Bryan daily eagle and pilot. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1909-1918, 1913-06-23
JUDGE MANSFIELD OPPOSES IS
Grand Master OF Masons in Texas
Tells Why the Resolution Should
Be Defeated.

Judge ]. ]. Mansfield of Columbus,
grand master of Masonry in Texas
has written Gen. II. b. Stoddard OF
this city giving a number OF unan-
swerable arguments why Resolution
IS should be defeated The letter is
as follows:
Columbus, Tex, June 20, 1913.
General H. B. Stoddard,
Bryan, Texas.
Dear General Stoddard: In reply to
your request OF June 18th, for my
views upon the proposed amendment
to the constitution providing for issu-
ing bonds for the University and other
state institutions, l will say that | am
most decidedly opposed TO the amend.
ment in the form in which it is pre-
scented. The proposition to authorize
the Legislature to issue bonds without
limitation as to the amount, or the
rate of interest to be paid, is so revo-
lutionary against constitutional gov
eminent that ] cannot believe it will
receive any considerable support from
those who understand it.
If it is the proper thing to abolish
all constitutional limitations on the
question of issuing bonds and paying
taxes, then | cannot see that we need
any constitutional limitations for any
purpose. If the people are to retain
no voice in the amount of bonds to be
issued and the rate of taxes to be
paid, then | cannot conceive Of any
need for a constitution at all.
In our zeal to build up great Uni
versity, A. and NJ. College or any
other institution, we should not be-
come biased to the extent of throw
ing to the four winds every principle
of constitutional government to ac'
complish that single aim. And while
! am not from Missouri, it will require
nothing short of the election returns
to the contrary to convince me that
the people of Texas are ready to take
such step. If you will observe close
ly, those who are advocating the
amendment completely dodge this fea-
ture of the case. They cannot afford
to openly defend such a principle, and
they will not do so. Those who op
pose the amendment can truthfuily
say they do so, not because they love
the University or the A. and NJ. Col
lege less, but because they love Texas
and constitutional government mora.
II the advocates of the amendment
say we can safely trust to the honesty
and good judgment of the Legislature
in fixing the amount of bonds to be is
sued and the rate of interest to be
paid, then | say in reply that for the
same reasons we can trust to their
Judgment and honesty on any other
question of limitation of power. Such
an argument CD is alike applicable
for the total adjustment of the con
stitution.
On this question of issuing bonds,
honest men may differ widely. Mr..
Cleveland issued 262 millions Of bonds
of the United States in time of peace,
and claimed that by so doing he saved
this country from panic and financial
ruin. His intelligence and honesty of
purpose were above reproach Mr..
Bryan, equally honest and intelligent,
condemned the measure in the most
unqualified terms, and claimed that it
did this country more harm than that
which could have been inflicted upon
it by all the hosts OF the Republican
party. If men of the intelligence and
honesty of Cleveland and Bryan can
take such widely divergent views upon
the question, then, | ask, what assur-
ance have we as to what views may
be entertained by members Of the