New-York tribune., 1910-06-05
THE RETTRN OF PEACE.

How are the prophets of an IRE
pressibIe conflict" within the Republican
party TO explain the passage OF the IN
terstate commerce bill in the Senate by
n unanimous Republican vote? This
was the measure which, according 10
Senator Cumming and other forecasters
of turmoil and trouble, was to split the
Republican organization wide open. We
were not greatly impressed by Mr.. Cum
mins's bellicose predictions. because we
knew that although he differed from
other Republican Senators on certain
details of the interstate commerce bill
reported TO the Senate, and for the sake
OF driving opponents In Iowa to the wall
was anxious 10 magnify those dlHer-
cnces. the party at large was not at all
disposed TO recognize in those diver
cencjes a cause for civil war. We were
satisfied that the party could not be
divided by any issue arising out Of the
consideration of the amendments which
it was proposed TO make in the inter-
state commerce laws, and our confidence
was quickly justified by the fact that
On the very same day on which Mr..
Cummins predicted general smash-up
on issues growing out Of railroad legis-
lation the Republican members of the
House of Representatives, his insur-
gent colleagues from Iowa included,
voted solidly for railroad bill satisfac-
tory to all shades of party opinion.
The same unification has now been
effected in the Senate. in which the
Iowa Senator has himself preached the
impossibility Of unification. He de-
parted for Des Moines a few days ago
in order TO carry on his "irrepressible
conflict campaign against the stand
pat element in Iowa, which opposes
his leadership. But before quitting
Washington he announced that he would
join with Senators Aldrich and Elkins
il supporting the railroad bill as
amended. Yet if he could cooperate
with them in Washington on a measure
which was 10 split the party throughout
the nation, why should he not he able
10 cooperate at home with Republicans
who share the views Of Senators .Adrich
and Elkins on railroad legislation
There is no state of civil war in sight in
the Republican party in Congress. Why
then should anybody talk Of civil war as
unavoidable in the party in Iowa?
The fact is that such differences as
have arisen over the details Of the inter
state commerce law are relatively trivial
from the point of view of party solidar-
ity. There were even bitterer disputes
in 1906 over the Hepburn railroad bill
Yet only one Republican Senator voted
against that measure when it was put
on its passage. 1t is unwise to get ex-
cited over minor quarrels within the
Republican party. especially when they
relate to so technical and abstruse a
subject as the regulation of interstate
commerce. Disputes of that sort are not
likely to rend party organizations Some
moral or personal issue is needed to
give vitality TO domestic strife. The
Republican party has had to face seces.
sions like those OF 1864 and 1872. due to
hostility to q leader and his methods. II
has had 10 live down the heated fac
tional anita gonisms Of the Stalwart and
Half Breed period Alongside those dis
turbances the present Regular-Insurgent
embroilment in Congress seems innocent
and incoDsequental. The party as a
whole takes it far less seriously than do
those statesmen who are conspicuousIy
engaged in il. They were wise when
they got together in the House and Sen.
ate and compromised outstanding diff
terences- The Republican voters are
not IN mood for discord and dicr,n.
ton, but for disarmament and harmony