,7y"iu't7W'r'rs'',s"!r"''"
AUGUST 3, 190
9
fore he was elected Several republican papers
call upon Mr. Pollard to deny the charge, but he
admits it, claiming that it was customary for a
man elected to fill a vacancy to draw pay for the
entire term. Some republicans insist that Mr.
Pollard be renominated.
"'."x
-
THE LAW RELATING to the Pollard salary
grab follows: "Whenever a vacancy occurs
in' either house of congress, by death or other
wise, of any member or delegate elected or ap
pointed thereto, after the commencement of the
congress to which he has been elected or ap
pointed, the person elected or appointed to fill
it shall be compensated and paid from- the time
that the compensation of his predecessor ceased."
While Mr. Pollard and his friends insist that in
accepting the money he was entirely within the
law, others claim that it was an illegal as well
as an immoral act. One lawyer evidently not
friendly to Mr. Pollard says: "That phrase 'after
the commencement of the congress to which ho
has been elected or appointed,' destroys the force
of 'Mr. Pollard's explanation. Mr. Burkett never
entered .into the duties of the congress for which
he was elected. The congress for which he was
elected began March 4, 1905, and it will close
at midnight, March 3, 1907. He sent his resigna
tion to the governor of Nebraska in January,
1905, to take effect March 3, 1905, at midnight.
Of course he never began to serve the term for
which he had been re-elected and, consequently,
Mr. Pollard can not claim the money under that
statute. If congress had meant to cover all cases
where there was a vacancy, it would never have
inserted the phrase, 'after the commencement'
etc."
. HHHE THIRD.jClONFERENCE'of the American
JTepublics opened at Rio de Janeiro July 24.
The "Drago doctrine" was one of the important
' subjects under discussion. This doctrine derives
its name from its exponent, Dr. Luis M. Drago
of Argentina. The Drago doctrine in brief is that
no nation has the right forcibly to undertake to
collect debts owing to its individual citiztr s by
'another nation. The conference at Rio de Janeiro
was asked to, submit to The Hague tribunal, the
, queWonj ''to what' extent, if at all, is the use of
force justifiable in the collection of such debt."
Referring to this doctrine, a writer in the Chi
cago Record-Herald says: "The Drago doctrine
is said by publicists to be merely an expansion
of the Calvo doctrine, dear to the hearts of Latin
Americans, but never engrafted upon interna
tional law. In its essence that doctrine was a
declaration that any claim against a nation by a
foreign citizen, or even a foreign government,
must be adjudicated by its own -courts, and under
no circumstances was a proper subject of diplo
matic representation or negotiation. The United
'States state department has disregarded it,
notably in forcing a settlement of the claims of
the Salvador Improvement company against Sal
vador, and is again pursuing the same course as
to Venezuela in the matter of the asphalt and
other American claims. But the principal basis
of the action of the United States up to this
point has been found in two reasons: First,
an assertion on the part of the United States
that no American citizen, by the mere signature
, of a contract or concession in terms submissible
for construction only to the courts of the grantors,
can cancel the right of his own government to
protect him in his rights, and second, an insist
ence upon the right of the government of the
United States to make sure that there has been
no miscarriage of justice in the" courts, accord
ing to Anglo-Saxon standards of law."
y
' t hi
IN AN EDITORIAL entitled "Bryan's eloquence
and the growing peace sentiment," the Chi
cago Record-Herald says: "Since progress to
ward arbitration must be gradual, the 'model'
treaty drafted by the union excluded questions
affecting national sovereignty and honor. It is
to this limitation tha,t Mr. Bryan, a 'distinguished
guest' at the conference with the right to address
it, raised objections in a speech that seems to
have been singularly persuasive and impressive.
