Waterbury evening Democrat., 1907-08-22
REPLIES TO TAFT,
Foraker's Answer to Oolums ( bus Speech.
ATTACKS HEPBURN RATE LlWl
Picks Flaws In secretary's stan1 on the Tartn Question = Aslks About Square Deal For
 Negroes.

GEORGETOWN, O., Aug 22.-In his
 first address after the Columbus speech
 of Secretary of War Taft United
 States Senator Foraker before tho
 Chautauqua assembly here discussed
 his fellow townsman's opinions, from
 which he differed in many particulars
 He attacked the Hepburn rate bill al great length, asserting that whatevel
 merit 1t possessed 1t owed to the amendments of the senate, most of them with my active assistance and some of them upon my own motion
 "If," he continued, ''the bill had been put through the senate as it was put through the house and the senate com, mittee, under orders to allow no amendments whatever, it would have been without any redeeming features whatever except such as the friends of that proposition may claim to find in the provision conferring the rate making power on the interstate cont merce commission. To that proposition I was unalterably opposed.
 "The objection to conferring the rate making power upon the interstate com. merce commission is not in my opinion answered by Secretary Taft. He, makes no answer to the suggestionI that the three powers of governmenti the legislative, the executive and the judicial, are all conferred on the cem-i mission and that this commingling of these powers is unprecedented and in violation of both the spirit and the lett ter of the constitution
 T have contended that so far as have yet been informed there has been no lowering of rates since the Hepburn law was passed whereby the shippers of Ohio have been benefited except on-i ly such as would have been made in all probability if the Hepburn law had never been passed. On the contrary, since the Hepburn rate law was passed the majority of their rates have been advanced. Very few if any have been lowered
 "The purpose of the Elkins law was to give the shippers of the country a, speedy remedy against rebates and discriminations of every kind and character and to absolutely break up and destroy such practices"
 Senator Foraker declared that suit by the government had been instituted under the Elkins act and not under the Hepburn law
 Senator Foraker spoke of his recent public requests that Secretary Taft give bill of particulars as to his tar iff revision views and, declaring the Columbus speech not sufficiently "lu- minous on this point" continued "One who was able year ago to de- clare himself unqualifiedly in favor of an immediate revision at that time should be able now to give some speci-
 dcations as to what then prompted him to make such a declaration. But, instead, we are told that he merely assumes that the cost of production in this country has so far diminished since the Dingley law was passed that the duties now in force are high CT than necessary to cover the diff l. ference in the cost of labor here and abroad. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that he is correct in his contention that the difference in labor and that difference alone should fxl tho H,y$r ha ~aavyas <n o,vo~l<~Ir &t,> c. .o& that the duties fixed by the Dingley law were. in the judgment of the con- gress that enacted that statute. no higher when they were fixed than was necessary to cover that differen- tial, and that the duties then fixed, ifl that rule is to govern, cannot be enough now, for it is common
 edge that the cost of all kinds
 has in the meanwhile advanq
 9 to 50 per cent. in this couI
 out any corresponding advar LllSI eign countries.
 For second reason for limmediats i revision we are told that | majority of the members of the National Manu- facturers' association have declared themselves in favor of a revision of ! the tariff. In the first place. the ac. ton of this association could not have influenced the secretary when he spoke 1 at Bath one year ago, for it was taken l only few weeks ago. Except his as l sumption and this action of this as- sociatIon, the secretary practically as- t.gns no other reason why tbe tarfft 1 should be revised. except only that !: revision must come some time and that | If we do not revise the Democrats may.
 What I contend for is that before any such revision is entered upon the people shall be heard on the subject, and I have already suggested that such a step should not be taken until after we have a chance to consult | them in the presidential campaign of next year."
 Senator Foraker called on the secre- i, tary to say what in his opinion the chief executive should do about thz> defiant notification of the war amend ments to the constitution. involved in 1 such statutes as that passed in Georgia only a few days ago. He is properly 4 In favor of doing all in our power for'i the eight millions of brown people in4 the Philippines who were until rscent- ly entire strangers and open enemiss- But how about the ten millions of black people in America. not one ofI whom ever drew q disloyal breafh who are openly and dedanfiy being de< nied their constitutional riShfs of eiti1 ssnship. Is thsre no pcwsr 10 prsTsnt