Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1922-03-21
NEWS RECORD
is REVIEWED
BYBEVERIDGE
Indiana Senator Deserves
Small Credit for Farm
Laws, Says Opponent.
LET PUBLIC JUDGE
Special to The Times.

"a Special to The Times.
- RICHMOND, Ind, March 21.--Senator
Harry 8. News record on farm legisla-
ton was fayed by ex-senator Albert J..
Beveridgs in 8 speech here last night in
which he emphasized his reluctance to
take up his opponents record as an issue,
but declared he was forced TO DO so by
those who speak for Senator New.
Credit for six farm relief measures was
given the farm bloc" by Mr.. BeYeridge
Four Of these measures were passed
without a roll call, he stated. and on the
day two OF these measures were passed
be declared Senator New answered no
roll call whatsoever, certainly was not
present and on q third voted In the mega
tive.
Mr. Beveridge called on Senator New
to give a list of laws written or orig
mated, policies framed or presented, ar
guments made. address delivered or
summary OF the record which he de-
clRred is constantly, stridently and al
most impOlitely thrust upon u.s." and
let citizens themselves give 1t atten-
ton"
Surely" Mr.. Beveridge said, at will
not be hard for them to produce at least
a summary; for, Of course, they them
selves. have made that search, and are
entirely familiar with that subject Sure
" they. themselves, know all about the
record of which they are so proud"
"HAyE A LOOK"
SAYS BEVERIDGE
eff, perchance, our ardent friends have
not pIodded through the mass Of bills,
debates, votes, motions, amendments and
all else that constitutes the public rec
&brd OF an American Senator, let US as
8,sist the7l-let them take the following
as a starLSr.
"Some weeks ago my opponent made
two appeals for the support Of the
farmers, giving as his reason the passage
OF six bills for the relief Of those who
produce the Nations food. All Of those
were what are termed farmer bloc
measures. our OF them were passed
without a ri call-nO ayes and noes !;
and on tn. day two were passed my op-
ponent answered no roll call whatever,
and therefore, certainly was not present
On another Of these bills my opponent
voted in the negative; and on the confer
euce report on that bill he did not vote
at all
NO complaint should be made Of my
opponent because Of this rather pallid
and negative showing made by the Off
reasons. But is II fair for him to plead
for the support of farmers upon ground
Of passage Of measures for which he did
not vote, or which he opposed?
"On three OF these measures there was
important and extended debates, in
which my opponent was silent. That
fact is not against him; but is It right
TO lead the farmers to infer he was an
advocate Of the measures upon which
he particularly appeals for their votes?
SAYS HE WISHES
TO BE FAIR.
But 1 mean to be fair-above all. 1
mean to be fair. I would not have 1t
understood that my opponent was en-
tirely quiescent and negative as to this
group OF legislation upon the enactment
. OF which he takes time from political
napuferences' to make q special plea for
- h votes Of the farmers.
ITO the chief Of these farmer bloc
%E rs. my opponent offered an important
Eendmeut and engaged in weighty arg
E#fment. This was the famous farmer
tariff bill-'the emergency tariff BILL as
it was called.
This measure was devised and passed
for the purpose Of protecting American
farm products from the competition OF
foreign farm products
1T was designed TO relieve the hard
pressed. Over-taxed debt-bLrdened farm
ers Of the United States from the threat
ened deIUge of cheap farm products from
the Argentine, Manchuria, Denmark and
elsewhere.
ITO this farmers tariff my opponent
offered an amendment against the impOr-
tation Of airplanes. His amendment pro-
vided an almost prohibitive tariff upon
imported airplanes.
IN the debate upon his airplane
amendment to the farmers tariff, my Op-
ponent declared the American airplane
industry must be protected from competi-
ton with foreign and especially British
airplane industry.
.s'rhe chairman OF the Finance Com
nfttee. that able and extreme protection
ist. the late Senator Penrose, sharply
opposed my opponents airplane amend
mept in terms almost sarcastic-indeed.
the language Of Senator PenrOse was
weII-nIgh impoIite He said the amend
ment was indefensible' and the air
plane manufacturers were only monop-
oily to hold up the American Govern
ment"
SAYS WATSON AIDED
DEFEAT OF MEASURE.
\ Senator Penrose further declared the
9FInance Committee (of which Senator
Watson was and is a member) unani-
mousIy rejected my opponents amend
ment when presented to that committee.
Nevertheless, my opponent insisted on
roll call on his airplane amendment TO
the farmers tariff bill, and his amend
ment was defeated By 8 vote OF sixty
four noes and ten ayes. The names Of
those voting for and against this pro-
pOsal are interesting.
so ended By opponents constructive
effort to aid American agriculture by
imposing a high protective tariff on
foreign airplaues.
Analysis OF my opponents action on,
or attitude toward. the other laws which
he cited as reasons why the farmers
should vote for him, reveals certain
phases almost as interesting as the air
plane adventure.