Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-02-20
The Senior Senator From Tex
as Tells Why
He VOTED AGAINST HATCH
And His Blu 10 Stop Dealing IN Futures o,
All Kinds.
The Measure Was Not Constitutional whIlo
tho One Coke Favored Was. and u Would
Have Been Effective WacoIlas 10
he Grover inauguration

Waco, Tex, Feb 10 Especially
Senator Coke under The date OF Heb. IA
writes the following letter to morning
paner concerning hts vote on she anti
have a copy Of your paper Of late Of
Feb. q, containing correspondence irom
Austin, In which ! am charged with Nv.
consistency IN The vote GA the Hatch
ant-option bill There never WAS
move perfectly hasolcss, grOundlesa
charge IN the world I am not surprised
90 see " In the Dallas News, because
that paper viii not publish the truth
about me II it knows "; but ! nIn sur
priscd TINT a paper 40 fair na yOuani
usually ~ should have puhlIshed it.
voted against the Hatch anti-oplion
hill in July last, n few days before the
Adjournment Of congNsa, under the Inn
precision that the vote would b. inkeu
before the adjournment, but contrnry TO
Hourrnl expectation the discuespn NEpn
prltructcd 20 that the hlll had W come
over 90 this session Nobody hen, in-
nrined that ! would vote FOR the Hatch
hlN, With my recorded utleuncea Ia the
Congressional Record. which Ind gone
over the whole country, proving 10 my
satisfaction it, uncOnstitutonnlity. When
that bill came TO the senate from the
house aud was rofcrred 20 the judiciary
committed. Senators Pugh of Alahnmn,
George of Mississippi and nyeelf mnde
u minority report against the Hutch bill.
reporting a suhatltute for H. We took
Che ground ln this substitute that cOn-
EreHs had the power TO deal with this
question undcr the clause OF the consu.
tuition which authorizes congress 20 vgu'
late lorpirn aud Interstate commerce.
Whereas the Hatch bill simrly Invoked
che power Ut taKntlOn, not for the coll
lection Ot revenue, but for the destr,c'
ton of the buHn. The majority " the
committee reported fayornhly she Hatch
AL Ia Ma Ia
minority of Che committed, composed Of
the othpr two gentlemen aud myself, W
ported the Substitute bill, 40 that thora
were two Rnii-opiion bills before the son.
ate, Onc the Hatch hill which came from
the house. aud the other the bill reported
by the minority of the judiciary com.
mittve. ! supported the latter aud oTt
posed the former iu the speech lnnde by
me, 10 which ! have Just r0ferrpd. |
have had grpnt deal OF corrcnpondenco
about this bill and both being AUTH
option bills, perhaps nt times I'D rot
50 sufficiently into details In explaining
the difference hctween them, assuming
that every body understood what ] had
publicly said IN reference 10 that subject
] never wrote or promised anybody |
would support the Hatch bill, because
| was always opposed to H. I write Ills
because / respect your opinion, aud !
hops you viii do me the luatiue to ,or-
rect the Impression which your paper has
mado In reference to this mAttyr I
have newer seen the day whom 1 would
vote for the Hatch bill. 1 was rlwayr
opposed to n. nude the first speech
thnt was made IN the sounte against u.
and there ~ nobody here but what
knows my position fully about it; whore
as The substitute bin reported by the
minority committee. / believe TO be- con-
sututiunnl aud advocated 10 la tho SAME
speech ia which ] denounced the Hatch
bill, The gentleman who thnught I
wrute him ! was going TO support thr
Hatch. bin simply got The thing mixed
up in bis mind lie know Of Unly one
bill. whereas therc were two I WAS
opposing one and SUPPORTED tho other
mo one thnt / WAS supporting was wdod
down before the Hatch bin WIS voted
on aud when the Hatch bin came MP
voted against A. senator George WIS
the Lender la Tie debate for the sup.
precision of futures and Opunnu, and
mndp the nbleat aud most exhaustive
speeches that We're made ia that debate.
lie voted ~ ] dd FOR The substitute I'LL,
but when that was voted down, he voted
with mo ngninst the Hatch bill.
| will add that the substitute bill which
| supported Willie Ia my judgment FREQ
frdtn constitutional objections, WIS in
the opinion of The best lawyers Il much
more effective bill FOR the suppression
OF futures aud options thnn the Hutch
bill Indeed, " it had been passed Il
would have destroyed thnt business root
aud branch, az was the Intention a
those who reported TO- Very truly yours,
RICHARD COKE.