"Here shall the Press the People's rights maintain.
Unawed by influence and unbribed by gain."
--Joseph Story: Motto of the Salem Register.
_Would any person believe that there is any one subject upon which the
newspapers of the United States, acting in concert, by prearrangement,
in obedience to wires all drawn by one man, will deny full and free
discussion? If such a thing is possible, it is a serious matter, for we
rely upon the newspapers as at once the most forbidding preventive and
the swiftest and surest corrective of evil. For the haunting possibility
of newspaper exposure, men who know not at all the fear of God pause,
hesitate, and turn back from contemplated rascality. For fear "it might
get into the papers," more men are abstaining from crime and carouse
to-night than for fear of arrest. But these are trite things--only, what
if the newspapers fail us? Relying so wholly on the press to undo evil,
how shall we deal with that evil with which the press itself has been
seduced into captivity?_
In the Lower House of the Massachusetts Legislature one day last March
there was a debate which lasted one whole afternoon and engaged some
twenty speakers, on a bill providing that every bottle of patent
medicine sold in the state should bear a label stating the contents of
the bottle. More was told concerning patent medicines that afternoon
than often comes to light in a single day. The debate at times was
dramatic--a member from Salem told of a young woman of his acquaintance
now in an institution for inebriates as the end of an incident which
began with patent medicine dosing for a harmless ill. There was humor,
too, in the debate--Representative Walker held aloft a bottle of Peruna
bought by him in a drug store that very day and passed it around for
his fellow-members to taste and decide for themselves whether Dr.
Harrington, the Secretary of the State Board of Health, was right when
he told the Legislative Committee that it was merely a "cheap cocktail."
The Papers did not Print One Word.
In short, the debate was interesting and important--the two qualities
which invariably ensure to any event big headlines in the daily
newspapers. But that debate was not celebrated by big headlines, nor any
headlines at all. Yet Boston is a city, and Massachusetts is a state,
where the proceedings of the legislature figure very large in public
interest, and where the newspapers respond to that interest by reporting
the sessions with greater fullness and minuteness than in any
other state. Had that debate {073}been on prison reform, on Sabbath
observance, the early closing saloon law, on any other subject, there
would have been, in the next day's papers, overflowing accounts of
verbatim report, more columns of editorial comment, and the picturesque
features of it would have ensured the attention of the cartoonist.
Now why? Why was this one subject tabooed? Why were the daily accounts
of legislative proceedings in the next day's papers abridged to a
fraction of their usual ponderous length, and all reference to the
afternoon debate on patent medicines omitted? Why was it in vain for the
speakers in that patent-medicine debate to search for their speeches
in the next day's newspapers? Why did the legislative reporters fail to
find their work in print? Why were the staff cartoonists forbidden to
exercise their talents on that most fallow and tempting opportunity--the
members of the Great and General Court of Massachusetts gravely tippling
Peruna and passing the bottle around to their encircled neighbors, that
practical knowledge should be the basis of legislative action?
I take it if any man should assert that there is one subject on which
the newspapers of the United States, acting in concert and as a
unit, will deny full and free discussion, he would be smiled at as an
intemperate fanatic. The thing is too incredible. He would be regarded
as a man with a delusion. And yet I invite you to search the files of
the daily newspapers of Massachusetts for March 16, 1905, for an account
of the patent-medicine debate that occurred the afternoon of March 15 in
the Massachusetts Legislature. In strict accuracy it must be said that
there was one exception. Any one familiar with the newspapers of the
United States will already have named it--the Springfield _Republican_.
That paper, on two separate occasions, gave several columns to the
record of the proceedings of the legislature on the patent-medicine
bill. Why the otherwise universal silence?
The patent-medicine business in the United States is one of huge
financial proportions. The census of 1900 placed the value of the annual
product at $59,611,355. Allowing for the increase of half a decade of
rapid growth, it must be to-day not less than seventy-five millions.
