Evening Republican, Volume 14, Number 81, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 April 1910 — BEVERIDGE GIVES KEYNOTE TO PARTY AT CONVENTION [ARTICLE]

BEVERIDGE GIVES KEYNOTE TO PARTY AT CONVENTION

Arouses wild Enthusiasm Among the Republican Hosts. > 4 —■ - ■ i THE TARIFF IS CHIEF SUBJECT Defines His Position and Demands Further Revision. THE PARTY WILL KEEP FAITH Says Republicans Can Be Trusted and That Action of Democrats Show They Are Not Sincere—lnsists Upon Rariff Commission. .

INDIANAPOLIS, April 5, 1910.—The speech of Senator Beveridge before the Republican State convention today was undoubtedly one of the most ' Important political declarations of recent years, "and was considered by : those who heard it as a clean-cut dec- : laration of his own and his party’s , policies in Indiana. It was given the j very closest attentiop by every one in the great audience and every telling point which he made was cheered to the echo, there being difficulty at times to still the enthusiasm of the delegates and visitors sufficiently for the Senator to proceed. He said: The cominff battle Is not so much bebetween political parties as such as between the rights of the people and the powers of pillage. In this struggle the Republicans of Indiana stand for the people. Our appeal Is not to partisans be- , cause of partisanship but to citizens because of citizenship. It Is another phase of the conflict as old as the Republic. It was so when i Washington fought to lift from the people’s neck the yoke of British oppression; j and the people who were patriots supported him and won. : It was so when Jackson defied secession and broke the power of arrogant apd unwise wealth; and while men of his own party left him, other men of all parties In overwhelming majorities held up Andrew Jackson's hands. ' : f It was so when Abraham Lincoln sought to save the Nation and end slavery ; and loyal men of ail parties forgot ancient party lines and gladly marched to death for the Republic and human rights | It was bo In the last ten years when another President attacked the country’s organized greed which wSs fattening on I the labor and lives of the masses; and again the masses forgot their partisan, ship and in overpowering numbers rallied around Theodore Roosevelt. t The people were for these men because these men were for the people. Defines a Political Party. A political party is not a group of politicians, each with his following, combining to win the spoils of place and power. Such an organization is not . a party—it is a band of brigands, and its appeals In the name of the party are mere attempts 1 to beguile and defraud the voter for its selfish purposes. Such organizations and men are the tools and agents of lawless interests which kn6w no party, attempt to use all parties and practice only the policies of profit. i From such a conception of a political party the Republicans of Indiana must and will forever remain free. The Republican party consists of millions of citl- , zens; and at their firesides sits the only ! council that determines the party's principles and purposes. The Republican party Is the' chlid of the Nation’s con- i sclenoe; It was bom of the mightiest moral Impulse of history; and always its appeal must be a moral appeal. It would be well for the people as a ' Nation and Republicans as a party If , there were a sincere, compact opposition party In the Republic. But there is not i The aggregation of politicians who control the Democratic party today mtsrepre- ! sent honest Democratic voters, and is not i a party at all. but a group of opportunists who repudiate their platform. Disproves democratic Sincerity. Recent events prove this. 'The Democratic party's last national platform declared for free lumber; yet half of the Democratic senators who voted at all voted for the highest duty proposed—a duty Increasing the House rate—on this common necessity for building the homes of the people. That platform pledged them to put on the free list articles competing with trustcontrolled products; yet nearly twothirds of the so-called Democratic senators who voted at all voted sos the highest duty proposed on iron ore, of which we have the greatest deposits on earth, controlled by the steel trust. Exoesslve duties which even protectionists could not tolerate many Democratic senators voted for: and nearly every increase of rates got a Democratic vote. The Democratic ■ platfom declared for postal savings banks; yet every Democratic senator but one, voted against this p6or min's banking bill, even after It had been, amended so as to keep the money collected by the postal savings banks in the communities where It was gathered for the uses of local business. So flagrant has been Democratic betrayal of party pledges that the last Democratic candidate for President. Mr. Bryan, has publicly denounced In scalding words these repudiators of blighted faith In our day, just as Grover Cleveland, the only Democratic President In fifty years, denounced in scalding words the betrayal of Democratic party pledges in his day. For example, a Democratic senator proposed and fought for a heavy duty on tea which would have taxed every table In the land because we must Import our tea. A Democratic senator proposed fend fought for an Increase of one hundred and twehty-elght per oent. over the Dingley rates on pineapples, which would have excluded this product from the table of the masses and the sick-rooms of the poor. Nor Is this the worst. The record shows that on May 18th, when the debate was hardly one-third over, a Democratic senator, speaking for his Democratic colleagues, proposed that a final vote should be taken on the bill Itself on the first of June. No Democrat objected to that proposal. But a Republican senator did object. That Democratic proposal would haye ended the fight, stopped the discussion of the schedules, and prevented such reductions as determined battling by progressive Republicans finally secured.

