body made a mistake in figuring the interest. I shall be glad to send and get the letter. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. I have the figures in my office, and I will bring them to the Senate at once. Mr. REED of Missouri. Very well. Arguments have been made on this floor by the Senator from Michigan [Mr. COUZENS] regarding certain transactions of the Treasury which are of a very serious character, and apparently they have made no impress. It was stated here by the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. REED] on yesterday that the Treasury had proceeded for a time under one rule with reference to tax levies and then had reversed that ruling; that part of the taxpayers had paid under one ruling and part had paid under another ruling, so that infinite confusion had resulted, confusion so great that all we could do now was to enact a law which would provide that when the Treasury proceeded to collect in the future the rule of law to be applied would be that most unfavorable to the Government, but if the taxpayer sought to recover his money the rule of law to be applied as to him would be that which was most favorable to the Government and most unfavorable to the litigant. That is an absurd proposition by which it is proposed to penalize a party going into court asking for justice-a ridiculous scheme! It is proposed to say there are two rules of law, one for the plaintiff and another rule for the defendant, one for the Government and another for the citizen. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. I know because I heard Mr. Mellon testify. He tried to return them to Hays when Hays came to see him a day or so later, but Mr. Hays asked that they be sent to him in New York, because he was going on a western trip and did not want to take them with him. So the next time one of Mr. Mellon's assistants was going to New York he gave him the package to take to Mr. Hays. That is the testimony. Mr. REED of Missouri. Mr. President, let us see why all that circumlocution; let us have regard to the fact that none of us came to town yesterday. Here are Government bonds that are just as negotiable as Government greenbacks or gold certificates. They have a market value which fluctuates but slightly from day to day; they can be cashed at any bank in the United States, big or little, at their market value. If the little bank did not have enough money to cash the bonds that day, it would nevertheless give the credit to the customer upon its books and it would get the cash the next day from a big bank. The man having honest possession of honest bonds, with nothing to conceal, with clean hands, upright heart, a decent purpose, and reasonable intelligence would have taken the bonds over to the bank and had them cashed. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. That is what Mellon suggested that Hays should do. Mr. REED of Missouri. Exactly. So when Mr. Mellon said to Mr. Hays "Do not hand the bonds to me; do not leave them with me; I can not touch them; I can not take them," he knew there was "something rotten in Denmark." Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. He testified that he knew that they were trying to conceal the fact that Sinclair had made a subscription, and they wanted to blame it on Mellon and he would not allow them to do it. Mr. REED of Missouri. Very well. Then he knew the neces knew they were Sinclair's bonds; he knew there was a committee of the United States Senate very anxious to find out the facts, and he kept the secret of the rogue who undertook to traffic with him-that is all there is to it-and he kept it well. He kept it until from outside sources at last the little track was found that led to him, and then he told of the transaction. That may be what the Secretary of the Treasury of the greatest Nation in the world ought to have done; that may be the code of morals that controls down there; that may be the response to public duty which we are there to expect; but it is not the standard the people of the United States have set up for their public officials. I am not sufficiently acquainted with the tax decisions to carry this discussion into specific illustrations, but it is a matter of common knowledge that the rulings and decisions of the Treasury Department have produced inexplicable confusion. One rule has applied for a given period of time and then has been changed. There is a very deep-seated conviction that these rules have been changed as acts of favoritism; and I have not the slightest doubt but that conviction is well founded.sity for concealment; he knew the purpose of concealment; he Every act of this Government, Mr. President, ought to be a public act ultimately, and ought to be a public act while it is going on, save in those instances where privacy is necessary in order that the ends of the Government may not be defeated. Speaking about privacy, although it is aside from the question I am discussing, there was introduced into the debate the secrecy and the privacy of the transaction between the Secretary of the Treasury and Mr. Will Hays. It is claimed that the Secretary of the Treasury did not know that those bonds came from a particular company. That is immaterial. What he did know was that the directing genius of the Republican committee wanted secretly to cash those bonds; that he had them, and there was some reason why he could not take them to a bank as an honest man would do with an honest security, lay them on the bank counter, and ask to be credited with their market value. He knew that. He knew it was to be something done under cover; that there was something wrong or the bonds would have been cashed in the ordinary way. I do not know how long he kept them. I think he did not tell us how long he kept them. It does not appear that he knows just where they were kept or just when they were returned. So far as appears, this $50,000 package might have been turned over to the cook or the chauffeur; he does not know where he kept it. