The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1877-11-30
THE RESUMPTION LAW RE
PEAL BILL
It H.asse. ahe HIOase Iss % Rso


BeB. Batter and - Few Others
Dodge - Vote.
The House of Representatives having
agreed to take a vote on the bill to re-
peal the third section of the resump-
ton law, on Thursday, Nov. y, pro-
ceeded to do so on that day, and after
voting down in succession all the va
rious amendments offered, except Mr..
Forts, which the finance committee
had accepted, reached final vote and
passed the bill by 1873 TO 40. The Gin
cinnati Gazette correspondent gives
the following account OF the House
doiDgs:
The contest ia the House was long
and tedious, and at one time the friends
of the measure became much alarmed.
Mr.. Fort, of Illinois, whose bill was the
one finally passed, spoke bat a few
moments. He understood that .ha pop
ular demand for the repeal OF the re-
sumption act is so great that the peo-
pie would change the Senate and Pres
Ident, If necessary 10 accomplish this.
1r. Fort, as member of the Banking
and Currency COMMITTEES, has con-
stantly opposed amendments beyond
those which provide simply for the re-
peal of the date clause. The bill which
was passed, It Is claimed, will save the
free banking provisions of the act of
1875. Speaker Randall, by a ruling
which did not please the hard money
men, although It satisfied every one
who had amendments, declared that all
amendments offered must be voted up
on. This might have involved calling
the roll fifteen times. The House soon
wearied of roll calls, however, and
nearly all amendments were rejected
by viva v0ce votes. The amendments
proper were fourteen in number. The
Fort amendment, which repeats the re-
sumption clause, but retains the free
banking provisions, was adopted with
out division. The remaining amend
ments were disposed of in their order,
nearly all of them being rejected
without division. HubbelI's amend
ment, which proposed to amend Forts
so as to declare q construction of the
resumption act, was rejected by 8 yea
and nay Vote-90 yeas to 158 nays
The amendment of Gov. Pound of Wis
consin, which provided to amend the
act generally, was rejected by large
vote. The amendment of Mr., Cox, OF
Ohio, providing for gradual resump-
ton, was also rejected by very large
majority. The amenment of Mr.. Cum
mings, of Iowa, providing for gradual
resumption, shared q similar fate, as
did that OF Mr.. Hewitt, of New York,
| authorizing the accumulation Of gold
o. 70 <aF
of legal tenders. Then followed the
defeat In quick succession of Mr.. Eden's
amendment repeating the resumption
clause and prohibiting the further issue
of bank notes; of Mr.. Chittenden's
amendment authorizing the withdraw
al of legal tenders and the reissue OF
bonds; of MIR. Keifer's amendment
prohibiting the retiring and canceling
OF legal tenders; OF Mr.. behring's
amendment which provided for re-
sumption in 1880; and of Mr.. Aldrich's,
limiting the reduction of outstanding
legal tenders, and providing for reis-
sue. Mr.. Stenger's amendment was
the next one to be voted on by yeas
and nays. 1t was very brief, and al
most in exact words followed the ST.
Louis platform, yet there were but sew
entcen Democrats who voted for it. II
was rejected by II yeas to 230 nays.
The remaining amendments were dis
posed of in quick succession, until the
last was reached, that of Mr.. Ward, oil
Pennsylvania. This amendment was
somewhat obscure. The practical eff
feet of iC seemed to be that, after 1879,
whatever might happen to anybody
else, the laboring men should have
their wages paid IN gold. This amend
ment was q piece of claptrap. The
hard money men so interpreted it, and
all voted for 1t in the hope of encum-
bering the bill with it so as to insure
its defeat. There were, beside, lot OF
demagOgues who feared to do anything
which laboring men might seem to in
terpret as opposed to them. The Ell
forts of these two classes resulted in al
most adopting this amendment, the
vote standing yeas 127, nays l29. The
vote was held back before announce
ment for nearly half an hour, for chan
ges to be made, and for names to be
read over twice, something quite unu-
sual. The friends of the resumption
bill were very much alarmed, and great
efforts were made TO induce members
who voted for the amendment e.
change their votes on the ground that
the success of the amendment meant
the defeat of the bill. A number chang.
ed, among them Ben. Butler and
Hayes, of Illinois. If Hayes had moi
changed the vote would have been tied
and the speaker would have been like
ly to have voted for the amendment
But Hayes, at the request of Mr.. Fort
of Illinois, changed his vote to no, sc
the amendment was defeated by two
votes. The Fort ball was then passed
by vote of 1873 yeas to 120 nays.
The following table gives a detailed
analysis of the votes by States and par
ties upon resumption: