The herald., 1897-05-26
THE BURROWS RESOLUTION

At the Republican senatorial caucus
held day before yesterday It was devel-
oped that there were divergences OF
views on several important matters
connected with the tarin bill proposes
by the finance committee. Mr.. Aldrich
made an explanation OF the sugar sched-
ule and attempted to make a defense
! against the charge Of favoritism to-
wards the sugar trust.
Senators Plat, Spooner and Hanna
vigorously opposed an increase Of the
tax on beer. These senators are all
politicians. Hanna being chairman of
the national Republican committee. No
doubt the opposition is for political
rather than public reasons. Hanna
wants to be elected to the senate, and as
the Germans are hostile to an increase
in price of their favorite beverage 1t
is important to Hanna that that element
should not be estranged from the Re-
publican party and it is very strong in
Cincinnati and Cleveland; and unless
those two cities can be carried for the
Republican ticket Hanna will be
thwarted in his senatorial aspirations.
The bill is unsatisfactory to the west
ern senators on account of the
changes made in the wool schedule, and
they propose to restore the rates in the
house bill The New England senators
are against the duty on hides, and for
a high duty on leather. Mr.. Lodge an
nounced his purpose to vote for all
amendment putting hides on the free
list
The bill abrogates the Hawaiian
treaty, which is bitterly opposed, espc
cially by Mr.. Frye, and the abrogation
was as vigorously supported by Mr..
Nelson. 1t was announced that the
committee intended to bring in all
amendment on that subject, but Of
what character is not stated. The di-
vergences Of opinion are numerous and
seemingly irreconcilable.
Mr.. Burrows sought to remove the
dilemma by offering a resolution to the
effect that Republican senators having
amendments to offer should present
them to the Republican members of the
finance committee. and if approved they
are to be offered in the senate, and if
disapproved senators presenting them
shall have the right to present them to
the Republican caucus, which is to be
called upon each separate schedule. It
does not appear what senator's right
will be if his amendment is rejected by
the caucus, but It is presumably intend
ed that he will act as the caucus directs.
This plan, If carried into effect. will
jeopardize our true interests, and espe-
cially those of California, for If caucus
action is to be binding the opponents of
western interests are in the majority.
Will grave senators place their judg-
ments and consciences in the hands of
a caucus and submit to the party lash?
Are convictions of public duty to be sub
ordinated to party interests, and rep
resentatives of a great state made mere
chessmen in the hands of political ma
If so, it may we'll be
feared that monopolies and trusts will
control for their own interests.
In the matter Of the election Of Of
f1cers, to be bound by party caucus can
do no serious harm, but when so grave |
matter as that of enacting a sweeping |
revenue law is to be acted upon, the
public welfare and perhaps the public
safety of free institutions are endan
gered unless senators act upon their
own opinions and under sense of re-
sponsibility to their constituencies.