The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-06-01

cratic members gathered around Springer
giving him aid and encou 'agement, wbil
many republican members were also Of
their feet, protesting urgently agaiDs
Springer, but Springer informed the speak
er deiiantly that he could not be taken from
the floor.
Humphreys, of Wisconsin-"You car
and will. | can do IL myself"
Springer-"lt would take larger pat
tern than you TO do il" CONTINUED
The Speaker-"The chair can very vel
afford 70 allow the gentleman from Illinois
to make rema'ks so far as they
apply TO the chair alone, but it is
quite another thing when gentleman
undertakes TO DESTROY the dignity of the
house by his own conduct" Applause by
the republicans.
springer-"That has been already de-
stroyed."
That is So" said Reed, "by your side of
the house."
The speaker-"Any proper motion that
the gentleman may wish to make relating
to the correction oi The journal, will be en-
tertained by The chair and submitted 10 the
house. The journal clerk in emitting the
motions that were not entertained pro-
ceeded1 exactly in accordance with the
rules"
Knott, of Kentucky, after some further
coloquy, made a constitutional argu-
ment in support of Springer's position.
The command of the constitution was
plain aud peremptory that each house
should keep a journal of its proceedings.
If that meant anything it meant that every
transaction which took place during its sea-
sions every motion mace and every ruling
on it, should be reduced to writing. The
journal implied a complete and truthful
journal. The truth that a motion was out
Of order was no reason why that motion
and ruling upon it should not appear on
the journal. On the contrary, IL should be
recorded as precedent Tor the future. II
nothing was to so on the iournal except
whatever the speaker choose TO have en-
tered on it, then the will of the speaker and
not the constitution or the rules would be
law of the house. Where was the redress
and what would then become of the
provision of the constitution which
required that the proceedings
Of the house should be truthfully recorded?
Had it come 10 this, that the arbitrary
dictum of the speaker, right or wrong, was
10 supersede and overrule the constitu-
tion? He had as high respect for the
speaker as any other member had, yet he
could not say the speaker was infalllble or
incapable of making mistakes. When the
speaker refused TO entertain the motion,
was he perfectly justified in such refusal?
He (kuott) could not say that the speaker
was not mistaken. On the contrary, he
said that the speaker was mistaken because
the rules gave the RIGHT of appeal from the
decision of the chair.
oenarai nronos;tion stated hv Knott hut
repeated that the jonrnal clerk had acted
strictly in obedience to the rules.
Haskell, of Kansas, argued that the jour
nal was 10. contain the proceedings OF the
the h1nse 4 motion that was not ente3-
,ained could certainly form no part of the
nroceedings of tbe house. After further re-
marks by Ka ,son. Kelley and Randall, a
motion to correct the journal was rejected
yeas 50. nays. l24.
Miller, of PENNSYLVANIA, then proceeded
with his opening speech in the contested
election case of Mackey VS.. O'Connor, but
mad not finished The first sentence when the
attention of the speaker was called by
the democratic member. to the fact that
the journal had not vet been approved,
They demanded the yeas and nays on the
question of approyal. The vote proceeded
and as the democrats withheld tLeir votes,
there was a likelihood of a failure of a
quorum, but an active hunt after repub-
lican absentees disclosed the fact that Will
son. of West Virginia, and Morse of Massa-
chusetts. who were paired, carried out their
promise to vote, if necessary to make
Quorum, which resulted in l46 yeas and 30
nays. So that b,e journal of yesterday was
approved.
Miller, of Pennsylvania, then proceeded
with his speech in favor of the report of the
elections committee in the case of Mackey
VS.. NO'Connor. In the course of his speech
Miller caused some amusement by an
exhibition of tissue ballots, which he called
"little iokeis" by which democratic frauds
are said to have been committed in South
Carolina. He gave an illustration of them
and suggested that in some close northern
districts il might be convenient for demo-
,rotc candidates 10 understand the game.
Tho discussion was continued by Davis,
of Missouti. AGAINST tbe teport, bv Paul, of
Viginia. in favor of il. Much OF Paul's
sneech was dlrecred TO the discussion of the
reimbursement poiicy I'm Virginia, to the
nIaise ofIbe readiusters as an honest party
and to criticism of tbe other southern
states in connection with their debts.
In fact. he declared that Virginia was the
only dehf.nayino sIate of the late Southern