Mr. Norbeck stands apart from these contemporaries. He has not always, but often done his own thinking and made his own decisions, notably in the Newberry case, when every last Senator who could possibly be controlled was marshalled for a whitewash by the administration forces. At that time, it should be remembered to his credit, Mr. Norbeck was one of the few whom the regulars regarded as "hopeless."

Mr. George Wharton Pepper, of Pennsylvania, comes next. When Penrose died, Mr. Pepper was appointed his successor, being seated January 10, 1922-while the Newberry fight was raging and only two days before the final vote. Penrose would have supported Newberryism; so did Mr. Pepper. Because of his prominence and fine ability, it was expected he would not sanction this scandal, but he then took a stand with the organization and has since remained a regular, not occasionally, but invariably. In personal character they were as widely separated as the poles; it would be difficult, however, to discover a vital Senate controversy in which Mr. Pepper has not taken a position quite in harmony with the record of his predecessor.

There are five other "tombstone Senators" in the group we are considering-members whose predecessors died in office. They are:

Mr. Porter H. Dale, of Vermont, who entered the Senate November 7, 1923, to fill the unexpired term of Williaw P. Dillingham, deceased.

Mr. William M. Butler, of Massachusetts, who took the place of Henry Cabot Lodge on November 13, 1924.

Mr. Rice W. Means, of Colorado, who succeeded Samuel E. Nicholson on December 17, 1924, after a brief service of Alvah Adams, the latter having been appointed until the special election.

Mr. Hiram Bingham, of Connecticut, who on December 17, 1924, succeeded Frank B. Brandegee. Mr. George H. Williams, of Missouri, appointed on May 25, 1925, to fill the term of Selden D. Spencer, which, like that of the others, expires March 4, 1927. So far, of course, Mr. Williams has no Senate record, there having been no session since he got the toga.

Of these, little need be said, excepting that they are pronouncedly pro-administration; in other words, Republican regulars.

The case of Mr. Butler, however, is different. He is much more than a Coolidge adherent: he stands out as a Coolidge sponsor and spokesman. What Mr. Stearns is to Coolidge personally, Mr. Butler is politically. When Coolidge faced the 1924 campaign for the Presidency, he made Mr. Butler Chairman of the Republican National Committee, a position still held by this Senator, one that gives him a prom

inence in the Senate to be gained otherwise only by years of seniority. Politically, Mr. Butler is a strict party Republican. Industrially, he is a cotton manufacturer, with four plants the Butler Mill, the Quissett Mill, the Hoosac Cotton Mills and the New Bedford Cotton Mills-the assets of which Moody's Manual places at $16,514,154. On December 31, 1924, the capital stock of these enterprises was $7,765,000 with "surplus and reserves" amounting to $7,647,840, the latter income tax exempt. All of these properties appear highly profitable. In addition to its regular return, the New Bedford Company paid a 200% stock dividend in 1922. These mills turn out fine cotton goods and, of course, are protected by the maximum duties under the FordneyMcCumber Tariff Law, approximating from 40 to 45%. The Butler interests extend also to public utilities, he being President of the Boston and Worcester Electric Companies, a holding concern, and the Boston and Worcester Street Railway Company. Mr. Butler is, in a way, the Mellon of Massachusetts. His training for public life was in the Murray Crane school.

Seven of the Senators whose terms expire next year are Democrats. Were the Senate controlled by a Democratic majority, they would have appeared first in these introductions; but, being of the minority, of course they had to bring up the rear. Such is their standing in all situations under the existing party order of preference and preferment.

The senior of this group is Mr. Lee S. Overman, of North Carolina, who has been a Senator since 1903.

Next is Mr. Duncan U. Fletcher, of Florida, who began in 1909.

Mr. Ellison D. Smith, of South Carolina, also started Senatorial service at that time.

Six years later, in 1915, Mr. Oscar W. Underwood, of Alabama, graduated from the House into the upper legislative body.

Mr. Edwin S. Broussard, of Louisiana, donned the toga in 1921, as did Mr. Thaddeus H. Caraway, of Arkansas.

