Proceedings & Collections - NSHS - Vol. IV

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

517

HON. O. M. KEM.

March 4th, 1891--March 4th, 1897.

   When Omer Madison Kem, at the age of twenty-seven years, landed in the vicinity of Broken Bow, Custer County, Nebraska, March, 1882, excavated a dug-out and settled upon a homestead, his ambition was to own and cultivate a better farm than was his Indiana home. His history was written in a few words: "brought up on a farm and received a common school education." Amidst privations and discouragements he held his steady way for eight years, until in 1890 he removed to the county seat, in order to assume the duties of Deputy County Treasurer. Ordinarily it required all the arithmetical skill of "a common school education" to ascertain the amount of salary due, where lands were not yet subject to taxation, the personal property valueless, and the impecunious emigrant unable to pay. The excited imagination of the pioneer told of the trembling of the earth when the wild buffalo herd swept by, or the earthquake telegraphed its arrival, or the cyclone moved to the music of thunder; but Mr. Kem lost all interest in such fictions after the political ground-swell of 1890. In that year he was nominated for Congress by the People's Party, against the Hon. G. W. E. Dorsey, then a Republican member, receiving 6,391 votes of a plurality, while 22,353 were cast for W. H. Thompson, Democrat.
   If the whole opposition vote had been cast for Mr. Kem, as it might have been, his majority would have been 28,944.
   On tariff reform, coinage of silver, issue of greenback currency and other prevailing questions, in the 52nd Congress, there was a close co-operation among the Nebraska delegation composed of one Democrat and two Populists; showing plainly that their line of separation involved "a distinction without a difference." In the sixth month after he took the oath of office in Congress, a question of irrigation being up for discussion, in which a portion of his constituents were deeply interested, he

518

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

came to the front with a plea for Western Nebraska, clear, distinct, intelligent, in manner modest, but firm and ready for any emergency.

GREAT STEALS COVERED UP.

At the very threshold of discussion he repudiated the mode of crowding appropriation bills to immense proportions, under the plea that each item was a paltry sum:

   Time and again have I heard the point urged on the floor of this House in favor of an appropriation, that it was small and ought to meet with no objection. Particularly was this true of the appropriation asked for the Russian sufferers, and when it was refused a great cry went up from a certain class of newspapers, and we were accused of the sin of refusing to donate to suffering humanity the paltry sum of $100,000.
   Let me remind these gentlemen that it was the appropriation of these paltry sums of ten, fifty, and one hundred thousand dollars, here and there, gathered together, that brought the last Congress up to the billion-dollar point, and the wrath of the people down upon those responsible. The argument favoring an appropriation because it is small is not the argument of a statesman, neither is it worthy the consideration of such, other than with feelings of the greatest contempt.
   There seems to be a well-settled conviction among the people that each session of Congress appropriates vast sums of money that amount to but little less than an actual theft of their substance, and but a few days since a member who has been on this floor for years said to me that he had never voted for a river and harbor bill because of the great steals embodied therein. This evil is looked upon by all with too great indifference and as unavoidable in procuring the appropriations necessary.
PEN PORTRAIT OF SETTLERS.

The portraiture of the constituency for whom Mr. Kem asked justice, was executed by an artist, inspired with sympathy and painting from nature.

MR. KEM: Over this territory are scattered to-day hundreds of thousands of as good citizens as you will find anywhere; men and women advanced in years, who know by experience the cost of citizenship when blood was the price paid; men and women of middle age, who are earnestly en-

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

519

deavoring to repair in some little degree their impaired fortunes, and establish a home they can call their own, where their declining years may be passed in peace, free from the demands of the landlord or rent-gatherer; young men and women, full of hope, courage, and energy, striking sturdy blows to subdue the virgin soil and prepare the way for coining generations. These comprise the class of citizens in whose interest these amendments will be offered, that we hope may result in the work being done, that will be followed by the establishment of a system of irrigation which in time will give to the people a supply of water, under their own control, free from the manipulations of corporation or trust.
   The appropriation we ask for is preliminary to, and affects a problem, upon the proper solution of which the prosperity and welfare not only of thousands of our own generation, but millions of those to follow rests. The water necessary to irrigation, like every other necessity of the people, is fast passing under the control of corporations, and if not checked in a short time the water supply of the West will be completely in the hands of a few individuals and the millions will be at their mercy, for he who controls that supply is monarch of all he surveys, and the people will be compelled to pay him whatsoever avarice and greed may dictate.
INJUSTICE TO EMIGRANTS.    MR. KEM: Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Holman) says that this work of irrigation is going on well enough. I beg leave to differ with him on that point. The fact is that over a great portion of the territory mentioned in this amendment nothing has been or is being done. There are thousands of citizens who have entered their lands in good faith, believing, as they had a right to believe, that they were within the rain belt, that there would be sufficient rainfall for the purposes of agriculture. They were justified in so believing because these lands were opened for settlement under the homestead, pre-emption, and timber-culture laws. If there was not sufficient rainfall for agricultural purposes they ought to have been opened under the desert-land law.
   I say those settlers have gone in there in good faith, and the amendment offered is to do justice to as good a class of people as you will find on God's footstool. I make no exceptions whatever. They are industrious, sober, hardworking, economical people, and are earnestly endeavoring

