The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-03-10
nnMoCRATIc REcrsANrs-

"
1t would be hard to say how long the
Puerto Rico infamy will keep the boards
From all present indications. unless the
senate should refuse to carry out the
foolish and dangerous proposition Of the
house committee an ways and means. it
will remain the leading topic of public
consideration until the adjournment of
congress.
The responsibility for this Infamous
raid on the people OF Puerto Rico has
been clearly located. 1t extends to both
the executive and the legislative branches
OF the existing administration 1t is the
one badge of trustism and imperialism
Which is enduringly affixed to that adj
miniStretion, and which no action that
may be taken will tear away. But there
Is other responsibility beside that Of
hnperialist politicians. And it should be
located and the consequences of it made
to endure.
Ihe Is per cent infamy passed the house
by a vote of 172 to 16l. a majority of II
Among that ~ votes four were cast nv
Democrats The Democrats casting those
votes should not be forgotten. They
should be driven with whips from the
seats they disgrace. They should be made
TO Join the forces of imperialism to
which they belong. They have no place
either in the rank or file or in the lead
ership of the Democracy. These party
dereltctS are as follows: Davey and
Meyer, Of Louisiana; Sibley, Of Penn
SylYania, and Deyries, of California. From
MI indications they have bitter reckon
Ing before them with their constituents.
There were four other Democrats who
failed on that momentous occasion to
stand up and be counted They were
believed to be opposed to the bill. They
were absent and impaired when the vote
came to be taken. They are as follows:
Fleming, Of Georgia; Small, OF North
Carolina; Smith. of Kentucky, and Stall
lines of Alabama These men have ALI
made good records in the house. They
are not of the bushwhac1ing variety of
politicians who are liable to take TO the
woods when a party emergency arises
such ~ the so-caIled PENNSYLVANIA Dem
ocrat SIbley, who not only voted for
the 10 per cent infamy, but spoke in its
favor, and whose entire cratic course
In the present congress should place him
outside of the pale of Democratic socie-
~. BGt why were these four men absent?
Or. ii their absence was unavoidabFe
why had they not taken the simple pre-
caution TO see that they We're paired with
those who favored the measure? This
is Il question that should be answered
No man is entitled to sit in the exalted
place Ct a national representative by the
votes OF any class of political society who
cares no more for his party or his public
obligations than these men appear to
care.
II there had been no reasonable chance
of defeating the measure, there would be
less occasion for denunciation of these
men. But. as d matter OF fact. the bill
might have been beaten out but for them
With full house and everybody voting
or paired. the bill would have been beat
en- ana the imperialists have probably
receded from their dangerous courses.
One cannot but read with a sense Of
admiration the press accounts given of
the appea rance on the floor of the house
of Representative Brownlow, of Tennes-
see, as he lay on his couch, attended by
his wife and physician, declaring: ST
would rather lose my life than see this
bilf' defeated" There is an intensity Of
conviction there which must teach even
the bitterest opponents of the measure
that not all who supported it did so from
unworthy considerations.
Whatever be the ultimate fate of the
measure. every Democrat in the country
Will be interested IN seeing that the men
through whose neglect or recusance
this measure passed the house shall have
dealt out to them the treatment which
the gravity Of their offense seems to
denaad.,
President Mckinley says he favors free
trade for Puerto Rico and adds that he