The Washington herald., 1909-05-25

Senator Aldrich and Senator Bailey had
another clash IN the Senate yesterday
just before the adjournment. az the con-
ciusion Of which the Senator from Texas
served notice On Chairman Aldrich that
he could not have unanimous consent for
an agreement 70 vote on the tariff bill
until after vote had been had on the
/ income tax amendment
Senator Bailey, al ths conclusion OF a
! long speech on party politics. IN which he
advocated a duty on lumber. and again
repgdiated the suggestion that free raw
materials was a Democratic policy. re-
CURED TO his favorite theme. the income
tax.
Senator Bailey submitted a proposal FOR
a vote on the income TAX amendment next
Thursday. lie asked for unanimous con
sent for an agreement. but Senator AID
rich again rose 20 object
AIdrich's Attitude Resented
Senator Bailey seemed TO resent Mr.. AID
rich's attitude and gave notice that TO-
day he would move his income tax amend
ment and take his chances
You shall not have an agTeeuent for
a vote by unanimous consent until after
a vote has been taken on the income tax
amendment" said Mr.. Bailey. Mr.. AID
rich made no reply.
Adjournment was taken while Senator
Bailey was stiH on his feet fUmbiing his
income tax amendment.
In a speech which led up 20 the con-
troversy. Senator Bailey chided the Re
publicans on their free trade tendencies.
He said the passage Of the pending bin
with its inequalities would ruin the Re
publican party.
He predicteI the free ust would grow
and the Republican party be rent
asUnder
''Tf the newspapers may BE believed.
and 7 an one Of those Senators who
does not believe everything he sees n
the newspapers. the Senator from Rhode
Island viii not have part IN the fran
ing of the next tariff bill We are told
that he Is % go into retirement. the well
earned retirement From that position
he may look on and witness the situation
which this bill has produced IN his own
party" Mr.. Bailey then paid a tribute
10 revenue tariff
4 Democratic Doctrine.
When did free raw material cease 20
Be a Democratic doctrine?'' asked Nj.
Aldrich
When men Ike myself took control
os the party" replied Mr.. Bailey The
Senator ought 20 read the platform OF
lSe5 on that subject
L wrote that plank, ard had n nin5
this thing when ! did"
Mr.. Cleveland and the other leaders q
MS party. who in lSs5 and previously
had stood for free raw material when
AIr Aldrich reminded him that william
IT, Bryan had always been an advocate
o. free raw material
Granting that were true. = would not
control ne" replied Mr. Bailey.
He declared that the Democratic party
departed from its traditions when Il ad-
vocated free raw materials and that the
attitude was taken as a matter oS party
.expediency and not as a matter OF party
principle.
Coming 20 the subject q his income
tax amendment the Senator from Texas
cklded Senator Aldrich for not a6hs7i1E
10 the traditions of his own party. he
reminded him that the first income tax
Law ever passed was the work OF the
Republicans
Admitting that it was levied at a tine
OF war Mr. Bailey pointed out that the
expenditures q the government even IN
der the stress T such conditions. were
less than they now are in these piping
times OF peace
In the stress OF war tEe Republican
party laid many oneroCs taxes. said Mr
AIdTica- The income tax is an oaeTous
tax"
Called an Onerous Country.
This IS an one-ous country replied
AIr Bailey with a smile Then he pro
ceeded TO lecture the chairman Of the
Finance Committee and his party asso-
ciates on the growing expenditures
They VIII pass H." said the Senator,
speaking OF the Republican side. 4 vio-
late no confidence when I repeat the
argument they are making on that side
20 get votes against the income tax
amendment. The Senate would have
passed this amendment had q vote been
taken short tine ago.
They say now 10 their party assO-
ciates. Vote down the income amend
ment. and then II this bill doesn't raise
enough revenue. We viii pass an income
tax OF our own and 10 some Senators.
10 whom they dare make the argument
thev say. we viii frame a bill that VIII
meet the objections OF the Supreme
Court But they don't say that 10 a
lawyer, They pick their men