yvrw frmji v
o
The Commoner
MARCH, 1917
ii
rtr r;- -ifr
Congressman Shallenberger's Speech
The House of Representatives in commlttoo
of the whole on the state of tho" union had un
der consideration on February 16, 1917, the
army appropriation bill. Below is printed part
of the debate in which Congressman Shallen-
berger of Nebraska participated. Ed.
Mr. Shallenberger. Mr. Chairman, on yester
day the gontleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Gardner) made a reference to Mr. Bryan and
his action in the face of conditions that confront
the country now,, and I endeavored to interrupt
him to ask him a question, but he declined to
yield. Later I asked two minutes in which to
address the house on the same question and
again that opportunity was denied me. So I take
the opportunity now before I begin my address
upon tho bill before the committee to ask again
the gentleman from Massachusetts, who I see is
here, whether or not he voted for" tho navy ap
propriation bill which lately passed the house?
Mr. Gardner. No. I was in New York, and
I telephoned over to Mr. Roberts of Massachu
setts, or made inquiries through the telephone
clerk, of Mr. Roberts, and he said he had a great
quantity of votes and it was absolutely unneces
sary for me to come over. Whereupon I asked
to be paired in its favor. I asked them .to get
me a general pair, which they did.
Mr. Shallenberger. I will call attention: to
the fact that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Mann) introduced an amendment on that bill,
as follows:
"On page 60, after line 23, insert: 'It is here
by reaffirmed to be the policy of tho United
States to adjust and settle its international dis
putes through mediation or arbitration, to the
end that war may be honorably avoided.' "
I would like to ask the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts if he agrees to that amendment?
Mr. Gardner. I will say to the gentleman
that I should have raised a point of order
againstthat, and it would have gone out. It is
absolutely and historically untrue. We never
had such a policy.
Mr. Mann. Is the gentleman aware that that
was inserted without controversy?
Mr. Gardner. Absolutely without contro
versy, because people did not know what was
being said.
Mr. Stafford. I want to callthe gentleman's
attention
Mr. Gardner. It is absolutely of no conse
quence, anyway.
Mr. Stafford. - The gentleman may think it is
of no 'consequence. "
Mr. Mann. It was inserted in the naval bill
of last year.
Mr. Shallenberger'. I was in the house when
it was adopted without a dissenting vote, and
there was no objection.
Mr. Gardner. And we have never used ar
llLtratiori in order to prevent war.
MVMjirvV'ill the gentleman yield the floor
long enough
Mr. Gardner. That -is for the, gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr."Shallenberber) to say.
Mr. Shallenberger. I yield to the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Mann).
Mr. Mann. The gentleman knows that the
same thing was inserted in the naval bill last
year, the current law$ -jwjthout any opposition
from anybody atthat:m:
Mr. Shallenberger. TjSnJtaware of that fact,
and therefore I wanted tb be sure that the gen
tleman from Massachusetts opposes that amend
ment. Mr. Bryan has devoted his whole' life to
this thing at issue right now in this dispute to
the sentiment and idea contained' in the Manri
amendment.
Mr. Gardner. The issue with the President,
who is not advocating mediation and arbitra
tion, is that what you meatyt?
Mr. Shallenberger. That is not what I meant,
and that is not the question at issue here. I
would like to say that those of us who know Mr.
Bryan in Nebraska know that one of the chief
reasons that induced him" to take a position in
the cabinet, and he stated it often, was the hope
that he might have the honor of bringing about
arbitration treaties between this nation and the
rest of the world. -The charge of the gentle
man from Massachusetts in his speech on yes
terday was that Mr. Bryan was "trying to tear
the nation asunder." Mr. Bryan has stated both
publicly and privately that ho considered It as
perhaps the greatest honor over pormlttod him
in his life when ho was permitted to prepare
and negotiate 30 arbitration treaties whereby
we would be enabled to settlo international dis
putes in accordance with tho precepts of this
particular amendment rather than on tho bat
tle field.
Mr. Gardner. Mr. Chairman, will the gentle
man yield there?
Mr. Shallenoerger. Yes.
Mr. Gardner. WaB Mr. Bryan able to mako
one of thoso treaties with Germany?
Mr. Shallenberger. He was not,
Now, I want to call the attention of the house
to the fact that if tho gentleman from Masaa-'
chusetts disagrees with this amendment, ho Is
in disagreement with this house and In disagree
ment with his own party, as shown by the roll
call on thtft bill. .The naval bill is tho most im
portant measure of national defense to be passed
in the American congress; and tho gentleman
from Massachusetts, the most ardent advocate,
and I will say an able one, of a policy of pre
paredness on the part of the nation, was not
here to do his duty when tho bill was voted up
on. The house by a vote of 340 to 22 voted to
carry that proposition. Tho arbitration amend
ment was in the bill and that is the thing that
Mr. Bryan has stood for during all these years.
Mr. Gardner. Does tho gentleman think tho
house is 340 to 22 against the proposition of
tho President on this question of .submarine
warfare?
Mr. Shallenberger. I know the house is with
the President, but I also know that arbitration
is the policy this house voted for.
Mr. Madden. Mr. Chairman, will the gentle
man yield?
Mr. Shallenberger. Yes.
Mr. Madden. Does the gentleman believe
with the Washington Times that this amend
ment was inserted in the bill surreptitiously?
Mr. Shallenberger. No. On the contrary, I
believe that this amendment was inserted in the
bill openly and with the full knowledge of the
membership of the house here. I can not con
sider it as having been done iri any other way.
