New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1909-08-08
4 FTTTJE APOLOGY.

The Hon. Champ Clark has issued a statement
intended TO meet the charge that the Demo
cratic minority in the House of Representatives
failed 10 do its share ia facilitating downward
revision Of the tariff by showing that on certain
rollcalls the Democrats voted more sOlidly than
they have ever voted on any tariff question
, 'since the close of the Civil War" II may be
true that the minority voted solidly on occasions
when their votes were certain TO count for little
or nothing. But on occasions when a solid
Democratic vote would have accomplished some
thing material and positive in the way of reduc-
ton, the House minority divided-just as the
Senate minority did-and contributed enough
votes to defeat important amendments proposing
lower rates
The Democratic minority. if united could have
overthrow the absolutism of the Speaker by
supporting the Republican insurgents who
wanted early in the session 10 vest the power 10
name committees and TO conduct legislative bust
ness in an enlarged Committee on Rules If the
fight against the old system had succeeded, the
House would have regained a fair degree of
selfgovernment and would have been able to
consider the tariff bill more carefully and more
in detail 1t would have had an opportunity TO
pass on provisions like the Littauer glove scheC-
ule and the advance in hosiery rates. which were
never submitted separately to vote. Freer
examination and freer action would have made
portuniUy 10 reduce certain House rates for trad
ing purposes in conference 1t came to be recog-
nized before the session ended that the greatest
obstacle il the House 10 rational revision was
the power of the Speaker. But enough Demo
Gratis, under the leadership of the rising hope of
sane Democracy in Kings County" the Hon. John
J. Fitzgerald threw their support To- the speaker
and renewed his lease of autocratic authority.
In return for a few committee appointments and
other fayors they helped TO continue a system
which made the fight for downward revision
more difficult than it should have been
Again, when it came to crucial items in the
Tarif schedules like lumber, the Democratic
seceders prevented the removal of the duty and
made il easier for the Senate 10 vote much
higher rate and secure considerably higher rate
in tie conference The Democrats in the Sen
ate followed the same policy of befriendinS
higher duties and throwing paragraphs into con
ference, when by voting for lower duties the
lower rates would have been made effective. If
the Senate Democrats had voted solidly for free
iron ore or free hides or free coal, the battle
over those items would have ended, three yaxa-
ti0uS items would have been taken out Of the
jurisdiction OF the conference committee and
lower average Of rates would have resulted
When they had the chance 10 accomplish some
thing the Democrats Of both branches lodged IT,
But they rallied nobly when it came 10 voting
for some proposition which had no chance Of
eng adopted and meant nothing
Mr.. Clark takes pride IN having brought all
the Democrats in the House but four TO support
his motion to recommit the Payne bill with in
structionS. The Democrats were entirely salts
fed 10 vote for Mr.. Clarks motion because it
had been so framed as TO repel Republican votes
and was sure 10 he rejected If he had Offered
motion 10 recommit with instructions on one
or two points-to rewrte the glove aud hosiery
provisions, for instance-he might nave had 4
majority with him. But he preferred to fire in
the air. offering an omnibus resolution which
received only the perfunctory support Of the
minority.
The Democratic leaders in Congress cannot
fool the country. They cannot fool even their
own party. In proof of that statement we ap-
pend few frank comments from leading Demo
cratic newspapers on the showing made by the
Democrats in Congress. Says The Memphis
Commercial-Appeal":
our Democrats in the tariff business. except
Gore and half dozen Others have gone along
and permitted the Republicans 10 have things
just as they wished. They took little part in
forming the bill. ana when the insurgent Repub-
hcans reyolted the Democrats rather sneered at
their course and gave silent aid TO the stand
patters and the regulars.
The Charleston News and Courier" IS more
severe, remarking:
Unfortunately for the Democratic party and
the country, the Democrats in the Senate and
the House followed Opportunity instead of
Principle I'm dealing with the question: a little
bit of protection for local interests here and
there, some thing for sugar and rice in louisiana
nubbin for the lumber industry in North Caro-
lima and Alabama. a hand-out for the carnDhor
orchards IN Florida, something of the sort
ana Whatever sop offered that seemed to be of
temporary advantage 10 my constituents"
Most sweeping Of all is The Louisville Cour-
ier-Journal." which says:
The country is indebted but little more To the
Democrats IN the present Congress than 10 the
Republicans for relief from the burdens Of a
taIlr Tor subsidy; the truth being that the bill
as II went TO conference was a product of Demo-
Gratis as well as Republicans and that several Of
ITS worst features could not have been incor-
poratrd IN II except for the votes Of Democrats
especially Of Democrats in the Senate And a
stu further and humiatingly significant truth
being that the chorus of opposition TO the bill
that Is now going up from the Democrats in
Congress is based upon the complaint, not that
II is a highly protective measure bat that il
makes an unfair division OF the protection swag.
Mr. Clark should ponder these judgments of
representative Democratic newspapers before he
issues another apology
n TTrIr c,Jrrf Fa-r