University of South Carolina Libraries
' _; - ' Vv-^ ? VV'-l':"1- '"V-; ' .2v<-' V ' ' :-' y - ' > \ - .:-'" ;: '- " - '?}' '" '". ;'-. .? VTl irrn wII gMBi r' I " i nil III ?? Washington, May 29, 1912. a Hon. Harry D. Calhoun, I Barnwell, S. C. Dear Sir: Since dictating a hasty reply to your letter of y the 25th inst. enquiring about a certain vote of Mr. Byrnes of your District it has come to my ? knowledge that I was not the only recipient of such a letter, which led me to conclude that you n - ' f _ 1 ? ^...1. AM * -? A/f - "D 1 T<?- AO mUSt ieei some pecuiicii iiilcicsl in ivj-i. jj vines n and that perhaps for that reason your letter de- tl served a more careful and extended answer. So c< I have taken occasion to verify the impression I a] had entertained of Mr. Byrnes' course in Con- ]j gress and my opinion is confirmed that his record Q has been a most excellent one, and he has display- y ed marked ability on many occasions, and he is a T faithful, able and upright representative; that r( the vote you complain of is the only one of ira- tl portance on which I have differed with him, and ([ that in that he had the company of nearly all the 0i Democrats m me House, including most an or v, the leaders. I could not get my consent to fall u out with him or discredit him for that vote. Un- 0i dor the circumstances he may be right. While I ]a am fully satisfied with the rectitude of my course, tl I admit that it is possible for him to feel the j; same way about his course. He certainly has the advantage of me in having two-thirds of the Democrats of the House with him besides many g of the leading Democrats of the country out of p the House. I SHOULD REGARD IT VERY tl FOOLISH POLICY TO DEFEAT HIM w BECAUSE YOU DIFFER WITH HIM n, ON THAT VOTE. IF YOU DO, YOU ai WILL TURN OUT TWO-THIRDS OF THE p, DEMOCRATS IN THE PRESENT HOUSE ' ti AND RETIRE FROM BUSINESS EVERY k: ONE OF THE DEMOCRATIC CANDI- p] DATES FOR PRESIDENT INCLUDING BRYAN. rc Yours truly, vj L. Signed: W. C. ADAM SON. w ^ Washington, June nth, 1912. Hon. Harry D. Lalhoun, L Barnwell, S. ?. T Dear Sir: tl: I have your rather peculiar inquiry of the ioth fi inst., and hasten to advise you that I was not te solicited by Mr. Byrnes to write you the letter of cc the 29th instant, or any other date, nor did he cl suggest that I write that letter or any other letter in for his satisfaction or any other purpose. After writing you on the 27th, I learned that you had S written similar letters to mine, to other members of the House, among them one of my colleagues T from Georgia. Then it occurred to me perhaps T in writing you hurriedly I had not expressed my- h; self as fully as I should, and I thought it right to th g$f-' send you a supplemental letter. ar Since learning that you are a candidate against lG Mr. Byrnes, I have deemed it only fair to liirn to ju furnish him copies of the two letters which I wrote you. I have no interest in your fight at all and would take no more pleasure in furnishing information affecting you than affecting Mr. Byrnes. It was something unusual to receive a " letter like yours asking me to pass upon the conduct of one of my colleagues, and I confess that I answered it rather hastily. I should have eitli- yQ er weighed the matter more fully before answering you and written you more in detail, or should jr have declined to discuss it at all. ^ Yours very truly, Signed: W. C. ADAM SON. ? e\ Did he receive any other letters from members ^ ar vho voted as he says he would have voted ? Yes; and I'll take another one of his own witnesses, Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. Why didn't he B. publish it? cc of st' Washington, 5-27-12. tu Mr. Harry D. Calhoun, as Barnwell, S. C. th Dear Sir: ' ar Your letter of the 24th inst. received. I appre- fc ciate very much your complimentary reference to j-u my remarks on the Bristow Amendment. You jn say "I notice that Mr. Byrnes of our District ft voted for the 'final adoption of the Bill. How do g( you reconcile his vote with others in this matter." m ; * The arguments advanced by those favoring the w Bill were that it was extremely unlikely that the fe power given by the Amendment would ever be fc exercised, that the danger if any was very re- f mote; and that, unless this amendment was ^ adopted, no resolution could pass providing for the election of Senators by the direct vole of the people. The demand for this reform has become so great that many good men thought it best to vote for the resolution as amended rather than have it fail altogether. A majority of the Congressmen ^ from the South took this position. My feelings and judgment caused me to vote the other way; |. but I feel sure that these gentlemen were as re honest and sincere in their conduct as I was. With reference to Mr. Byrnes, I will say that I am serving on a committee with him and have had a good opportunity to study and to know him. I regard him as a splendid young man, honest, conscientious and intelligent. He is active and m energetic. He devotes himself untiringly to no his work. From what I know of him, I say unhesitatingly that no constituency has a representa- j1( tive who is more anxious to be of service to his constituents, or one who is more unremitting in UN his efforts than has the one represented by Mr. t0 Byrnes. as (Signed) HUBERT D. STEPHENS, tr Member of Congress. p ti< And then Senator Tillman: Mr. Tillman has Jc furnished me copies of his correspondence. Mr. se ocb- Inm wliat lip thnncrhf ahmit ^ V^illliUUil uiu nut ii4i? ?