That is the wholesale price. The retail price of all the patent
medicines sold in the United States in one year may be very
conservatively placed at one hundred million dollars. And of this one
hundred millions which the people of the United States pay for patent
medicines yearly, fully forty millions goes to the newspapers. Have
patience! I have more to say than merely to point out the large revenue
which newspapers receive from patent medicines, and let inference do the
rest. Inference has no place in this story. There are facts a-plenty.
But it is essential to point out the intimate financial relation between
the newspapers and the patent medicines. I was told by the man who for
many years handled the advertising of the Lydia E. Pinkham Company that
their expenditure was $100,000 a month, $1,200,000 a year. Dr. Pierce
and the Peruna Company both advertise more extensively than the Pinkham
Company. Certainly there are at least five patent-medicine concerns
in the United States who each pay out to the newspapers more than one
million dollars a year. When the Dr. Greene Nervura Company of Boston
went into bankruptcy, its debts to newspapers for advertising amounted
to $535,000. To the Boston _Herald_ alone it owed $5,000, and to so
small a paper, comparatively, as the Atlanta _Constitution_ it owed
$1,500. One obscure {074}quack doctor in New York, who did merely an
office business, was raided by the authorities, and among the papers
seized there were contracts showing that within a year he had paid to
one paper for advertising $5,856.80; to another $20,000. Dr. Humphreys,
one of the best known patent-medicine makers, has said to his
fellow-members of the Patent Medicine Association: "The twenty thousand
newspapers of the United States make more money from advertising
the proprietary medicines than do the proprietors of the medicines
themselves.... Of their receipts, one-third to one-half goes for
advertising." More than six years ago, Cheney, the president of the
National Association of Patent Medicine Men, estimated the yearly amount
paid to the newspapers by the larger patent-medicine concerns at twenty
million dollars--more than one thousand dollars to each daily, weekly
and monthly periodical in the United States.
[IMAGE ==>] {074}
Silence is the Fixed Quantity.
Does this throw any light on the silence of the Massachusetts papers?
{075}
Naturally such large sums paid by the patent-medicine men to the
newspapers suggest the thought of favor. But silence is too important a
part of the patent-medicine man's business to be left to the capricious
chance of favor. Silence is the most important thing in his business.
The ingredients of his medicine--that is nothing. Does the price of
goldenseal go up? Substitute whisky. Does the price of whisky go up? Buy
the refuse wines of the California vineyards. Does the price of opium go
too high, or the public fear of it make it an inexpedient thing to use?
Take it out of the formula and substitute any worthless barnyard
weed. But silence is the fixed quantity--silence as to the frauds he
practices; silence as to the abominable stewings and brewings that enter
into his nostrum; silence as to the deaths and sicknesses he causes;
silence as to the drug fiends he makes, the inebriate asylums he fills.
Silence he must have. So he makes silence a part of the contract.
Read the significant silence of the Massachusetts newspapers in the
light of the following contracts for advertising. They are the regular
printed form used by Hood, Ayer and Munyon in making their advertising
contracts with thousands of newspapers throughout the United States.
On page 80 [IMAGE ==>] {080} is shown the contract made by the J. C.
Ayer Company, makers of Ayer's Sarsaparilla. At the top is the name of
the firm, "The J. C. Ayer Company, Lowell,, Mass.," and the date. Then
follows a blank for the number of dollars, and then the formal contract:
"We hereby agree, for the sum of............ Dollars per year,........to
insert in the............. published at............... the advertisement
of the J. C. Ayer Company." Then follow the conditions as to space to be
used each issue, the page the advertisement is to be on and the position
it is to occupy. Then these two remarkable conditions of the contract:
"First--It is agreed in case any law or laws are enacted, either state
or national, harmful to the interests of the T. C. Ayer Company, that
this contract may be canceled by them from date of such enactment, and
the insertions made paid for pro-rata with the contract price."
