Ladysmith news-budget. [volume] (Ladysmith, Rusk County, Wis.) 1907-1927, 1909-05-20
n1Ilrl1rlTlR1nT1HIn
! WASHINGTON LETTER
by John j. Hannah
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES

Washington, d. c., May 17.-Senators
La Toilette and Money took the hide
off of Senator Root and hung it over
the senatorial fence in the debate upon
the schedule covering bar iron. Mr..
Money took Mr.. Root to task for lee
turing the Senate and said that when
he got fairly warm in his seat he would
not indulge himself in such lectures. He
also said that men who came to the
Senate to do as other people wanted
them to do should be kicked out by the
people at home who had sent them.
These were pretty costic remarks
to the new Senator from New York
but he brought them upon him
self by his intollerable habit Of aris-
ing at several instances in the course
of the debate, particularly whenever
Senator La Toilette asked question to
determine the basis upon which any
particular schedule was made and,
more by his manner that by what he
said, indicating that he had some per-
sonal spleen against the Senator from
Wisconsin. Mr.. Root began this per-
Torrance upon the schedule affecting
gas retorts and his intolerant manner
was passed over at the time but it
cropped out on one or two occasions
since. On Friday last, when the Cum
Minis amendment reducing the duty on
bar iron was under discussion Mr.. La
Toilette asked for certain information
and criticized the Finance Committee
because it did not furnish to the Sen
ate the information upon the schedules,
which the Senate had right to expect.
To which Mr.. Root replied:
''Mr. President, | want to say a
word, induced by the observations of
the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. La
Follette) regarding the duty of the
Finance Committee to the members of
this Senate. We are not making a
tariff bill in this body. The Constitu-
ton precludes us from the performance
of any such Office. The House of Rep
resentatives makes tariff bill and
sends it to the Senate. 1t is the
privilege and duty of the Senate to
concur or refuse it's concurrence and
TO amend or propose amendments in
accordance with its judgment.
"My proposition is that, when the
Finance Committee report no amend
ment to the House provision, the
House provision stands before us for
action, not as if it were proposed by
the Finance Committee, but as it is
proposed by the House without action
on the part of the Finance Committee.
Therefore no responsibility is thrown
upon the Finance Committee to fur
nish facts and arguments in respect to
to that particular provision.
Mr.. La Toilette: "Mr. President,
when this bill came from the House to
the Senate and was referred to the
Committee on Finance, it passed under
their jurisdiction, with full power to
make changes in every duty and in
every paragraph Of the bill. The rea-
soning by which the Senator from New
York (Mr. Root seeks to arrive at the
conclusion that the Senate Finance
Committee has no responsibility for
any part of the bill in which they make
no change, after having that bill in it's
entirety, from its title to the last line,
under consideration, | do not believe
will appeal to the judgment of the
Senate, and | know it will not appeal
to the judgment of the country.
'lsit to be assumed or to be argued
that when, after full consideration of a
duty proposed by the House, the FL
nance Committee reports that House
duty back to the Senate without
amendment, the committee does not
thereby sanction and approve that
duty? If we are to proceed upon that
theory, of what meaning is it that a
bill is considered by committee and
reported back to us with the recon-
mendation of the committee that the
bill pass as reported, both it's amended
and unamended provisions?"
The position which Mr.. Root took
upon the question of the power of the
Senate would not be taken by 4th
rate country lawyer in Indiana, where
they require no examination upon adj
mission to the bar.