon. Grove L. Johnson, member of Congress from the Second District 
              of California, standing on the floor of Congress, with all the world 
              listening, piled up charges against the yellow editor such as no 
              man with red blood in his veins would rest under for an hour. The 
              Californian Congressman said in part:  
               
                      Hearst is a young man, rich, 
                  not by his own exertions, but by inheritance from his honored 
                  father and gifts from his honored mother. By the reckless expenditure 
                  of money he has built up a great paper. The Examiner has a large 
                  circulation. It did have a great influence in California. At 
                  first we Californians were suspicious of “Our Willie,” as Hearst 
                  is called on the Pacific Coast. We did not know what he meant. 
                  But we came to believe in him and his oft repeated boasts of 
                  independence and honesty. Daily editorials written by “Our Willie’s” 
                  hired men, praising his motives and proclaiming his honesty 
                  had their effect. Besides, “Our Willie,” through his paper, 
                  was doing some good. We knew him as a debaucher, a dude in dress, 
                  an Anglo-maniac, but we thought he was honest. We knew he was 
                  licentious in his tastes, regal in his dissipations, unfit to 
                  associate with pure women or decent men, but we thought he was 
                  honest. We knew he was erotic in his tastes, erratic in his 
                  moods, of small understanding and smaller views of men and measures, 
                  but we thought “Our Willie” in his English plaids, his cockney 
                  accent and his hair parted in the middle, was honest. We knew 
                  he had sought on the banks of the Nile relief from loathsome 
                  disease contracted in the haunts of vice, and had sought to 
                  rival the Khedive in the gorgeousness of his harem in the joy 
                  of restored health; but we still believed him honest, though 
                  low and depraved. We knew he was debarred from society in San 
                  Francisco because of his delight in flaunting his vileness, 
                  but we believed him honest though tattooed with sin. We knew 
                  he [15][16] was ungrateful to his 
                  friends, unkind to his employees, unfaithful to his business 
                  associates, but we believed he was trying to publish an honest 
                  paper. We knew he had money, not earned by himself (for we knew 
                  he was unable to earn any money save as a statue at a cigarette 
                  counter), but given to him by honored and indulgent parents; 
                  we knew he needed no bricks with which to pay his way, but while 
                  we knew all these things we still believed “Our Willie” to be 
                  honest.  *  *  *  When William R. Hearst 
                  commenced his abusive tirades against C. P. Huntington and the 
                  Southern Pacific Railroad Company and the Central Pacific Railroad 
                  Company, and to denounce the Funding Bill and all who favored 
                  it as thieves and robbers, we thought his course wrong, his 
                  methods bad and his attacks brutal, but we believed “Our Willie” 
                  honest in it all. When C. P. Huntington told the truth about 
                  “Our Willie” and showed that he was simply fighting the railroad 
                  bill because he could get no more blackmail from the Southern 
                  Pacific, we were dazed with the charge, and, as Californians, 
                  we were humiliated. We looked eagerly for “Our Willie’s” denial, 
                  but it came not. Cornered, he admitted that he had blackmailed 
                  the Southern Pacific Company into a contract whereby they were 
                  to pay him $30,000 to let them alone, and that he had received 
                  $22,000 of his blackmail, and that C. P. Huntington had cut 
                  it off as soon as he knew of it, and that he was “getting even” 
                  now on Huntington and the Railroad Company because he had not 
                  received the other $8,000 of his bribe. He admitted by his silence 
                  that the Southern Pacific Company was financially responsible, 
                  but that he dared not sue it for the $8,000 that he claimed 
                  to be due for fear that his blackmail would be exposed in court. 
                  With brazen effrontery only equaled by the lowest denizen of 
                  the haunts of vice he unblushingly admitted he had blackmailed 
                  the railroad company, but pleaded in extenuation that he did 
                  not keep his contract, but swindled them out of their money. 
                   *  *  *  To learn “Our Willie” was a common, 
                  ordinary, everyday blackmailer—a low highwayman of the newspaper 
                  world—grieved the people of California, myself included.       This in short is the man the presses 
              of whose journalistic sore on the night of the assassination of 
              William McKinley would have been smashed to pieces had his guilty 
              conscience not warned him to surround his lutescent premises with 
              police officers with their trigger-fingers ready for business. For, 
              like all anarchists Hearst is the first when in trouble to invoke 
              the protection of the law he affects to despise. But his bolt is 
              about shot. Chicagoans have found him out. His crocodile tears are 
              appreciated at their true value. In fact they have done him infinitely 
              more harm than good. Chicagoans know that in all its slimy career 
              the Chicago-American has never equalled the utter mendacity and 
              hypocrisy of its editorials bewailing Czolgosz’s foul deed. |