The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1890-02-07
TIMID CONGRESSMEN
AFRAID TO STRENGTHEN j. :E TERMS
OF THE INQUIRY BILL.

AFRAID TO STRENGTHEN TIE TERMS
OF THE INQUIRY BILL.
They Say the Measure Will Re
II an Attempt Is Made to Improve Its
Provisions They Dare Not Ask Congress
for . Decent Appropriation.
GFtom the yoice.1
The Voice's suggestions for the i'm
proyement of the bill for q Federal Com
mission TO investigate the liquor traffic
are received with varying expressions Of
approval or objection by the Congress-
men and Senators who profess interest
IN the liquor question. Senator G. b.
Farwell of Illinois represents an attitude
chat is not without support among the
leaders of the party of Temperance and
morality Il have not read that bill"
said he to me, 4but I tell you frankly that
if it was got up by the Prohibition party
which is tryiGgto defeat the Republicans,
/ shall be opposed to it for that reason
alone" When l informed this highly SEN
sitive Senator that the measure did not
originate with the Prohibition party, but
anon-partisan temperance society, he gra-
ciously agreed to read it before condemn
ing it utterly.
The Congressman who are relied on by
the Prohibitionists for favorable and fair
action upon important measures, showed
wide differences Of opinion as TO the ex-
peaiency of insisting on q strong bill and
idea seems to be that It is not snfe to ask
too muc' of the present Congress-that
is, that an inquiry bill SO drawn as to in
sure o fair and thorough investigation, or
to fix the responsibility for careless or
dishonest work, W II not meet with favor
ut this time. But some Of the Congress-
men are evidently disposed to recognize
the justice of the Voices demands, al
though not quite satisfied of the ex-
pediency of taking an uncompromising
stand.
Congressman j. D. Taylor of Ohio,
Chairman of the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic
Committee, thought that it would kill
the bill it too large an appropriation were
asked for. He also thought that the bill
would be killed if its friends should ask
for "too large a number OF Commits
sioners." He felt that President Harrison
could be trusted to appoint a fair Com
mission-that he would not dare do other
wise. Mr.. Taylor said the first meeting
of the committee would be held in q few
days.
Congressman J. A. Picker, of South
Dakota, o member Of the Alcoholic
Liquor Traffic Committee, said:
Il think the bill would be endangered
by asking for 500, 0o0, but 1 believe
$4,000 would be too small an %appropria-
tion. Twenty-Five thousand dollars would
be about right. A good Secretary for the
Commission is indispensable. 1 don't
see how they can do anything without
one. 1t would be we'll 10 increase the
membership of the Commission to seven.
If too many Commissioners were APP
pointed the expenses would be too great.
1t would be we'll to lay out their duties
more specifically, and also 10 give them
general jurisdiction concerning any mat
tiers pertaining to the subject which they
might desire to investigate"
Congressman Daniel Kerr Of Iowa, an
other member of the Liquor Traffic Com
mittee, thought five Commissioners
would be enough, and he couldn't see
why the provisions made il the bill in
troduced by Senator Frye were not ex-
plicit enongh.-He thought the Commits:
sion should have a good secretary, but he
did not believe that more than a years
time ought to be consumed in making the
AAIoASb ~ q AoASe1 pClAou "c1o IhACA
the results of the work would be of prac-
tically no value to this Congress. He
was of the opinion that it would be we'll
to have the Commission consist OF one
Prohibitionist, one Democrat, two Re-
publioans and one woman. He thought
that $40, 900 would probably be sufficient.
The Commission would have the advan-
tage of some sources of Investigation
that would cost ~nothing-for example,
the resources of the Bureau of Statistics.
Congressman Tracey. of Iowa, also be-
lieved that five Commissioners would be
enough. If o change were made he would
reduce the membership to three. while
Sic, 900 may not be enough" said he, 4
bill" He did not think it would be de.
sirable to define the duties of the Com
mission more explicitly, forhe considered
them to be satisfactorily defined in the
present bill.
Congressman Thomas G.. Skinner, O.
North Carolina, one of the Democratic
members of the Liquor Traffic Commit.
tee, thought, generally speaking, it woult
be best forsucha CommisGionto be small
He could not give an opinion as to thu
amount of money that would be needed
but regarded 800, 600 as too much. HI
believed, however, that the duties Of the
Commission should be made very ex
plicit. He gave me the following state
ment of his position on the prohibition
question:
Personally I am q Prohibitionist.
voted for Prohibition when the questio,
was submitted in North Carolina. I sale
that personally I was a Prohibitionist.
don't think it is a question for the Ma.
tional Legislature TO decide, but for tn.
States. In other words, I am q State
Rights man."
Congressman S. r. Pet.rs, of Kansas
said:
Il think the investigation can be &C
complished best by q small Commission
I do not anticipate any danger from the
fair Commission by the President. I an
satisfied with a $40, 0G0 appropri ltion
because some supporters of the bill
Eight be scared if We should ask TO,
more. Whatever is lacking can be bette
obtained by subsequent allowances. Thu
business Of the Commission is clearl,
enough defir ed in the bill as it stands"
Congre j. P. Dolliver. of Iowa
said he hadn't given the subject any con
.siderat on. The efficiency of such (
Commission. in his opinion, would de
pend mora on the ability of its members
than their number. An appropriate,
~ OuE1t ~ hS H. Auloo CAOIRu ~ StCuEt
a thorough investigation.
Congressman Il. w. Perkins OF Kansas
believed that $ln,G would not be enough
and that seven Commissioners would b
better than five.
The majority of the Congressman with
whom l talked confessed utter ignorance
of the provisions Of the bill. This meas
ure has been bonding for nearly twent,
years, yet the patriotic and intelligen
gentlemen who are sent to Washington IL
attend to tho interests of the country
coolly admit that they have never paiG
any attention to one of the most impor'
tant and Oldest bills before them for con
sideration. Among those who admitted
10 me that they had not examined the In
quiry bill were Senator Farwell of Hi.
nois, Senator Ransom of North Carolina
Senator Hiscock of New York, and Con
gressmen Miles Of Connecticut, Rife O
Pennsylvania, Lee Of Virginia. Bayne o:
Pennsylvania, McMillin of Tennessee
Baker of New York, Gear of Iowa, Pay
son of Ohio, and Hooker of Mississippi
Mrs. Ada NJ. B%ittenbender, legislativ.
G ~ N.Ysa-o1 IU n NJ tt