Arizona republican., 1890-10-27
HE KILLED THE RAILROAD BILL

"had passed the North and South Rail- road bill, but it was vetoed by the President. 1" This claim is not on a level with hls other assertions, as to truth, for it does appear that he did do some thing toward passing the measure in question. But, while he assisted in passing the bill, his course was such as to leave taint of jobbery upon the measure and to compel President liar rison to veto it.
 Knowing that the measure was a popular one among the people of Mari copa and Yavapai counties, knowing that the business interests of each county demanded the proposed improve ment and would hold him responsible for any failure to push the bill, Mark Smith did advocate it before the House Committee on Territories and with a number of members of both branches of Congress. He undertook the work from mere idea of expediency, to gain popularity at home, not with any real regard for meritorious measure, and if to his statements is to be attributed the passage of the bill, to those same statements its rejection at the Presi- dents hands is also due.
 In the national legislature thousands of bills are annually introduced, most of them of purely local benefit or im- portance, and the circumstances of each measure cannot be thoroughly investi- gated by every legislator. The pick of the men of the land is supposed to be gathered and upon the mere word of the local representative are many Of the measures passed.
 Thus it was with Smith. Instead of consulting with eminent authorities about any defects there might be in the North and South bill, instead of solicit ing it's passage simply upon the ground that it would be of value to his constitu- ents, he stood before the Committee on Territories and brazenly lied. As in stance, he said that the rail road would have length in Maricopa county of only fifty miles, when any person who would have taken the trouble to turn to map, as did President Harrison, would have seen that the distance must necessarily be over seventy miles and, to cap all, made the misstatement that the bill proposed loan by the county, for which it 'eds to receiue the bonds of the railroad company. Such a bill could not work any hardship upon the taxpayers of the county and so the bill was passed without opposition, the members of Congress relying inn plicitly upon the statements made by the Delegate from Arizona. The bill was sent to the President and after care ful consideration was returned by him with veto message of which 1t IS neces- sary in this connection to quote only a paragraph:
 This bill proposes to confer authority upon | the Supervisors of the county of Maricopa to issue county bonds at the rate of 5000 per mile, in aid of railroad to be constructed from Phr- nix northwardly to the county line, q distance estimated at fifty miles, but probably somewhat | longer. The bill seems to have passed the House | of Representatives under an entire misappre- hension of its true scope and effect In the brief report submitted by the Committee on Terri tories it is said that, "by the terms of the bill the county receives bonds in payment of the money proposed to be advanced" and in the course of the debate the Delegate from Arizona mistakenly stated in response to a request for information, that the bill proposed loan by the county, in exchange for which it was to re- ceive the bonds of the railroad company. In fact, the bill does not provide for loan to be secured by bonds, but for subscription of stock. | How far this mistake may have affected the pas sage of the bill cannot of course be known.
 Thus it will plainly be seen that, while the misstatements of Smith had passed unnoticed in Congress, by the evidence of an official document, which was made part of the Congressional Record, dld he stand accused and con victed.
 Pettifogging is not allowable upon the floors of either branch of Congress and when Delegate is caught in making misstatements or misrepresentation it can be readily imagined how much in- fuence he will be able to retain among those upon whom ne, as simple Dele gate, without vote, must rely for the passage of any measure coming up for action in which his constituents are interested.
 Can it not be readily seen that Mark Smith, by this one set of falsehoods alone, has forfeited all the respect and consideration that has heretofore been accorded him as representative of Arizona. Honorable men, such as those who exert influence upon the floors of Congress, have only con tempt for such methods and Smith from that time on has been held as a person whose word is not worthy of reliance.
 Such being the case, would it not be futile and useless to return him to Con- gress, would not such step be in the nature of an endorsement of such methods of legislation and would it not be most discreditable to our Territory, which should have In Congress her best citizen, a man of honor, of probity, of industry and intelligence.
 -