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. Mr. President, will the Senator from Missouri yield to me? Mr. REED of Missouri. Yes. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The Senator from Missouri might be interested to know that when that package reached Mr. Mellon he put it to one side, forgot it, and left it lying all night on the top of his desk in the Treasury Department, The next morning when he found what it was he put it in the safe. Mr. REED of Missouri. Yes. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. And he sent it back as soon as he could see Mr. Hays. Mr. REED of Missouri. That was the only $50,000 package he ever left on top of a desk overnight in his long and illustrious career. Mr. CARAWAY. I had understood that he took it home with him instead of leaving it on his desk. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. The Senator from Arkansas is wrong about that. Mr. CARAWAY. The reporters of the newspapers who heard the testimony, then, were wrong. Mr. DILL. He stated in the hearings that he forgot them, but that he went back that evening and got them. Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. I heard the testimony. He did not say that he went back. Mr. REED of Missouri. How long did he keep them in his safe? The Senator from Pennsylvania, of course, knows. LXIX -572 Speaking of Will Hays, I wonder if he had expended so much of his energies regulating the morals of the people of the United States by censoring the picture shows that he had exhausted the moral element of his character and had no more morals left. I beg to suggest, in the interest of common sense, that Hays ought to be removed as the censor of the picture-show business and "Fatty" Arbuckle ought to be given back his job. I remember that when Mr. Hays came before the committee of the Senate which was then investigating and trying to find out what moneys were being raised, he told us that they had adopted an ironclad rule that they would not receive, I believe it was, more than a thousand dollars-it may have been $10,000-from any man; and he proceeded to expatiate upon the wickedness of receiving large contributions, because they might create a condition where the contributors of huge sums might ask favors in return. But it was not long after that until he was receiving huge contributions from Mr. Sinclair. and that was not very long after Sinclair had obtained the oil lands of this country which he believed to be worth from $200.000.000 to $300,000,000. Mr. President, a little more publicity, a little more light will do no harm. I have to make tax returns, and anybody is welcome to look at my tax returns. I see no reason why any honest man, making an honest return, should hesitate in his dealing with the public to have the public know that he has honestly dealt with them. Mr. President, I have in my hand a letter addressed to the Senator from North Dakota [Mr. FRAZIER]-I am now referring to the matter of interest-which reads as follows: THE UNDERSECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, Washington, January 16, 1928. MY DEAR SENATOR: In reply to your favor of the 3d instant further with reference to the application of surplus receipts to debt retirement, I am inclosing a statement compiled on the basis of daily Treasury statements showing public-debt retirements from specific sources each fiscal year from 1920 to 1927, in one column of which are shown retirements from surplus of receipts. (During the reading of the foregoing letter:) Mr. REED of Pennsylvania. It is not necessary for the Senator to read any further unless he wishes. It is evident that my statement was wrong, if that is figured correctly. (After the conclusion of the reading of the letter:) Mr. REED of Missouri. Mr. President, that is all I desire to say at this time. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment proposed by the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. NORRIS ]. Mr. REED of Missouri. On that I call for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Chief Clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BRATTON (when his name was called). I am paired with the junior Senator from Indiana [Mr. ROBINSON]. In his absence I withhold my vote. Mr. CURTIS (when his name was called). I have a pair with the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. ROBINSON]. Not knowing how he would vote on this question, I withhold my vote. Mr. JONES (when his name was called). The senior Senator from Virginia [Mr. SWANSON] is necessarily absent. I have promised to take care of him, and therefore must withhold my vote. If at liberty to vote, I should vote yea." If the senior Senator from Idaho were present, he would vote "yea on this question. If the senior Senator from Massachusetts were present, he would vote "nay." Mr. JONES. I