520

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

to establish for themselves homes and have paid millions to the Government for the privilege of so doing. I have here a letter from the Commissioner of Public Lands, which gives some. idea as to the amount of money that these people have paid into the Treasury of the United States.

The letter gave about $300,000,000 drawn from the settlers of the region in question, during twenty-three years. Mr. Kem continued:

   Now in all this work, covering a period of twenty-three years, there has been expended of this vast sum but $3,900,000, and about half of that in the Eastern States, as the map will show. These settlers have found by sad experience the rainfall to be insufficient, but have been hanging on, as it were, by the eyebrows year after year, hoping that each successive year would prove better than those preceding.
   Now, I wish to say in answer to the question of the gentleman from Mississippi, that it would be nothing more than fair and just if every dollar that has been paid into the public treasury in the manner I have referred to, except the amount necessary for filing fees, was used for the purpose of establishing irrigation systems that would supply, the want of rainfall to these people on the lands upon which they have settled, and thus place these lands on an equality with other lands, opened under the same. provisions, which are embraced within the rain belt.
   And I say, sir, that the homestead law will never be fulfilled until this provision has been made. But all we ask here is that $60,000 of this appropriation shall be used in a certain territory that heretofore has been almost wholly and totally neglected in this work. By referring to the map it will be seen clearly where the work has been done, and you will find that the territory mentioned in that amendment has been almost entirely neglected in the past. We only ask now that this sum be used in the manner proposed within the territory indicated, and which has been so grossly neglected in past years.
   I say that if you will give us one-tenth of the amount which you have received in the way of appropriations as a protection to your people from overflow, and benefits that you have derived by appropriations for the improvement of your rivers and harbors, we will be willing to compromise on that. You have had vast sums for improving your rivers, for building levees of the Mississippi River to protect your lands liable to inundation.

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

521

Now, I want to say, Mr. Chairman, it does seem to me that every time there is a motion made or a step taken in this House for the purpose of aiding or helping in any way the farming class of our country, there is a constitutional or some other kind of objection raised against it. It seems to me, sir, that there is a combination in this House against the Western wealth-producer. I do not make the charge as true, but I say it seems to be true. And yet this amendment is offered in the interest of a class of people that feed the world, and on whose shoulders this Government rests and without them it could not exist six months. [Applause.]
ELECTION OF PRESIDENT BY THE PEOPLE.

Near the close of the 1st Session of the 52nd Congress, he appeared in advocacy of the election of U. S. Senators by direct vote of the people.
In this speech, quite elaborate and carefully prepared, was set forth necessity for a change, inasmuch as the fathers adapted the constitution to the prevailing condition of their day, provided for amendments as progress and experience should dictate. In reply to the conservative cry "Let well enough alone," he responded: "Nothing is well enough that can be made better, and he who conforms to the idea of well enough, has not only ceased to advance but has actually turned the wheels of progress backward." In his introduction he said:

The disposition of man to take advantage of the misfortunes and prey upon the weakness of his fellow man made government a necessity. Since the day our first parents were driven from Eden, this disposition of one man to steal from another his birthright has followed the human race like a curse; it is the underlying principle that has demoralized and destroyed every government that has gone down in past ages, and will destroy every government now existing, unless carefully guarded against by wise, just, and wholesome laws, righteously administered.
Man's greatest enemy is man, and I know of nothing against which he needs protection so much as against his fellow-men. This is not a new thought, but is as old as history, and every government that has and does exist, was and is a monument to its truth; and it is evident to my mind that the fathers of our own government realized this with perhaps greater force than we do; the evidence of

522

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

which appears in the following words of the preamble to the Constitution: "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice." Let us pause here for a moment to consider the significance of these words, "form a union to establish justice." It signifies, sir, that Justice had been dethroned and the time come when it was absolutely necessary for the people to unite and raise her up, that domestic tranquillity might prevail, the common defense be provided for, the general welfare promoted, and the blessings of liberty secured not only to themselves but to their posterity.
FEARS OF THE FATHERS.

