The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-03-28
TWELVE PAGES.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2s, 1891.
MIR. Voorhees, ERROR.

The washington dispatches indicate
that Senator Voorhees, is laboring under
a strange misappreheusion as to the
criticisms of him that have been made
by republican newspapers. They state
that he is "smarting under the news
paper criticisms of the senate finance
committee for the proposed sugar duty"
and that he made this statement:
L don't know why i should be singled
out for criticism on this point. l have
not been enthusiastic for the sugar duty,
but a great many democratic senators
believed the sugar duty was necessary
TO enable US TO pass the bill. President
Cleveland has been one of the strongest
advocates of the sugar duty and the in
come tax. too. for that matter.
We have watched the newspapers of
the country quite carefully. and we as
sure Mr.. voorhees, that we have not
found one which Singled him out for
criticism on this subject. There has
been criticism of some other senators in
this connection, but none of Mr.. Voor-
hees that we have seen. There has also
been criticism of the senate sub-com-
mittee as body on this ground, but al
most without exception the criticism
has applied only to the increased duty on
refined sugar. That is a paipable dona-
ton TO the sugar trust. and there is no
senator who openly acknowledges that he
IS interested in the welfare of that asso-
citation of brigands. Very few people care
anything about an uniform tax Of cent
a pound on all grades of sugar, and very
little objection would have been made
10 such a provision 1t would. of course
benefit the sugar planters of Louisiana,
but it could rot benefit them more than
one-haIf as much as the Mckinley bounty
of 2 cents a pound. So far as benefit 70
that interest is copcerned it is an ap-
parent Improvement on the existing law.
But the donation to the sugar trust,
while not so great as that made by the
Mckinley bill, is directly opposed To
democratic doctrine More than that. il
IS universally believed TO he the result
OF corruption Of number of senator's,
to the public the stain Of their dishonor
falls on the entire senate. We have
reached a point in the progress Of tariff
reform where the awakened conscience
OF the people viii not tolerate any such
action
The only point on which Mr.. Voorhees,
has been singled out for criticism. so far
as we are aware. is the matter Of the
FIVE years extension of time in which
to pay taxes that is given to the whisky
trust. It has been directly charged by
a number Of republican papers that Mr.
Voorhees, is responsible for this The
Sentinel has said that Mr.. Voorhees, owes
it to himself. TO his party and to Indiana
10 demonstrate that he is not responsible
for it. by having this stricken from the
bill, or making such an earnest. aggres-
sive effort to do so that the responsible
ity will be placed where it belongs And
also, we have insisted that he should fol-
low the same course as to the donation
TO the sugar trust and the iron and
coal combine. If the present provisions
OF the senate report are adopted by the
senate without such effort the entire
democratic majority in the senate will
be held responsible for them, and the
democratic party Will be held responsible
for the democratic senators. Mr.. Voor-
hees Will necessarily be held more re-
sponsible than others because his position
as chairman Of the finance committee
gives him more power than other sena-
tors This situation is perfectly plain.
Everybody sees it. unless. indeed, Mr..
VOORHEES, himself may not