Mr. Walter F. George, of Georgia, took this office November 22, 1922.

Of these, Mr. Underwood has announced that he will not seek reelection. Doubtless the other six will.

As Democrats, being of the minority during the period we are considering, they have had little opportunity to frame or to influence legislation. The significant thing is that almost without exception their attitude has been directly opposed to that of the Republican regulars.

Moreover, in every vital controversy, wherever it was possible for a triumph of public welfare over "the administration program," such as the defeat of

the Mellon plan, that result was due to the almost unanimous Democratic stand against the powers that be.

Recently the tendency has been for both the old parties to become political, rather than statesmanlike, but it can be said that a very real and fundamental difference does exist between Republicans and Democrats, at least as demonstrated in the Senate. Insofar as tariffs and taxes, both direct and indirect, are concerned, they are radically and traditionally different.

Out of protection and privilege, modern monopoly has developed to great, proportions. Naturally the predatory part of the population, by reason of its dependence upon the favors of government, would align itself more with the party most generally in power. Perhaps that is largely the explanation; but it does not alter the fact that Democratic Senators as a whole have quite consistently opposed the trend toward monopolization. In all the more outstanding controversies, they have voted, most of them sincerely and understandingly, one must believe, with the Independent Republicans.

What stands out, above and beyond all else, is the fact that the very body and heart and soul of the dominant machine is to be found in the list of Republican Senators who come before you for reelection in 1926.

First, there is the chairman of that party's national committee-Mr. Butler.

Second, the President pro tempore of the Senate -Mr. Moses.

Third, the Majority Leader-Mr. Curtis.

Fourth, the Assistant Floor Leader-Mr. Watson. Fifth, the Secretary of the Caucus-Mr. Wadsworth.

Sixth, the Republican "whip"-Mr. Jones.

As to committee influence, this group is all-powerful. It holds sixteen of the thirty-four chairmanships, many of them most important, like Finance, Rules, Judiciary, Interstate Commerce, Military Affairs, Public Lands, etc. It has half, or more than half, the majority membership on all the crucial committees. When legislation reaches the conference committee stage, which determines the final form of measures, this group has one or more voices and votes with respect to all issues involving appropriations, revenue, railroads, banking, commerce, the army, the navy, the post office, the judiciary, public lands, civil service, elections, Indian affairs, territories, pensions and patents.

These Senators, therefore, command the machine. Moreover, they man it. In every ordinary controversy, their strength is sufficient to control the result. Invariably they have held and exercised the

balance of power, in many crucial matters supplying half or more than half the voting strength to determine the decision.

It is, then, a truly remarkable election situation that confronts you. Usually several Independents are to be voted upon; this time the Republicans are all strictly and unqualifiedly "reactionary," excepting Mr. Norbeck and Mr. Jones, with neither of them outstandingly "progressive."

And of the thirty-two, twenty-five are Republicans. Only seven Democrats are included, and each of them from a state in which there seems no possibility of a Republican gain.

As you may have guessed, I am writing a book, upon which work is well advanced, to be called "Your Servants in the Senate." It is intended to make you acquainted with the Senate, particularly that portion upon whom it is your opportunity and your duty to pass political judgment next year. Let me say, very frankly, that it has no other purpose.

So far you have only "shaken hands" with these Senators. The real introductions, of a kind to enable you really to know and to understand them, make up the chapters of the book.

Throughout the task, my role is that of introductionist-not that I labored to such an end, but because the exposition quite naturally and logically took that course. In a way, I am the toastmaster. I introduce an outstanding Senate controversy, or an issue involving vital public welfare, and then turn the "meeting" over to these Senators. Only they do not "speak," as they are accustomed to do in the Senate, but their record does, and that is the part I would have you comprehend. The real introductions are thus accomplished by themselves-through the records they have made.