He fancied the fathers doubted the ability of the people to govern themselves unless aided with checks and balances.

MR. KEM: This fear manifests itself perhaps with no greater force than in the provisions for electing the President of the United States, which has at different times in the history of our country resulted in defeating the popular will by placing in the executive chair a man whom the majority did not want and for whom they did not vote, thus defeating the very principles Sought to be maintained.
In 1876 the American people were brought to see the danger of an electoral system, which made it necessary to provide an Electoral Commission in order to preserve the peace, and that placed the judges of the Supreme Court in a position that caused many people to feel that the decision rendered was not free from party prejudice. Mr. Chairman, if I had the power I would go much farther than this resolution seeks to go; I would remedy this defect in the Constitution in order to guard the people against the dangers that threatened the peace and safety of the Republic during the continuation of the electoral contest referred to, by making the President elective by the popular vote. I would allow no middle man, as member of an electoral college, to stand between the people and the consummation of their desires as expressed at the polls and defeat the popular will, as they have done in the past. The evil of this defect is so apparent and the necessity for a remedy so plain that all sickly sentimentality should be thrust aside and a fair amount of American common sense applied to the blotting out of this remnant of British monarchical misrule.

Turning attention to a speech of Senator Chandler, of New Hampshire, who said such a change would produce a "Federal

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

523

election law," he contended that Senators' elections could be as easily effected by the states as the election of members of the House was at the present time. As to the charge that bribery could exist in a nominating convention as easily as in a state legislature, he contended that the people at the polls had a chance to reject a nominee, but none as to a bribe-elected Senator of a legislature.
He met the argument. that men of wealth could secure nominations by the answer that if they were desired there would be no bar to their election, but the will of the people would be supreme. In one terse epigrammatic sentence he said: "No man should be allowed to sit as a representative of the people whom for any reason they do not want."
Of historic views on the subject, he instanced those of Senator Benton, of Missouri, previous to 1850:

   Mr. Benton held as fundamental truth to which there was no exception, "that liberty would be ruined by providing any kind of substitute for popular election"; asserting that all elections would degenerate into fraud and violence as the result of intermediate elective bodies. He showed further that it was the law of the few to disregard the will of the many when they got power into their hands, and that liberty bad been destroyed whenever intermediate bodies obtained the direction of the popular will; he reasoned both from history, the philosophy of government, and the nature of man, and referred to the period of direct voting in Greece and Rome as the "grand and glorious periods of popular government," when the people were more prosperous than at any other period in the history of those governments, and wound up with these words:
   "I believe in the capacity of the people for self-government, but they must have fair play, fair play at the elections on which all depends."
VIEWS OF MR. MADISON.    The question of universal suffrage was discussed long and earnestly in the Federal convention, and the present method of electing United States Senators was a compromise between the two extremes, one side holding for direct popular suffrage without any restrictions, and the other contending for a property qualification.
   Mr. Madison, in commenting on the above situation, held

524

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

that while at that time a majority of the Nation were free holders, that the time would come when the majority would be without landed or other equivalent property, and called attention to the danger of property holders allowing that kind of a majority unrestricted suffrage. Mr. Madison's prediction as to the diminution of numbers of property holders of the Nation is only too true, and becoming more apparent every day, but he in his reasoning did not seem to grasp the idea that legislation would or could have anything to do with bringing about this result or that restricting the popular franchise would or could in any degree be responsible for the aggregation of the property of the country in the hands of the few. Nevertheless, we are firmly convinced that if it had not been for the legislation that gave 191,000,000 acres of the people's land to the railroad corporations more of the people would have homes; if it had not been for the wicked, vicious financial legislation in the last twenty-five years more people would own the property of our country. If it was not for the unjust tariff laws of the past and present by which certain classes engaged in certain occupations are guaranteed a profit while all other classes have not only to run their chances on profits, but must also pay the other fellows' profits there would undoubtedly be more property owners.
INCOME TAX.

