Omaha daily bee., 1888-07-29

ing, and relating to naturalization Mr..
Hawley opposed the bill, occupying several
hours. BY a yea and nay vote Farley's
amendment was adopted; Mr.. Harrison aD-
sent. MIR. Growers amendment relating to
laborers was adopted by yea and nay vote;
Mr.. HARRISON absent. A yea and nay vote
was also taken on the ten years limit amend
ment of Mr.. ingalls,, which was decided in
the negative; Mr.. Harrison absent. Mr..
| Maxey said on this particular amendment;
~ am pared with the senator from Indiana
mir. Harrison) who is necessarily absent.
] should vote nay if he were here, and the
senator (Mr. Harrison) would vote yea"
Thu amendments of the committee were
then concurred in and the bill put upon its
passage, the yeas and nays being ordered.
The bill was passed-Yeas, 20. Nays-l5.
Mr.. Harrison absent. Senator Maxey, when
| his name was called, said: 81 was paired
with the senator from Indiana(M Mr.. Harrison)
on the ten years amendment. In the note
which he wrote me he said that if
that amendment should be voted
down he would vote against the
bill. | am inclined to think that
] under that statement he would regard it as
was voted down, and therefore | shall de-
cline to vote. ] should vote for the bill, and
he, from the statement made to me-, would
vote against it.h
Mr.. Hawlcy made the following state
ment: ~ desire to make a statement in re-
gard to three absent senators. | did not get
here in time, or / should have done so in the
morning hour. Messrs. Sewell, Harrison
and Hampton are necessarily absent, in an
Investigation at the soldiers home, ana left
a mote at my desk which / did not get in sea-
son, asking permission of the senate to be so
absent" So that Senator Harrison's alb
sence is explained by Senator Hawley. Rec
ord, vol. -, pit. 3, p. 1. 73S to 55l, to 9, 563.)
April 4, 1882, the presidents veto message,
accompanying this bill, was presented to the
senate. The veto was based upon the repu-
diation of treaty obligations. The message
and bill were laid on the table.-(Record,
vol. 10, pit. 5, p. Q, 55l to 2,563.)
On April 5, 1882, Senator Farley moved to
take up senate bill III, returned by the pres
ident with his objections. Motion agreed TO-.
Mr.. Sherman submitted again the motion to
refer it to the committee on foreign relations,
which motion caused considerable debate
upon the point OF order raised by MIR. Nor
gan, of Alabama; and the leading questions
involved in the bill were freely discussed.
The yeas and nays being ordered on Mr..
Sherman's motion, the senate refused to re-
fer-nays 81, yeas IS; Mr.. Harrison voted
yea The The question Of the passage
I upon which the yeas and nays were
taken, resulted in 90 yeas, 81 nays, Mr.. Har-
rison voting nay. The bill did not pass, two
thirds not voting,in the affirmative. -(Record,
vol. 10, pit. 3, p. 9, 607 to 2,617.)
The position OF the president as set forth
in his veto rests upon treaty obligations.
His objections to the bill were in harmony
with the position taken by most of the re-
publican senators excepting those from the
Pacific ~states), US shown throughout the de-
bate. Senator Harrison undoubtedly acted
in good faith in opposing this bill from the
point of treaty obligations. Senator Bayard,
the present secretary of state, declared in
this debate on April 5, that the Burlingame
treaty was a humbug; it began and ended in
it page 3, 6l6), and it is presumed that be-
lieving as he did he had a right to disregard
it. His argument would imply at least a
l l.- f". ~ NA.,y ,.t,tA AhA ,aN,,tl,
cans on the other hand felt bound by its obi
cations.
On April Is, 1882, House Bill 5,SO4 was re-
ceived in the senate and referred to the COM
mittec on foreign relations. April 10, 1882,
Mr.. Miller (California), reported this bill
with amendments. In making the report
Mr.. Miller said:
II wish to say that the report is that of a
majority of the committee, and is not a unan-
imouS report, the chairman OF the committee
having reserved the right to support or OPP
pose amendments which may be offered"
April 81, 1889, Senator Miller California;
attempted to fix a day for consideration of
this bill. but fniled.
April 25, 1882, ON motion of Mr.. Miller (Cll-
formal, the Consideration of tho bill was
proceeded with. Mr.. Morgan gave notice
that the bill in its present form did not re-
ceive the sanction Of the whole committee;
there were at least three members of the
committee who were opposed TO it in its pres
cnt form, as amended. (But he did not
name them). The ommitte amendments
were agreed to without calling the
yeas and nays until the section providing for
Chinese citizenship was reached, this being
section IA. The yeas and nays were ordered
on striking OUT this section, and the amend,
ment was reiected-32 nays, 20 yeas; Mr.
Harrison voted yea. The next amendmcn,
was to strike out the fifteenth section, which
reads as follows: "rhat the words Chinese
laborers,' wherever used in this act, shall be
construed to mean both skilled and unskilleG
1000. n,l Itna1 ~, ~ AuAI IL, ~t,t, ~
The yeas and nays were ordered on this
amendment. The yeas were ~, the nays
were Is. The amendment was agresd to. II
was stricken out. MIR. Harri son voted yea
Mr.. Farley then gave notice than when the
bill anne into the senate from the committee
of the whole he would renew his motion,
The bill was then reported TO the senate a
amended and the reserved amendments, to
I gcther with the bill. were ordered printed.
Senator Morgan addressed the senate a
great length in favor of the bill..-Qtecord
Vol. Is, pit. 4, p. 3,2ds to 3,2Il.)
! April 20, 1882, the senate resumed consid
GRAFTON of the bill, tho question being on con
curing in the amendment as in Of
the whole, striking out the fifteenth section
+, After considerable debate Mr.. Edmund
offered an amendment to the pending If
teenth section, making. the section read
THE words Chinese laborers' whereve
used in this act shall be construed TO include
person who are usually engaged in man
ual labor" After debate the senate nd
iourned without action (Record, Vol. IL, pit
4 4, y. 3,30S to 3,3l2.)
April II, 1852, the senate resumed onsid
GRAFTON, with the Edmunds amendment pend
Q ing. Mr.. Edmunds withdrew his amend
ment. stating that he was under q mis-
4 apprehension when no offered it. At thi
. point OF the proceedings the senat,
found itself very much embarrasse,
upon examination Of the condition
Of the amended bill. The skilled
labor section was stricken out, while tn.
: fourteenth section was retained. Ua6er thi
amendment the drift of the debate was gen
: orally settling down to the definition OF On
. nese laborers as used in the treaty and in tn,
bill under consideration. Mr.. Grover con
tended that the president WAS satisfied 'yitl
or approved that portion OF the bill containe,
/, in the tenth section, and read the fcllowin;
|, clause from tho presidents message:
/. "As TO the class Of persons TO be afecte,
the Americans inserted In thctr draft q pro
vision THAI the words Chimes latorers' sig