The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-04-11

paper, or a journalist, that would not d as l do in that particular I. have II, patience with those newspapers edite, by the money downstairs rather thai by the brains upstairs. Their preach ments are fiimsy, flatulent, vapid, insipid colorless, contemptible. infamous an, their owners are. spcophants and towards liars and slaves. What my mind forge, and my conscience approves my pen vii write and 1t will write none else. Thanl God there are brave newspapers in the land and they Illustrate all that Thomas Jefferson meant by a free press But this time I am innocent of in consistency. 1 still say that Mir. Bailey's speech on the judicial power, whether Il is sound or not, IS a great effort, and still belive and l now say that MT Bailey's stand on the tariff will make Texas a republican state. If Texas fol- lows him. As well eat the devil as to drink his broth.
 And speaking of consistency what is MT. Bailey's record on that? William M. Springer a democrat from Springfield, H., was chairman of the committee of ways and means of the Fifty-second Con- gress, of which body Joseph W. Bailey was member. MT. Springer assailed the tariff in detail He brought in numerous bills that the republicans, in derision, called pop guns" and each of them put raw material on the free list The first was wool and at that time Texas was wool state. Did MT. Bailey oppose it !? No, he swallowed free wool, free lumber, free coal, and everything else free that Springer set before him. Nor is that all In the next succeeding Congress the Will son bill was gorged with free raw mate rials as it passed the House of Repre- sentatives, and MT. Bailey supported it. though score or so of half baked dem ocrats voted against it. So. if the Fort Worth Record would scalp a man for ln- consistency let it chase MT. Bailey out of the woods.
 Morrison and Carlisle, Mills and Wilson, all held that raw materials is the c of tariff reform. And mark you, West | Virginia, whence hailed William L. Will son, is an enormous producer of coal, lumber and wool. Kentucky grows more
 
 | but democratic Kentucky voted free hemp. pure raw material, because to | tax it imposed an additional burden on | the man growing cotton in Texas. And ! Texas ought to be honest enough and generous enough and proud enough to vote for free wool for the child sleep ing under blankets in Kentucky
 It is true that hemp, a raw material, | is taxed in the Payne-Aldrich monstrosi- | ty; but it was done on motion of W. O. | Bradley, a republican senator from Ken lucky, who is in exact agreement with | Bailey as to raw materials. I don't blame | Bradley. He believes in it because it is | republican doctrine to tax the masses to 1894. he voted for free hemp; but if | how Bailey voted on the hemp proposi- l ton. but if his consistency harlzed back | to 1894 lie voted for free hemp; but if | he conformed to his preesnt evangel he voted for the tax and thus imposed ad- | oitional hardship on the Texas cotton | farmer, whom 1t is impossible to protect and who pays the tax on raw materials. | How a cotton farmer, whether owner of | the soil or renter, can follow Bailey is n- | conprehensible. I know cotton bagging is made of jute and perhaps more things | other than hemp, but the higher the price | of hemp, the higher the price of all fibers that compete with it. And that | is fundamental.
 | It cannot be too frequently repeated | and it should never be lost sight of that | as to raw materials MT. Bailey is in pre- else accord with Aldrich, Cannon and | Dalzell-except they call it what it is, l protection, and he calls 1t what it is not, revenue. The effect is the same, strictly the same. For example, the tax on lum- Ter yields less than s5000,O00 revenue and bestows on the lumber trust more than | S75,C0O000 protection-unless the foreigner pays the tax, as Aldrlch says and as Bailey dare not say. No wonder the lum- Der trust estimates Lorimer's vote in the Senate as precious.
 | But just think of it. The Texas gorged with the glory of the Alamo, and radiant with the glory of San Jacinto, the Texas | made so illustriolis by the deeds and the creeds of Sam Houston. Albert Sidney Johnston, Louis T. Wigfal, John II Reagan, David B. Culberson, Rober a. Mills and others-this Texas is now to be deformed into a miserable Lazarus and sit down at the gates of Congress to get : the miserable crumbs that fall from the tariff table, while the dogs of monopoly lick his sores, How do you like it, you cotton grower. the bone and sinew of the Imperial Commonwealth? You will pay this unnecessary and onerous tax
 And with what grace does Texas re-
 
 If Texas is to prey at the same dump of garbage? If it Is virtue to protect the lumber of the lumber trust, how can you make shame of the protection awarded to the steel of the steel trust? All the difference is that one is grown in Texas ard the other forged in Pennsylvania Get down your Bible and read St. Paul l Wherefore, come out from amona them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord and touch not the unclean thing and will receive you.'
 IF this miscegenaton between Texas , and Pennsylvania has not been solem- nized, in the name of political morals and in behalf of public decency. forbids the bans.
 Now, I don't say that MT. Bailey Is con. scious of the manifest fact that in his stand for taxed raw materials he is fetch. ing and carrying for the republican party but that is precisely the effect of his action, as witness circumstance that oc. 1 cured at a meeting of the Texas Cottor Growers association. or something like that. A MT. Hudspeth. democratic stat senator, announced that he was a protec | tionist, and incidentally he conveyed tho secret that Senator Bailey is our greates statesman These be thy gods, ( Israel.'
 Don't you see the leaven working? No even in Texas is there room for pro tectionist undisguised. in the democrat, party. Now, it is not six inches iron where Hudspeth stands to the republican | pa mn hear this man ic oop,ir.r ba,. ',