The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1918-02-08

H'oNt VI 'NSi NlluS else IN point OF
political interest in the Senate. This
Is wholly below the surface as vet.
But the bill is now recognized as an
Administration measure. H. is ex-
pected to focus Republican opposi-
ton. II is not expected that il will
command anything more than per-
functory support, except from a
minority of Democratic Senators to
whom the wishes of the Admins
tration are paramount The powers
1t proposes to delegate, including
wholesale suspension of law, are
considered more than royal.
The most nearly direct reference
TO the bill yesterday was by Senator
Jacob II. Gallinger of New Hamp-
shire. He was denouncing the
rapacity illustrated in the record of
Southern war claims, as filed by al
legged loyalists. He exposed such
patriotism" merCilessly, instancing
the case of a well-knOwn religious
organization which, after securing
$4,000 Oh a claim for patriotic
sacrifices, made under compulsion in
saving the Union, was Obliged to
disgorge or fOregO the money on evil
dence of fraudulency of the claim.
In that connection, Mr.. Gallinger
thought that instead of devoting its
attention to Outlawed claims, dis
credited by more than half a CEN
tury's failure to validate them, the
Senate would be forced to consider
- -.
abdicate its functions altogether,
and decide whether it is to turn re-
publican government into autocraey
or monarchy. The issue against
giving further consideration to the
patriotism of Southern loyalists be-
tween 1861 and 1865 prevailed.
In the interest Of history, it may
be added that outside of Tennessee,
Kentucky, and Missouri, Southern
"lOyalists" between 1861 and 1865
were almost, II not quite, as quiet as
fool paCifists' are now. Speech
was absolutely free, but was some
what modified at times by tar
and feathers. In Tennessee, where
the .1Oyalists' shot instead Of talk
GU AANg NOhhACu dDlN IIlOTe
in saving the Union" than they did
subsequently when shooting United
States deputy marshals for interfer-
ing with their moonshine distilleries.
Senator Smith, chairman of the
Senate Interstate Commerce Com
mittee, submitted the majority re-
port of the committee, recommend
ing the passage Of its railroad bill.
Its most important definition is that
the Government is practically ten
ant at will" Of the railroads under
the bill as submitted. This definition
applies also to the House bill, now
ready to be reported.
A further definition of the Senate |
committees view is that "the amount |
of just compensation Is not legis- !
lative question: is judicial ques-
ton" This was the strongest con-
tention of the railroads before the
committee. 1t involves making set
tlement with them by agreement,
TO them, to avoid litiga-
ton. The Senate bill is drawn for
that principal purpose.
Senator Cummins Of Iowa an
rounced that he would submit mi
nority report on Monday, and that 1t
would not be intended to obstruct. 4,
He expects to deal with the single |
issue of compensation. /
In a minority report, submitted |
by Senator Poindcxter of the State
of Washington, and ordered printed,
the entire problem is forclbly han
died from two main standpoints OF
objection. First, he objects to fin
ing any set date for returning the
roads TO the companies, and, sec
ond, he disagrecs with the clause
regulation of rates,
it better to leave rates to |
be regulated as in the past, with a |
mere proviso that the President |
may make changes necessary for |
war purposes and only for war pur-
poses.
His view Of the issue of holding |
the roads is that they should not be !
returned until a system is devised |
of correcting the worst abuses from |
which the public has suffered. II
no other form of Governmental |
control is found adequate, then he !
expects the remedy in outright |
ownership if that |
should be necessary"
The feature of the debate on the 1
state of the union" in connection (
with the diplomatic appropriation
bill in the House, was the speech OF
Hon. Carter Glass. of the Sixth Nir- 1