Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1913-06-23

fine speaker, but a profound
thinger, and a logical reasoner;
lawyer, of course. Recently he made
a speech in congress in which he at
tackled the Democratic party, calling
attention to its pledges and ante-elec-
tion promises. He laid much stress on
the platform promise that no legitimate
industry would be injured, and then
proceeded to roast the party for taking
the tariff off wool. He stated that
wool growing is legitimate industry,
and that the removal of the tariff
would ruin it. His argument was well
made and would be effective If his
premises are true, but are theyi
Congressman sinnott was born and
grew to magnificent manhood in Wasco
county, the greatest sheep county in
the whole northwest. When Nick first
saw the light Wasco county was bound
ed on the east by Idaho, on the north
by British Columbia, on the south by
Nevada, and on the west by the sum.
nit of the Cascade mountains. At that
time the whole country was devoted to
cattle and sheep raising. There was
little mining in Baker and Grant coun.
ties, but the industry was stock, Nick
absorbed the idea Of protection on wool
along with his catechism and Sunday
school lessons, and has the two so in
termingled that he cannot tell where
religion ends and the sacredness Of the
tariff on wool begins The Lord g
Prayer, The Sermon on the Mount and
the tariff on wool are all in the same
category with Congressman sinnott To
doubt the sacredness of the tariff on
wool is as much an act Of sacrilege to
him, as to deny the divinity Of the
Savior. In fact, when Nick reached the
age for whiskers, he refused TO grow
them because he preferred wool, and 50
shsyes clean He asserts that the WOO
industry will be ruined if the tariff il
taken off wool, but how does he know
He has never seen the proposition triej
out, and simply presents his belief as {
proven fact. ASIA lawyer he woul,
consider the evidence as insufficient
as simply the ex.parte statement of al
interested party. He assumes the woo
industry is going to be shocked in tn
head and makes his argument on thi
assumption. There is no evidence tina
the Democratic party is violating II
promises. If IL should prove true tina
the removal of the tariff on wool IN
iures that industry, his argument an
accusation would have some force; bu
until that time II does not apply EN
cry other industry from which IL
proposed to romovo the tariff puts II
the same pitiful plea that II is going I
bo ruined, that il cannot survive ha'
ing its bottle taken away from IL, A
parties in the last election had a plan
in their platforms plcdging the revisio
Of the tariff downwards, and IL n
plant Of every industry was heedC
there would be no change of the tarit
at all, unless II was upward, and
view Of tho experience Of the last a
ministration in that line, II is not pro
able thero win be any change in thi
direction. The American people hay
decided that a business that cannot |
carried on except At loss is po,
business TO engage in. II the peop
have to be taxed and the money Civ,
to others 10 maintain those others
business, IL is pretty good busine
proposition to lot go Of.
II Congressman sinnott's premis
wero correct his argument would ha,
somo force, but they are not correct,
at least not so proven, or admitted, NJ
henco are but an expression Of h
opinion as 10 tho result Of the propos,
u--au.,,ur.rsIu-.urr---.-u-