Democratic Party’s EtU Allies. But why has the mfSrtanted Democratic party fallen on such evil dayaT Ask the followers of Cleveland In New York and he will tell you that the Democratic party In New York la controlled by Murphy’s Tammany Hall In the metropolis and Conner’s Tammany Hail In Buffalo, Utterly Ignorant of the country. profoundly Indifferent to Its needs, and Concerned only In the enormous and purely local loot of the great cities of the Empire State. Ask the follower of Bryan In Illinois and he will tell you that the Democratic party In Illinois Is controlled by Roger Q. Sullivan and Ms Chicago Tammany Hall, allied with all the evil interests In both parties throughout the State of Lincoln and Grant. Ask the follower ot John W. Kerii. ?£ .and he will tell you that the Democratic party In Indiana Is controlled by Thomas Taggart and his Tammany Hall, which prostitutes every ob&slderatton of public welfare to Its ends Just as Murphy's Tammany Hall does in New York and as Sullivan s Tammany Hall does In Illinois. As a Republican. I do not rejoice In this plight of the Tammany controlled end misnamed Democratic party of toWith all my heart I wish Its eteSppts, purpose, record were otherwise, ere It a party which honest men who Her from us could trust and vote for, krmwHig that their filth would not be betrayed. It would be easier to fight for righteousness In our own. But It is not; and SO it is more vital than evCr that the Republican party should be kept true to the people's conscience and the people's Interests. It shall be kept true—lt will be kept true. In fighting for that we are fighting not only for the welfare of our own party, but for the welfare of the American people, and through them, of all humanity. Indeed, the Republican party means the welfare of the nation and of humanity; if It did not, I would not be Interested In It. Tariff the Immediate Question. In this the Immediate question Is thetariff. The misnamed Democratic party In Its convention this month will declare for a tariff for revenue only. I have shown you bf the i*eCor<j that such a declaration Is false pretense. But suppose It were not; a tariff rof revenue only means a, tariff "which will bring In the most revenue. But such a tariff Is a tariff on things which everybody In this country consumes and which nobody In this country produces. That means a tariff on coffee. Will they favor a tariff on coffffee? It means a tariff on tea. Are they for a tariff on tea? It means a tariff on food products which we cannot-raise in this country yet which we must have. Are they for a tariff on these products? The only great modern tariff-for-reve-nue-only country In the world is the United Kingdom, and her tariff revenues are raised on coffee, tea and such products as I have mentioned. A tariff for revenue only places the workingmen and manufacturers of this country on an exact equality with the laborers and manufacturers of Europe and other countries. Do American workingmen and manufacturers want that? A tariff for revenue only has been abandoned by every modern nation on earth excepting only the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom itself is about to abandon it. Shall America, the most advanced of all countries, go back to the tariff methods of China, Turkey and Abyssinia? Shall America now put on what Chamberlain and Balfour in England declare to be the “worn-out and mothiftten revenue system” that the United Kingdom is now casting aside? Germany. France, Italy, Japan, Austria, all the modern world, have protective tariff? —scientific protective tariffs—although their protective tariffs are far lower than our tariff. Shall, we stand alone among the nations On the tariff question as the Democracy oneg urged us to stand alone among the nations on the money question? Shall we be for free trade now as the Democracy urged us to be for free silver then? Indiana for Protective Tariff. The Republicans of Indiana are for a protective tariff which covers thy difference between the ’ cost of production here and abroad. Less than that is unjust to American more than that is unjust to American consumers. And Injustice Is the only foe that protection need fear. It was to reduce the Pingley tariff to meet changed conditions and secure justice that we undertook Jts revision. Our last state platform said; “Protection never wag a matter of schedules. and while reaffirming the timehonored doctrine that there shall be a discrimination In duties that will tully protect the wage earner in the United states, we have never desired a higher rate than would accomplish that purpose. Give protection to the wage-earner? Yes! But give unneeded millions to gigantic interests? No! That was the last platform of Indiana Republicans and that is my platform now. What Beveridge Stands For. At the last session of Congress, in common with other life-long Republicans and protectionists, I fought for such duties In every schedule as would carry out this principle. Like President Taft, I wanted free iron ore. of which we have the greatest deposits on earth and which the Steel Trust chiefly controls. On iron ore no protection is needed, and I could not stand for the duty that was proposed and passed, and I cannot standtor it now. But a majority of