Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-09-02

rraphed statements which have been
issued from Mr.. Raskobs subsidized
bureau through the mouths of pliable
sponsors certainly supports the charge
that the business of this bureau Is mis-
representation, and that we have no
parallel in American history of per-
son being paid, set up in ONCE and Is
suing such hbelous misinformation
about the President of the United
States.
I'm proof of this fact, I instance the
dates of a few of the many such state
ments on a few Of the subjects they
September IS, 1929 isrepresents
the President as responsible for lobby
lists that swarm Washington
December 18, 1929-Insinuates that
the President looks with favor upon the
corruption of the election of Senator's
Cites Senate Report.
December %, 1926 rs that If
AL Smith were in the White House and
his name had appeared in the Lakin-
Shattuck (sugar lobby correspondence
impeachment proceedings would have
been discussed before now
December %, 1929-Insinuates that
the President was venally connected
with the sugar lobby, and yet the DEM
ocratic chairman of the Senate Lobby
Committee on January 6, 1880, In re-
porting to the Senate and referring to
the President. said: Your committee
finds no improperly nor anything open
to censure or criticism No retraction
of this foul libel by the Raskob bureau
has been made.
October %, 2s-Misrepresents the
President as desiring to abolish the BIZ
- - - 10 ~
mission and appoint all Republicans.
Its bipartisan character was insisted
upon in several messages sent to Con-
greSs by the President.
April %, 1930-Represents the Pres
ident and Republicans as endeavoring
to obtain the unbridled right to raise
or lower a tariff rate as it suits his
whim or interest and becomes excited
over the prospect of such tyranny,
which would enable him to destroy one
section of the country to the advantage
of another yet the President advocated
at all times that this authority be in
the hands of bipartisan commission.
with a limitation in rate changes OF
so per cent of the duties fixed by Con-
gress.
Action on Tariff Defended.
September %, 1929-InSinuates that
the President is in collision for unlim-
tied revision Of the tariff, yet when the
measure was passed it was found that
Congress had revised only 81 per cent
of its $500 items.
october %, 1929-Insinuates that
the President intends to ask Congress
to abandon the tariff bill. The Pres
ident made no such suggestion.
October 81, 1929-Represents the
President as responsible for Senate de-
LAYS in passing the tariff bill.
November IS, 1929-Repeats the
same charge, although it was obvious
to the whole country that the opposi-
ton delayed the bill for six months,
thus contributing to economic depres-
sion and business uncertainty.
August 10, 1930-AttackS the Presl-
dent for delay in appointing the Tariff
Commission, and asserts he had year
to select its members, whereas the
Tariff Commission bill, giving this au-
thority, was then only six weeks old:
The question of whether there would
be a commission, and what its charac-
ter would be, was in doubt to the very
last minute, as 1t was the last thing
settled by the conference between the
two houses of Congress.
October 90, 1929-Insinuates the
President brought about the stock
market crash.
October 90, 1e2s-Implies the Presi-