The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1908-09-26


lature by Mr.. Price. ! have delayed
saying anything about this letter because,
having no recollection, on the subject
have been trying to ascertain II | re-
ceived the letter. what l did with IT, or
did on account of 1t. l cannot ma any
trace of such a letter on my files, or OF
any answer in my letter book l have
not been able to communicate with Mr.
Price, who introduced the bills mentioned,
but he has stated in a public interview
that he abandoned the bills because
Governor Nash told him that Senator
Hanna and / were opposed to the meas
ures and that we feared it might dam
age President McKinley's interest in the
national campaign upon which we were
then entering, If their passage should be
insisted upon. Mr.. Prices statement
suggests to my mind that in all probable
ity 1 referred the letter to Governor
Nash. 1 do not know of any other way,
if ever received it. to account for its
absence from my files.
I'm any event. I know that took no
action with respect to it, nor on my own
motion with respect to any other bill
pending in the Ohio legislature at that
time or at any other time since l became
a member of the Senate, March 4, 1897.
IN no instance since that date have
sought in any way to influence legisla-
ton at Columbus.
Correspondence Ceases.
while I have occasionally heard from
Mr.. Archbold during the period that has
elapsed since the termination of my en-
ployment in the early part of 1901, do
not recall receiving any letter from him,
except, if 1 received it, the one relating to
the Jones bill, which had any reference
to legislation pending in Congress, or to
1871 vvrl,4 Oh 1,nI off RfRI
duty to perform until he wrote me the
letter of May Z, 1906. proposing a re-
employment with respect to the suits and
prosecutions threatened in Ohio. In any
event, he never addressed me on any sub
ject since my employment except only
as any other citizen with whom l was
acquainted might have done, and there
was never suggestion from him, or
from anybody else, that I was under the
slightest obligations to support or oppose
any proposed legislation on behalf of
that company. Notwithstanding what the
President says in his answer to Mr..
Bryan, of September %, that l was the
representative and champion and dessie ifre
of corporations in the Senate there is no.
a word of truth in any such statement,
whether made by him or anybody else
This brings me TO Mr.. Taft's letter
and what the President has said in his
comments on the same.
Mr.. Taft's Letter
Now, as to the letter itself:
ut gives as the reason for Judge Taft 8
hostile attitude that
" He ID has opposed the vital policies
and principles of the administration, and
in his opposition has seized upon and
magnifed an important but incidental
matter to embarras sthe administration,
using in this without scruple a blind race
prejudice to accomplish his main pur-
pose
1T is really a question of political
principle.
In respect to this the legislature Of
Ohio expressed what l believe to be the
sentiment of the people of Ohio in
resolution asking the senator to support
the rate bill.
Senator Foraker declined to follow
this resolution.
When the issue is whether the support
shall be returned, 1t must be determined,
if this Is to be a representative form
of government, not by the question
whether he has followed his conscience,
but by the question whether he really
represents the principles that his con-
stituents desire supported and put into
practice
This quotation shows that the grounds
of Mr.. Taft's opposition to me were two
fold-the rate bill and the Brownsville
matter
LAS to the rate bill, Mr.. Taft says of
me in his letter enumerating the reasons
why he could not accept an Endorsement
for the presidency if coupled with an in
dorsement of me for senator:
He has opposed the vital policies and
principles of the administration and adds
as another reason that L would not vote
for the rate bill, although requested to
do so by the Ohio legislature.
Mr.. Taft knew l had never opposed
the policy of supervising and regulating
interstate carriers and interstate COM
merce. He knew. that my opposition to
the rate bill was not because l was op-
posed to the general policy of regulation
and supervision, but only to certain
clauses, among them the rate-making
clause and the commodities clause.
This bill contained some provisions on
account of which l disliked to vote
against it, and so stated in the senate,
but 1t contained others that seemed to
me so vicious that 1 could not doubt
that it would bring upon us not only
panic, idleness, suffering and distress,
but still other evils that did not then
seem to be generally foreseen.
Entertaining this view of the meas
ure, studied the subject with very great
care and felt when l had reached my
conclusions that it was my duty to my
constituents and the whole country to
disregard the instructions of the Ohio
legislature most of the members of
which body had probably studied the
questions involved but very little, if at
all.
II do not agree with Judge Taft that
q senator should be controlled by the
Legislature of his state against his in
telligence his conscience and his judg-
ment.
Senator's Duty.
81 think a senator who would thus yield
to public clamor and do violence to his
conscience, his intelligence, and his judg-
ment, would be unfit to represent a great
commonwealth In the congress of the
United States.
without disparaging genuine morality,
it can be truthfully said that less mag
mary and professional rightness of action
and moral awakening, and more common
sense in the policies of the adminlstra ton
would have been better for the country,
and would have excited less of that op-
position of which Mr.. Tafts letter COM
plains.
"At any rate, in the presence of the
decision on the commodities clause and
the unfortunate consequences resulting
from the enforcement of the rate law as
to foreign commerce, l do not think
need make any apology for voting against
the rate bill; certainly | do not think
it was an offense of such a heinous
character that l should be read out of
the party on account of it, as Judge
Taft's letter practically proposed. have
in mind not the stopping Indefinitely of
adequate railroad construction at a time