Democratic senators did stand and fight for it, and stand for It -now. Like President Taft I wanted many raw materials which need no protection. find duties on which burden American industry, put on the free list—yet only two were so treated. I could not stand for the duties on these articles proposed and passed and I cannot sfknd for them now. Like President Taft, I wanted the an;lent woolen schedule reduced —a schedule forty-two years old, which if ever right, long since has served its purpose; which now gives to the Woolen Trust unfair control of our markets; which oppresses the woolgrower, burdens other woolen manufacturers, raises the price and reduces the weight of the people's clothing. I stood against that schedule when we tried to reduce It; I stood against it when the bill was passed; and I stand against it now’. I could not stand for the duties placed on lumber, out of which the homes of :he people are builded; lumber, of which we are the greatest exporters on earth; lumber, out of which for domestic use and export mighty fortunes have been made; lumber, In the making of mighty fortunes out of which our forests have been ruthlessly slaughtered. I could not stand for the duty proposed on lumber when that schedule was voted on; I could not stand for it when the bill was passed; and I cannot stand for it now. But Democratic senators did stand and fight for It, and stand for it now. Fought Cotton Schedule Increase. I could not stand for an Increase of < duties on cotton cloths, the higher frades of which are used as clothing y every man. woman and child, rich or poor, throughout the whole Republic, i I could not stand for that when the ! evidence was against it and no evidence for it; and when the manufacturers themselves formally declared before the House Committee that their business was thriving, their labor employed and that all they asked was that the tariff on cotton goods should not be decreased. I stood against those Increases on cotton goods when the schedule was voted on; T stood against them when the bill wate passed; and I stand against them now. I” could" not stand tor"an Increase of duty on structurad steel, punched and feady for use, out of which all modern buildings are constructed and with which bridges al over the country are i builded; and I cannot stand for it now. I could not.stAtad for the increase of ' duties on those grades of linoleums which are the bdor thaji’s carpet; or on zinc, which Is a universal necessity; or on sUk. which Is a part of the clothing >r adornment df evnrv tro»rlM« •.»-

man, nelress or working girl; and I cannot stand for them now. ■I could not stand for the obsolete and Ififaihous sugar Schedule, which no man in Indiana can read and understand. but which the Sugar Trust can read and understand; yet determined efforts to change that schedule were opposed by Democratic votes. Only one thing was done to the sugar schedule —a thing insignificant and absurd; we reduced the tariff on refined sugar five cents per one hundred Rounds — one-twentieth of one cent a pound—which was jworse than no reduction 1 because it cannot possibly affect the pflce and therefore is a deception; yet that is one of the boasted reductions we hear of. Above all, I could not stand for the slaughter by the Conference Cofnhiltfee of the modest and moderate beginning of a tariff commission which I wrote Into the bi'l that passed, the Senate; but all save one Democrat were the feriemles-of any tariff commission then and are its enemies now. These are examples of increases. I agalnst them then—l am against them now. Meaningless Decreases. It is said that the law has made reductions on articles entering into the consumption of the people to the value of five billion dollars; yet the bulk of value of those articles is made up of IUCh things as lumber, agricultural impiements, meat and food products, of all of which we are the greatest exporters In the world; steel rails and coal, which,we export; barbed wire, monopolized by the Steel Tiust; nafls, manufactured and sold by an International trust as complete as the in- - ternatlonal tobacco mbnopdly; yarns ; and threads, the raw material for textiles, on which textiles themselves when finished for the people’s use, the tariff was increased; sugar, which was not in fact but only in preterise, etc. These are examples of decreases. • From few If any of them do the people get the slightest benefit. | It Is suggested that all legislation is : compromise—and compromise on 'purely j economic details often is wise; but cotnI promise with sheer injustice always is , wrong. To trade decreases that do not help the people for increases that hurt the people is not honest compromise—-it Is spurious compromise; It is not honest protection—it is a perversion of protection. Extortion is not protection. If a hate should be Increased one thousand per cent, the extortionist would claim that it vyas protection and denounce aAa free trader the real protectionist. Will'lnsist on Revision. I was for a law that would have taken the tariff out of the way of business for ten or a dozen years—and such a law ; could have been Written and it shall be j written. Business needs tariff stability, and only a satisfied people can give tariff stability. The dictate