Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1914-04-04

4 speaker Cl4Ik gave Al unworthy eX.
hibition Of himself in his speech on the
toll exemption repeal bill and that not
withstanding the fact that he confessed
his appreciation Of the need for q rea-
soning treatment Of the Issue.
In spite Of this, Mr.. Clark presented
himself AZ tho passionate hill billie.
and II may astonish Q good many
Americans to learn that a man OF this
character IL in high position.
Mr.. Clark fundamentally consid-
cred the possibility that his political
future was being sacrificed for the poll
He might more reasonably have been
with difficulty will survive this exhibi-
ton and cannot possibly survive many
others like it.
Mr. Clark had an argument to make
for toll exemption. and showed that he
knew how to make 1t. Had he con-
fined himself to this he would have
preserved the respect CO The men who
oppose him in his present course. His
arguments were answerable, but they
might have been made by a man sim
cereiy conn--::asceS. ns the Justice and
equity Of his position and at no sacri-
fee Of political future.
Mr.. Clark essayed to interpret the
treaty. as nearly all the toll exemption
lists do, without regard to the history
Of canal negotiations between the
United States and Great Britain. When
its provisions are thus viewed there
may be q question Of Interpretation.
but when years OF controversy leading
to the determination of the question
are considered. along with the instru-
ments which preceded the treaty now
governing the intent becomes apparent
and what direction American honor
points IL clearly Indicated
Mr. Clark. however, might honestly
have advanced his arguments. Ha
might have urged that the benefit te
shipping. even IL that shipping wero
monopolistic. was sufficient reason fol
Discrimination In favor OF some states
and against others. He mi3ht have
defended subsidy.
He would not have been convincing,
but that would have been because Of
the fault inherent in his position. He
would have commanded re4pect. But
the speaker of the house Of representa-
tives cannot act the 1antar and be re.
spected.
It is doubtful If any speaker Of the
house ever made a statement 30 un-
worthy as the following by Mr.. Clark:
II would rather see the canal blown
up than give the British any control
OF it,
This utterance is illustrative Of the
nature and trend Of a considerable
part Of Mr. C1ark'se speech. It IL diff
fcult 70 characterize II by other than
the word contemplate. The ordinary
member Of congress is permitted to re-
veal his own stupidity or malevolence
pretty much az he wishes. He sug-
gests merely the misfortune OF the dis
trict he represents. and there always
viii be unfortunate Districts The
speaker Of the house stands in a diff
ferent position. He is likely to sham
the nation. and Mr.. Clark SO nearly did
1t that contemplation Of his words is
unpleasant.
The suggestion that the repeal Of an
ac. subeidizing monopoly Is eauiva-
lent 20 giving control OF the canal to
the British is contemplate. 1t is hard
" helievable that an American in high
position would so lower himself IN
debate of such importance.
This ranting appeal to prejudice and
passion strengthens the belief that
providence had something to do WITH
the Baltimore convention OF the demo-
cratic party. The Hon. Champ Clan,
| might have been president OF the Unit
| ed States