This clause is remarkable enough. But of it more later. For the present
examine the second clause: "Second--It is agreed that the J. C. Ayer Co.
may cancel this contract, pro-rata, in case advertisements are published
in this paper in which their products are offered, with a view to
substitution or other harmful motive; also in case any matter otherwise
detrimental to the J. C. Ayer Company's interest is permitted to appear
in the reading columns or elsewhere in the paper."
This agreement is signed in duplicate, one by the J. C. Ayer Company and
the other one by the newspaper.
All Muzzle-Clauses Alike.
That is the contract of silence. (Notice the next one, in identically
the same language, bearing the name of the C. I. Hood Company, the
other great manufacturer of sarsaparilla; and then the third--again in
identically the same words--for Dr. Munyon.) That is the clause which
with forty million dollars, muzzles the press of the country. I wonder
if the Standard Oil Company could, for forty million dollars, bind
the newspapers of the United States in a contract that "no matter
detrimental to the Standard Oil Company's interests be permitted to
appear in the reading columns or elsewhere in this paper."
Is it a mere coincidence that in each of these contracts the silence
{076}clause is framed in the same words? Is the inference fair that
there is an agreement among the patent-medicine men and quack doctors
each to impose this contract on all the newspapers with which it deals,
one reaching the newspapers which the other does not, and all combined
reaching all the papers in the United States, and effecting a universal
agreement among newspapers to print nothing detrimental to patent
medicines? You need not take it as an inference. I shall show it later
as a fact.
[IMAGE ==>] {076}
"In the reading columns or elsewhere in this paper." The paper must not
print itself, nor must it allow any outside party, who might wish to
do so, to pay the regular advertising rates and print the truth about
patent medicines in the advertising columns. More than a year ago, just
after Mr. Bok had printed his first article exposing patent medicines,
a business man in St. Louis, a man of great wealth, conceived that it
would {077}help his business greatly if he could have Mr. Bok's article
printed as an advertisement in every newspaper in the United States.
He gave the order to a firm of advertising agents and the firm began in
Texas, intending to cover the country to Maine. But that advertisement
never got beyond a few obscure country papers in Texas. The contract of
silence was effective; and a few weeks later, at their annual meeting,
the patent-medicine association "Resolved"--I quote the minutes--"That
this Association commend the action of the great majority of the
publishers of the United States who have consistently refused said false
and malicious attacks in the shape of advertisements which in whole or
in part libel proprietary medicines."
I have said that the identity of the language of the silence clause
in several patent-medicine advertising contracts suggests mutual
understanding among the nostrum makers, a preconceived plan; and I
have several times mentioned the patent-medicine association. It seems
incongruous, almost humorous, to speak of a national organization of
quack doctors and patent-medicine makers; but there is one, brought
together for mutual support, for co-operation, for--but just what
this organization is for, I hope to show. No other organization ever
demonstrated so clearly the truth that "in union there is strength." Its
official name is an innocent-seeming one--"The Proprietary Association
of America." There are annual meetings, annual reports, a constitution,
by-laws. And I would call special attention to Article II of those
by-laws.
"The objects of this association," says this article, "are: to protect
the rights of its members to the respective trade-marks that they may
own or control; to establish such mutual co-operation as may be required
in the various branches of the trade; to reduce all burdens that may
be oppressive; to facilitate and foster equitable principles in the
purchase and sale of merchandise; to acquire and preserve for the use
of its members such business information as may be of value to them; to
adjust controversies and promote harmony among its members."
That is as innocuous a statement as ever was penned of the objects of
any organization. It might serve for an organization of honest cobblers.
Change a few words, without altering the spirit in the least, and a body
of ministers might adopt it. In this laboriously complete statement
of objects, there is no such word as "lobby" or "lobbying." Indeed, so
harmless a word as "legislation" is absent--strenuously absent.
Where the Money Goes.
But I prefer to discover the true object of the organization of the
"Proprietary Association of America" in another document than Article
II of the by-laws. Consider the annual report of the treasurer, say
for 1904. The total of money paid out during the year was $8,516.26.