have been requested to announce the following general pairs: The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BINGHAM] with the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. KENDRICK]; The Senator from Delaware [Mr. DU PONT] with the Senator from Florida [Mr. TRAMMELL]; The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. KEYES] with the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. EDWARDS]; The Senator from Maine [Mr. GOULD] with the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. RANSDELL]; The Senator from New Jersey [Mr. EDGE] with the Senator from New York [Mr. COPELAND]; The Senator from Indiana [Mr. WATSON] with the Senator from South Carolina Mr. SMITH]; The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. McLEAN] with the Senator from Virginia [Mr. GLASS]; The Senator from West Virginia [Mr. GOFF] with the Senator from Mississippi [Mr. HARRISON]; The Senator from Illinois [Mr. DENEEN] with the Senator from Mississippi [Mr. STEPHENS]; The Senator from Nevada [Mr. ODDIE] with the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BARKLEY]; The Senator from Colorado [Mr. WATERMAN] with the Senator from New York [Mr. WAGNER]; and The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. PINE] with the Senator from Ohio | Mr. LOCHER]. Mr. WALSH of Montana. I desire to announce that the senior Senator from North Carolina [Mr. SIMMONS] has been necessarily called away. He has a general pair with the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. NORBECK]. The roll call resulted-yeas 27, nays 19, as follows: Broussard Barkley Mr. REED of Pennsylvania (when his name was called). Mr. WARREN (when his name was called). I have a pair with the junior Senator from North Carolina [Mr. OVERMAN]. I do not know how that Senator would vote on this question. If at liberty to vote, I should vote "nay." I withhold my vote. The roll call was concluded. Mr. LA FOLLETTE. I have been requested to announce that the junior Senator from Montana [Mr. WHEELER] is absent from the Chamber because of the death of his sister. He has a general pair with the junior Senator from Idaho [Mr. GOODING]. I do not know how the junior Senator from Idaho would vote on this question; but if the junior Senator from Montana were present and at liberty to vote, he would vote "yea." Mr. WALSH of Montana. On this matter I have a pair with the Senator from Vermont [Mr. DALE]. I transfer that pair to the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. THOMAS] and will vote. I vote "yea." Mr. NYE. My colleague [Mr. FRAZIER] is unavoidably absent. He has a general pair with the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BLEASE]. I do not know how the Senator from South Carolina would vote upon this matter; but if my colleague were present he would desire to be recorded in the affirmative, Curtis Deneen Kendrick Keyes Smith Stephens Swanson King Locher McLean Ransdell Robinson, Ark. Thomas Trammell Wagner Walsh, Mass. Warren Waterman Watson Wheeler The VICE PRESIDENT. On agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. NORRIS] the yeas are 27 and the nays are 19. The Senator from Kansas [Mr. CURTIS], the Senator from Washington [Mr. JONES], and the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. WARREN], who are present, were paired and did not vote. A quorum being present, the amendment of the Senator from Nebraska is agreed to. Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, I hope that we will recess at this time until 11 o'clock to-morrow. I feel that I should give notice now, so that Senators may govern themselves accordingly, that if it is humanly possible I shall try to keep this bill before the Senate to-morrow until it is disposed of. Mr. REED of Missouri. Mr. President, that is not humanly possible, because the proposition in itself is inhumane. DEVELOPMENT OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION WORK Mr. McNARY submitted the following report: The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 9495) to provide for the further development of agricultural extension work between the agricultural colleges in the several Mr. MCMASTER. My colleague [Mr. NORBECK] is unavoid-States receiving the benefits of the act entitled "An act donating ably detained from the Senate. If present, I understand that public lands to the several States and Territories which may he would vote "yea." Mr. BRATTON. I transfer my pair with the junior Senator from Indiana [Mr. ROBINSON] to the junior Senator from Utah [Mr. KING] and will vote. I vote "yea." Mr. NORRIS. I have been requested to announce the absence of the senior Senator from Idaho [Mr. BORAH). He is paired with the senior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. GILLETT]. provide colleges for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts, approved July 2, 1862, and all acts supplementary thereto, and the United States Department of Agriculture," as amended, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows: That the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 1 and 2: Mr. McNARY. Mr. President, the RECORD shows that some days ago I made some remarks on a motion entered by the Senator from Utah [Mr. KING] to reconsider the vote by which the Senate passed the bill (H. R. 12632) to provide for the eradication or control of the European corn borer. The bill passed the House and the Senate, and the day after it passed the Senate the Senator from Utah moved to have the bill recalled from the House, and there is now pending his motion to reconsider. I desire particularly at this time that the Senate shall act on the motion to reconsider, because the deficiency appropriation bill will be here to-morrow, and it is quite neces sary to carry on this important work. I therefore move to lay on the table the motion of the Senator from Utah to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. RECESS Mr. CURTIS. I move that the Senate take a recess until 11 o'clock to-morrow morning. The motion was agreed to; and (at 6 o'clock and 55 minutes p. m.) the Senate took a recess until to-morrow, Saturday, May 19, 1928, at 11 o'clock a. m. