The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-02-01
THE FALSE PROPHET.

Readers of our esteemed morning.
contemporary will remember tn,
prediction that il ventured to pu
forth on more than one occasion
during the discussion of the Ed
munds bill in Congress. It was t.
the effect that those who opposed
the bill would be repudiated by
their constituents, and relegsted t
the quiet ebscurity of their home
life. Having run across the record
of the vote in the House on the final
passage of the bill, which lie very
nearly Identical with all the yea and
nay votes taken as to any special
feature of the measure, we have
thought it worth while to ascertain
tust what became Of the Represent
atives in the last Congress, and
learn just how many of them were
''shelved" for having opposed the
Edmunas bill. We do this not
with the view to demonstrating
that our esteemed contemporary is
false prophet-for it is generally
regarded as the FL Mahdi Of western
newspapers-but merely on account
Of the interest that attaches to the
investigation. The bill was passed
by q vote of 1919 to ~, f1fty.one not
voting. Of thoPe who voted for the
bill 1O1 are members OF the present
Congress, having been endorsed
and ress.ected by their constituents.
That Is to say, so per cent, as near as
may be, of the members who worked
for the passage of the bill, have
been sent back, their course having
been approved. or the AZ who
voted against the bill 81 were re-
turned, including Mr.. Kenna, of
West Virginia, who was subse-
quently the recipient of still higher
honors, having been elected
United States Senator. Thus it
will be seen that something over
81 per cent. of the laws opponents
were endorsed by the people, prov
ing, if the election proved anything
in the case, that more voters were
opposed to the law than those who
favored is. Those who refused to
vote on the measure, being too
eoWardly to place themselves on
record on the question. suffered most
severely at the hands of the people,
only IS out Of the 81, or 35 per cent. of
the non-votefs being returned. If
these figures mean anything at all,
1t is that It would have been better,
in the ligheof the average mem
ber's desire for reelection, for all to
have voted against the bill, when
instead Of p Per cent. of the old
&tives being returned Ga
per cent. Of them would have been
sent back.
Another error in connection with |
5his matter might as we'll be pointed
put here. 1t has been the effort of
Republicans to convey the impress
ZION that their party passed the Ed.
nunds bill. There is nothing In |
,he bill which should make any one
eel proud over having voted for the |
measure; but as a matter of fact
the percentage of the Democratic |
members who voted for the bill is |
very nearly as large as that of the
Republicans. Of the 1O1 Representa-
tives returned vino voted for the
bill IS are Democrats and So Repub-
licans. |
We maintain that all these figures |
simply demonstrate that the people
care very little how their Repre-
sentatives vote upon any question,
SO long as they vote conscientiously.
The people do not like congressman
who are afraid to express an opinion
and those who have no opinion to
express.