Of this, one thousand dollars was for the secretary's salary, leaving
$7,516.26 to be accounted for. Then there is an item of postage, one
of stationery, one of printing--the little routine expenses of every
organization; and finally there is this remarkable item:
Legislative Committee, total expenses, $6,606.95.
Truly, the Proprietary Association of America seems to have several
{078}objects, as stated in its by-laws, which cost it very little, and
one object--not stated in its by-laws at all--which costs it all its
annual revenue aside from the routine expenses of stationery, postage
and secretary. If just a few more words of comment may be permitted on
this point, does it not seem odd that so large an item as $6,606.95,
out of a total budget of only $8,516.26, should be put in as a lump sum,
"Legislative Committee, total expenses"? And would not the annual report
of the treasurer of the Proprietary Association of America be a more
entertaining document if these "total expenses" of the Legislative
Committee were carefully itemized?
[IMAGE ==>] {078}
Not that I mean to charge the direct corruption of legislatures. The
Proprietary Association of America used to do that. They used to spend,
according to the statement of the present president of the organization,
Mr. F. J. Cheney, as much as seventy-five thousand dollars a year. But
that was before Mr. Cheney himself discovered a better way. The fighting
of public health legislation is the primary object and chief activity,
the very raison d'etre, of the Proprietary Association. The motive back
of bringing the quack doctors and patent-medicine manufacturers of the
United States into a mutual organization was this: Here are some
scores of men, each paying a large sum annually to the newspapers. The
aggregate of these sums is forty million dollars. By organization, the
full effect of this money can be got and used as a unit in preventing
the passage of laws which would compel them to tell the contents of
their nostrums, and in suppressing the newspaper publicity which would
drive them {079}into oblivion. So it was no mean intellect which devised
the scheme whereby every newspaper in America is made an active lobbyist
for the patent-medicine association. The man who did it is the present
president of the organization, its executive head in the work of
suppressing public knowledge, stifling public opinion and warding off
public health legislation, the Mr. Cheney already mentioned. He makes
a catarrh cure which, according to the Massachusetts State Board of
Health, contains fourteen and three-fourths per cent, of alcohol. As
to his scheme for making the newspapers of America not only maintain
silence, but actually lobby in behalf of the patent medicines, I am glad
that I am not under the necessity of describing it in my own words.
It would be easy to err in the direction that makes for incredulity.
Fortunately, I need take no responsibility. I have Mr. Cheney's own
words, in which he explained his scheme to his fellow-members of the
Proprietary Association of America. The quotation marks alone (and the
comment within the parentheses) are mine. The remainder is the language
of Mr. Cheney himself:
Mr. Cheney's Plan.
"We have had a good deal of difficulty in the last few years with the
different legislatures of the different states.... I believe I have a
plan whereby we will have no difficulty whatever with these people. I
have used it in my business for two years and know it is a practical
thing.... I, inside of the last two years, have made contracts with
between fifteen and sixteen thousand newspapers, and never had but one
man refuse to sign the contract, and my saying to him that I could not
sign a contract without this clause in it he readily signed it. My point
is merely to shift the responsibility. We to-day have the responsibility
on our shoulders. As you all know, there is hardly a year but we have
had a lobbyist in the different state legislatures--one year in New
York, one year in New Jersey, and so on." (Read that frank confession
twice--note the bland matter-of-factness of it.) "There has been a
constant fear that something would come up, so I had this clause in my
contract added. This is what I have in every contract I make: 'It is
hereby agreed that should your state, or the United States Government,
pass any law that would interfere with or restrict the sale of
proprietary medicines, this contract shall become void.'... In the
state of Illinois a few years ago they wanted to assess me three hundred
dollars. I thought I had a better plan than this, so I wrote to about
forty papers and merely said: 'Please look at your contract with me and
take note that if this law passes you and I must stop doing business,
and my contracts cease.'" The next week every one of them had an article,
and Mr. Man had to go....