During the first regular session of the 53rd Congress, January 31, 1894, Mr. Kem delivered a speech with the following affirmations: That by repeal of the income-tax law in 1873, $640,000,000 worth of property escaped taxation; that the People's Party platform in 1892 declared for a graduated tax on incomes, increasing as they grew larger; that he accepted the provisions of the Wilson bill as an "improvement on the present iniquitous system"; that "under the present system the wealthier men became, the less tax they pay in proportion to their ability"; that the old law, from 1863 to 1873, furnished in taxes $347,220,807, of which Nebraska paid $244,593; that these collections were made "during a period when colossal fortunes were a rarity and millionaires a curiosity"; that $100,000,000 could be raised easier now than $31,000,000 thirty years ago; that 31,500 persons own more than one-half of the total wealth of the country; that the bill will reach aristocratic foreigners doing business in this

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

525

country, and that the enemies of the measure,--"and I love it for the enemies it has made,"--are the organs of "anti-silver," and "on this floor it is opposed by that class of Republicans and Democrats who, in the recent fight for the people's money, gave us the unprecedented spectacle of Cleveland Democrats and Cleveland Republicans standing side by side, as two souls with but a single thought, two hearts that beat as one."
To the charge that the law would lead to perjury, he replied:

   The individual who is only waiting for an opportunity to perjure himself is already a perjurer, and his morals can not be corrupted.
   The whole principle of taxation means search and inquiry.
   The opposition has claimed that the South would only pay 3 per cent of their tax. If so it is because the South has but 3 per cent of the taxable incomes.
   The above statement proves the truth of the claim so often made by the Populists, that the Northeastern states, through class legislation, have gathered in about all of the surplus wealth the balance of the country has created. Therefore they are able to, and ought, to pay a greater part of this tax. The man who undertakes to-day for such a reason to arouse sectional hatred is an enemy to good government.
MONOPOLY.

In a speech delivered March 9, 1894, Mr. Kem, denouncing the "Washington Gas-light Company," proclaimed his theory of monopoly:

Mr. Chairman, I believe in the principle, and have advocated it before my people, that it is the duty of government to see, so far as it is possible, that no corporation or combination of men shall control any of the necessities of the people; for it is evident that, when such conditions exist, the party or the power having control of such necessities will also have the power to extort for those necessities more than the people ought to pay as a matter of justice and equity.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I believe each municipality should control these necessities, such as local transportation of freight, humanity, or intelligence, water systems, and lighting plants, by its own municipal government. I believe in forming a monopoly of all the people to control the necessities of all the people for the sole benefit

526

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

of all the people of each municipality. And in cases where these necessities are national, affecting the interests of the whole people, I believe it is the duty of the National Government to take control of them in the interest of all the people.
A municipal or national monopoly for the purpose of controlling any of the necessities of the people, in which all the people are partners and alike reap the benefits, is always right; but a monopoly of any such necessity by a few private individuals for private gain is always wrong, and should cease. Congress should never again grant a charter, franchise, or subsidy to any individual or corporation through which public necessities may be controlled.

As the first regular session of 53rd Congress was coming to a close Mr. Kem prepared a speech upon irrigation, from the standpoint of a progressive Populist.

ITS IMPORTANCE. The work of redeeming these arid wastes through a system of irrigation is more gigantic and fraught with greater good to humanity than any work ever undertaken in this country. It is so colossal both in size and benefits that the mind of man can scarcely comprehend it, and no power on earth can successfully grapple with it, except that of the whole people combined operating through the National Government. But this power can solve the problem successfully, cause this desert to blossom as the rose, and dot its hillsides and valleys with prosperous, happy homes.
ITS MAGNITUDE. Nearly one-half the total area of the United States lies in the arid and subhumid district, all of which needs irrigation for successful agriculture. The district is composed of the following seventeen states and territories: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Indian Territory, Texas, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Idaho, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, Washington, Oregon, and California. Narrow strips on the eastern and western borders of this great district are well watered naturally. Contiguous to these strips are considerable tracts that are classed as subhumid. The rainfall in these tracts is often sufficient to produce good crops, but it can not be depended on year after year. This subhumid region includes about half of the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Indian Territory, and Texas.