Mr. Bryan urged" the adoption of an amendment
covering to some extent even questions of the
most 'vital' kind. He proposed that any contro
versy over any of the excluded questions should
be submitted by the disputants, severally or
jointly, to an international commission of in
quiry, the decision of the commission not, how-
The Commoner.
over, to have any binding effect. Mere publicity
and delay and sober second thought, Mr. Bryan
argued, would prevent war, in most cases, oven
oyer tho 'vital' questions excluded from the1 scope
or the projected arbitration agreement. It Is cer
tainly a tribute to Mr. Bryan's force and elo
quence that the conference has adopted his very
material 'rider.' His address In support of it
will in due time be reprinted in full on this side
and will be read with Interest, as was his ad
mirable 'Fourth' address on the higher moral
standards which we now demand of nations and
governments. It is a pity Mr. Bryan has no op
portunity to address a body of monarchs, espe
cially of the ''mailed fist' variety, and try the
effect of his magnetic eloquence on them. Tho
noble cause of peace, arbitration and partial dis
armament might be measurably advanced by such
experiments."
A LONDON CABLEGRAM to the New Y6rk
Herald says that Mr. Bryan, interviewed
upon the dissolution of the Russian douriia, said
that the czar's latest move in the struggle with
the peoples' representatives waB a calamity of
the gravest character. Tho Herald's cablegram
quotes Mr. Bryan as saying: "While I should
hesitate to forecast the effect on the empire, I
believe the result can only be the establishment
of a second douma which will have the same
ideas and principles as the recent one. No one
who has been in touch with tho men who com
posed that body can doubt their competency.
They appeared thoroughly representative of the
ablest citizenship, qualified in every particular to
perform the duties of their office. The douma,
though, still lives. Its members in' the future
may be different, but the Russian people have
been given a taste of representation rind the gov
ernment can take no backward step."
JOHN BRISBEN WALKER, formerly owner of
j uie 'LObtnorolifan Magazine, has written an
open letter to Presicu- Roosevelt relating to
the conditions of the packing ic s. A New
York dispatch to the Chicago Record-rier&i y
plalns: "John Brisben Walker has taken up th'e
cudgels in defense of the packers and hag "not
hesitated to rap President Roosevelt' for hia: cru;
sade which resulted in the passage of the 'moat
inspection law by congress. In a letter to the
president which Mr. Walker gave out tonight the
praises of a certain Chicago packing house are
sounded in a way that would make the average
press agent turn green with envy, although Mr.
Walker insists his motives are disinterested.
From the letter it seems that Mr. Walker has
been taking the part of a self-appointed investi
gator of stockyards conditions, and about two
weeks ago sent in a report to the president which
was as far from the Nelll-Reynolds document as
it could be. In his letter to Mr. Roosevelt, due
apparently to the fact that the president neglect
ed to publish Mr. Walker's findings to the world,
it is alleged that extraordinary injustice has been
done to this packing house, and the beef agita
tion is compared to the Dreyfus case."
'"
WILLIAM JEFFERSON POLLARD, of St.
Louis, celebrated as a police magistrate,
has adopted the plan of giving to the men brought
before him charged with drunkenness, the choice
between signing the pledge to abstain from all
intoxicating liquors for a period of one year and
going to the work house. Having signed the
pledge, the offender is required to report to Judge
Pollard twice a week. If he breaks his pledge
he Is sent to the rock pile. A writer in the In
dianapolis News says that of more than two hun
dred men who have signed the Pollard pledge in
the last year, barely three per cent have failed
to keep it This writer ig also authority for the
statement that Tom L. Johnson, mayor of Cleve
land, has a plan which promises to be a worthy
rival- of the Pollard plan. The News writer says :
"Mayor Johnson proposes to establish a sanita
rium for drunkards at the city's farm colony, and
to instruct police magistrates to sentence victims
of the liquor habit to this retreat, instead of to
the workhouse. The city physicians look ask
ance at the scheme and all other Cleveland doc
tors are opposed to it, because, they say, it is
'unprofessional. But Mayor Johnson and the
Rev. H. R. Cooley, directors of the city's chari
ties and corrections department, are both enthu
siastic on the subject, and are experimenting with
several 'jag cures.' As soon as they shall have
found one that seems to be effective the mayor
will have a bill introduced In the legislature to
establish a sanitarium of the sort ho has In mind.,
Pure air and hard work on the city's farm willi
not only rejuvenate tho individuals, ho thinks,
but will result In greater good to socloty than'
any service tho offender could render the city
inside of prison walls. Society makcB drunkards;
why should It not provide tho means of curing
them? Besides, ho believes, the best way to euro
a jng Is to acqulro 'Immediate municipal owner
ship' of it not 'Immediate' as thoy use the Word
in Chicago, but Instnnter, forthwith, before It
has had a chance to do anybody save tho pro
prietor harm. Advocates of municipal ownership
will watch the mayor's experiment with more
than ordinary interest."
