Middletown transcript., 1907-02-16
WASHINGTON LETTER

WASHINGTON, d. c., February 9th, 1907
CENATOR Beyeridge was bitter in hi
~ comments this week on the Housl
Committee on Judiciary which returned
his anti-child labor to the Appropriation
Committee of the House with an adverse
report sa, ing it was matter in which
the Federal government conld not prop
erly interfere. In speaking OF the report
of the committee Senator Beveridge said
| SIT is absurd as matter OF Law. 1t de-
liberately ignores the decision OF the
Supreme Court, like the famous lottery
decision; ignores the existence Of dozen
similar existing laws such as the meat
law, the pure food law, or the law prohib.
itine Interstate commerce in insects and
numerous similar laws; completely ig-
nors the fact that the power OF Congress
over Interstate Commerce is the same as
the power over foreign commerce. which
has been held to be fact by the Supreme
Court Of the United States more than a
dozen times. The report ignores the ex-
isting law prohibiting the importation Of
convict made goods which the Supreme
Court authorizes this country to bar from
interstate commerce. The report of the
Committee from legal standpoint is ab-
surd and inexcusable. but it has still
worse effect. II reform bill can be killed
by referring them to small committee Of
men then there is an end to the whole re-
form movement. Such matters should be
brought to the floor Of the House and be
put to a record vote. As the case now
stands a committee or subcommittee
creates itself small supreme court inside
OF Congress and allows Senators and Rep
resentatives to hide behind it and refrain
from voting on any measure of reform or
other measure against which they dare
not go en- record. consider the precedent
established the most dangerous of recent
years."
50
1t appears from Senator Rayner's
speech last week and the resolution which
he has now introduced into Congress call
ing for reversal of the Presidents deci-
sion in the Schley court of inquiry case
that the whole of the Improbable and
unsavory Schley-Sampson controversy is
to be re-opened and perhaps kept before
the public for another term of months if
not years 1t will be recollected that the
President in passing upon the findings OF
the SchIey court Of inquiry held that Ad-
miral Schley had been guilty of grave
technical errors during the fight against
Cervera's feet of Santiago. and that the
battle, as a matter Of fact, was Csptain's
fight and could not properly be credited
to the direction Of either Schley or Samp-
son as feet Commander. This decision
while it naturally created hostile comment
on both sides whi e the controversy was
still hot was in reality about as fair as
could be rendered under the circun-
stances. The battle at Santiago was
Captains fight il ever there was one in
Naval history. Admiral Sampson was
not on the ground during any part OF the
active engagement and Admiral Schley
while he may have been nominally in
command could not be said to- have had
any more part in the eventual destruction
of the Spanish feet than had any other
ship commander in hesqnadron. There
was undoubtedly much bitter hostility
against Admiral Schley by the other
naval officers on the south eide OF Cuba.
He was blamed by his enemies for many
things that he neglected, and given credit
by his friends for many things that he
did not do. admiral Sampson while
fine tactician was cold and distant man
who had not the power of personal mag
netism in the same degree as his rival
and despite his coldness and tactiturnity
he undoubtedly died Of broken heart as
tile result of the controversy. The public
is tired OF the whole affair and it will be
with great regret that the real friends Of
the navy will see the controversy re-
opened at all.