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

527

   This arid and subhumid region contains about 2,000,000 square miles of territory, or 1,280,000,000 acres, 100,000,000 acres of which may be irrigated in time. This at a fair estimate gives ample room for 1,250,000 rural homes, sheltering an agricultural population of 6,250,000. Along with these will come other millions to engage in various trades and professions. Just as irrigation spreads out over this vast region will it become populated and brought within the pale of a higher civilization.
PRIVATE ENTERPRISE INSUFFICIENT.    If the work of reclaiming these and lands is left to private enterprise it will only be accomplished in spots, here and there, where the water is most available. The vested rights of those private parties who first enter the field will interfere with the rights of those who may come after. The work will be done under seventeen different sets of laws in as many different states. As a result of this a large amount of irrigable land will remain in a wild state. Endless litigation will follow. The water supply will pass into the control of syndicates. The farmer will be robbed, as is always the case when his necessities are controlled by others. And the final outcome of the whole business will be that the husbandman will become a tenant on his own land, while be turns over to the attorney and water owner everything he makes for the privilege of eking out a miserable existence in his own home.
PATERNALISM,    Mr. Chairman, is a word that has been in great demand ever since the organization of the Populist Party. It has been hurled at us upon every occasion with a vim and energy worthy of a better cause. We are accused of seeking to establish a paternal government. Why should we seek to establish something we already have in its very worst form? Paternalism is just what we are organized to destroy.
   What is paternalism in government? It is the favoritism of the government towards a few of its citizens by which they are given special privileges, enabling them to control the necessities of the people and rob them. The Pacific Railroad case just cited is an example. This is the government paternalism of an unjust parent pure and simple.
   But I think it should be called infernalism, for really that is its nature. No more paternal infernalism, if you please. We have already had too much of that under Republican and Democratic rule. Our motto is: "Equal rights to all

528

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

and special privileges to none"; and we hope to see the day soon when the present paternal form of government, which means the government for the. few and the devil take the balance, will be changed to a fraternal form, which means the good of all.

In denouncing precedents of railroad construction, special protection and monopolistic banking he said:

The relation that should exist between the Government and the people is not the same which exists between the parent and his helpless infant or a doting father and a favorite son, in which the father lavishes upon the son all the good things of life, while his brother and sisters go hungry and ragged. The true relation is that existing between the members of a fraternal organization and its officers, the members contributing to the support of the organization according to their several abilities, the officers in turn enacting and executing the laws in such a way as to give protection to all alike.

The conclusion of a candid and searching speech, of which these few extracts give but a faint idea, was not enthusiastic of immediate results:

Mr. Chairman, as above stated, I have no hope of getting any relief from Congress as now constituted. It is almost impossible to get even a hearing on this matter, to say nothing of action that will accomplish the work. Thousands of dollars are appropriated for monuments to dead men, thousands for firing the sun-down gun, millions to build cannons so large that it costs hundreds of dollars to fire them once, and millions more for the general interests of the East, but not one cent for irrigation, the West's greatest interest, although we are more than willing to repay it.

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

529

HON. E. J. HAINER.

March 4th, 1893--March 4th, 1897.

Eugene J. Hainer, of Aurora, Hamilton County, Nebraska, was born August 16, 1851, at Funfkirchen, Hungary; emigrated to the United States with his parents in 1854; the family, after living one year at Chicago, moved to the Hungarian Colony at New Buda, Iowa; remained there until 1857, when they removed to Columbia, Missouri, where they resided until 1860, returning again to New Buda; his early boyhood was spent on his father's farm; at the age of 15 he left home, working as farm hand near Garden Grove, Iowa, until 1873; received his education at Garden Grove Seminary and Iowa Agricultural College, teaching school during vacations to meet expenses; graduated from the Law Department, Simpson Centenary College, Indianola, Iowa, in 1876; removed to Aurora, Nebraska, in 1877, where he has since resided and engaged in the practice of law; is interested in banking and in a line of creameries in southern Nebraska; was never a candidate for an elective office until elected to the 53rd Congress as a Republican, receiving 15,648 votes, against 11,486 votes for William H. Dech, People's Independent, 8,988 votes for Victor Vifquain, Democrat, and 1,312 votes for J. P. Kettelwell, Prohibitionist.
In 1894 he was re-elected to the 54th Congress, receiving 19,493 votes, against 15,542 for W. L. Stark, People's Independent, Silver Democrat; 2,763 for S. S. Alley, Democrat, and 905 for C. M. Woodward, Prohibitionist.

POSTAGE REDUCTION.

Entering upon the duties of a Representative, in the 53rd Congress, where this sketch leaves him, his business capacity qualified him for successful work; and integrity of character held the confidence of his constituency, and gives abundant promise of future success. Having introduced a bill to admit
36

530

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

scientific, educational, fraternal, historical, and trades union papers and periodicals to a lower grade of postage, and the bill being disfavored by the Post Office Committee, at the investigation of the P. 0. Department, Mr. Hainer was specially delighted when a deluge of a 1,000,000 petitioners demanded its passage, and as an amendment to an appropriation bill it was enacted into law.

TARIFF.

