Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1886-09-03
Mr.. Edmunds and the Cleo BiIl-Thc
Waterman Answered


Montpelier lTUtchmdn to break the force
of Senator Morrilis calm and candid let
ter on the subject of the oleomargarine bill
and of Mr.. Edmunds's title to the support
of the true Republicans and honest people
Of Vermont. Nermunters capable of the
impudence OF standing up to assert that
our veteran Vermont senator, the Nestor
of Congress, and the embodiment of can
dor and truth, did not know what he was
writing ABOUT, or was undertaking to
mislead the public, must be so rcry few,
that we incline to the belief that the
IFdtchmdH'S editorial was the production
OF the imported vagabond who is running
the anti Edmunds canvass in Vermont.
If the Waterman is to be believed, Mr..
Morrill, did not even know the composition
of his own committee; nor know much
about the course of legislation any way
nor understand the course of his own col
league on important subjects. On all
these points the editor of the Wdtcinun,
native or imported, is able to instruct
him
We shall not waste much space In fol
lowing up the lVutchmdt'S specious
statements. 1t is enough to say that most
of its alleged citations from the Congress
SiOndl Record are either Interpretations
or most pitiful pettifogging of the facts
1t undertakes to print list of Republi
can senators who voted against referring
the oleo bill to the committee on agrcul-
ture, but omits from the list Senator
Joe Hawley of Connecticut, who was a
friend and supporter of the bill. BY
fugling about the votes on amendments
some Of which, as Mr.. Morrill, has shown,
were favored by some friends OF the meas
IRE because they believed that without
them the bill would be vetoed by the
president-the Waterman attempts to
make out that only small minority of
the members Of the Committee on Finance
were friendly to the bill. We will not go
into this matter further than to say that
the Congressional Record shows that
Senators Morrill,, Sherman, Allison, Al
drich, Miller, Jones of Nevada and Nc
PhersUu, voted for the bill, or would have
voted for it, If present-several of them.
Mr.. Morrill, included, being paired with
opponents of the bill. In other words
SCrCH of the ciCrcH members of the
finance committee were in favor of the
bill. The Waterman says Mr.. Morrill,
admits that the Democratic members Of his
were opposed to the bill. Not so.
lie says that call or nearly all, " the dem
ocrdtic members were opposed to it. In
point Of fact, one democrat, Mr. McPher-
son of New Jersey, was in favor of the
bill
The Waterman complains that Senator
Morrill, does not explain why Mr. Ed
having originally favored refer
ring the bill TO the finance committee,
voted against such refer
ence. Mr. Morrill, does not explain this
because no explanation was necessary.
The suggestion that the bill ought to 90
to the finance committee was first made
by Senator Morrill,. 1t was a friendly
designed to aid the bill. Sena-
tor Miller, having fences to look after in
New York, wanted charge of the bill, and
it went to his committee. Six weeks
later, when the bill was upon its passage,
Senator Beck, leading opponent of the
bill, moved to refer it to the finance com
mittee. The sole purpose of the motion
was to delay and probably defeat the bill.
There was no reason why it should go To
0Hy committee. 1t had had its reference
and consideration, and been duly reported
upon; and in that stage Of the case "A mo-
tlon even to refer it back to the commit.
tee on agriculture could only have been
hostile to the bill. Mr. Edmunds, as a
friend of the bill. of course voted against
any such obstructive proceeding. That
was all there was of that.
al ia Tr;ti fi.-,
to make on Mr.. Morrill's course in rela-
ton to this matter. Very well the course
OF Mr.. Morrill, and that of Mr.. Edmunds
were identical-eXcept that Mr. Morril's
illness prevented him from sustaining the
bill by argument, as Mr.. Edmunds did
Our senators voted for the reference Of the
bill to Mr. Morrill's committee, because
MS tax bill it belonged there because
it was safe with that committee, and be-
cause if placed, as it would have been if
it had gone to that committee, under the
charge of those able and experienced vet
Grams, Morrill, and Sherman, it would
have been put through without change,
or with less change than it recei we'd.
Together they voted against every
and every motion cal
culated TO delay or defeat the
bill. Mr.. Edmunds made the ablest
argument that was made
in the debate in favor of the bill. With
out his experienced and powerful aid, and
high legal standing, the bill could never
have survived the assaults of the able
lawyers arrayed against it. We copy
some extracts from his speech in another
column. Mr. Edmunds, by his personal
saved the bill, in the last
stages Of legislation, from postpone
ment which would have been fatal to it.
His action in that matter we have printed
at length from the Congressional Record.
He would have made an effort in open
Senate to raise the tax to four cents, if
Senator Miller, who had charge of the
bill, had permitted; but he Miller
thought it not best to attempt it. In short,
Mr., Edmunds showed himself from first
to last, the strong, watchful, eilec-
tive friend of the measure. It
had no tirmcr or more valuable
supporter Any assertion to the con