of justice are better for business than the dictates of bosses ; for the people obey justice and defy • bosses. I was for a law that would have protected the wages of every workingman in Indiana and yet enable thift workingman to get his clothing and creature comforts cheaper—and such a law could have been written and it shall ho written. | I. was for a law tsat would have made the position of salaried man and traveling man fiiore secure and yet made less his cost of living—and such a law could ‘ have been written and-shall be written. I The farmer’s prices, the laborer’s wage, the clerk's salary will not be reduced if the enormous and unfair profits of the ; sugar trust, the woolen - trust, the tobacco trust, the oil trust, and other moi nopoiies of the people’s daily necessities j are reduced. No! but the people’s cost of living will be reduced. ! I was for a law that would have given every manufacturer in Indiana ample protection, and yet enable him to get his raw materials cheaper—and shell a law could have been written and it shall be written. I was for a law that would have benefited the farmer and yet reduced the price he pays for tire necessities he buys —and such a law could have been written and it shall be written. , Tariff a Moral Question. , The making 6f a tariff, so long as moderation and Justice are followed, is an economic question; hut the moment excess and injustice are practiced, the making of a tariff becomes also a moral question. So the tariff fight last year wa» a moral fight. And who bore the battle? I i want the people of Indiana to know that all the real fighttijg that was done for Justice in tariff schedules was done by , Republicans and not by Democrats. Not only did the Democrats do no real fighting in the Senate, where all, the real fighting occurred; but when we tried to force the tobacco trust again , to turn over to the government the millions of ctollars of taxes it annually was collecting from the peopßfc-gnd to take from the trust its coupon system, which is its most powerful weapon for Crushing competition, the Democrats of the Senate voted solidly against it. After the Senate had passed that amendment the Conference Committee mangled it and gave back, again to the tobacco trust its coupon sysi All these things and many more the bill contained when, as a conference report, it came to final passage. But passing a bill does not sanctify the wrongs of" its separate paragraphs, I fought and voted against it and for what I consider I plighted honor. I fought and voted against excess and for protection. I I fought and voted against the interests and for the people. I fought and voted | for the genuine Republicanism of Lincoln, the founder of our faith; of Morrell, the j father of our tariff; of Garfield, the tnj terpreter of our principles; of McKinley, the apostle of protection; of Roosevelt, | the captain of the great modern moverI ment for righteousness in American government and American life. The People His faster. When first I was chosen as the people's senator, eleven years ago, I said, 'speak--1 ing to the legislature that elected me; | “The people only are my masters, and to ! the people I will be true.” That has i been my platform since—that is my plat- \ form today. And when that, is no longer my platform. I voluntarily will hand i back my commission, to the people who gave it. But assuming that honest differences of opinion exist—and giving to those upright men who voted for the law as a whole credit for perfect sincerity, what is the way out of the difficulty? Surely not to turn the government over to that grotesque band of politicians in public life and who want to get into public life who today misrepresent the Democratic party. The people know what such men did in the tariff contest in Cleveland's , day, for which Cleveland rebuked them ; ( what they did in the last tariff contest, ; for which Bryan rebuked them. What honest Democrat —what honest citizen—approves or trusts them? Demand* Tariff Commlaaiou. Where, then, lies the plain remedy? In a tariff commission. | Three years ago I presented to the Senate a bill creating such a commission. That idea had back of it at that time more manufacturers, more stock-raisers fndre farmers, more of all the producing interests than any similar measure ever Presented to the Nation's legislature. Yet i that body at that time it had not one single friend; and every Democrat was its enemy. Events have changed all that. The tariff debate helped to change it. The change became so great that a member Of the Finance- Committee itself, Senator McCumber of North Dakota, declared in a powerful speech that this question never could be intelligently or justly settled except. by the aid of a tariff commission. Yet every Democratic senator except Senator Newlands remains Its enemy. A tariff commission Is the one great piece of constructive legislation the Nation needs and demands to settle tho tariff question. It is wicked and absurd that the interests of all the producing elements of the country—manufacturers, farmers, stock-raisers, merchants, workingmen and other* —should longer be mere cards played by politicians for their own political advancement and pecuniary welfare. We have a Bureau of Corporations, a Bureau of Labor, an Immigration Commission, Monetary Commission to gather tfie facts on all these subject*— yet all these facts put together are not ao Intricate and difficult as the 'facts a tariff commission must gather.. Republican!* New Favor Plaa. When I Introduced the tariff eotnmlsalon bill three years ago I said that It had no friends In Congress. Today a ufrge majority of Republicans are for R, and But" had only a few friends in Congress. ! Therefore I fait that it was imoosaihla to