Now, I want to say, Mr. Chairman, that I have
been somewhat maligned myself on some of
these matters, and I believe that a great in
justice has been done to Mr. Mann, one of tho
ablest citizens- of the United States, one or tno
truest patriots of this country; and also an in
justice has been done to this houso when such
.an editorial as that was published in the paper
mentioned. Such slanders of public men are a
disgrace to the newspaper profession, and to
American civilization as well.
Mr. Madden. Mr. Chairman, will the gentle
man yield for one more suestion?
The Chairman. Does the gentleman from
Nebraska yield to the gentleman from Illinois?
Mr. Shallenberger. Yes.
Mr. Madden. Then the gentleman does not
believe it would be possible to sneak such an
amendment into the bill-without the house un
derstanding what it was?
Mr. Shallenberger. No. sir. I do not believe
it for a moment.
Mr. Gardner. Mr. Chairman, will the gentle
man yield?
Mr. Shallenberger. Yes.
Mr. Gardner. Can the gentleman explain how
'this important amendment could bo passed
"without our having any information on it be
forehand? Mr. Shallenberger. That was because it was
tho opinion of the house it should be adopted.
Mr. Gardner. Does the house usually re
main silent when a matter is brought up in
which the house is vitally interested?
Mr. Shallenberger. It is, when the maUer,
in the opinion-of the whole house, ought to go
in the bill.
Mr. Mann. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. Shallenberger. Yes.
Mr. Mann. The same proposition was con
tained in the naval bill whichjvas passed a year
ago .ItSa-the current law. I offered ray amend
ment in about the same place in the bill -when
wo reached about tho same place in tho naval
bill this year,
. Mr. Shallenberger. Yea; thd same as It wu
before.
Mr. Mann. Anybody watching tho proceed
ings with respect to tho naval bill and attend
ing to business and knowing about tho matter
would havo boon Informed.
Mr. Shallonbergor. Mr Chairman, I have re
ferred to this matter because Mr. Bryan is not
hero to spoak for himself If ho wore horc, he
would not need mo as a feeble advocato for
Mr. Tllaofc. Mr. Chairman, will tho gentle
man ylold?
Mr. Shallenberger. Yes.
Mr. Tllson. Is It not a fact that HiIh nmnnrl.
ment spoken of was subject to a point of order,
and ono objection would havo put It out?
Mr. Shallonbergor. Yes; certainly.
Mr. Sherley. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman
will permit, tho rule and custom of the houso
is that tho man In charge of a bill shall protect
that bill from extraneous matter. There are
many of us who aro required to bo almost con
stantly in commltteo, and thoroforo do not have
tho opportunity to mako tho objections that thoy
would mako If thoy were on tho floor, and we
must go on the assumption that extraneous mat
ters will not bo introduced Into a bl.l.
Mr. Shallonbergor. I do not think that ex
traneous matters should bo intro'duccd into a
bill.
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, will tho gontle
man ylold?
Mr. Shallenberger. Yes.
Mr. Gordon. When that amendment waapf
fored by the gentleman from Illinois (Mrann)
I went to Mr. Padgett, the chairman of tho com
mittee on naval affairs, and suggested that ho
mako a point of order against It, and ho said. "I
do not caro anything about It."
Mr. Shallenberger. He accepted It.
The point is, Mr. Chairman, that tho gentle
man from Massacuhsotts (Mr. Gardner)
charged that Mr. Bryan was "tearing the nation
asunder" by advising arbitration rather than
war as a settlement of international disputo. I
do not myself subscribe wholly to that doctrine,
Thoro aro things I would not arbitrate. If Ger
many deliberately sinks our ships upon tho high
seas, with Jobs of American lives, In tho face of
tho President's solemn warning, then thoro Is
nothing but the arbitrament of arms loft to us
in honor. Buf tho charge is Implied that Mr?.
Bryan is not standing by the President. I believe
ho is and will continue to stand by hlni in peace
or in war. He has stood by him when he needed
support in times past, and ho wll do so as a pat
riot In the future. Ho will not fall him in the
hour of war, if war must come, any more than
ho has failed him in time of peace.
Now, there Is a sharp division or opinion be
tween Mr. Bryan and the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts (Mr. Gardner) at this time as to what
should be our national policy. Mr. Bryan is a
manvof great personal magnetism and courage,
and I believe the gentleman from Massachusetts
is tho same. They both responded to the call
to arras in the Spanish-American war and were
willing to go forth and die for their country;
and although I believe they are passed military
ago now, their patriotism and courage aro such
that they would do so again if their country
called. Mr. Bryan, with his great personal in
fluence throughout tho country, is doing the
best ho can to keep our country out of war,
whereas the gentleman from Massachusetts
seems to bo doing the best he can do goad this
country Into war, and I am willing to abide br
tho verdict of the country as to which of these
two gentlemen is serving his country the best la
thiamine of peril. Mr. Bryan went into this
struggle to keep the country out of war. He
may meet defeat here, as he has met defeat
many times before. But defeat does not destroy
a great man. It takes a real man to suffer de
(Continued on Pago 23.)
000000000000000
'
WANTED THE NAMES AND AD- 0
DRESSES OP ALL DEMOCRATIC AND
INDEPENDENT VOTERS WHO ARE
-WELLING TO ASSIST MB. BRYAN IN
DRIVING THE LIQUOR INTERESTS
OUT OP THE NATION. &
ft
0 0 0 0
'