The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1910-08-31

against the taxpayers of the South
and refused to stand for II. am
willing that my Democracy be meas
ured by the standards of such men as
Money, Daniel and Griggs who for
three successive terms was chairman
fthe Democratic congressional COM
mittee. Calhoun and McDuffie in 1S4e
voted for a duty Of 20 per cent on
rough lumber and 80 per cent on
dressed lumber, and I am willing to
take my stand with them. If they
are Democrats, then 1 am one; if thcy
are not, then 1 am not.
Statement of Minority Leader.
What does the Hon. Champ Clark
say about my vote? In The Ne IS
and Courier Of July 3, 1910, SPEAK 1g
of the South Carolina delegation. he
says:
There has been no delegation
which has been more faithful to it's
duties both in attendance, and in vot-
ing always with the Democrats, than
the South Carolina delegation. On
every question that has been made
politically they have lined up to a
man and voted right"
I wrote Mr.. Clark and asekd him
! specifically whether my vote, putting
| Democratic revenue duty on lum-
ber, was, or should be made, a test
of party loyalty; whether there was
| any special reason why the Demo-
| cratic platform should demand that
this article be placed upon the free
| list; whether I had not asked him to
| call caucus on this question and
| promised to be bound by It; and
whether I had not always been loyal
to the principles Of the party. In re-
ply he writes:
Il never tried to make the vote on
lumber party matter or a test of
party loyalty. What I did try to do
was to make the vote on the tariff bill
a party measure, and on rNe motion
to recommit the conference report on
[ that bill which was a test, every
! Democrat in the house voted with me,
J except one, Mr.. Broussard Of Louisi-
ana. On the adoption Of the confer
ence report every Democrat voted
with me, except two, Messrs. Bous-
sard and Estopinal Of Louisiana. On
both these propositions you voted
with me-"
| These were the test votes, and this
is what the Democratic leader says
about my attitude. On the final pas
sage Of the bill. both in the house and
as it came from the senate, voted
with my party and against it,
| Answering the question as to the
demand for free lumber in the Den.
yer platform, Leader Clark says
II do not myself believe in putting
specifications in a platform. My judg.
ment is that platform ought to state
general principles"
| Again. as to the caucus, whose &C.
ton makes party policies in congress
he says:
1T is fact that a good many Dem.
ocrats wanted q caucus called on the
tariff bill. You were one Of those who
wanted a caucus"
AS to my general Democracy
Leader Clark says
$50 far as I recollect, and I think
my recollection is correct, you have
1 never kicked out Of traces on any.
thing which was O. party measure"
1t seems to me that if my Democ.
racy is good neough for the chosen
leaders, both in the house and sen.
ate, it ought to be good enough fol
those who criticize me.
Lumber in Tariff Act.
The statement has been made by a
newspaper of the State which deludes
itself into the belief that it has beer
ordained as guardian of the Democ.
racy Of the State that Ito vote against
free lumber would be un-Democratio
irrespective Of platform because il
would be out of harmony with the
traditional Democratic tariff posi-
tion." l challenge the correctness OF
| this statement, and I assert that II
was made either in woeful ignorance
OF the fact as proven by history, OF
comes with the deliberate and ma
lcious intention to mislead the peo-
pie by misrepresenting the facts.
assert that with only two or three ex-
ceptions every Democratic tariff act
from the beginning of the government
up to the Civil war contained a duty
on lumber, ranging from to 35 per
cent ad valOrem. AS 1 recall it only
the acts of 1924 and 1928 carried no