The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-05-21

two-thirds vote the action OF the com
mittee In rejecting the SOFA led SUD.
sidy amendment TO the postofice bill
inserted by the Senate.
Mr.. 2. Taylor Tenn offered an
amendment providing tnat 400 OCO
shall be appli' d 10 the transportation
OF foreign mails by existing lines run
ming from New 0fleans 10 CenirAl and
South American ports.
Mr.. Hewitt IN. Y moved 10 strike
out the Appropriated for $500, 600 and
insert one Of $500 600, and TO add 10
the Senate amendment the following:
"And the Postmaster General she'll, As
far as pc sible, cause the msils OF the
United States 10 be carried TO and from
faid placer, respectively, IN American
built and reg stared steam hips, pro-
vided the same can be carried Tor a
reasonable compensation 10 be by him
determined, but not exceeding the
rate OF so cents per nautical mile Tor
the distance usually travelled In the
most direct and feasible courss be-
tween the terminal points heIeinbe-
fore specified"
Mr.. Barry Mrs. opposed the Sem
ate amendment on the ground that It
was a subsidy.
Mr.. Mills Tex. characterized the
amendment as a donation OF $40, 900
TO American ship-builders, chief Of
whom was John Roach.
Mr.. Price Wis said that subsidy
was the theory that unde lies every
progressive institution throughout he
land. Everything wss subsid zed
down 10 the salt water, and then O n.
greas became frightened and ftood
still while the American ships were
driven from the tel.
Mr.. Findlay md ] favored the
amendment,
Mr.. Morrison [Ill.] SPECIFICALLY OPP
posed the return 10 the subsidy policy
Il former years which was involved 10
the amendment OF the Senate.
Mr.. Randall Pa. called attention
to the curious spectacle presented by
the Senate amendment, which In
yolved an expenditure OF $4,000 900,
but which had not one word OF execu-
tive suggestion or approval TO COM
mend II. There was no estimate for
the appropriation. 1t emsnated from
the Senate---a body which had been
contendlnR for years against putting
any general legislation on appropria-
ton bills. In voting upon this amend
ment he wanted every member to
range himself on the side where he
expt ctsd TO say TO the end. APP
plause on the Democratic side. Last
year the Senate amendment, similar
TO the ending proposition, had been
put through in the House by. reat on oil
abse teeism, but he invoked every
man TO 90 record himself Oh this FRO
position now that he would not find il
nee smry 10 absent himself hereafter
Mr.. Blount [Ga. in c'osing the de-
bate, said that last winter under the
threat Of al extra session, the House
had c)pcur, ed in the Senate amend
meut appropriating 100000 for the
fore On mail service. The Dem0Qrpijc
administration came into power and
put the ban OF Its condemnation on
the proposition. The policy Of the
administration on this subject could
~ Y DJ IDlblhhou1 hDu WuoH tuu CAAthSN
states Senate, In violation OF its rulee,
In violation OF the p inciple that gem
eral legislation should not be placed
upon appropriation bi Is, sought TO
force this propo htion upon the admin
istra,ion, there was an audaciiy and
boldness exhibited that needed TO be
met with courage. The Issue was
plain and clear cut, and, for one, he
was willing, ss Democrat, to lake
the responsibility for his action.
Mr.. Bunows's amendment was re-
| jected-yess, 80; nays. 1850.
This amendments offered by Mr.. Tay-
lor Tenn and Mr.. Doueherty Fila. ]
were rejected without division.
The Senate amendment was non.
concurred In without division, and the
committee rose and reported It's action
to the House.
The House confirmed the action OF
the Committee on the Foreign Mail
Service amendment by vote Of lis
yeas TO 50 nays.
The announcement OF the result
was received with round OF ap.
plause from the Democsatic side.
The bill and amendments will now
be sent to the Senate and 90 TO con.
ference committee.
The House then adjourned.