>.v my vote? He asked what he thought of the action of the Democratic House? Mr. Tillman has st furnished me the entire correspondence so that as f>ecause Mr. Calhoun showed part, I could show H : Jr 11 and he would not be done an injustice by him. cli o 11 crivp it o\] in vnti Washington, D. C., June 3rd, 1912. [r. Harry Calhoun, Barnwell, S. C. >ear Mr. Calhoun: Since writing you 011 June 1st, I have thought lore about the proposed constitutional amendlent, and I feel it is due you that I ohould say lis: When the House of Representatives accept:1 that amendment with the proposed Bristovv m'endment 011 it for which all our South Carona members then present, voted, THEY OULD HAVE HARDLY DONE OTHERWISE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. hey had done everything they possibly could to imove the obnoxious provision, had voted for le Bartlett amendment and in every way eneavored to secure an amendment acceptable to tir people. The leading Democrats of the House oted for it, and they did this because of the rgent appeals of William Jennings Bryan and i-liot- loi^lorc ,ri-f tViA rkortv TITPV n1<;r? WPTP UlVi i^UUVA L'i UAV |/Ui X.J U. MAWV TT VA V irgely controlled by the concurrent resolution of le South Carolina General Assembly itself of anuary 24th, ign, a copy of which I send you. THIS CON CURRENT RESOLUTION .MOUNTS TO INSTRUCTIONS TO THE ENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES ROM THE STATE. Indeed it is a part of le Democratic platform passed at Denver, and hile it is true that the Bristow amendment was ot a part of the original program, in their nxiety to get the constitution amended so as to rovide for the direct vote, they felt that we in le South could take the risk because, from their nowledge of conditions and temper of the peole, they felt as I do, that the probability of ever siving to resort to extreme measures, was very :mote, if not impossible. The Yankees are coninced of one thing, I believe, and that is that the hite men in the South will not be governed by re negroes under any circumstances. THIS AMENDMENT IN NO WAY INREASED THE POWER OF CONGRESS O CONTROL ELECTIONS. They can pass te Force Bill now if they had the votes, and om my observation, and I have traveled exnsively and lectured on this subject all over the >untry, I have found the Yankees very little inined to meddle with the South's way of managg the Race Problem. ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, I FAIL TO EE HOW ANY RIGHT THINKING AND !ELL MEANING MAN CAN CRITICISE HE DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED FOR HIS MEASURE. I therefore, would not ive you consider me as doing so in any sense of e word. It is merely a difference of opinion id I know the South Carolina members of the wer house are as good democrats as I am, and ist as anxious to maintain white supremacy. Very sincerely yours, (Signed) B. R. TILLMAN. Washington, June n, 1912. ir. H. D. Calhoun, Barnwell, S. C. y dear Mr. Calhoun: Yours of June 5th to hand, and I note what >u say about the votes of our Democratic ethren in the House of Representatives. I ive never said that our men voted "right." I stinctly said that I thought they made a miske. I do not now say that it: was a "good ing," for I am as much opposed to it now as I rer was, but having done all I could to prevent e Bristow amendment from being tacked on, id THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE ( AVING done: all THEY COULD, i DO i OT FEEL THAT THEY ARE JUSTLY TO E CENSURED and that was all I intended to >nvey to you by my second letter. - The people : South Carolina, if they are opposed to this conitutional amendment can instruct their Legislare to vote it down. I do not feel that there is much danger as you seem to anticipate should e amendment be ratified. I think perhaps the n'cndment will fail to get the necessary three>urth vote. If I were a member of the Legisla- i re, I would vote against it still as I have done I the Senate. None of us know now what the | iture may have in store for us, but all true )uth Carolinians know that under this amendent, if it should be ratified, \\? will maintain hite supremacy in South Carolina, just as we I tve maintained it in spite of the thirteenth and >urteenth amendments, AND I DO NOT IilNK YOU OUGHT TO BE UNHAPPY BOUT IT. Very respectfully yours, (Signed) B. R. TILLMAN. . Washington, June 12, 1912. r. hi. JJ. Lamoun, Barnwell, S. C. j "y dear Sir: ' Replying to yours of June ioth, Mr. Byrnes d not solicit or suggest that I write you again in ference to what I had written. i Yours very respectfully, I (Signed) B. R. TILLMAN. j Don't you think that in fairness to Senator Tillan he should have printed all of his letters and )t misled the people? As to Senator Bacon, I care nothing for what 4 thinks about it. Having voted against the rerwhelming majority of Democrats he is trying explain the best h'e can. He may say he voted gainst this measurev because he believed it deacted from the power of the States; but few iople in Washington believe he favors the elecm of Senators by the people at all. Senator )hnston, of Alabama, says the Southern reprentatives voted against this measure because ey were younger than he is. Some of the xithern representatives, many of them who uck to their party, are as old as he is and have . good memories, not to speak of common sense, e may criticize the Southern representatives, - : . \ ' - <. ' '-> " ' V-r.