The interior journal. [volume] (Stanford, Ky.) 1912-1984, 1916-07-14
EIGHTH DISTRICT POLITICS

In just what way there was "per-
version" or misrepresentation" of
the Congressional Record as charged
by Congressman Helm, in his effort
to bolster up his record as ''consis-
tent upholder of the President" by
the author of few incongruvial OBJ
servations upon Helms said record
in a recent advertisement in this pa
per, it is hard to fully understand. In
discussion of Helms part upon sever
al bills, considered by all the party
leaders of unusual Importance and
record of the vote was quoted. Mr..
Helm takes the pains, it seems, not
to deny that. He does not deny that
Currency act, favored by the Presi-
dent, but thinks, probably, that his
speech in support of it-whether he
voted for it or not-should satisfy
his constituents and the President.
Mr.. Helm does not deny that he
did not vote upon the immigration
bill and in this instance seemS.tafV
great JUNCTION to his soul let
ing the observations made in connec-
ton with this bill. 1t is true that the
ISSlutHI Was NO1 luz ILLS Ulll, DIS
Mr.. Helm says. The President We
toed it. The House then took it up
to endeavOr to pass it over the Pres
ident's veto. Mr.. Helm, the "consis-
tent" friend Of the President then
did vote upon the bill. But he voted
AGAINST the President. He voted
to pass the bill over the Presidents
veto. The Congressional Record
shows he cast such a vote.
In regard to the antitrust bills,
Mr.. Helms explanation of "unavoid-
able delay" at the funeral of Sena-
tor Bradley is amply sufficient; tho
great many of the members who
were "unavoidablys absent when i'm
portant measures came to vote,
seemed to have believed their posi-
ton on them sufficiently important
to have arranged pairs and to have
them recorded in the Record. The
Record does not show that Mr.. Helm
arranged a pair on either of these
important bills when they were UP,
and therefore the effect of a Demo-
cratic vote was lost in each instance.
In regard to the repeal of the Pan
anna Tolls Exemption Act, the con-
gresham from the Eighth evidently
does not claim any "perversion" or
misrepresentation of the record,
which shows he was the only Demo-
cratic member from Kentucky to DE-
SERT THE PRESIDENT and to
vote alongside of Messrs. Langley
and Powers the two Republican mem
bers from Kentucky. He explains,
however that he stood with Speaker
Clark, Oscar Underwood and other
party leaders on this bill. However,
it might be pointed out, neither Mr..
Clark nor Mr.. Underwood is a can
didate for president of the United
States, nor the uncontested leader of
the Democratic party in the nation.
The Democratic party has to win its
fight in November upon the official
acts and record of Woodrow Wilson
and not of Champ Clark or Oscar
Underwood. And the Democratic
party in the Eighth district will be
mmeasurably stronger in November
with candidate for congress who is
known to take the same position on
national affairs that Woodrow Will
son takes and not Champ Clark or
Underwood. No one will gainsay,
however, but that if Mr.. Helm believ-
ed they were right and Woodrow
Wilson was wrong on the Panama
question, he did the eminently prop
er thing in voting as he did. No one
will censure him in the least for cast
ing his vote as his conscience dictat-
ed, regardless of how any man stood.
If the position he took indicated his
viewpoint of this bill, he should be
highly commended for maintaining
an inf1eXible attitude and immutable
position on it regardless of the fact
that the greatest president in half
century and the matchless leader of
the democratic party, stood the cham
pion of the other side.