I read this to Dr. Pierce some days ago and he was very much taken up
with it. I have carried this through and know it is a success. I know
the papers will accept it. Here is a thing that costs us nothing. We
are guaranteed against the $75,000 loss for nothing. It throws the
responsibility on the newspapers.... I have my contracts printed and
I have this printed in red type, right square across the contract, so
there can be absolutely no mistake, and the newspaper man can not say
to me, 'I did not see it.' He did see it and knows what he is doing. It
seems to me it is a point worth every man's attention.... I think this
is pretty near a sure thing.
[IMAGE ==>] {080}
THIS IS THE FORM OF CONTRACT--SEE (A) (B) (C)--THAT MUZZLES THE PRESS OF
THE UNITED STATES.
The gist of the contract lies in the clause which is marked with
brackets, to the effect that the agreement is voidable, In case any
matter detrimental to the advertiser's interests "Is permitted to appear
in the reading columns, or elsewhere, in this paper." This clause,
in the same words, appears in all three of these patent-medicine
advertising contracts. The documents reproduced here were gathered
from three different newspapers in widely separated parts of the United
States. The name of the paper in each case has been suppressed in order
to shield the publisher from the displeasure of the patent-medicine
combination. How much publishers are compelled to fear this displeasure
is exemplified by the experience of the Cleveland _Press,_ from whose
columns $18,000 worth of advertising was withdrawn within forty-eight
hours. {081}
I should like to ask the newspaper owners and editors of America what
they think of that scheme. I believe that the newspapers, when they
signed each individual contract, were not aware that they were being
dragooned into an elaborately thought-out scheme to make every newspaper
in the United States, from the greatest metropolitan daily to the
remotest country weekly, an active, energetic, self-interested lobbyist
for the patent-medicine association. If the newspapers knew how they
were being used as cat's-paws, I believe they would resent it. Certainly
the patent-medicine association itself feared this, and has kept this
plan of Mr. Cheney's a careful secret. In this same meeting of the
Proprietary Association of America, just after Mr. Cheney had made the
speech quoted above, and while it was being resolved that every other
patent-medicine man should put the same clause in his contract, the
venerable Dr. Humphreys, oldest and wisest of the guild, arose and said:
"Will it {082}not be now just as well to act on this, each and every one
for himself, instead of putting this on record?... I think the idea is
a good one, But really don't think it had better go in our proceedings."
And another fellow nostrum-maker, seeing instantly the necessity
of secrecy said: "I am heartily in accord with Dr. Humphreys. The
suggestion is a good one, but when we come to put in our public
proceedings, and state that we have adopted such a resolution, I want to
say that the legislators are just as sharp as the newspaper men.... As
a consequence, this will decrease the weight of the press comments.
Some of the papers, also, who would not come in, would publish something
about it in the way of getting square....."
[IMAGE ==>] {082}
This contract is the backbone of the scheme. The further details, the
organization of the bureau to carry it into effect--that, too, has been
kept carefully concealed from the generally unthinking newspapers,
who are all unconsciously mere individual cogs in the patent-medicine
lobbying machine. At one of the meetings of the association, Dr. R. V.
Pierce of Buffalo arose and said (I quote him verbatim):... "I would
move you that the report of the Committee on Legislation be made a
special order to be taken up immediately... that it be considered
in executive session, and that every person not a member of the
organization be asked to retire, so that it may be read and considered
in executive session. There are matters and suggestions in reference to
our future action, and measures to be taken which are advised therein,
that we would not wish to have published broadcast over the country for
very good reasons."
Now what were the "matters and suggestions" which Dr. Pierce "would
not wish to have published broadcast over the country for very good
reasons?" {083}
Can Mr. Cheney Reconcile These Statements?
Letter addressed to Mr. William Allen White, Editor of the Gazette,
Emporia, Kan.
By Frank J. Cheney.