Brownsville herald. [volume] (Brownsville, Tex.) 1910-current, 1928-06-05
Pease Explains Garner Vote On
Fordney Tariff Act; Sid Hardin
Attacks C~ongressman's Record

To The Herald:
In SATURDAYS issue Of your paper
there appeared an editorial under
the caption. Garner and the Tariff
II was stated in that editorial that
the handful OF followers"-as you
describe those who are against Gar
ear misrepresenting Garner and
in the course Of the argument offer
ed there appears this statement:
"The allegation that he is opposed
to protection for the farmer is the
flimsiest of camouflage."
IL the opposition to Garner
amounts to but a handful" then
certainly you can afford to be fair
to that handful" and ! am going
TO ask that the following reply be
printed.
You deny that Garner is opposed
to protection for the farmer, vet on
page 21S1 Of the Congressional Rec
ord reporting the proceedings OF
congress for January %. 1921, sou
will find that he himself said: II
am not a protectio1ist." July Fl,
1921, in discussing The tariff ques-
ton he said: "Unless the foreign
QGOLS are TEmlLLCu anu II WI
exports are TO continue . there is
no more question in my mind than
that night will follow day that you
must turn toward international free
trade"
On that occasion and in that
speech he referred to what another
congressman had declared in these
words: THE gentleman cannot find
in any statement / have ever made
where I spoke Of the benefits to be
derived from a tariff. nor can rae
gentleman show where I said that
| would levy il for protection, seal
ing from / 10 so per cert"
Now. sir. you will see that il was
not my followers VINO originated the
statement that Garner was not for
a protective tariff for agriculture.
II was Garner himself Who said that
he was not. and who. n litsi- later.
voted against the emergency tariff
measure brought forward to give the
farmers protection.
In another paragraph you say Of
Mr.. Garner: "Hs led the fight in
1921 to increase protection on agri
cultural products and decreased the
wide margin Of protection afforded
manufacturers" Then you quote a
nan named Stengle "a declaring that
Jack would 20 right into a lions
cage and fight with its occupants"
That reminds me. During the
Revolutionary war there was a very
brave British general whose horse
Just would run away with him and
70 the opposite direction from the
enemy the m a battle started.
u must have been like that with
Garner in 1921 If he led any fight
to get protection for the farmer he
led II Ike that general led his
forces. Maybe he himself would en-
ter a lions cage with the courage
Of a Daniel. But he rode Old eau.
Gus. and when the hour Of real test
came Caucus took to his heels.
That was the year. sir. when the
emergency tariff came before con
gress. IL extended tariff safeguards
TO the farmer without giving any
increase to the manufacturers. II
was designed expressly for the
struggling producers OF the ~nation
and did not include any benefits for
any others. But John Garner vo,ed
~ a > WV viii see DIV turn
ing TO page 355, part !, vol. 81 of the
record Of the 9th congress.
it - Ell right to attack one who
dares oppose your choice. But Il
IS all wrong 70 say that choice is
being misrepresented on the tariff
issue by my supporters, when il Is
his W words and his own votes
that are being offered as TESTIMONY
against him.
You COMPLAIN that the ones now
opposing Garner are the ones who
have been opposing protection for
agriculture. You also complain hat
that element is trying to block Gar
ner's efforts TO have the tariff COM
mission increase the duty on farm
products. There are no facts to
Justify any such assertions. Those
backing me are free men living in
this district and realizing that they
cannot make anything producing ag-
riculture. unless some favorable ac-
tion is taken in their behalf by
congress. They have searched the