During the second session of the 53rd Congress, the Wilson tariff bill being before the House, Mr. Hainer delivered a carefully prepared speech upon protection and free trade, without attempting to discuss the minutiae of the bill.
In the introduction he made beautiful reference to his constituency:

I represent a constituency having their homes in the territorial center of the United States. To the east are the great manufacturing and business marts of the distributing centers. To the west are the great Rockies with their wealth of ores, and semitropical California. To the north are the immense fields of wheat and oil and forests of timber. To the south are the broad fields of cotton, cane, and rice. My people are engaged largely in agriculture and the trades dependent upon that great industry. They sell the products of their fields mainly to Americans engaged in manufacturing, mining, transportation, and in mercantile pursuits. They are excelled by no constituency in intelligence, straightforwardness of purpose, and loyal devotion to country. They are not to be deceived by words, be they uttered with the vehemence of the tempest or the easy grace of the most polished and suave orator. No smiting of the Congressional breast, coupled with agonizing protestations of a determination to "serve God and the people regardless of party dictation," will reconcile them to a measure which strikes down the industrial independence and interests of our Nation, cripples its markets and degrades its labor.

And in his conclusion, twined a garland for his adopted country:

Mr. Chairman, the supreme test of true greatness in either individual or nation is its capacity to endure pros-

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

531

perity. In adversity and great trial America not only retained her place among the nations but deservedly gained the unqualified admiration and respect of the world. Entering upon her second century, favored beyond the power of speech to declare, may she be given the saving common sense to cherish and "hold fast that which is good." Respect comes to the self-respecting. Freedom is his who waits not on another; who commands that which satisfies his wants--abiding greatness and prosperity to the nation which promotes thrift, dignifies labor, and encourages, advances, and protects its people.

In the spirit of Kossuth, his thoughts were of the exile and emigrant:

Prosperity comes only from industry, labor, saving, and thrift. Waste does not conduce to it. Above all, Americans will be independent. That spirit has become a fixture here. Our forefathers and some of us grew tired of contributing by our sweat to the luxury of lords and to enrich royalty. We welcome to our midst, even as we ourselves were but recently welcomed, every honest, industrious, law-abiding man who wants to better his conditions and become a loyal American citizen. Let such bring here their machinery, their skill and strength, wealth and enterprise, their manhood, and join with us in upbuilding and sustaining a policy which has for a generation made our country's name synonymous with opportunity.

In his argument, proper, he contended, that all the Presidents have favored protection; that the country prospered most under the highest tariffs; that free trade would equally cripple agriculture and manufactures; and that an income tax was the pet of demagogues; and in illustration of these and kindred propositions, numerous authors, messages, speeches and statistical tables were consulted and arguments adroitly adduced. He arrayed the bill itself against the doctrine that protection was unconstitutional:

The pending bill refutes the objection. The committee reporting it admit, as everyone who examines it must see, that it is not shorn of protective features. It covers nearly 4,000 articles. The greater part of these are produced in this country. No one giving the question a moment's consideration will deny the proposition that a tariff on an article the like of which is produced in this country is

532

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

necessarily protective. It may not be sufficiently high to accomplish any useful purpose, but it is protective. The importer must in the first instance pay the duty. That is conceded. With this added cost he meets in competition the domestic article which has not paid the duty.
Can you convince the importer this is no disadvantage to him? Will the tariff reformer who is selling the domestic article deny the duty is a protection to him?

Nevertheless, Mr. Hainer retired from the arena of debate, exclaiming: "This bill has no merits. It is full of demerits. Its very shadow is a blight and palsy. In its operation it will be worse than pestilence."

FEDERAL ELECTION LAWS.

On the 26th day of September, 1893, Mr. Tucker, of Virginia, advocated his bill, "To repeal all statutes relating to supervisors of elections and special deputy marshals and for other purposes." Mr. Tucker said:

   The first proposition, therefore, to which I ask the attention of the House is this: That the right of suffrage emanates from the state and is not conferred in the Constitution on the citizen by the Federal Government, but Is reserved to the states and so declared to be in the Constitution itself. In the second section of Article I of the Constitution we find this provision:
   "The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states; and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature."
   That is, whatever provision Congress may make under its powers with reference to the "manner of holding" elections, the original right of suffrage rests with the states of the Union. By this provision of the Constitution suffrage is conferred through the states, and it leaves in the states the determination of the right and the conditions of suffrage; and the citizen is entitled to it because he is a citizen of the state and not because of his citizenship of the United States.
   Such right of suffrage and conditions of are subject to the suffrage laws of the state of the citizen and must be prescribed and limited by such state. The state may say that no man under 21 years of age can vote, which is a condition of suffrage; or it may say that none but property holders can vote, which is a condition of suffrage; or it may

