People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1898-01-20
Senator Young's Views.

In a communication published il
the Pratt County Union on Decembe
I'd, Representative W. F. Brown, o
Pratt county, makes the same sen
satioDal charges efecting the in.
tegrity Of Senator W. A. Harris tina
have appeared in all the dailies O
the state. These charges are a:
follows:
First: | will assert that W. A.
Harris, aided by his first lieutenant,
Jerry Simpson, defeated the maxi
mum railroad bill.
Second: assert that Mr.. Harris
was in collision with the railroads
from the day of his election and that
they, in return for the support they
gave him for the position of U. S.
senator, dictated his every act, and
his policy from the day the legislative
session opened.
Third: | assert that the bill intro
duced by Senator Harris was drafted
by a bevy of railroad attorneys, as
was the Walters bill and the Farrelly
bill; or if they did not wholly draft
them tney had the privilege of re-
viewing them, and striking out such
portions as were obnoxious and in
sorting such portions as WEIR parlicu-
larly favorable to them.
In the first charge the word crate"
seems to have been omitted after
"maximum." As to this charge |
have simply this to say, that in the
senate caucus of the silver members
on the railroad bill there were sew
eral other senator's who were much
more vehement in opposition to the
old maximum rate bill than was
Senator Harris. On this proposition
the caucus was very nearly equally
divided; and with all the Republican
members opposing a maximum rate
bill, such bill could not have been
passed, even had Senator Harris
favored it. 1t was senators on our
side-mOst if not all Of whom were
i believe acting conscientiously-
who defeated the maximum rate bill
and not Senator Harris. They urged
very strongly the proposition that
such bill would be pronounced un-
constitutional by the courts, and that
it would therefore be useless to enact
it. Those who favored the maxi
mum rates provision took the ground
that We lad promised such a bill in
our platform and were in honor
bound to enact it.
When in the senate, it was moved
by Senator Householder to substitute
the old maximum rate bill for the
committee bill, the vote stood as
follows:
Ayes: Benson, Braddock, Cald-
well, Campbell, Cooke, Hart, Hell
mick, Householder, King, Lupfer,
MoSher. Pritcnard. Titus and Vouno
IA.
Noes: Armstrong, Battey, Cole
man, Crossan, Farrelly, Fulton,
Hanna, Harris, Helm, Hessin, John
son, Jumper, Lamb, Lewelling,
Matthews, Morrow, Reser, Ryan,
Shafer, Sheldon, Sterne, Stocks,
Wallace and Zimmer.-24.
Absent: Field and Forney.
Unless, you see, Senator Harris
counted for six or seven, the change
of his vote to the affirmative side of
the question would not have effected
the result. He cannot be singled
out as the man who defeated a maxi
mum rate bill-only as one of the
men.
The second charge is very broad
and sweeping one, and it would re-
quire very different sort of testimony
from anything Mr.. Brown advances
to convince any fair>minded man of
its truth. Senator Harris whole
career in congress was devoted to ex-
posing and defeating the plans of
the Pacific railroad Hobbies to rob
the government. But for him
Huntington's refunding bill would
have been enacted, and so many
millions of dollars were at stake to
secure its passage tina; had Senator
Harris been the sort of man Brown
charges he would certainly have
feathered his nest then. The charge
made here is that Senator Harris
was Gin collision with the railroad
attorneys from the day Of his election
and that they, in return for the
support they gave him for United
States senator dictated his every
act."
This reflects not only on Senator
Harris but on every man who
supported him in the silver caucus,
and pictures them all black, as work.
ing for the railroads candidate for
senator. Such wholesale defamation
of so large portion of tine Populist
-