In order that you may be informed as to what is coming, and prepare yourselves for its proper public use, I here present a descriptive outline of this volume:

YOUR SERVANTS IN THE SENATE

INTRODUCING THEM TO YOU-a preliminary installment that characterizes and catalogues the thirty-two next up for reelection; then the amazing introduction of, by and to themselves in—

CHAPTER I

They Appraise Themselves

this being the sensational story of "the conviction and acquittal" of Newberry.

INTRODUCING THOSE “HIGHER UP”—illuminates the Senate machine and its relations to "the powers that be," followed by illustrations of this "administration influence" in

CHAPTER II

They Support the President

with the confirmatory evidence of the official record pertaining to two political episodes, three that relate to scandal cases, three that reveal their attitude toward privilege seekers, six with reference to militarism, and one-very important-having to do with a typical administration attempt to dominate legislation-a kind of "omnibus" chapter-under these captions—

Ladd Walks the Plank;

The Coalition Hits Cummins;
Trying to Save Denby;

Opposing the Walsh Report;
Suppressing Investigations;
A Tariff Commission Test;
Saving the Packers' Bacon;
Concerning Muscle Shoals;

Their Attitude Toward Militarism; and
The Ship Subsidy Scheme.

INTRODUCING THE MOSES OF INDUSTRIALISM-Very calmly, and with no unkindliness, presents Mr. Andrew W. Mellon and his private enterprises, gives historical and legal aspects of his fairly obvious ineligibility to hold the office of Secretary of the Treasury; then comes the results of his power and point of view in

CHAPTER III

They Approve the Mellon Plan INTRODUCING THE PROFITEER-takes us into the realm of indirect taxes, the form of special privilege most prevalent, most expensive to the public, and most dependent upon the ever-increasing "favors of government"-illustrated most aptly in

CHAPTER IV They Tilt the Tariff

INTRODUCING DOLLAR DIPLOMACY-is just that-followed, of course, by

CHAPTER V

Their Part in Foreign Affairs

INTRODUCING THE PATRONAGE VENDERpresents a pertinent picture of machine building and operation, in its application both to the living and the dead, politically speaking-followed by the record of Senatorial subserviency in this connection, stressing the Warren episode, in

CHAPTER VI

They O. K. Appointments INTRODUCING THE BALANCE SHEET-very brief and pointed, precedes a final summing up of the official behavior, attitude, affiliation, and influ

ence of these "next-up-for-election Senators," with their attendance record, which you find in—

CHAPTER VII

A Summary of Their Stewardship INTRODUCING MODERN PROPAGANDA-explains a lot concerning why you actually know so little about your official servants, they and their friends being able to manipulate public opinion almost at will, a condition so "dangerous to the perpetuity of a free government," as they said of the Newberry scandal, that we offer a practical, workable antidote, which you should insist on applying, found in the following

CHAPTER VIII

Questions for Them to Answer

INTRODUCING YOU TO OPPORTUNITY-reveals what you can and should do about all this, as the very selfishly interested "party of the first part" in elections and legislation. Then, finally, comes

CHAPTER IX

What the Senate Should Be and Doand I have performed my greatest public service.

We expect to have this book-Your Servants in the Senate completed and ready for distribution very

soon.

It will cost $1.75 for each cloth bound copy, and $1.00 per copy in paper binding. Reductions will be made where a number is desired.

The first edition will be limited to the public demand. Therefore let us know in plenty of time if you wish one or more copies.

THE

The Successor of Ralston

'HE death of Samuel M. Ralston removes from the Senate a statesman of the old school. He invariably demonstrated good ability and high motives in all his public life. Like Silas Wright, it could be said of him that he spent more time declining offices than others did in seeking them. Undoubtedly the last Democratic nomination for the Presidency would have come to him had he not insisted upon withdrawing as a candidate.

As his successor, Governor Jackson, of Indiana, has appointed Arthur R. Robinson, an Indianapolis lawyer. Mr. Robinson has given no expression of the position he will take in the Senate, but his appointee significantly announced that "he will in all things faithfully support the President."

This will make necessary two Senatorial elections in Indiana next year. James E. Watson must face the voters because his term ends March 4, 1927, and the Robinson appointment also will then expire.

