Omaha daily bee., 1909-04-12
Democratic Impotenoy.

The history of congress from its
very beginning fails to disclose SO
striking an example of impotence on
the part of the minority as that just
presented by the house democrats in
the present session, 1t is automatic
that an effective minority constitutes
a most helpful brake on legislation,
but the tariff bill which has just been
passed by the house goes through
without a single imprint of democratic
craftsmanship,
In the campaign which preceded the
last election, the democratic platform
declared for immediate revision Of the
tariff and insisted hat the democratic
party was the only organization
capable of performing the work. Dur
ing this campaign. Mr.. Bryan as the
democratic standard-bearer, explained
the party's tariff policy to be a gradual
and piecemeal reduction of schedules
with all articles manufactured by trusts
placed at once on the free list. Every
member of the house elected as a dem
ocrat was elected on the same ticket
with Mr.. Bryan and on the same plat
form with him and presumably in duty
bound to put forth at least an effort to
write the democratic tariff plank into
law.
Assuming tina the minority could not
be united upon a democratic tariff bill
as a whole, it would naturally be ex
pected that they would present some
sort of an amendment declaring that
the present revision was only a part Of
a scheme of gradual reduction and
charging the free list by the addition
of all trust-made articles. Failure to
offer these amendment goes to show
that the house democrats are as much
at variance on these proposition as on
any other and that they regard the
tariff plank of the Denver platform as
a vote-getting sop, just as they regard
deposit guaranty and the SO per cent
trust remedy as proposed in the same
platform.
The fact is that the democrats in
congress are most fortunate in having
been spared the responsibility of pass
ing a tariff bill, which would have
devolved upon them had they carried
the country and found themselves the
majority instead of the minority. The
debate on the tariff has disclosed most
widespread disagreement among the
democrats, not only on details of the
schedules, but also on the broad prin-
ciples of protection and revenue rails
ing. There are free trade democrats
there and tariff for revenue democrats
and high protection democrats. For a
side light on this diversity, read this ex-
tract from the Congressional Record
from a speech delivered by Arseno
Pujo of Louisiana, one of the demo-
cratic members:
In a spirit Of fairness to the membership
of this house, and in order that my position
may be thoroughly understood. l want to
say in advance that / am not a free trader.
And 1 want to say further that l believe that
a tariff should be levied upon imports which
will not only produce a revenue sufficient
to defray the expenses OF the government
and provide means for its proper internal
development, but also, that lue regard
should be paid to the equities of citizens OF
the United States.
l am not unmindful OF the strength OF
the argument that it is the duty of a repre-
sentative of the people to l~egislate in favor
of the consumer and not in favor of the
producer. Yet when the touchstone of COM
mon sense is applied to this proposition, II
leads to a conclusion Numerically opposed
to the soundness and logic OF such a posi-.
ton and would, in the very nature OF
things, destroy the object sought to be
accomplished.
1t must be borne in mind that II condi-
tions are made so onerous that a COM
modify or necessity of life can only be pro-
duced at a loss its production will cease
and the consumer will not have 1t to
consume.
The only open question is whether
the democratic minority in congress is
as hopelessly helpless on other issues
as it has demonstrated itself to be on
the tariff. Can the democrats get to-
gether IN any other subject of party
policy, and If they cannot, as is most
probable, how can they go before the
people mex year with the face to ask
to be given full control of our national
law making?