THE STAND-PAT ORGANS point with prido
to the fapt that notwithstanding tho ox
treme tariff duties, the Imports as well as tho
exports for the fiscal year just ended, surpass all
previous records. The Springfield (Mass.) Re
publican says: "The manner In which these fig
ures are being used by the, stand-pat people is
calculated to convey the impression that thoy
regard a large foreign trade as a good thing
and that a high tariff in no wise Interferes ex
cept In so far as it operates to reduce undesirable
imports, Wo concede, they scorn to say, that for
eign trade is desirable; but behold the figures
under a high-tariff policyalmost three billions
and increasing every year; and what hotter can
you expect than this under any other policy? Tho
party In power has asked that Its appropriations
for the current fiscal year be considered on a per
capita basis .instead of as a lump sum which is
big enough to cause some misgivings. And wo
arc further asked to compare this per capita ex
penditure with that of other leading nations. Lot
us, then, consider the foreign trade on a per
capita footing and in comparison with certain,
other nations noted either for their free trade or
protection policies: Per capita exports and im
ports: ,irj ' Exports. Import.
United States $. ;..$20.45 $ 14.60
Germany' . . .'. . ; ,V. ' ... V, ,.7i .., . . 224 26.61
France .; .J i.:7.f.T. ..... 23.56 28.12
' fTrtV.1 ,. ly , . - am at -l i
... --.;. 1fr. &&&& VAA.-fcfi? Titt vSil!
THE SPRINGFIELD Republican points out
that "the United States, with the highest
tariff of all, has the smallest foreign trade of
all relative to population. Germany stands next
to us In devotion to the tariff policy, and next
to us also In the relative smallness of its foreign
trade, while the country's experience shows how
baseless is the contention that a high tariff on
imports .and a so-called favorable trade balance
possess necessary relationship. France, also
much given to protective duties, has a per capita
foreign trade about as amall as that of Germany;
while free trade England far exceeds all three
countries mentioned, and the free trade Nether
lands, even more given to commerce than Eng
land, presents figures unapproached by any of
the countries. It Is obvious from this comparison
that protective tariffs are a hindrance to foreign
trade, and the higher the tariff the greater the
hindrance: If we are to find advantage and glory
in foreign commerce, we shall plainly consult
both by effecting tariff reductions. Otherwise we
should see In such foreign trade figures as we
are now able to present a matter for national
commiseration instead of congratulation."
A GOOD STORY concerning the late speaker
of the house of representatives, David B.
Henderson, is related by Harper's Weekly: "Mr.
Henderson's early professional experiences wero
not materially different from those of most young
lawyers. Finally he was retained in an estate
case which involved large interests. The future
speaker was mighty hard up, and he was seriously
thinking of asking the heirs to pay his bill, which
he had never rendered. He was meditating
whether to charge them $200 or $300, when one
of the heirs, representing them all, stepped brisk
ly into his office and, taking out a roll of $500
bills, said: 'Mr. Henderson, I want to pay your
bill,' and commenced laying down these $500 bills
until he had $2,500 before the astonished young
lawyer. Looking up at Mr. Henderson the heir
said: 'Is that enough?' And the lawyer, with
that self-possession which subsequently made him
famous, calmly said: 'Peel off another one and
we will call it square.' "
in
