Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-05-21

welliver resolution adopted, Governor
Cummins addressed that same conven-
| ton. He made a Vigorous speech voic-
ing the country's demand, and especial
| ly IoWa's demand, for effective railroad
| regulation.
| The truth is that Mr.. Dolliver Topped
on the railroad question when he was
forced to the tardy conclusion that he
must flop or lose more with the pub
| lie than he could gain by staying on
| the railroad side Mr.. Dolliver stayed
| with the railroads just as long as they
could do more for him than anybody
else could; he dropped them and took
the public's side at the moment when
he had become convinced that 1t was
good politics for Mr.. Dolliver to do so.
He did just what Mr.. Dolliver always
/ has done in such matters, and just
what he learned to do in the school of
Allison.
The real story Of Mr.. Delivers rela-
tons to the so-called Hepburn bill
would make fine and illuminating read
ing in Iowa at this juncture; but it is
too long, and too unimportant, to just
| ify the effort to write it in detail.
Briefly the Hepburn bill was:
| Originally drafted by the interstate
commerce commission.
Fixed up, on the basis of this original
draft, by Judge Cowan of Texas and
Mr.. Dolliver.
Introduced by Mr.. Hepburn.
Passed by the house.
Reported by democratic votes from
| the senate committee, and turned over
to Mr.. Tillman to manage because the
| people who reported it wanted 1t In
the hands Of man who would handle
1t successfully.
| Extensively amended in the senate
after long debate in which Mr.. Dolli-
yer took very little part because-I am
now giving universal Washington
opinion of the time-Mr. Dolllver was
sulking in utter disgust at the refusal
of the committee to place him, instead
OF Tfllman, in charge of the bill.
When DoIIiver SuIked.
| Mr. Dolliver made one of the first,
II not the first, speech for the bill.
When the great constitutional uues-
tions involving the very fundamentals
| of the legislation We're reached, Mr..
Dolliver was beyond his depth. Con-
stitutional law wasn't exactly Mr. Dol
| liver's forte. He mixed up with Bailey
one day, and retired from the fray in
sad condition OF plumage and a
worse state of temper. Senator For
aker at another time took occasion to
develop the paucity Of information pos
sessed ty the Iowa pioneer reformer''
about the real questions in issue.
During most Of the long period of that
debate Mr.. Dolliver spent little time in
the senate chamber, and took almost no
part In the discussion. He did sue
coed, however, on one occasion, In maxi
ing startling statement which indi-
Gated something of his attitude toward
the question. That was when, In a
moment Of evaporation because
Senator Bailey raised point
which wasn't easy to answer, Mr..
! Dolliver served notice that the repub-
licans didn't need any democratic votes
for the bill, anyhow; they would pass
| 1t without. Coming at time when
| there was every evidence that the bill
would not pass without democratic
votes the retort was singularly unfor-
tunate. in the railroad debate, as in
the present campaign. Mr.. Delivers
temper failed to stand the strain OF Sc
we're pressure. AT the very time when
he issued his def to the democrats,
more experienced republicans were
working hard in the effort to effect
q coalition of progressive republicans,
to pass the bill 1t was not until as
surance was made doubly sure, OF pass
ing the bill by such combination, that
the tory republicans gave up the fight,
came into camp. and supported the bill.
Mr.. Delivers policy OF driving away
the support Of democrats would have
killed the legislation
A Federal Judgeship.
So much for the Hepburn bill his
tory. Now it may be worth while to
recall the incident OF the selection Of
a federal judge for the northern Iowa
district, when Judge Oliver p. Shiras
retired. Tom Healy, Mr.. Delivers
fellow townsman, was the leading cam
didate for the place. He had three
votes in the caucus Of seven which was
to determine to whom the place should
go. The railroads had just one purpose
in that contest: to defeat Healy. They
didn't particularly care who got the
Job; any of the others was a good
enough Judge for them.
Why did the railroads want to de-
feat Healy? The first reason was that
Healy had legislative record Of in
dependence that they didn't like, The
second and more specific was that
Healy in the state senate had made a
speech in favor of resolution direct
ing the Iowa senator's, and requesting
the Iowa congressman, to support an
anti Injunction bill. In the course OF
that speech Mr.. Healy paid an elo-
quent tribute to Senator George Fris-
bic Hoar, father Of anti injunction leg
islation, and pointed out the reasons
why such measure ought to pass.