The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1894-10-25

penlCenClarleS, and secured an appro
prlation of $2500, to be expended by
federal officials in conjunction witt
those of Texas.
In his general and indefinite state
ment it is gratifying to note the con,
fesslon OF gross error on his part in the
vote which operated TO the establish.
ment of monopoly in this state. But
this admission shall not relieve him oi
the larger responsibility of champion
ing the cause of monopoly in the form
OF non"interference with existing cor,
| porations where the right to regulate
is not reserved in the charters. Ii
will be observed that the third section
OF the article Of the constitution res
lating to private corporations makes
declaration of the principle that the
right to regulate freight, tolls, wharf
age or fares by individuals, companies,
or corporations shall ever remain un-
der legislative control. Judge Nugent
in the convention endeavored to ex-
empt existing corporations from the
operation OF this preservative rule.
In this connection Judge Nugent
complains that did not credit him
with making persistent fight in the
convention TO prevent the squander-
ing of the public lands on railway
corporations.' To have done so would
have violated the truth of history and
further exhibited his inconsistent
course, which l deemed already well
enough established. On October II,
as a member of special committee,
he reported to the convention against
any further grant of lands in aid of
railway construction, stating that
the policy was not well
founded in principle journal of
Convention, p 342,) and yet on Mo-
vember he voted (Journal, p. 629)
for proposition to grant lands "for
The encouragement Uf and In aid in the
construction OF raiLrOade," at the rate
of 16 sections to the milo for broad
guage and II seCtiona Tor marrow
guage roads.
There are several matters in Judge
Nugent's statement which suggest
only a passing notice. 1t is of no con-
sequence, for instance, that he pub
lished in an obscure and unknown
newspaper declaration of the nomi-
nation of the non partisans for asso-
ciate justice of the supreme court or
that he was then opposed to party
nominations for judicial officers or
hat he had not then formally" re-
nounced his fealty to the Democratic
party since he admits sympathy with
that political movement and is now
supporting judicial nominations and
advOeating an unknown and incom-
petent Populist on hiH ticket
for chief justice of the su-
preme court, and another for
Judge of the court of criminal appeals.
That in 1890 he "supported Governor
Hogg and his commission views" is
hut another evidence of his remark
able political unsteadiness, for the
governor stood on platform which
expressly denounced the sub.treasury
scheme aud government ownership Of
railroads. CandOr should have
prompted him to state that Weaver
is the nominee OF the POpulists in
an Iowa district for congress and that
ne has been endorsed by a mere fac
tion of Democracy, the remainder
openly revolving against it, aud q
decent respect for the most ennobling
of Sou hern memories should have i'm
PEELED him to state some other motive
for his support, as Southern man, OF
one of the most malignant enemies OF
the southern people.
1t is significant that insisting upon
frankness the distinguished Populist
fails utterly to speak in this inter
view or during the canvass of certain
inn portant matters affecting state af-
fairs. Among other things the sbuf-
fling cOurs OF the convention which
nominated him and OF bis patty upon