The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-06-03
THOSE WHO SWEAR BY sMooT.

IT seems to nettle his "Moutb -
here, for any one To fail in howing
down to Smoot and accepting linn 10
great man. The Tribune has not
been able to respond as il would like
to this call for adulation and is conse-
quentiy under the ban in that cave of
falsehood and INSCRIPTIONS, brazon mis-
representation.
In this connection The Il" Mouth -
makes reference TO a "forced dis.
patch. an idea which springs from the
felonious mind of its editorial writer,
There has been no forged dispatch in
tins paper. No doubt the inspiration
for suggesting it comes from the
hahitual practice Of the sheet which
casts that reflection upon The Tribune.
His Mouth claims that Smoot
was more influential than Beveridgc in
getting his snubbings left ont Of the
Record, according 10 our showing. This.
however, does not necessarily follow.
The Smoot success in this meant sim
ply that he had been able to bcg or
because of his more submissive tone,
and his weaker ability TO call out re.
sentiment. Bevcrdgc is "caustir
cuss, and when he puts on a blister it
burns: tho one feeling that burn. does
not forget while it lasts, But. as the
account which we copied stated, Bevcr.
idgc had get hope that the scad on
him would he eliminated from the Rec
ord in its permanent, bound form,
Smoot, however, by reason Of his com
parative inoffensiveness is forgiven
sooner. on his plea for mercy.
Since the "Mouth' is on the keen
watch to reprint everything that it eau
find in his favor. no doubt it will GO
into ecstasics over the Smoot paper on
the manufacture of cotton, a mas(crIy
production. which astonishcd the Senate
by its intimate knowledge of all the
processes Of cotton manufacture, TO
every detail, and on every species OF
cotton manufacture. The Senate, how.
ever, does not seem TO have been I'M
pressed, as Smoot spoke to empty seats.
All the Senators knew, Of course. that
Smoot was simply reading a statcmeIc
expert, and so they knew that he was
not dealing with knowledge possessed
by himself. As, Of course, how c0lld
he be, since he has had no opportunity
to acquire any intimate knowledge Of
cotton manufactures. Further proof
that he was reading the production of
another. was afforded when. after the
call for and muster of quorum. Smoot
lost his place, and calmly proceeded tn
read n number Of pages that he had
read before. not noticing the rcpcti-
ton. so little sense had he of the mean.
ing Of what he was reading.
OF like mlsapnlied admiration is the
Mouth So collection of thanks from
various literary societies or associa
tions, thanking Smoot for his revision
of the copyright laws, and his produc
tion of that which the Speaker of the
German Rcichstng pronounced to be
"Thc crazlest pot-pourri Of modern
ideas and petty peanut protectionism
that can be imagined and ga rcgu-
lar caricature Of complexities and alb
surdities,' and which the New York
Evening Post, the most distinguished
daily literary newspaper in America,
pronounces to be true bill of indict-
mcnt. In view Of this, the effort to
boost Smoot for his work on that re-
vision is rather uphill work. But Of
course Smoot had little to do with the
work Of that revision. He was chair
man of the committee, and the draft
was handed him by the parties in in
Lerest, and the interests involved were
able to push the bill through Congress.
The putting of blame on Smoot for the
measure is justified only by way of