Jefferson jimplecute. (Jefferson, Tex.) 1907-1926, 1911-02-10

thing more regarding the grea,
things IL store for Jefferson Large
bodic. move slowly, therefore you
dear people must wait. unless you
are willing to pu, your shoulder to
the wheel and push the wagon on
| am quite sure the good things"
I referred to in nv last will event.
ually come. | don't think this is
an instant where the wish is father
to The thought So you will have
70 wait Developments.
| notice the Galveston News
makes editorial mention of Mr..
Rosell's bill to bond a railroad g
intangible assets. If the railroads
are required to pay TAX on their in
tangible assets why should they
not be allowed TO bond then? Now
if the roads should be allowed 10
bond this class Of assets and de
fault, a receiver appointed, what
would he take charge CT, and wh at
would be sell and how would he
make delivery? Then If all this
cannot be done why should rail-
roads be made to pay on something
that is not really an asset--some-
thing that cannot be delivered 1t
may be my obtuseness, but have
always thought the law emlnentiy
wrong. If bonds are permitted to
be issued, | question if purchaser
could be found for them ] cannot
see how such bonds can be realized
on. Any way, | am glad Mr. Row
ell has introduced the bill; this may
more forcibly show the absurdi,y
of the law requiring the tax.
There is one thing in politics /
cannot IN understand when two pub
lie men Of the same politica name.
Ct use name instead of falth)are di-
agonally opposed to each other
now each Can be supported by the
same voters This may again be
case of my dullness Yet this Is
the case; I do not understand why
Two republicans can both be good
republicans yet one stands for free
trade and the other for protection;
and the same of democrats | no
tice Senator Culberson is decidedly
against Senator Lorimer, while
Senator Bailey is for bin. OF one
thing am quite sure Senator Cul.
berson knows where his bat is. If
no wrong had been com mitted, why
do the friends Of Senator Lorimor
practice every means possible to
prevent a vote. The eyes Of the
United States is today watching the
actions Of the y. s Senate in the
Lorimer case. Less things than
that have caused new mouuds IN
political graveyards. Lest We for
get, read what the Galveston News
has to say:
SENATOR BAILEY IN 1905 AND 1911.
Senator Bailey seems to be the lead
ing or most active supporter Of Senator
Lorimer 1t would really appear rea-
sonable, considering the record made
by Senator Baileyhimself to expect him
to be most active in the contention for
Mr.. Lorimer's exclusion. Mr.. Lorimer
is a republican who was enabled to Be-
cure election by the bribery of demo
cratic members of the Illinois legisla-
ture. Senator Bailey is democrat
and is fully informed touching republi-
can politics and methods in Illinois
including the buying Of voters as we'll
AS the bribery Of members of the legis-
laturc. AS lawyer he must know
quite well that the presumption is now
against the accused man and that the
burden of proof has been placed square
ly upon him by the abundent evidence
Of vote selling and bribery.
But that is not all. Senator Bailey
stands fully committed to this view OF
such cases. He led all the senators in
the prosecution of Senator Burton OF
Kansas, and made In his speeches ar.
guments which are directly contradic-
tory of his strained arguments in favor
of Mr., Lorimer. In the Burton case
Senator Bailey was the man who dwelt
upon the argument that the senate was
the Judge of the election and qualifica-
tons of its members and under its pow
ers Of expulsion was judge Of how long
they should remain. In the same speech
he employed the words following; "The
rule is different here, In the senate
from that which prevails in the courts
There is a safeguard for the liberty Of
the citizen; he must have his guilt es-
tablished beyond reasonable doubt
Here the rule ought to be that he mus,
free himself from all appearance o.
wrongdoing beyond reasonable doubt
These are the words of Senator Bal
ley of Texas in the Burton case five
years ago. They contradict squarely
his present contention for different
rnle in the Lorimer case.
That is not all. Senator Bailey in
the Burton case said; "Mr. President,
we IN not afford to be too tender with
these questions, would be the last
man here or elsewhere to stain an hon
orahle name by even proposing an un-
just inquiry. But senator's who do be-