get a rull Hedged tkrut commission enacted into law; and so I acted on the theory of getting the best I could, and It proved a fatal theory. For what was the’ result? I drew the provision authorizing the President to appoint persons with fall power to make tariff Investigations under his direction Senator Aldrich would not agree to all of it. He struck out or changed vital language. Yet what remained of my provision gave these persons broad powers to gather necessary facts to aid Congress in tariff legislation. In this form it passed the Senate. But the Conference Committee struck out absolutely every word giving those persons any powers to Investigate and collect the facts, leaving to the President nothing but the authority to employ persons to assist him in the administration of the maximum and minimum section of the law. Senator Hale, the senior member of the Conference Committee, declared again and again on the floor at the Senate that the Conference Committee had done this for the express purpose of depriving these persons of any power whatever to gather facts or to do any work which a tariff commission could do, And no senator denied the trythfulnese of Senator Hale's statement ag a matter of fact nor his correctness as a matter of .Jaw .after he had made his determined assault. President Taft’s Efforts. , President Taft, by executive construction. has attempted to restore to th«se persons he Is authorized to employ, some of the powers that the Conference Committee purposely destroyed. But executive 'oonstructlon can not restore powers that Congress deliberately refused to give. EVen If It could, another President might construe it differently; and •Ay President at any time can discharge the sO-oallej tariff board. A commission of experts as permanent as the Department of the Government, with duties fully prescribed in the law Itself; a commission safe from the accidents of politics, secqre frbm the dlfferlflf opinions of changing Presidents; a commission equal to that of Germany Or Japan—that la what the Government needs, that is what the Nation demands and that is what we will have. Work of Republican Party. Republican law and administration has stopped rebating by railroads, has regut Jatgd railway rates and established the principle that the Government can protect the shipper from discrimination, dishonesty and abuse. Republican law and administration has limited the powers of eased meats, poisoned foods and Impure drugs. But much remains to be done. The States oan not do it. These trusts are formed under the laws of States which clothe them With their powers and issue to them letters of marque and re, prlsal to sail the seas of trade throughout the whole Republic, sinking honest merchantmen wherever they find them and levying tribute wherever they go. They must b#vbrought under the guns o" national authority, stripped of their unrighteous power and made to serve the people by honest methods and for fair profit instead of being permitted to rob the people by dishonest methods and for outrageous profits. Theodore Roosevelt urged this plan. President Taft has recommended it in his message. I proposed it in my* debate with Mr Bryan. It is,right in principle; but no bill bringing these gigantic Corporations beneath the power of the Nation’s government must permit any of the evUs which they practice under the aiftfaority of State government. No such law must perpetuate the wrongs that trusts- commit today under the protection of wtate governments. Any law for this greattend must be carefully drawn in the interests of all the people, to protect all hdnest business. And the time has come % hen all laws are read and studied before they are passed. The time has gone v hen statutes are enacted on faith. A kind of public man has appeared who I joes upon the theory that “faith witiout works is dead.” —-—lnsists on Injunction - LnTr. | The possibility of abusing the riglit of injunction must be prevented. Every Snan should have his dav in court—that is the first great maxim of law-madeii liberty and liberty-made law. This i3£ the foundation of the people’s respect fort and obedience to the courts. To give to, the laboring man his day in court on any injunction .against him gives him nothing more than his just rights, and takes from the employer none of his Just rights. On the one hand it takes from the laborer’s heart,, his sense of wrong and from the censcienceless agitator his chief argument ; while on the other hand It puts the employer to no disadvantage if he is in the right, and denies him improper advantages if he is in the wrong. It quenches the fires of unrest; it strengthens the Nation's faith in the courts, and it does all this- by securing justice. Justice is the sovereign word of public peace and human welfare.

