Indiana daily times., 1922-03-10

continued me in that position while l
remained in the Senate; that in my
fourth year as Senator I was made d
member of what was then that small
unofficial, but directing group, called
| 1.-THE Family :" and that was the young
est Senator ever taken into those power
full organizations. But these marks OF
confidence were not bestowed because of
a more placid acceptance of anything and
everything concocted by others.
When our Philippine policy was un-
determined, the public mind confused,
and the leaders of our party undecided,
was it wrong for me to have gone to those
islands, studied conditions at first hand,
and stated the facts and suggested a
course Of action to the Senate and the
country? Or ought I to have done
nothing, and merely voted when I was
told to vote and as I was told to vote :?
Would it have been better to have let
hundreds of thousands of little children
be ruined in body, intellect and soul by
practical slavery at tender ages in cotton
mills. mines and sweat shops, because
leaders of both parties would not inter
fere with that brutal system. and were
deaf TO the cries of the inuocents; or to
have taken up their cause, drafted a bill
to end the evil, begun the fight for that
genuinely humane and sound business
reform, and kept up the battle until the
sense and consciene of the voters of his
party won over to that splendid cause
the leaders of his party, and the construc-
tive proposal became one Of his party's
nobleet issues?
Would It have been better to have
played politics" and make no inquiry as
to the well-being of the people, or to
have dug into conditions, learned the ter.
rible fact that, although cP Preful inspection
was made of all meat al meat products
exported to other couitries, no inspection
whatever was made of the same sort of
food when marketed here at home, so that
diseased and injurious meat prepara-
tions were sold to our own people?
And having discovered by research
this wicked and economic practice, ought
a Senator to have acted like a mummy
because short-sighted party leaders feared
to let action be taken; or. instead, ought
he to have written and proposed a meas
ure TO end such criminal folly, led the
fight for that measure, and finally re-
ceived the support of the very leaders
who at first strove to dlssaude him?
Would it have done his party more
good had such a Senator yielded and let
matters alone, on the one hand; or, on
the other hand, had he worked and
fought until the meat INSPECTION law was
on the statute books, and his party, at
the next and succeeding elections, asked
the peoples support on that very stat
ute as one Of his party's finest achieve
ments7
Which course would have benefited his
party most: To have spent much OF his
time disciplining his party's local or
gSuization like Prussian drill>Sergeant
for personal ends; or, to have delved into
the source of public revenue and thus
discovered that the Tobacco Trust was
collecting and keeping millions Of the
peoples money which. by right, ought TO
have gone into the Nations treasury?
And, having found this state Of thlngs.
wo1ld it have been better party policy
to have said nothing and done nothing
about It because leaders Of both parties
objected; or, to have drawn and intro
duced legislation to correct such moral
malappropriation, and fought for that
measure until his party's leaders saw
the wisdom Of It, the Til passed and his
party acclaimed 1t as one Of its
triumphs?