The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-04-24
THE HOUSE.
The Greater Portion of the Day Devoted to n
Contested Election.

Contested Election.
WASHINGTON, April 23.-ME Payson, from
the committee on public lands, reported bill to
prevent unlawful occupancy of public lands,
which was placed on the House calendar.
Mr. Randall from the committee on appro-
priations, reported back the naval appropriation
bill, with the senate amendments, and moved
Inconvenience in these amendments.
Mr. Kasson raised the point of order that the
amendments must first be considered in commit
tee of the whole. The bill was an important one,
affecting as it did, the construction of the new
naval cruisers, and he did not think the House
should, pro forma, express non-eoncurrenee in
the amendments.
The Speaker sustained the point of order, and
the bill, with the amendments was referred to
the committee of the whole.
Mr. Randall said he would not move to go into
committee, as he had agreed not to interfere
with the tariff bill at this time. The action
of the appropriations committee in recon-
mending non concurrence in the amendments,
was for the purpose of expediting the appropria-
ton bills and to secure early adjournment.
Mr. TownShend, from the same committee,
reported back the postoffice appropriation
bill with the Senate amendments, and moved
non-concurrence in those amendments.
On point of order by Mr.. Kasson, this bill
and the amendments also, were referred to the
committee of the whole.
Mr. Turner, of Georgia, chairman of the COM
mittee on elections, called up the Kansas con
tested election case of Wood VS.. Peters. The
majority resolutions declares in favor of seating
Mr. Peters. The resolution of the minority pro-
vides for the seating of contestant Wood
The greater portion of the day was consumed
in discussion of the case. 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 towithdraw
the point of order which sent the naval appro-
priation bill, with the Senate amendments, to the
committee of the whole but Mr.. Kasson de-
clined, as no satisfactory agreement could be ar
rived at as to the time to be allowed for debate.
The House then went into committee OF the
whole Mr.. Converse in the chair), on the naval
bill.
Mr. Randall said the Senate had added an i'm
portant amendment increasing the appropriation
to the extent of Sc, 528 $780, and one amendment
which reduced them S. 000
Mr. Kasson said the main importance of the
amendments was not in the amount of money
appropriated, but in the object of the appropra-
tons 1t was proposed to secure ornaments for
the vessels now in process of completion,
and to proceed with the construction of four
new cruisers.
Debate ensued, participated in by Messrs. Kas-
son. Randall and Reed.
Mr.. Dorshemer, having been granted five
minutes by Mr.. Randall expressed the opinion
that the House should withdraw from the UNI
only because it was wise party policy to with
draw from that position, but because the plainest
dictates Of patriotism demanded it. Was there
anybody who contended that any party could
stand in this country which opposed rehabilita-
ton of the navy. He was not asking for great
navy, for such a navy France, England,
OF Germany had, but he would
like to see navy equal to that
of Portugal and Denmark. He would like that
the great cities of the seaboard were not abso-
lutely at the mercy of one of the third-eass
powers of the world The House should go on
and order additional vessels and if it did not, it
would meet with severe judgement from the
country at large 1t had been said Congress
must wait until it saw whether the four ships in
course of construction were good. Had it come
to thisl Had the Americans, at one time dis
putting possession of the seas with the most
powerful nations of the world, come to this-that
they must wait to see whether one ship was
good before they built anotherl
At this point the gavel fell, and Mr.. Randall
rose to reply.
Mr.. Dorsheimer interrupted him, to say that
the gentleman had promised to yield to him fif
teen minutes.
Mr.. Randall denied having made any such
agreement, saying he had promised to yield the
gentleman such time as he could, dependent
upon the time consumed by Mr.. Reed and Mr.
Calkins.
Quite an angry dispute arose between the gem
tlemen on this point, in the course of which Mr.
Randall said the gentleman from New York did
not understand him as yielding fifteen minutes.
when it comes to that, said Mr.. Dorsheimer,
angrily, II say that did"
'And say you did not, retorted Mr. Randall.
81 put my word against yours and will let the
House judge of it, continued Mr.. Dorshelmer.
81 say this" replied Mr. Randall, that when
the gentleman took the floor | said to the chair
man that yielded five minutes, and that fact
all around here know"
Mr.. Dorsheimer: ''That did not hear; but
when l left the gentleman gave me assurance
l should have fifteen minutes land again repeat
put my word against his"
Mr. Henly corroborated Mr.. Randalls state