The Party of Conservation. Republicans started the movement to save from the interests the natural resources of the Nation. The hands of monopoly and greed already have seized upon billions of doUars worth of these sources of our prosperity, and they now are reaching out for still more. They shall not have them. Our natural resources must be developed not in the interest of a privileged few, but for the benefit of all the people. Coal' in the United States has long Since passed into private hands; yet the Nation still owns enough in Alaska to supply fuel to American consumers for centuries to come. That coal land must be kept the property of the people. Before the Senate Committee on Territories, of which .I am chairman, private interests testified that on one single coal field in Alaska a net profit of two hundred million dollars can be made. If such profits are possible, the people should get part of them.

I a tn sorry that no Democrat ever thought of or proposed any of these great policies; for they are so broad and great that they are policies of patriotism and not policies of partisanship. And. yet no Democrat in public life ever did propose a single one of them. No Democrat in public life proposed the railway rate' law; that law was Republican in origin and enactment. No Democrat proposed the conservation of natural resources; that was Republican in origin and execution, and will be Republican in enactment. No Democrat proposed the meat inspection law; that was Republican in origin and enactment. No Demo M-at proposed the pure food law; that was Republican in origin and enactment. No Democrat proposed the child labor law; that was Republican in origin and will be In enactment. No Democrat proposed the employers’ liability law; that was Republican In origin and enactment. And whatever the so-called Democratic party has proposed before an election, enough of the men who were elected on those proposals repudiated them after the election to nullify them. The Republican party has its shortcomings and its faults, for it is human Yet it is our glory that within the Republican party there is always a saving and regenerating Influence springing from the conscience of its voters which corrects its mistakes and In the end brings it true to the nation’s higher destiny and to human welfare And It Is a misfortune of the Democratic party that even good men like Tllden, Cleveland and Bryan could not save It from the dark and forbidding Influences which brought its promises to naught. With this truth of history before them, will any patriotic citizen vote to give other ffreat affairs to the management of such men? Take for example the Panama Canal—the mightiest work of human Rands. The process of wedding the world’s greatest oceans is being accomplished even as I speak. That, too, was Republican in origin, enactment and execution. The Panama Canal will be remembered when all other legislation of today Is forgotten. What citizen is willing to trust that vast enterprise to the associated Tammany Halls of the nation? Fighting for the Right. To me public life has but one meaning’; to me this Republic "has but one meaning. It Is this: hgre qre mllHonß of human beings. Not one of these millions asked to be born, yet horn we were without our consent. Not one Of us asks to die, yet ffle we must without our cohsent. And in the brief space between birth and death all of us except the favored few have a hard enough time. What can be dohe to make the load of all these millions lighter? That Is what ciVlirzhttbn means to me. What can be done to help the American people give an examnla m all the world of the orosru*

ot civilization and human contentment? ,s all P u *>Uc life means to me The success of a party as such means 1)111 success of a party as U is the agent of human welfare means everything. I want the Republican party to be that Instrument. It nrnst be. It shall be. It will be. It Is. Away with suggestions of Individual power, pro lit or career! Awhy with for P art y advantage! Up with the banner ot Justice! Ud with the flgg of human rights! And let us carry Tt to the endof the eon diet knowing that the tyelfare of the people Is the only thing worth workingfor, wqrth living tor. and, as our fathers have shown us, the only thing worth dyln* for. Up with the banner i'jxwum;. sx: lata victory.