Presumably one of the four having incomes of $5,000,000 and over-to whom "tax reform" by cutting the surtax from 40% to 20% is to apply—is Mr. Mellon himself who, according to data reported by the Federal Trade Commission and by the Senate is a stockholder in sixty or more corporations.

The number of incomes of $1,000,000 and upward is 74. These 74 represent .001% of the total number of taxpayers and pay 5.39% of the individual income taxes, or about $40,000,000 a year.

The 1,843 having incomes of $150,000 and over represent .025% of the total number of taxpayers, and pay 23.35% of the total individual income taxes, or about $200,000,000 annually.

The taxes of these classes in higher income brackets consist chiefly of surtaxes. Reducing their

surtax rate from 40% to 20%-which is what Mr. Mellon means by "tax reform"-amounts to an aggregate tax cut of about $100,000,000. This, in the lexicon of Mr. Mellon, is not "loss of revenue," but "stimulation of productive enterprise."

The amount of the stimulus to Mr. Mellon's own "enterprises" based on his personal income tax of around $1,000,000, might approximate $500,000 per annum. If, as Secretary of the Treasury and financial adviser of the Administration, he can save $500,000 on his own tax and make similar tax reductions for his associates in sixty corporations, he is perhaps doing more for his "productive enterprises" than if he sat on sixty industrial boards in Pittsburgh.

This was altered slightly in a subsequent release, after it became evident that Congress was not likely to approve the first recommendations; but his original figures disclose the inequities of the Treasury proposal.

There are 2,470,970 in the class with tax-paying incomes from $2,000 to $3,000. Mr. Mellon would now reduce their tax from $7.50 to $5.00. At that saving of $2.50 per person, it would take 200,000 of these reductions to equal the probable $500,000 reduction proposed on Mr. Mellon's own $1,000,000 surtax, if that be the amount of it.

There are 1,717,628 with incomes from $3,000 to $5,000. It would require 50,000 of these, at a reduc

tion of $10 each, to equal a single $500,000 surtax reduction.

There are 397,630 with incomes from $5,000 to $10,000. Mr. Mellon would reduce their taxes $20 each, requiring 25,000 of them to total the "saving" on one million-dollar tax.

For all the 4,586,228 small income tax-payers, the total proposed reduction, according to Mr. Mellon's first figures, would approximate $29,306,325-less than one-third the desired surtax reduction of about $100,000,000 for the 1,843 having incomes of $150,000 and over.

How Publicity Works

One of the most interesting and important features of the fight on the new Mellon plan will be the proposal to repeal the publicity provisions of the existing law. As to one phase of its results there appears to be no possible doubt: it has decreased tax evasions.

Treasury officials freely predicted that tax receipts under the 1924 act would be 25% less than formerly. The Actuary of the Treasury estimated that the decrease of revenue would be $400,000,000, while Mellon predicted a fifty million dollar greater loss.

The "Preliminary Statement" issued by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, on August 28, 1925, reveals what actually happened.

......

......

$1,691,089,534 $1,841,759,316

Income taxes under the old act were: For the fiscal year 1923 For the fiscal year 1924 Average for the two years ... $1,716,424,425 Income taxes under the 1924 act for the fiscal year 1925 were, as reported by the Bureau, $1,761,659,049.

Thus, under a law which provided for publicity, instead of the predicted decrease of 25%, or $400,000,000, there was a decrease in 1925 of only 4% under 1924, and an increase of 4% over 1923.

Furthermore, under publicity in 1925, instead of a 25% decrease in tax volume, the increase for 1925 over the average for 1923 and 1924, under secret tax returns, reached $45,000,000, or approximately 212 per cent.

Concerning Tax-Exempt Securities E

XCEPT for one phase, Searchlight readers are familiar with the Mellon plan. We have not so far had much to say concerning his long and determined campaign against tax exempt securities.

As organizer and stockholder of many corporations-industrial, railway, waterpower and public utility-Mr. Mellon has doubtless experienced the strong competition of tax-exempt state and municipal bonds, and Federal Farm Land Bank bonds.