-: -V ' - . -J --4 - ... ' . - r /*,-- 1 i : ' 7 ; 'y.' " ' ' ; " ' l" ' - \ '"' ' '. '/'*'r.;-' but I am glad that I voted with a majority of them against him. He voted for Lorimer and now has opposed to him Capt. Richmond P. HobCAn nrliA Ttnll triArf 11t r j\su, *yiiu win liiv-raL urvti^y ucicdi nun. v.ci umuy, one of the other Senators who voted against this measure, has already been defeated, Foster, of Louisiana. When Mr. Calhoun says or intimates that he fears negro domination again in South Carolina, he does not mean it. He does it for votes. When in '76, with half the manhood of the State left lying on the fields of Virginia, those who remained, poverty stricken though they were, and surrounded by Yankee soldiers, overthrew negro rule and established white supremacy, they established it forever; and today no man with red blood in his veins will admit the possibility of his being ruled by an inferior race of negroes. If I feared it I would not admit it, and the mere statement is an insult to the white people of the South, and unworthy of a man who boasts of the glorious name of Calhoun and the military name of Colonel. Oscar Underwood Tells Why He Fought For Amendment. May 2ist, 1912. Mr. Morrison H. Caldwell, Concord, North Carolina. My dear Caldwell: Yours of the 19th inst. reached me this morning, in reference to the Bristow amendment. Of course, as you understand, the Bristow amendment is merely in line with amendments to the Constitution that have repeatedly passed the House of Representatives since the Civil war, and received the votes of the Democrats in Congress. It places the United States Senators on exactly the same status as the members of Congress. It does not in any way change the qualifications of voters and I do not think there would have been any real question raised about the matter if it had not been for the fact that I was a candidate for the Presidential nomination and the Wilson men in the House tried to use my vote to affect the result of the election in North Carolina. In this day and time there is no possibility of a Force bill being enacted. I really believe it is an injury to our people in the South for some of our Statesmen to continue to talk about it. If the Bartlett proposition had been agreed to in the House, the Senate undoubtedly would not have concurred and it would have resulted in the defeat of the resolution to elect United States Senators by the people. As I have always been heartily in accord with the main purpose of the resolution, I could not vote for a proposition that I felt was intended to defeat it. Of course, the real vote was on the adoption of the Bristow amendment itself. Two hundred and thirty-seven voted in favor of it and thirtynine aginst it. All the Democrats from New Jersey, Mr. Wilson's state, voted with me against the Bartlett amendment, as did Mr. Henry, of Texas, and Mr. Burleson, of Texas, who were recently in North Carolina, making speeches for Governor Wilson. On the passage of the Bristow amendment, Burleson and Henry both voted for it, as did Messrs. Kitchen, Page, Pou, Small and Stedman of your State and most of the Democratic members from the South. When the final vote was taken in the Senate on the Bristow amendment, Senator Simmons of your State voted for it and Senator Overman, who gave out the interview against me stated in the Senate, wherr his name was called, "On the 'final passage of the joint resolution as amended (which was the Bristow amendment) I am paired with the Senior Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Tillman). If he were presented he would vote "nay" and I should vote "yea." I send you record of June 12, 1912, with corner ot page turned, giving the vote of the Senate, and also the Record of May 13th, giving my speech on the vote in the House. I think after an examination of these records you will see that the charges made against my vote were purely for political reasons to effect the present campaign, and that the position I took was really sustained by the Senators and members of Congress from North Carolina, because if they really thought there was danger in the Bristow amendment, they would not have voted for it. Of course, it goes without saying that I am not in favor of a Force Bill, or having Federal troops at the polls, but I was in favor of electing United States Senators by the people, and cast my vote to accomplish the result. Sincerely yours, (Signed) O. W. UNDERWOOD. Senator Tillman Says This Amounted to Instruction to Vote as Byrnes Did. RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN 1911 IN REGARD TO THE ELECTION OF UNITED STATES SENATORS BY A ' VOTE OF THE PEOPLE. Sec. i. That it is the sense of the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina that the Constitution of the United States relative to the election of United States Senators be so amended as to provide for their election by a direct vote of the people of each State. Sec. 2. That a copy of this resolution be furnished each member of Congress