St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-04-24

mittee of the whole.
Mr.. Turner, of Georgia, chairman OF the
committee on elections, called up the Kan
sas contested election case of Wood VS..
Peters. The majority resolution declares in
favor Of the sitting member, Peters. The
resolution of the minority provides for the
seating of the contestant Wood. The great
er portion of the day was consumed in dis
cussion of the case, and finally the minority
resolution was lost, only two members, Ben
nett and Weller, voting in the affirmative,
and the majority resolution was adopted.
Mr.. Calkins requested Mr.. Kasson to with
draw the point of order which sent the naval
appropriation bill with the senate amend
ments to the committee of the whole, but
Kasson declined, las unsatisfactory agreement
could be arrived at as to the time to be al
lowed for the debate. The house then went
into committee of the whole, Mr.. Converse
in the chair, on that bill.
Mr.. Randall said the senate had added
twenty important amendments, increasing
the appropriations to the extent of Sc, $685.
$50, and one amendment which reduced
them s., 900.
Mr.. Kasson said the main Importance of
the amendments was not in the amount of
money appropriated, but in the object
of the appropriation. 1t was
proposed to secure the armament for
new vessels now in process of completion,
and proceed with the construction of four
new cruisers. He recalled the time when
the United States navy was the pride of the
country, and when no banquet was complete
without toast in honor of the army and
navy There was no such navy to-day, and
the Iroquois club and Free Trade club met
and banqueted without a word commemor-
atng either of the great national defenses.
This indicated decay upon political men, that
the sentiment of national honor which under
lay the national glory and national prosperity.
The arm of the executive government was
paralyzed by the consciousness that it could
not back its positions with that degree Of
physical force which every nation recognized
as necessary addition to moral force. He
pictured the dangers which threatened any
nation which had not sufficient strength to
defend itself from humiliation. Foreign in
fuence, under the protection of foreign gov
ernments, had already seized one of the great
| lulcI OCGduIC JdSSd8to DtbNcCu luc dClut
and Atlantic, which had been the occasion Of
an intellectual contest, and struggle between
this country and foreign governments for
fifty years. The great water route by way Of
Nicaragua which has been neglected for two
years, would soon pass from our control
and become property of an
alien government, unless the United
States were prepared to defend with the RICH
hand of physical power its right to control
that great route. Wherever he looked he
saw the progress of measures directly hostile
to our interests and directly in the teeth of
the policy that every government in this
country has asserted to be vital to it. If he
did not mistake the temper of the house
it would declare war rather than see the
Nicaragua route pass out of the control of
this government. He expressed his admira-
ton of the action of the Democratic senators
in voting an appropriation for new vessels,
and for proper ordnance, and he hoped that
in this house the record might at the proper
time show, when it came to a question of
national honor and national safety, that
there was no division, and he appealed to
his friends from the south to help
restore the old sentiment of honor and adj
miration for the navy, which could not be
restored until the flag was put afoat upon
the seas, aud the country was ready to de-
fend it with its blood. He wanted the new
vessels to be furnished with guns, and the
country to be exempt from that danger Of
humiliation which was ever present to every
nation which was not prepared by blood and
physical means to defend its honor.
Mr. Randall in reply said no one on the
~ ~ rI,e
thized with that party, was responsible for
the paralysis of the navy or was guilty of
neglect in that particular. The senate amend
ments to the naval bill increased the appro-
priations over Sc, 100000. OF this 2,000,-
900 was for monitors, and 50, 500, 600 for
steel cruisers. That amendment was sub
stantaly the bill on the speakers table. He
suggested that wisdom dictated to the house
not to enter on building of III ore cruisers on
this bill when there was a bill on the same
subject pending in the naval committee,
waiting consideration, as to whether the
cruisers already authorized would be a com
plete success Another item of the increased
appropriation was S680,000 for ordnance.
When opportunity offered and time permit
ted, he was willing to discuss that subject
very fully whether the navy department was
a proper department to be entrusted with
that amount of money. The committee in
asking the house to dissent from these
amendments thought the business of the
house would be facilitated thereby, and an
intelligent and wise conclusion could be
reached through conference committee.
Mr. Reed criticized Randalls remarks
saving no reasons were given for the conclu-
sion at which the gentleman arrived. The
gentleman knew the bill pending on the
speakers table was there, not for life. but
for death. In other words, he did not want
to adopt the amendment because there was
another bill on the speakers table, which he
knew could not pass. The gentleman said,
1--WE are not responsible for the paralysis of
the navy, that belongs to the past" Who
was Irresponsible for the paralysis at present?
Would the gentleman deny that the paralysis
which would ensue, when the cruisers were
afoat without gun, was due to him?"
Mr. Calkins, member of the committee
on aspirations, said it had been determined
by that committee to non concur in all
amendments and let them go to the confer
ence committee, not for the reason that the
minority did not favor most of the amend
ments, but for the purpose of facilitating, if
possible, the passage of the bill.
Mr.. Dorsheimer having been granted five
minutes time by Mr.. Randall, expressed his
opinion that the house should withdraw from
the untenable position in which it was
placed, not only because it was a wise party
policy to withdraw from that position, but
because the plainest dictates of patriotism
required it. Was there anybody here
who contended that any party could
stand in this country which opposed
the rehabilitation of the navy. He was not
asking for great navy, for such navy as
France Or ENGLAND or Germany had but he