Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 1, 1922)
t WWPWtm. 'j'"i,?p,,T v- f The Commoner FEBRUARY, 1922 s The South Not for Protection Mr John H. Kirby of Texas, president of the southern Tariff association, is prophesying that ho solid south will be broken unless the Democrats abandon their low tariff policy. In an interview given 'out from "Washington, Mr. Kirby said: "I feel commissioned to warn the Democratic leaders and members of the Senafe that, unless they repudiate the tariff policy announced by Minority Leader Kitchin on the floor of the House, April 14, 1921, and accepted by a large majority of the" Democratic members of the House, then the solid South will be broken." Mr. Kirby takes exception to a sentiment ex pressed by Mr. Kitchin as follows: Quoting Mr. Kitcliin's address to the effect that "a sensible protectionist will go to the party that has taught and practieed protection for fifty years and not to the party who has always opposed it," Mr. Kirby said "against this announcement we place the demands of every productive industry in the South for a protective tariff on raw materials and the signature of 80 per cent of the bankers of our leading Southern states.' Mr. Kirby claims to represent eighty per cent of the bankers of the Southern states in his advocacy of protection'. This is nqt the first time that Mr. Kirby has made this prediction and he is not the first Southern protectionist to speak in this vein. But he has been a false prophet heretofore like other- Southerners hold ing his views and there is no indication that they are wiser now than they have been. The tariff question is not a new one and the principle involved in it is quite well understood. It is taxation of the many for the benefit of the few the few like it, the many object to it when they understand it. Not one Southern voter in ten can be benefited by a protective tariff, probably not one in fifty. Mr. Kirby hap pens1 to be one of the ones who would be bene fited because he deals ikv lumber, but must of the people of the south buy lumber, and they are no more anxious to contribute unnecessarily to Mr." Kirby's wealth than they are to the wealth of New England beneficiaries of protection. The men who benefit by high tariff have loud voices and they make enough out of the tariff to enable them to go tc Washingtpn or :to send agenta tnere to make known their views. The tax payers are the forgotten people who bear the burden bu.t cannot be heard except through their senators and members. Fortunately, the senators and members from the South have, as a rule, been loyal to the masses rather than to the privileged few. Mr. Kitchin is conspicuous ly so, therefore he incurs the criticism of Mr. Kirby and those of this kind. But Mr. Kitchin has incurred that sort of criticism throughout his entire career. Instead of its injuring him he fattens on it. W. .J. BRYAN THE NEWBERRY VERDICT By a small majority. Mr. Newberry has es caped expulsion. He secured the votes of all the Republicans but nine (excluding those ab sent and paired). It was not a very glorious triumph but it was enough to assure him a senator's salary and' enough, to besmirch his Party in the Senate. The Democratic party oted solidly to unseat him and Senators Bornh. Upper, Jones, Kenyoh, Ladd, LaFollette, Nor beck Norris and Sutherland, (Republicans), voted with the Democrats. Mr. Newberry has 2n0Iu0 be grateful that the vote was delayed unui the Republicans secured an overwhelm ing majority in the Senate; if the case had been aecided by the last Senate he would have been thrown out. in Bn t the IntorestJng part of the subject is not JJ the vote. That might have been expected iz yfe cnsider the part that money plays in republican campaigns; the, wording of the reso anlJ? amusine." The Republican majority Cp? to deordorize its vote by a, con Sn10nx of such expenditures as character B?vi. Newberry's election. The resolution thf run ,,at wnether the amount expended in ub (Michigan) primary was $195,000 as was S,reprted or openly acknowledged or in v ere were some few thousand dollars caJ t si the amunt expended was itl either beon 2 large' mucu larger than ought to have ceqq vf Pended- ' ThQ 'expenditure of such ex a31ve Bums in behalf; .of a oanditfate EITHER. Sary ?? .ZlLyS tote honor and dignity of the SeSe and dangerous exce sWrSnn0' a iTQ eovernmetfch nounced by the Republican Senate. If the judos Renuhil5nyideV,elopod a 8enSG of mor as the Republican leaders, seem to havo they could acquit most any influential man by the adoption of-, the same plan : Resolved ; that we set the' ac cused; free but wo Want it distinctly Understood that wo heartily condemn the methods by 'which he ushered his victim into 'eternity. u If -some; prominent man is accused of em bezzlement oi? other form of stealing, the jury can .include in the verdict of acquittal an indig nant protest against the thioviBh methods em ployed by the accused in appropriating the money of others. If Senator Newberry is at all sensitive on the subject he WILL resign; how must he feel as he mingles with his colleagues and recognizes that those who refused to ex'pol him tell the world that the expenditures of such excessive sums on behalf df a candidate "either with or without his consent" is "contrary to sound pub lic policy, harmful to the honor and dignity of the Senate and dangerous to the perpetuity of a free government." The Republicans have framed an indictment against themselves by seating a man who per mitted if he did not commit a wrong that is disgraceful to the body in which he sits and dangerous to the perpetuity of the government from which he draws a salary. W. J. BRYAN. HAM-STRINGING THE BONUS Some, of the Republican leaders are propos ing to raise money for the soldiers' bonus by special tax on particular articles an automobile tax, a gasoline tax, and a one per cent increase in postage being suggested among other forms of taxation. It would be a great mistake to attach the bonus to any particular tax; it would at once array against the soldiers those upon whom the burden would fall. They would feel, and with some justification, that they were be ing made to bear more than their share of the expense of the bonus. Where one soldier would be benefited a half-dozen or dozen tax payerB would be irritated. The soldiers' service was to the entire country and the tax should be paid out of the general fund. If to pay the bonus it js necessary to de vise new