from South Carolina. In the House, ? Columbia, S. C., January 24th, 1911. J* Comments of the Press on Mr. Byrnes' /" 1 117 1_ vaooa tv urn* BYRNES FORGING TO THE FRONT. The Washington correspondence of the News and Courier contained the following: ?: , None of the first-term members of Congress from the South, and very few of such members from any part of the country, can be justly said to have acquired more influence in the deliberations of the 62nd session than Mr. James F. Byrnes, of the Second South Carolina district. This fact is the more remarkable in connection ? with the circumstances that Mr. Byrnes Is one of the youngest Congressmen on the whole list. He has shown a great deal of practical ability in shaping matters for presentation on the floor, and likewise in advancing them in debate after they have come up for consideration by the House. 4 His success as an organizer has begun to attract ~ much attention from his colleagues. One of the phipf pigments in the success is that he does not seem to care overmuch who gets the credit, individually, for promoting legislation in which he is interested, provided only that the legislation is The great influence of Mr. Byrnes in advancing the movement for Federal aid for good roadsin the various States by organizing the advocates of this policy in a compact phalanx behind a joint bill, offered as a rider to the postoffice appropriation bill, has been mentioned in this cocresponMr. Byrnes has also been extremely active as a' member of the war claims committee in pushing the effort to secure definite information from the Government as to the ownership of property * j|| captured and sold by the Federal authorities dur-1 ing the civil war, and his bill on this subject, favorably recommended by the war claims committee, has been made the subject of a long communication from the Secretary of War to the Speaker of the House. Another committee on which the young South Carolinian has been prominent is the committee .-JsSB on banking and currency, which made him a . member of its sub-committee to handle the Money Trust investigation. While at first in favor -M of the action of the House Democratic caucus, y|j which assigned various phases of this inquiry to other committees, Mr. Byrnes became convinced gjjj&a from subsequent experience as a member of the sub-committee that if a genuine investigation was to be made, it would have to be concentrat- *':W% pA in r\r\p rnmmittp^ with am Die nowers. and in supporting the request of his sub-committee for such authority in the debate of Thursday, which .. 'SM resulted in overwhelming accession to the sub- / ^|3| committee's views, Mr. Byrnes drew great applause by declaring, in colloquy with Representa tive Tribble, of Georgia: / "For my part, as a member of this sub-committee. I do not want to be connected with an investigation the result of which we know now would be a farce, because we would be stopped .J|| at every step, and if we arc to be hedged in, if we are to be restricted in our power, I can say to * - the House that I intend to ask the chairman to be relieved from duty upon this committee, because I do not desire to be one of a committee starting out to investigate a Money Trust, by direction of this House, and knowing from the very cam- |j mencement of the investigation that we can absolutely make of it nothing but a farce." WHERE THERE'S NO DANGER. ' 'iBfl The people of South Carolina are not likely take seriously an outcry against South Carolinamembers of Congress because they voted for the amendment providing for the election of United States Senators by direct vote. The adoption of the amendment in the form in which it finally G^.gKjS passed Congress, to be submitted to the States for ratification, gives to the Federal government no more power to interfere with senatorial elections than the government already has in respect to the election of members of the Lower House. The last 36 years have proved conclusively that there is no danger of negro domination in the South, and if the danger of a "force bill" could be escaped a quarter of a century ago, when both v Houses of Congress were still full of Northerners of the generation that had participated in the War Between the Sections, it is ridiculous to talk about the existence of such a danger now. The people of South Carolina are suffering from the oppression that the election of Senators by machine-controlled legislatures in many States causes. What .is desirable now is that the Senate shall be restored to the people. The people of the South can be depended upon to keep it out of the hands of the negroes.?Editorial appearing in Columbia State Jun'e 26, 1912. BYRNES COMMENDED. We have received and read with interest a copy of the speech made in the House on April 22nd by Hon. James F. Byrnes of this Congressional District in favor of a bill providing for the payment out of the public funds of compensation for the use of the highways over which the rural mails are carried. Though interrupted and questioned by several city Congressmen Mr. Byrnes sustained himself excellently in running debate and made an argument that showed his accurate and entire acquaintance with the benefits that would come to the farming interests of the country. And what helps the farmers helps i everybody.?The Barnwell People.