The citizen. (Frederick City, Md.) 1895-1923, 1912-08-02
WASHINGTON.
Legislative and Gem
eral Topics from
the Capital.
Special Correspondence to the Citizen.)
Washington, July 20, 1912,

plan"
The greasing of the ways to send the
Bull MooSerS back into the Republican
ranks is being done by such men as SEN
atorS CummlnS, Bourne, Borah, Brown
Bristow, Works and Gronna and Repre-
sentatives Murdoch, Cooper, Davis, Ken.
dali, Hougen, Prouty, Lenroot, Hayes
and Woods.
1t is not for love of Taft that these men
are anxious to prevent Col. Roosevelt
from forming a new party. 1t is selfpres-
ervation. Most of them assert to friends
that their excuse for not "boltinp" is
that they hope to bring about reforms
within the party"
Luther NJ. Walker, on behalf of several
Southwestern tap line" railroads, told
the House Commerce Committee, con-
sidering changes in the Interstate Com
merce act, that the Interstate Commerce
Commission had used coercion and prom
lses to prevent litigation of its orders and
threatened criminal prosecution of rail.
roads which proposed to appeal to the
courts.
Mr.. Waller produced letters purporting
to have been written by members of the
commission to various railroads, making
promises Of lepiency if they would with
hold suit following the issuance of the
commissions orders.
Chairman Clements, of the commission,
was given permission to reply formally to
the charges later
The fight in the Senate over the revi-
sion of the wool schedule, which ended
SO Spectacularly and so sadly for Senator
Penrose and other stand patters by the
adoption of the LaFollette substitute for
the Penrose and the House measures.
may be renewed when the question OF
naming OF Senate contereeS on the bill
comes up. 1t will be renewed with vigor
and determination by LaFolette, if re-
ports of the stand-pat program which
reached him prove correct.
Penrose and the other stand-patters
were bitterly disappointed over their final
defeat after they had mustered enough
regular and Progressive votes to put over
the Suddenly-sprung Finance Committee
substitute for the Democratic House bill.
LaFollette had been carefully kept out of |
the secret that the Pensose bill was to be |
sprung as it was realized the Wisconsin |
leader would not join in the scheme |
But enough ofthe Progressives who would |
go along were let into the plan to assure
its success by giving the Penrose bill a |
bare majority. The Democrats had also |
been left in the dark with one or two pos |
sible exceptions But LaFollette's fight |
ing blood was fully aroused as soon as |
The Penrose trick was turned and he Sc
cured a working arrangement with the
Democrats to try to substitute his old |
bill for the Penrose bill He had the
Progressives in a corner, for they |
couldn't afford to queer their records by
refusing 10 support in this session wool |
bill that was good enough for them in the |
special session. The Progressives were
thus compelled to turn their backs on
Penrose after putting through his bill and |
almost Immediately vote to undo what |
they had done.
The essential points of the LaFolette
hill and the House bill are as fallows:
Raw wool: LaFolette bill, 10 to as per |
cent; House bill, 20 per cent
Wool wastes and rags: LaFollette bill, |
IS to 80 per cent House bill, 20 per |
cent.
Combed wool or tops: LaFollette bill,
20 per cent. House bill. rs per cent.
Yarns: LaFollette bill, As per cent;
House bill, 80 per cent.
Cloths, ready. made clothing, knit fab
RIGS, women's dress goods, etc: LaFol-
lotte bill, SIS per cent House bill, IS to
so per cent.
Carpets: LaFolette bill, IS per cent;
House bill. rs to so per cent.
These are the more striking compari-
sons between the two measures. When
the House and Senate conferces reached
a compromise year ago the raw wool
duty was compromised at 20 per cent.
the wool waste duty at 80 per cent; the
combed wool duty at 81 per cent; the
yarn duty at IS per cent; the ready-made
duty at 49 per cent.
When the LaFolette wool bill reached
the House Majority Leader Underwood
demanded that it be sent to conference
and the Senate amendment be agreed to.
Representative Payne, of New York.
Republican, objected to the bill going to
conference before it had been referred to
the Ways and Means Committee. Ac-
cordingly the naming of the conferees
was put over until later.
At the White House President Taft's
callers predicted that he would veto the
wool bill il it came to him in the form it
left the Senate which is substantially the
same bill as was vetoed last year. Mr..
Taft has yet had no conference with Re-
publican leaders about the bill.
Chairman Underwood also sees
chance for the cotton revision at this SEES
sion Of Congress.
II am going to call the Ways and
Means Committee to consider the advisa-
billty OF calling up our cotton bill" he
said. Nov that the Senate has shown
a disposition to enact some legislation
giving the tariff people relief we might as
well take up cotton"
sentative Norris, of Nebraska, by Repre-
sentative Humphrey, of Washington,
Taft man, in the House. in reply to the
two-day speech of the Nebraskan con-
demning the recent Chicago Republican
Convention. in which he had charged
that the delegates from the State of
Washington had been obtained for Presi-
dent Taft through political corruption.
Humphrey disavowed any personal
knowledge OF the manner in which the
delegates were selected, saying he was
not at home at the time.
So vituperative was the Humphrey at
tack that Norris several times sought to
interrupt but unavaiIingly. When Hum
phrey concluded, Norris sought time TO
make reply, but former Speaker Cannon,
whom Norris fought so bitterly two years
ago, had charge of the time on the Re-
publican side and declined to yield the
floor.
In hope OF alleviating conditions among
the Peru Indians in the Putumavo rubber
country the British Government has con.