Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1917-03-08
BRYAN SEES S
MARK in ship BILL
Apostle of Pacifism, How.
h ever, Does Favor Gag on
Senate Talk
FEARS THE PREDATORY
Objects to Having U. S. Serve
"the Interests" in Carrying
on Trade
BY WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN

f MIAMI, F1a MarCn b.--l am akdlIlSl ull
clustering and have for several years beci
advocating cloture rule in the Senate.
believe in the right of the majority To RUE
and am sorry to learn from press dispatches
that the Senate is inclined to require two
thirds vote for the closing of debate
A majority vote ought to he suhcienj
after each Senator has been given reason
able opportunity TO express his views. It
require two-thirds vote is TO give TO iht
predatory interests the same power ihd'
they now have TO prevent legislation hostile
10 their privileges.
As long as the rules permit a minority "
obstruct legislation we may expect them
TO be employed to prevent progressive IegIs-
lation just as they were employed two years
ago to enable the shipping trust to defeat
the Presidents shipping bill
MISUSE or RULES
Whether the Senators should use the
rules to defeat a proposed measure is a
matter entirely in the discretion OF the
Senators, who are responsible to their con-
stituents alone, just as the president Is
responsible to the general public only when
he uses his veto to defeat a measure raw
ored by a majority Of the Senate and House.
So far as have seen expressions from
the Senators nearly all Of those VINO voted
against authorizing the arming of ships ala
80 for the purpose Of compelling an extra
session of Congress or because they Oh
jected to the phraseology of the biII since
the President has power to call Special
session OF Congress at any time, ana ASK
for legislation he desires, the lingo press
will find it difficult to convince tire public
that there is anything reasonable In the
desire to have Congress in session Even
the most war-likc Of the newspapers VIII
hardly insist upon the abolition of Congress
now. whatever they might have the bold
ness to advocate in time of war
QUESTION OF "LANGUAGE'
The second question relates TO the merits
of the bill. So far as | am able to Judge
the objections urged. were not to giving
authority to the President, but related to
the language to be employed. and surely If
congressional authority is needed, the metn-
bers of Congress cannot fairly be denied
discretion as to the language to be cm-
ployed.
Every one recognizes that the giving Of
authority involves serious risks.
The public has such complete confidence
I'm the President that Congress would not
hesitate to ,:onfer upon him any power that
he could himself use, but the President
cannot ride on the ships himself or handle
the guns. He cannot even direct the man
who pulls the trigger.
The expert gunner will be some 5000
miles from Washington when he carries
out the authority conferred. lie will not
only have the experts desire to test his
skill. but he will be under the immediate
direction of a shipowner, who may have
a large pecuniary interest in landing COM
traband cargo.
The President has not asked Congress
to Surrender to him authority to declare
war: is it strange that Congress should
hesitate to put an expert gunner In posi-.
tion where. by his mistake. or by mis-
take of an Interested shipowner, he may
commit an act Of war!
CIR, N.r,C, r,N tIpr-gI,
The Senate and House did not agree
as to the phraseoOgy of the proposed bill
The Senate wanted to include "other in
strumentalties" which the House thought
too vague description of the power con-
ferred The House also excepted from in
surance merchantmen, carrying arms and
ammunition, and a minority Of the House
committee favored inserting this exception
in the paragraph authorizing the arming of
ships.
/ am heartily in sympathy with the
House in withholding insurance from ships
carrying arms and ammunition and am also
in sympathy with the minority Of the
committee in the belief that the exception
should be extended to the arminr Of ships
as well. The bill in both Senate and House
provided for protection Of Americans only
when they were lawfully on ships and il is
for Congress to say what is lawful
In my opinion law should be enacted
clearance from any bolligerent
ships carrying American passengers to t,u-
rope. American papers of the cath of last
month contained the following dispatch
from Halifax. y. :.
OCEAN BARRED TO WOMEN
HALIFAX, y. s.. Feb 23-A num-
Der of women and children who arrived
here last night on a steamship from the
United States for Europe were taken off
today by Government authorities under
a regulation which provides that
women and children may not sail from
British port for England at present
Three Americans aboard the liner.
which arrived in port last night. we're
permitted to continue the voyage. Clear
ance papers We're refused until twenty
five Canadian women and children had
been removed. They were taken ashore
in tugs.
KEEP OFF THE SHIPS
If Great Britain will not allow British
women and children to sail on a British
ship bound for England, why should the
United States allow American women and
children, or even American men, TO SAN
IN any belligerent ships going into the
LANCER zone?
II will be noticed that the Halifax dis
patch says that three American women
we're allowed TO proceed" OF course The
British officials had no authority to remove
women, but why should the
United States allow the owner of a heI
gerent ship to safeguard contraband
;argo with American women and children,
,r even American men?
And why should our Government permit
he United States TO be drawn into this war
by the folles of any American citizen who
% disregards his country's welfare as to
ravel upon belligerent ship whether for
pleasure or for profit?
Drake CaIlacfion nm Cal