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

533

say that no man can vote until he registers, which is a condition of suffrage; or it may say that no man shall vote who can not read or write, which is a condition of suffrage. None of these conditions, confessedly, can be regulated by the Federal Government, but are left wholly to the states.
These laws ought to be repealed, Mr. Speaker, because they seek to take away from the state, that alone can be stow suffrage on the citizen, the power of determining the right to vote; they ought to be repealed because they have been the subject of collisions and jealousies and unnecessary clashing of authorities since their enactment; they ought to be repealed, sir, because they are reconstruction measures, the unhappy reminders of a period in our history forever gone, except from the memory of the people; they ought to be repealed because the states are as much interested in seeing that their Representatives are properly elected as the Federal Government can possibly be.

Mr. Hainer, of Nebraska, indicated his readiness to enter the discussion by propounding an inquiry; and a week thereafter occupied the House with a carefully prepared speech. He said:

   Mr. Speaker--The question now before the House is one of the deepest interest, affecting essentially the foundations of the Federal Government. Nominally the bill under consideration seeks merely to repeal certain sections of Federal law looking to the supervision of Federal elections by supervisors and deputy marshals, practically it goes further and seeks to wipe out every possible trace of Federal control and Federal supervision of elections.
   In approaching the discussion of this question, I confess I hail from a district which regards this Union not simply as an aggregation of states, but as a great nation, not merely exercising delegated but original powers based upon the fundamental law.
   Representing as I do, in part, the people of a state nearly every quarter section of which is occupied by a man who gave evidence of his loyalty to the Union by bearing a musket in the days when many gentlemen who now declaim against these laws were fighting against the Government, I confess that I have some feeling on this question.

1st. Proceeding with his argument, he examined two cases decided by the United States Supreme Court affirming the constitutionality of the last amendments.
2nd. Argued the necessity of Federal election laws, from the

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

534

character of state legislation before the war of the rebellion, when it had been enacted that: "The servants shall be quiet and orderly in their quarters, at their work, and on the premises; shall extinguish their lights and fires, and retire to rest at seasonable hours."

"Oh! what humanity there is in this?"

3rd. Protested against the home rule of the South, but made the following admission: In North Carolina--

   In the prohibition campaign of 1881 negroes and whites spoke from the same platform. There was no political question at that time before the people; it was simply a question of prohibition or anti-prohibition.
   My Democratic friends then forgot the wonderful menace to society and government which inhered in the so-called black vote. No objection was then made to the negro vote. Since then, and in the same State, railroad elections were held and negroes were registered and voted without difficulty. In May, 1886, in the City of Greensboro, the whites organized negroes to assist in the election of a mayor, and, being successful, that same mayor made a congratulatory address to them. In 1891, at Greensboro, in a contest between two Democratic candidates for mayor, negroes were sent for in carriages to vote for one or the other of these white Democratic candidates.
   In 1891, at a bond election, where $30,000 was voted to secure an industrial and normal school for white girls, negroes were allowed to register and vote. They were sought for. But in 1888 these same negroes did not dare to celebrate the election of President Harrison.

   4th. Included a statistical report of the proportion of votes cast in districts North and South, for members of the House, showing the larger percentage in behalf of Northern members.
   5th. He furnished proof of the charge that a North Carolina school board published a revised edition of a State School History, which agreed with their own views of the cause, the progress and collapse of the war, and in which they refused to say, "The Confederate government fled from Richmond;" but put it mildly, "left Richmond."
   Of the voter he said:

There is some danger, I admit, from the ignorance of voters. There is that danger in the South as well as in the

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

535

North. We shall hail the day when every man shall be raised to a much higher standard educationally than is his to-day.
But I venture to remind the gentlemen from the South that neither intellect nor intelligence is synonymous with education.
SUGAR BOUNTIES.