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FRIDAY, May 18, 1928 The House met at 12 o'clock noon. The Chaplain, Rev. James Shera Montgomery, D. D., offered the following prayer: Again, O Lord, our God, the morning light has broken and Thy mercy embraces all, because Thou dost see and understand. From day to day Thou dost make known Thy loving-kindness, which blesses us with quiet-hearted trust. Teach us that the richest treasures of life are invisible and Thy supreme revelation is to the human heart. Thy greatest gifts can not be weighed, measured, nor counted. Do Thou spare us from the pride which is the root of sin and endow us with that humility which is the beginning of every virtue. Rebuke all unrighteous conflict throughout our country and reproach all selfishness, which is the poison that blights the flower of human happiness. Persuade us that he who forgives most shall be most forgiven. In the name of our Saviour we pray. Amen. The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved. MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate, by Mr. Craven, its principal clerk, announced that the Senate had passed without amendment a bill of the House of the following title: H. R. 457. An act to create a board of local inspectors, Steamboat Inspection Service, at Hoquiam, Wash. The message also announced that the Senate had passed with amendments, in which the concurrence of the House of Representatives was requested, a bill of the House of Representatives of the following title: H. R. 11134. An act to authorize appropriations for construction at military posts, and for other purposes. The message further announced that the Senate disagrees to the amendments of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 4235) entitled "An act to amend section 12 of the act entitled 'An act to provide more effectively for the national defense by increasing the efficiency of the Air Corps of the Army of the United States, and for other purposes,' approved July 2, 1926," requests a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and appoints Mr. REED of Pennsylvania, Mr. GREENE, and Mr. FLETCHER to be the conferees on the part of the Senate. The message also announced that the Senate concurs in the following concurrent resolution of the House of Representatives: House Concurrent Resolution 38 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the action of the Speaker of the House of Representatives and of the Vice President in signing the bill (H. R. 9568) entitled "An act to authorize the purchase at private sale of a tract of land in Louisiana, and for other purposes," be rescinded, and that in the reenrollment of such bill the number "58" be stricken out and the number "158 " be inserted in lieu thereof. SENATE BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS REFERRED Bills and joint resolutions of the Senate of the following titles were taken from the Speaker's table under the rule, referred to the appropriate committees, as follows: S. 126. An act for the relief of May Gordon Rodes and Sara Louis Rodes, heirs at law of Tyree Rodes, deceased; to the Committee on War Claims. S. 200. An act for the relief of Mary L. Roebken and Esther M. Roebken; to the Committee on Claims. S. 1364. An act for the relief of R. Wilson Selby; to the Committee on Claims. S. 1618. An act for the relief of Margaret W. Pearson and John R. Pearson, her husband; to the Committee on War Claims. S. 1633. An act for the relief of Edward A. Blair; to the Committee on Naval Affairs. S. 1976. An act for the appointment of an additional circuit judge for the second judicial circuit; to the Committee on the Judiciary. S. 2149. An act authorizing and directing the Secretary of Agriculture to investigate all phases of crop insurance; to the Committee on Agriculture. S. 2482. An act for the relief of the White River, Uintah, Uncompahgre, and Southern Ute Tribes or bands of Ute Indians in Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. S. 2572. An act granting certain land in the town of Hot Springs, N. Mex., to the State of New Mexico; to the Committee on the Public Lands. S. 2792. An act reinvesting title to certain lands in the Yankton Sioux Tribe of Indians; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. S. 3327. An act for the relief of Robert B. Murphy; to the Committee on Naval Affairs. S. 3427. An act authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to make readjustment of pay to Gunner W. H. Anthony, jr., United States Navy (retired); to the Committee on Naval Affairs. S. 3676. An act authorizing the Turtle Mountain Chippewas to submit claims to the Court of Claims; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. S. 3690. An