forms of taxation, lH the new taxes be paid into the general fund so there will bo no visible connection between the tax and the bonus. If any special tax is imposed it should be im posed upon the fortunes created by the war; the millionaires who got rich out of the war or prof ited in a special Way are indebted to the sol diers who fought while the profiteers made the money. It would be more than poetic justice to make those who especially benefited contribute to those who rendered special service, but it 'is too much to expect that this congress will tax 'the profiteers for the benefit of the soldiers; it was this congress that postponed considera tion of the bonus bill until after the tax on ex cess profits was repealed. W. J. BRYAN. PRESIDENT ELIOT ON PROHIBITION On another page will be found the remarks of Dr. Charles W. Eliot, president emeritus of Harvard university, before a committee of the Massachusetts legislature. Special attention is called to Dr. Eliot's testimony because his posi tion is somewhat different from that occupied by most others who go before such committees. He did not become a TEETOTALER until after he was EIGHTY years old. He did not become an advocate of prohibition until war prohibition was enacted. He cannot be called a "fanatic" and he expressly disclaims being a WJWoy. As a loyal citizen he favors the ENFORCE MENT OF LAW; he is a citizen of Massachusetts and wants- his state to be in sympathy with the sentiment of the nation. He is now convinced that prohibition is not only a WISE measure but a NECESSARY measure if our nation is to bessaved from intemperance and from the evils that follow in the wake of intemper- aDIt 'is time for every friend of law and order to sneak out; The line is being drawn more and mo? fo?early between those who respect the gov more cieariy uej ? whQ ftre law. foT Dr E'liot'fappea? ought to influence all the intellectuals who are yet standing out against prohibition if there be any such. Strike or What? Mr. Gompors has spoken out strongly against any system of compulsory arbitration. Ho is right. Compulsory arbitration, whothor the pow er bo deposited in a board or a Judge, is out of harmony with the Bpirlt of our institutions. Arbitration implies a finding that can Do en. forced how can a finding be enforced in the Uiuted States? Suppose a boai'd or court is par tial to the labor side of the dispute and issues an order that amounts to a confiscation of the property of the employor would ouch an order stand? No one thinks so. But suppose, as:is more likely, the board or judge' is partial to the employer's side. Can an order be enforced against an employee if, In ef fect it condemns him to involuntary servitude? Surely such an order would not stand. And yet these are the alternatives whon arbitration is compulsory. It all depends upon the bias of-tho man who decides. Everyono is more or less biased, oven though unconscious of bias. Ho may not admit the bias, but you can prove it on him. Tell him suddenly, of a dispute between capital and labor and the answer ho makes before investigation will indicate his bias. i i The employers will always try to secure arbi trators who are biased their way arid the la boring men will try just as hard to securo arbi trators who are biased for their side. General ly, a board is made up of men all of whom, ex cept one, are known to be biased in favor of ono side or the other. The ono man is supposed to bo unbiased but ho never is. The only question is' whether both sides will gamble on his bias or whethor one side will secretly know where he stands. Mr. Gompors is right in opposing compulsory arbitration. Ho is right in suspecting arbitra tion, even when it is voluntary, because 'of tho uncertainty as to the supposedly unbiased man. But what has Mr. Gompers to suggest as an al ternative? The strike? The employers who op pose arbitration have the lockout to fall back on. But what about tho public MAe interested third party? It furnishes the money for the employees' wages and for the employers' prof its. . It is not time for it to have Jttf day in court? Labor must not bo surprised if the pub lic, in desperation, turns to arbitration as a matter of self-protection, if it can find nothing better. The public do not regard either tho strike or the lockout as tho BEST thing in sight. Labor has a chance to win this fight by propos ing a plan that will protect tho public and at the same time do justice to employer and em ployee. INVESTIGATION Is better than arbi tration investigation with reports that are not binding in law but which will guide tho public to an intelligent expression of sympathy. A large percentage of the people desire justice be tween employer and employee. If they are per mitted to underst&nd the contest they will throw their influence on tho side of justice, but how can they use their influence without know ing the facts? And how can they be -sure of tho facts if they have nothing but ox parte state ments before them? The doctrine of "investigate before-you shoot" has spread over the world and is destined to ex ert a powerful influence in the prevention of war. Why not investigate before strike or lock out? If investigation provides a remedy for in ternational difficulties why may it not provide a remedy 'for industrial disputes? Truth is not afraid of tho light. The Bible tells us of those who "love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil." Why not seek- light through investigation and then leave the find ings of the board to rest upon their merits and to persuade according to their weight? Tho principle embodied in this remedy has received practically unanimous endorsement in this coun try and throughout almost the entire civilized world. Why not apply it to industry? If it can bring peace between different races and lan guages, may it not bring peace between citizens and neighbors? W. J. BRYAN. A BOY'S REPORT On another page will be found a report of one of Mr. Bryan's speeches made by Francis J. Duke, of Richmond, Va a student at Saint Christopher's Boy's School and published in The Pine Needle, the school paper. It Is reproduced because it is one of the most accurate and faith ful pieces of condensed' reporting that has como to Mr. Bryan's notice. The boy. who did it dis played unusual journalistic talent. This report was scheduled to appear in the January issue of The Commoner, but waa omitted owing to lack of space. UM 'A -. N 4, ' . Mite V3 ?l' J f '. ri