A proposition to repeal the act allowing a bounty on sugar, which had cost the government $9,000,000 per year, met the opposition of the member from Nebraska. He claimed that "it is the duty of the government to continue the bounty now provided by law till July 1, 1905."
Quoting from President Cleveland's Hawaiian message: "That the United States in aiming to maintain itself as one of the most enlightened of nations would do its citizens gross injustice if it applied to its international relations any other than a high standard of honor and morality," he continued:

   That these sentiments are correct and creditable will hardly be questioned. They have met with general approval on both sides of the House.
   I quote them only to re-enforce the suggestion that a principle so strangely and strenuously invoked in behalf of a foreign Queen, disreputable both in public and private life, be not withheld when dealing with nations with whom we have treaty relations, and our own people who have taken the Government at its word and invested millions in a useful industry. This bill annuls our reciprocity treaties, without even consulting the other contracting parties. It takes from our own people the inducement which alone led them to engage in an otherwise losing venture.
   We have no moral right to do this. I greatly question our legal right to abrogate this law, running as it does for a specific time, and for which the appropriation has already been made.
   It is more than a mere bounty or gratuity; it confers a vested right.

On the supposition that the Democratic majority must respect the sentiment of party friends, he attempted to array Secretary Morton, the Omaha Herald and Dr. Miller upon the side of the sugar bounties. His conclusion was as follows:

I am surprised that any gentleman should hesitate for one moment to vote the protection needed. You ought not

536

NEBRASKA STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

to hesitate. You ought to stand for everything that is American. Do that and you will cease to be dependent upon foreign countries.
Now, Mr. Chairman, in the few moments which have been given me, I cannot possibly hope to cover any considerable portion of the ground which should be traversed. I know that gentlemen on the other side are only too anxious to vote down this industry. They are not in a temper to listen to the reason and the facts in the ease.
But, gentlemen, let me tell you that two years from now there will be a Congress sitting in this hall which will listen to the voice of the people and protect their industries. [Applause on the Republican side.] You spit upon the industries of the North and West to-day, but the people whom you so insult will in turn administer a fitting rebuke to you. Do your worst now, but the day of reckoning is at hand. [Applause on the Republican side.]
MISSOURI RIVER COMMISSION.

Without indirection, circumlocution or hesitancy Mr. Hainer attacked the general course of improvement by the Missouri River Commission, March 19, 1894:

   Mr. Chairman, what is the object of this Missouri River Commission? Its first and great object, in the broad sense, is and must be to facilitate and extend commerce; not simply to make that river navigable, though that may be incidental to the final object to be attained.
   What is the character of the commerce along this stream? Clearly it is of a double character. First, it is the commerce which extends up and down the stream itself, and secondly, the commerce which goes over and across the stream.
   As a matter of fact, the commerce which extends up and down that stream is, as the gentleman himself admits, inconsiderable. On the other hand, the commerce which passes over the river at the city of Omaha alone exceeds all the commerce which floats either on the Mississippi River. the Missouri River, or both combined. There is no question about that fact.
   Let us get at the truth of this matter, the real kernel of it; for what we want to do here, as intelligent legislators, is to expend the money of the people in serving the needs of the people. We are not interested simply in making a stream navigable if no commerce is to be benefited thereby; anti if there is more of benefit to be had in improving the

MEMBERS OF U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

537

river along those points where commerce is engaged, then it may be wise and to our interest to expend money for that purpose.

Having affirmed that improvements should proceed from upstream downward and finding that $1,000,000 had been expended on a stretch of fourteen miles near Jefferson City, where no boat in commerce was entered, he exclaimed:

Now, at that rate, Mr. Chairman, how much money will be required to bring that Missouri River into a navigable condition from its mouth to Sioux City? Why, it would take $80,000,000. How much time will it require at the rate which work has been progressing? It will take one hundred and twenty years. And yet these gentlemen say that the contract system requires that all expenditures be made in continuation of this project, slower in execution than the wrath of God, and more expensive than the most prodigal would care for one moment to stand as sponsor.

Having by an unanswerable array of facts shown that the commerce crossing the river at Omaha and other points was peculiarly "interstate and transcontinental," and was threatened by disasters to the great bridge from floods and changing channels, he gave an analysis of the pending bill:

   Take the appropriations asked for here. They are $750,000. What does this Commission propose to do with that? It proposes to pay for traveling expenses and salaries $20,000; for surveys, permanent bench-marks and gauges, $30,000; for operating snag boat, $35,000; and for a system of improvement in the first reach, that means from the mouth of the Osage River down, about 150 miles, $665,000, which makes up the whole $750,000; and not a particle of it is for the protection of the real commerce that goes across this river, or for the protection of the great interests which ought to be protected, as it seems to me.
   It is time that great national interests located in the West were heard in these halls. The South and East find ready audience, and their petitions seldom denied.
   Of this I do not complain, but submit to your sense of fairness that the reasonable and just claims of the West be no longer ignored.

Ending his labors in the 53rd Congress, second session, he added to the literature of the Record a speech, contrasting state bank issues with national currency.