The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1884-06-19
END OF HIS TILT IN THE
SENATE WITH INGALLS, OF
KANSAS.
Brown ChOked off by the Choir
and Ingalls, Stands UP to
His Words.
Democratic Caucus to Deter
mine Upon a New Pro-,
gramme in the House.
Points of the Mexican Treaty
and Its Policy Shown mp and
Defended.


WASHINGTON, June 17.-After the
reading OF the journal, Mr.. Brown
rose to a. question of privilege. lie
had the clerk to read the remarks of
Mr.. ingalls, made yesterday, relating
to Mr.. Browns version of his (Brown's)
remarks made in the debate of Friday
last.
When the clerk had concluded the
reading, Mr.. Brown said he had
not replied to Ingalls, yesterday,
because he did not wish to speak
under the irritation which Ingalls,
words were calculated and intended
to provoke. In what he had to say,
he would keep within the decorum of
the senate, and he had reduced his re-
marks to writing. He called the at
tention Of the senate to the insulting
and opprobious language used by
Ingalls, towards a member of the SEN
ate, who could not repel such insults
without a violation of the rules, which
all senators were, in honor, bound to
obey. Mr.. Brown did not wish to
glaze over the matter. The charge
of the senator from Kansas
was that of falsefying the
the record and committing forgery
upon the records of the senate. This
language was a deliberately planned
insult and uttered not only in viola
tion of the rules but in defiance of the
authority of the presiding officer of
the senate.
The chair remarked If the senator
was applying that language too the
senator from Kansas, he (Brown) was
doing the very thing he was charging
against THAT senator in accusing a
brother senator of deliberately plan
ing an insult. The chair said the SEN
ator from Georgia was out of order.
Mr.. BroWn-"Then sir the remark Is
withdrawn under the ruling of the
chair" The remarks of the senator
from Kansas, Mr.. Brown said, were
not made hastily, but, after two days
had elapsed, and after, as Brown sup
posed, a satisfactory disclaimer had
been made of all offensive imputatiOnS.
Mr.. Brown then referred to the un-
senator's. No matter how accurate
reporter may be, he could not
hear all senators with equal dis
tinctness. Had the senator from
Kansas called his attention to the
words complained of, as was usual in
such cases, he would publicly have dl-
vested the language of every trace,
even of seeming unkindnesS and de-
probation. Notwithstanding, even
assurance was given in the senate by
Mr.. Brown, the senator from Kansas
had persisted in his purpose OF insult
ing a senator.
The chair thought this observation
was out of order.
Mr.. Brown submitted to the senate
whether it would permit such an
outrageous breach of its privileges
to go unnoticed. In regard to
want of courage there was moth
ing in the person, character or
antecedents of the senator from Kan
sas to make him an object of appre-
hension, or to excite the fears of any
man. There was no place so safe as
this senate chamber for man of dis
Greet courage to bluSter and parade
his vituperative rhetoric. No other
senator would have used such lam
guage as the senator from Kansas
had used under the protection of the
senate, and he Qngalls) would not
use it except under the protection OF
the senate.
Mr.. Ingalls, saidif the senator from
Georgia would allow the remarks
made this morning to stand as they
had been delivered, he Qngalls) would
be contented, ,butlf these remarks were
to be amended .by Interpolation and
observations not delivered, after they
had betn sent to the printing house,
he Ingslls) preferred' to wait before
canVaSsing the vote until all the re-
turns were in. The senator from
Georgia, Mr.. Ingalls, said, was
mightier with the pen than with
either the tongue or the sword; that
the senator shed ink like water. He
was very courageous with the
pen. Mr.. Ingalls, would not be
diverted from the real question
at issue. The question was, whether
the records of the senate had been fall
sified by the Interpolation of matter,
personal in its character, susceptible
only of an offensive Interpretation,
after the records had been made up by
the reporter. This would not have
been done in the ordinary affairs of
life, between one gentleman and anoth-
er. THE chair thought this remark
out of order.
Mr. lngallS Ln6Q WlbHuIcW IuO 10
mark and said to the chair that it
would not appear on record. He en-
quired how it would be ii senator
should write into the debate state
ments to the effect that the senator
from Alaska was cunning and sane
timonious hypocrite, who was forever
washing his hands with invisible soap,
imperceptible water, and that they
were not over clean morally after that
performance. Suppose he were to
characterize the senator from Alaska,
after the debate had ceased, the" . riah
Heap of the senate? Suppose
he were to say he was the Joseph
Surface of American politics; that he
was the snivelling political pecksniff
who had been on all sides of every po-
litical question, who had belonged to
every political party in his life time
and belonged to none he had not be-
traged? Would that be within
the privileges of debate, or In accor-
canoe with the proprieties of legisla-
tiAe proceedingsY These observations
Mr.. Ingalls, said he used as illnstra-
Itions. They had no personal applica.
ton. AS TO the imputations of the
senator from Georgia, upon his Gin
gall's) courage and appearance
| he begged to say to the senator from
(sooroia that he HnQallSl here dis