act to correct the military record of Harley 0. Hacker; to the Committee on Military Affairs. S. 3692. An act to amend the act entitled "An act to readjust the pay and allowances of the commissioned and enlisted personnel of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard. Coast and Geodetic Survey, and Public Health Service," approved June 10, 1922, as amended; to the Committee on Naval Affairs. S. 3694. An act regulating juvenile insurance by fraternal beneficial associations in the District of Columbia; to the Committee on the District of Columbia. S. 3844. An act amending the fraternal beneficial association law for the District of Columbia as to payment of death benefits; to the Committee on the District of Columbia. S. 3848. An act creating the Mount Rushmore National Memorial Commission and defining its purposes and powers; to the Committee on the Library. S. 3868. An act authorizing an advancement of certain funds standing to the credit of the Creek Nation in the Treasury of the United States to be paid to the attorney for the Creek Nation, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. S. 3881. An act to provide for the paving of the Government road, known as the Dry Valley Road, commencing where said road leaves the La Fayette Road, in the city of Rossville, Ga., and extending to Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park, constituting an approach road to said park; to the Committee on Military Affairs. S. 3942. An act for the relief of Maj. Charles F. Eddy; to the Committee on Claims. S. 3949. An act to amend section 10 of an act entitled "An act to provide for stock-raising homesteads, and for other purposes," approved December 29, 1916 (Public, No. 290, 64th Cong.); to the Committee on Public Lands. S. 4085. An act to prevent professional prize fighting and to authorize amateur boxing in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the District of Columbia. S. 4187. An act for the relief of Con Murphy; to the Committee on Claims. S. 4234. An act authorizing the purchase of certain lands by John P. Whiddon; to the Committee on the Public Lands. S. 4309. An act to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to dispose of a certain lighthouse reservation and to acquire certain land for lighthouse purposes; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. S. 4327. An act to relinquish the title of the United States to land in the claim of Seth Dean situate in the county of Washington, State of Alabama; to the Committee on the Public Lande. S. 4344. An act granting the consent of Congress to the State Highway Commission of Arkansas to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across White River near Clarendon, Ark.; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. S. 4346. An act to authorize an appropriation for the purchase of certain privately owned lands within the Fort Apache Indian Reservation, Ariz.; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. S. 4353. An act authorizing Huntington Clarksburg Bridge Co., its successors and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the Kanawha River at a point at or near Winfield, Putnam County, W. Va.; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. S. 4441. An act to amend the laws relating to assessment and collection of taxes in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the District of Columbia. S. 4454. An act for the relief of Jess T. Fears; to the Committee on Claims. S. J. Res. 99. Joint resolution to amend joint resolution directing the Interstate Commerce Commission to take action relative to adjustments in the rate structure of common carriers subject to the interstate commerce act, and the fixing of rates and charges; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. S. J. Res. 131. Joint resolution providing for the participation by the United States in the International Conference for the Revision of the Convention of 1914 for the Safety of Life at Sea; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. SECOND DEFICIENCY APPROPRIATION BILL Mr. WOOD, from the Committee on Appropriations, reported the bill (H. R. 13873) making appropriations to supply deficiencies in certain appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1928, and prior fiscal years, and providing supplemental appropriations for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1925, and June 30, 1929, and for other purposes, which was read a first and second time, and, with the accompanying report, referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered printed. ADDRESS OF HON. WILL R. WOOD Mr. TILSON. Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD by printing therein a speech delivered over the radio on Tuesday evening. May 15, by our colleague the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. WOOD]. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Connecticut asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD by printing an address delivered over the radio by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Woon]. Is there objection? Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, is there any politics in that speech? Within the coming month our two great political parties will hold their national conventions. In these conventions the platforms will be written and the standard bearers will be chosen. The delegates to the national conventions are now being selected by the varying processes prescribed by the State laws. State conventions are adopting resolutions for the guidance of their delegates to the national conventions. Sectional and factional as well as national viewpoints are finding their way into the State party platforms. The air is filled with the claims and counterclaims of the adherents of the rival candidates for the greatest honor the American people in their wisdom can bestow. Issues are being urged in both parties as paramount to their success. There is a clash of opinion and a confusion of sound, Political observers and writers are endeavoring to clarify the atmosphere and guide us to definite conclusions. It is well that they should do so, for it is an engrossing theme and one well worthy of our best thought. Out of this welter of factional and party controversy must come, and will come, in my honest opinion, the mature judgment of the American people, which will be expressed at the polls next November. The superficial thinker may draw aside from the subject as unworthy his consideration, but the extent that we give it our attention and cur thought will be the measure of our worthiness to enjoy the benefits of a representative government. For, fellow citizens, I firmly believe that the two-party system is essential to the success of a representative form of government. Its necessity was made manifest in the early days of our growing Republic, and from that day to this outstanding American statesmen have been its advocates. Our Democratic friends seem to be agreed that that great American, Andrew Jackson, was a Democrat, though as a Repullican I may well claim that the soundest part of his political theory was Republican, for he was an outstanding protectionist. Most certainly he was a party man, and no one has ever claimed he was ashamed of it. At a time when confusion was much worse confounded than now, when factionalism was never more rife, when feeling ran higher than at any other period in the country's history, Abraham Lincoln was able to make up his mind what party best suited his views and he joined it the new Republican Party. As a Republican, I am devoudy grateful for that. Neither that vigorous old fighter, Andrew Jackson, nor the wise and understanding Lincoln, molded his party exactly to his liking, but each in his own way, kept in the fray and strove maufully for his ends. The scoffer will say that the conflict of to-day is but the bickering of politicians and place seckers-that the average citizen is very litle concerned in what they may say or do. The scoffer bas said the same thing in every political campaign in the country's history, buf, fellow citizens, the scoffer is wrong. To show concern in the things that concern us is a duty we can ill afford to scorn. We are all vitally concerned in the welfare of our Government. Underneath all of this clamor, all of these charges and countercharges, all this apparent confusion of principles and ideas, there is a determined quest for truth. We have not too many politicians, but too few. Politics deals with the science of Government and we will have good Government only so long as our ablest citizens give this science their best attention. Politicians who give their main thought to patronage and place are not the leaders of thought in American politics to-day any more than they were in the days of Jackson and Lincoln, but even they have a better conception of government and its problems than the indifferent citizen too engaged in his personal affairs to give any thought to the subject at all. While, as I have said, the issues of the 1928 campaign are not yet clearly defined, while they will not be fully joined until after the two great national conventions in June shall have declared their party principles and the men selected as the party condidates shall have developed their ideas and interpretations of those principles, to my mind it is sufficiently clear that in its broadest aspect the greatest outstanding question to be considered should be which party can be depended upon to manage most successfully the domestic affairs of our Government and insure to our people the most satisfactory relations with other nations. reason. The verdict of the 1920 election was unmistakable, An uprising of our people so nearly spontaneous-I might say so nearly unanimousagainst the party then in power did not happen without a There was a nation-wide dissatisfaction, as we all remember-dissatisfaction with the conduct of domestic affairs by the Democratic adminis tration, and a deep and settled resentment against the abortive attempt which had been made to involve us in a permanent foreign alliance, in contravention of the established American policy of good will toward all nations and entangling alliances with none. The American people then expressed their determinaton that that mistaken attempt, however The well intentioned, should remain an attempt and nothing more. Democratic Party could no more return to its original position on that question, though certain Democrats still profess to think so, and hope to win an election, than it could revive the free silver issue of 1896 and hope to win on that. The promises of a party which has made such mistakes in judgment as to what is best for the American peoplemistakes which were vital and fundamental, and I have cited only two of them-will well bear the closest scrutiny. The American people should not be misled