The Prince George's enquirer and southern Maryland advertiser., 1922-07-21
TARIFF BILL HIT
TWICE in SENATE
Move to Enforce CIoture on It
Fails, and 1t Is Attacked by
Majority Member.
REPUBLICANS ARE WARNED
LaFoIIette Declares Defeat in Novem-
Der and 1924 Is Sure II Measure
Passes-Democrats Pre-
vent Gag.

Observation-Disclosures of the Repub-
lican motion for cloture on the admin
istration tariff bill and dramatic at
tack on that measure by Senator La
Toilette of Wisconsin, a Republican
member of the committee that report
ed it, featured the proceedings in the
senate. The vote to, invoke the exist
ing cloture rule was 45 to 35, or nine
less than the necessary two-thirds ma
jority The Democrats were a unit
against the motion, which was opposed
also by five Republicans.
The roll call follows:
For the motion: Republicans-Ball.
Bursum, Calder, Capper, Curtis, du-
Pont, Edge, Elkins, Ernst, Fernaldy
France, Frelingbdysen, Gooding, Hale,
Harreld, Johnson, Jones of Washing
ton. Kellogg, Keyes, Ladd, Lenroot,
Lodge, Mccormick, McCumber, McKin-
ley, Mclean, McNary, Nelson, New
berry, Nicholson, Norbeck, Oddie, Pep
per, Phipps, Poindexter, Rawson,
Shortridge, Smoot, Spencer, Sterling.
Sutherland, Townsend, Wadsworth,
Warren and Willis-45.
Against the motion: Republicans
Borah, Brandegee, LaFollette, Moses
and Norris-5. Democrats-Ashurst,
Broussard, Caraway, Culberson, Dial,
Fletcher, Gerry, Harris, Harrison, Hef-
lin, Jones of New Mexico, Kendrick,
King, Myers, Overman, Owen, Pittman.
Pomerene, Ransdell, Robinson, Shep-
pard, Shields, Simmons, Smith, Stan
ley, Swanson, Trammell, Underwood,
Walsh Of Massachusetts and Walsh Of
Montana-3O. Total against, 35.
Four senator's, all Republicans, pres
ent were unable to vote because of
pairs with absent Democratic senators.
They were Cameron, Dillingham;, New
and Watson. Twelve senators, six Re
publicans and six Democrats, were abb
sent.
Delivering the first of a promised
series of attacks on the tariff. Sen
ator LaFollette declared the only way
the Rpublican party could be saved
from defeat in the congressional elec-
tions in November and from disaster"
in the presidential election in 1924,
was to recommit the bill for rewriting
on the basis of "the old Republican
principle" of merely equalizing the
difference in the cost of production at
home and abroad. If that could not
be done, he added. the legislation
should he abandoned.
Characterizing the bill as even worse
than the Dingley and Payne-Aldrich
laws which, he declared, had caused
the political upsets in 1910, 1912, 1914
and 1916, Senator LaFollette asked his
colleagues if they thought the people
had forgotten; if they thought the peo-
pie would calmly accept the burdens
in 1922 which they SO decisively re-
fused to carry In 1910 and 1912"
Powerful, indeed, must be the in
fluences which can bludgeon through
this legislation" he said. "When the
political leaders responsible for 1t
know that it means the defeat of their
party and the end of the political
lives of most of the leaders responsible
for this bill"
Taking up specifically the cotton
schedule in the bill, Senator LaFolIette
declared the rates as reported to the
senate in many instances were from
IL to 80 per cent higher than those in
the Payne-Aldrich law and from 100
to 200 per cent higher than those in
the existing statute. He said the COM
mittee majority had removed lone Of
the many jokers slipped into the cot
ton schedule" and lowered some rates
so that tables of comparison he had
prepared were not exactly accurate.
He added, however, that he understood
the committee majority did not intend
to lower the rates below the level of
the Payne-Aldrich law and presented
many tables to show that the cotton
manufacturers had prospered under
the Underwood law rates.
Senator Smoot, Of Utah, ranking
Republican on the finance committee,
defended the cotton schedule.