Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-06-24
HAWLEY WINS HIS POINT.
THE ANTI-RETENTION BILL TO
BE RECONSTRUCTED.

All the Republicans Except Mr.. Van
Wyck Vote in the Affirmative and
Five Democrats Follow Suit-Mr. Ed
munds Promises that the Judiciary
Committee VIII Not shelve the Bit.
WASHINGTON, June 23.-Mr. Hawley's
notion was taken up by the Senate to-day
to reconsider the vote by which the Senate
passed the bill prohibiting members OF
Congress from acting as attorneys of land
grant railroads. Mr.. Beck resumed the
floor and continued mis- remarks against
reconsideration. He denied that he had
Intended to ipjure anybody by the intro
auction Of the bill.
If the Senate should agree to the mo-
ton to reconsider that would be the last
of the bill.
Mr.. Beck read Mr.. MitchelPs amend
ment proposing to forbid members of Con-
gress from dong law business for men
who were managers of banks or i'm
porters of foreign goods, or who manu-
factured butter, Oleomargarine, tobacco
Or whisky. "If that is not taking a lick
atcreation," :" exclaimed Mf. Beck. He de.
precated that sort of amendment, but
added that he had often heard the fable of
the advice given to all foxes by fox
whose tail had been cut off. That advice
was that they should all have their tails
cut off because his had been cut off. He
thought the fable illustrated the case of
this amendment.
MIR. MITCHELL'5 DENIAL.
In reply to a reference by Mr.. Beck TO
the published report that Mr.. Mitchell
was attorney for the Northern Pacific Rail-
road Company. Mr.. Mitchell said with
some warmth that ne was the attorney of
20 railroad. He desired the Senator from
Kentucky Mr.. Beck to understand that
he Mr.. Miiehell) had never while in the
Senate been employed by any railroad
company to argue any case in court or
out. He was not now and had not been
for over year the attorney of any corpo-
ration whatever. He was representing
no corporation here. If the bill were to be
passed on the idea that every member of
Congress who was a lawyer was dishonest
with a view Of making him honest, then
the bill should he made to include matters
indicated in Mr.. MltchelPs suggested
amendment.
CRITICISED BY CALL.
Mr.. Call did not dispute Mr.. Beck's de-
Fotion to the public interest, but regarded
the bill as most hurttul to the interests of
the country and to the character of the
Senate. 1t would result in holding Sena-
tors responsible not TO the Senate, but to
Judge of the United States Court. A
dozen United States Judges could be
bought before two-thirds OF the Senate
eould. The people of Florida had once
elected majority of Democrats to their
Legislature. How did the Republicans
overcome that majority? BY getting
United States Judge to order the arrest OF
the Democratic members. we were In
the habit of belittliug the Senate and
It's functions and the character of the
Senators, but that was wholly wrong.
No pTAGON EOR TT
There was no reason for it. Neither was
there any reason for any presumption
shat there were any paid attorneys here.
The theory of the bill was that the men,
bers of Congress could be bought by fees
as attorneys, Ii that theory was correct
the Senate could not prevent it by saying
that that special fern of purchase should
not be effected. There were thousand
ways by which men could be corrupted
without retaining them as lawyers and
without the payment Of money.
MIR. Mitchell asked Mr.. Beck when he
had been told that he Mr.. Mitchell was
attorney for the Northern Pacific.
Mr.. Beck said he had been so told; the
gime did not matter.
Mr.. Mitchell said he was not in con-
tessional, but he had resigned eight
4 months before his election.
SIMPLY LIE.
He Mr.. Mitchell remembered the time
when it had been said In the newspapers
that certain members of Congress were
very Jealous in regard to certain whisky
matters.
Mr.. Beck-Oh, well, that was just SIM
ply lie; that's all there Is about that
Laughter.
Mr.. Mitchell had no doubt of that.
MIR. Pugh SAID he bad voted for the bill,
but, on afterward examining it, he bad
concluded that it was hasty, incOnsider-
ate and mischievous legislation.
Mr.. Evarts said that OF seventy-six
Senators sixty-five were lawyers. This
bill was a reprOach on these lawyers. He
had never, except in the vilest revilings,
heard any reproach OF the great pro-
fession of the law. He had never heard
outside the Senate so deep stigma on
. the Senate az was placed on 1t by this
bill But whether good or bad 1t was GER
. tainly serious and far-reaching measure.
and was entitled to deliberate considera-
ton.
UNDER A BIAS.
Mr.. Edmunds said the theory of the bill
was that gentlemen OF the profession OF
The law having clients were under bias
IN favor of those clients, and that this
bill was necessary in order TO exclude
that bias. Mr., Edmunds' voice gave out
before he bad proceeded far and be was
seized with a troublesome cough. lie
. tpok MS seat with remark b0at Tue sldIe
i OF his health did not permit him to debate
The question further.
Mr.. Vance said there was an impression
thrOuohout the country that good deal
Of iObberY and improper legislation ema-
mated from Congress. Whether that was
true or not, 1t was the part of wise men TO
hyoid the occasion for the imputaiion.
ne thought il would be unfortunate Tor
The Senate not TO stand by this bill.
Il Mr. Hawley thought that his motion TO
n reconsider was amply justified by tue de-
bate.
RECONSIDERATION GRANTED.
Mr.. Sherman taking the floor SAID the
universal rule Of the Senate was 10 grant
reconsideration almost as matter or
c9urse whenever asked for. Even when
.le senate was almost unit againet
~ vote for its reconsideration had
often been unanimous. This bill met bis
nearly approval. The criticisms made
hSainst IL were rather too fine.
Tue motion 10 reconsider having been
brought 10 a vote was agreed 10 by III yeas
20 II nays. The only Republican voting
,h the negative was Mr.. Van Wyck. The
democrats voting In the affirmative were
R,sars. Call, Gray, Payne, Pugh and
tsnsOm.
Nlr llawley then moved 10 refer the bill
" ".lf judiciary Committee.
Mfs unca called for the reading 0f the