by specious arguments intended to lead them away from the main theme. Weigh the record of the Republican Party for the last 68 years, during all of which time it has been in power, with the exception of three short intervals-its promises and performances-against the record of the Democratic Party over the same period, what it did while in power during the short intervals the American people intrusted power to it and what it promised to do, and then give careful consideration to the promises of both parties for the future. But be wise, I urge you, and weigh these promises for the future in the light of the record of both parties in the past. What does the Democratic Party propose to do about the protective tariff policy, for instance? That is one of the great fundamental policies of the Republican Party. It is a vital part of its management of the affairs of the American people which makes for their well-being and success. Some Democrats have come to see this and a growing But the great majority of number are beginning to acknowledge it. Democrats in Congress who ask protection for their particular industries still would deny it to others by voting against Republican tariff bills. They still give lip service to the theory of free trade or a tariff for revenue only, while announcing their determination to revise the tariff downward to help the American farmer. How can they help the American farmer by destroying his home market and crippling the buying power of the consumer of his products? The standard of living of the American wage earner, the highest in the history of the world, can not possibly be maintained under anything but a protective tariff. The hordes of cheap European and Asiatic labor might just as well be freely admitted to our shores to compete with American labor as to take down our tariff wall. Cheap foreign labor can compete no less surely on its own shores as on our own. The Democrats were honest when they said, in their minority report on the emergency tariff act of 1921, passed by a Republican Congress for the relief of agriculture. "Sensible protectionists will go to the party that has taught and practiced protection for 50 years and not to the party that has always opposed it." If they will be as honest this year In their national platform, the tariff issue will take care of itself in this campaign. For not even the solid South will much longer permit its Representatives in Congress to maintain a dishonest attitude on this question. The mandate given the Republican Party in 1924 to continue direc tion of governmental affairs was no less convincing that that which returned it to power in 1920. The facts were before the American people in 1920 and 1924. We will await They will be again in 1928. in confidence the result BRIDGE BILLS Mr. DENISON, by authorization of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, called up the following Senate bills on the Speaker's table, similar House bills having been favorably reported from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, which were severally reported and severally passed, and motions to reconsider the votes by which the bills were passed were severally laid on the table: S. 4401. Authorizing Elmer J. Cook, his heirs, legal representatives, and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across Bear Creek at or near Lovel Point, Baltimore County, Md., and a point opposite in Baltimore County, Md. (A similar House bill (H. R. 13652) was laid on the table.) On page 2, line 25, of the above Senate bill an amendment to strike out the word "interest" and insert in lieu thereof the word "interests" was agreed to. S. 4345. Authorizing the Interstate Bridge Co., its successors and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the Missouri River at or near Kansas City, Kans. (A similar House bill (H. R. 13482) was laid on the table.) S. 4381. Authorizing H. A. Rinder, his heirs, legal representatives, and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the Missouri River at or near Niobrara, Nebr. (A similar House bill (H. R. 13592) was laid on the table.) S. 4357. Authorizing Henry Horsey, Winfield Scott, A. L. Ballegoin, and Frank Schee, their heirs, legal representatives, and assigns, to construct and operate a bridge across the Des Moines River at or near Croton, Iowa. (A similar House bill (H. R. 13501) was laid on the table.) S. 3793. Authorizing the St. Croix Interstate Bridge Co., its successors and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the St. Croix River near Grantsburg, Wis. (A similar House bill (H. R. 12912) was laid on the table.) REAPPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATIVES Mr. FENN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself luto the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 11725) for the reapportionment of Representatives in Congress. The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. RANKIN) there were-ayes 58, noes 36. Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote upon the ground that there is no quorum present. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Mississippi makes the point of order that there is no quorum present. Evidently there is not. The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will bring in absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll. The question was taken; and there were—yeas 296, nays 49, not voting 85, as follows: |