The times and democrat. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1881-current, 1910-07-21
That Lumber Duty.

Il
Congressman Ellerbe, who like
Congressman Lever, voted with the
Republicans for a duty on lumber, Is
having q warm time in his race for
reelection and it Is doubtful II he
pulls through His opponents charge
nim with deserting the Democratic
party when he voted with the Re-
publicans to tax the people or MS
district on every foot of lumber they
mad to buy. They have pressed MIN
so hard that he has called on Champ
Clark, the Iemocratic leader for
.Incule of political character.
Clark gave it to him, but he took
good care not to endorse Ellerbe S
vote with the Republicans on the
lumber question. The following conf
ment from the Florence Times, which
is in Mr.. Ellerbe's district. on MT.
Levers reception by the people in
Lexington shows how it feels to-
wards MIR. EIierbe. Here is what
The Times says:
"In this conn ection We might well
call attention to the fact that IT Is
said that the good people OF LeXlng-
ton are gcing to swallow Hon. a.
F. Lever, republican policies and all.
That may be all right # they are
So fond of Mr.. Lever, and he is such
2 nice man that we do not blame
them for, being so fond Of him, but
it is a very dangerous matter to let
the representatives of a democratic
reople: think that they can do as
they please in the matter of the sup
rcrt of the policies of the opposition
party in congress, the very life OF
the nation and the well being of the
reople is tied up iE this principe,
and if they like Mr.. Lever SO Wei
they should make 1t plain to him
that they are willing to swallow him
with all of his faults. but that he
1qust recognize republicanism as
fault and eschew 1t in the future.
Then all may be we'll"
In the speech made by Mr.. Lever
On the occasion referred to by the
Times. he said he had no apology
to make to the Democrats who mad
elected him to Congress for his vote
with the Republicans to tax lumber.
He endeavored to justify his violat-
ing the platform On which he was
elected by saying that the duty on
.unlber put $4,000, 600 in the public
treasury and did not take a cent out
of the pockets Of the oeople ne re-
presented. If this was true, Mr.. Le-
yer would not be justified in breaking
his pledge to the Democrats OF THIS
district who elected him to congress.
But the claim made by Mr.. Lever 's
not true. The high price of lumber
brought about by the duty on 1t, IS
causing most of the luraber made IN
this section to be shipped to Nor
thern markets, and the only way our
own people can get it is to pay the
price that lumber sells fol. in the
big markets, minus the freights.
We refer above, of course, to the
lumber that is used in building hous-
es and such things as that, tbut it
does not cover the tax that the peo-
pie of Mr.. Levers district have to
pay because of his vote to put duty
en- lumber by long ways. Most OF
our people use furniture, and there
is not a piece of furniture. made, IN.
this country that dones not cost more
because of the duty OIL lumber than
it would cost if there was no duty
on lumber. This is a. tax that no
man in the district can escape. 1t
makes no difference whether he lives
in a mansion or a cabin. Yet Mr.
Lever, says. the tax or lumher does
rot take cent out OF the pockets
of the people of his district. II he
will study the conditions a little we
think he will admit that he was mis-
taken when he mace that statement.
The duty on lumber was not put on
us revenue duty, but was put on
as a protective duty by the Repub-
licaEs with the assistance of few
Democrats.