The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-06-22

authorize the issue Of one and two-doIar notes
in place of mutilated and cancelled notes of like
denomination.
Mr.. Randall raised the point Of order against
the amendment also, declaring that the avowed
object of the proposition was 20 compel differ
ent administration of the law than was practiced
at present. and, therefore, changed existing laws.
Mr.. Anderson, of Kansas, stated that the
amendment was in the exact language OF the
existing law. He did not think that point of
order should be raised against proposition to
compel the Secretary of the Treasury to obey
the law.
Mr.. Randall think he has,
Mr.. Anderson think he has not
Mr. Randall-The gentleman wants to compel
him to do something, and / want him to exer-
else the discretion lodged in him by existing law
Mr.. Anderson-The Secretary has not obeyed
existing law.
the amendment was in contravention OF the rules
of the House.
Mr.. Ryan, Of Kansas, took the ground that
the amendment was sort Of suggestion by the
legislative body to the executive that it desired
to have the 81 and So notes reissued. and nothing
more.
Mr. Bland, of Missouri, said that the law on
the statute book required the Treasurer to keep
in circulation $346, 600 900 legaltender notes If
this amendment were adopted, the amount of
legaltender notes would not be increased, but
between 40, 1000 900 and $4,000, 900 silver dollars
would be piled up in the Treasury. His policy
would be to leave the legaltender circulation
where it was, and make room for ST. and 81 coin
notes issued upon silver. Silver needed legisla-
ton to get it in neutrality-suspicious. needed
none. The amendment he contended. violated
existing laws because 1t changed the discretion
of the Secretary of the Treasury. 1t was bad
policy for those who advocated silver circulation
to endeavor to drive silver out of circulation by
compelling the issue of ST. and So legal-tender
notes.
The Chair overruled the point Of order, and
then Mr.. Warner advocated the adoption Of the
amendment. He desired he said. to let the peo-
pie choose which they would Undergraduates
silver.
Mr. Bland emphatically opposed the amend
ment, regarding it as attempt on the part of
the opponents of silver 70 do away with the ne
cessty of passing the bill providing for the issue
of silver certificates of small denominations.
MIR. Weaver, OF Iowa, announced himself as
good a silver man as the gentleman from Mis-
souri,, but declared that if the fight came be-
tween greenbacks and silver, he was greenback
man.
Mr.. Symes, of Colorado, spoke a good word
for the silver dollar, and Mr.. Miller, of Texas
stated that it was the intention of the banking
and currency committee to call up the certificate
bill as soon as the appropriation bills were dis
posed of.
The amendment was lost-75 to 81.
Mr.. Warner then offered an amendment of
similar purport but pending action the commit
tee rose.
Mr.. Zach Taylor, of Tennessee offered reso-
luton reciting the fact that the lower portion of
the city of Memphis has been in part destroyed
by the caving of the bank of the Mississippi
river at that point. and authorizing the loaning
to the properly authorized officers of the taxing
district of Shelby county all or enough of the
under the control of the Mississippi River Com
mission, to be used in improving the river below
Peel street in that city. The resolution was
adopted, and the House adjourned.