Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-01-28
THE DISTRICT LOSES ms DAY.
Mr.. Hemphin Makes q Good Fight
Against Heavy Odds.

THE DISTRICT LOSES ms DAY.
Mr.. Hemphfn Makes q Good Fight
Against Heavy Odds.
The District was deprived of it's day in the
House to-day. About four out of every five
of the members preferred to go on with the
consideration of the sundry civil bill. District
business is made the special order for this day
by the rules, and this rule can be departe d
from by unanimous consent, or by, one at o
time, refusing TO consider the several bills
until all on the calendar relating to the District
are disposed Of.
An effort was made to induce Mr. Hemphill
to yield the day without resistance, but he pre-
ferred to hold it il he could. He made a stub
born fight for it, calling up one bill after
another as fast as they could be voted down,
until it became evident that no District bust
ness could be done. He first called up the Jury
bill, the consideration of which was promptly
refused Then successfully he called up the
bills to relieve building and loan associations
from certain taxes,e ITO relieve Christ's church
from taxes on certain property, the pawnbrok-
ers' bill and the bill to acquire property for
Rock Creek park. The House refused to con-
slider any of them to-day. Mr.. Hemphill then
tried to get unanimous consent for another
day or an evening session for the District bust
ness. He failed in this through the objection
of Mr.. Blount. Mr.. Randall then got up his
appropriation bill.
COLUMBIA INSTITUTION FOR THE DEAF AND DUMB,
During the consideration of the sundry civil
appropriation bill in the::House this afternoon,
Mr.. Rogers (Ark.) called attention to the para
graph relating to the Columbia institution for
the deaf and dumb, and asked for information
as to whether there had been any change of
nrODOaAd tn no in tufi
MIR. Clements (Ga.) explained that the bill
limited the entire expenditure of salaries in the
institution to $4,000, no matter from what
source the money. came. 1t was further pro-
vided that the District Of Columbia should
hereafter pay one-half of the expenses of stu
dents entering the institution from the Dis
trict Previously all the expenses Of these stu
dents have been paid by the national govern
ment. Existing law provided that the institu-
ton might receive from the states forty stu
dents free Of charge. SO far as tuition was con-
cerned. The practice had been to receive no
students from some states and many from
others. The bill proposed to remedy this.
QUITE LONG DEBATE FOLLOWED
upon the question. Mr.. Rogers made point Of
order against the changes in the whole clause
from the existing law.
Mr.. Hit made similar point of order
against that part of the clause which provided
that no more than S25, 900 should be expended
for salaries and wages. He held that it would
be in order to say in this bill that not more
than 900 of the sum contained in this bill
should be used for salaries but that they had
no right in this bill to put such limit upon
the expenditure of the donated funds not car
ried in the appropriation bill. Such pro-
vision was a change OF existing laws regu-
lating this matter, and therefore out of order
Mr.. Hemphill argued in favor of the point Of
order that the clause was a change of law, which
proposed to take from the directors of the in
stitution the management OF the funds donated
to the institution or derived in other ways. He
thought the proposition was clearly out Of
order.
Mr.. Randall thought the proposition was not
out Of order. The law as it stood was evaded,
he said and larger salaries paid than Congress
contemplated; this proposition was to prevent
such evasion.
THE CHAIR SUSTAINED THE POINT OF ORDER
and Mr.. Randall then offered an amendment
which the chair held to be in order, provid-
ing that SO much only of this appropriation
as would, together with money derived from
other sources, make up the sum of $4,000,
should be used for salaries.
Mr.. Hemphill protested against thisr amend-
ment, declaring, by comparison, that the
amount expended IN salaries in this institution
was actually and proportionately smaller than
that expended in like institutions elsewhere.
He spoke at length upon the worthy character
of the institution. and defenned it earnestly.
Mr.. Randall said that he was an earnest
friend to the institution, and his object was not
to injure it but to see that the money appro-
priated went to the benefit of the inmates and
not to give extraordinary salaries to individuals.
He cited that the president OF the institution
got "A, 600 per year, his house rent, and as Mr.
Randall understood, the support, practically,
of himself and family.
MR.. HEMPHILL DEFENDED THE INSTITUTION
and opposed the amendment warmly, and
sharp tilt occurred between Mr. Hemphill and
Mr.. McMillin. Mr.. Hemphill said that if the
gentleman from Tennessee was better informed
he would not speak so rashly as he had during
the discussion. Mr. McMillin referred to ex-
trayagance inn salaries, and took the ground
that MIR. Randall occupied, stating that it APP
peared that the inmates were not properly
certain states that had very few inmates there.
ARE there any applications from these
states?" asked Mr.. Hemphill.
II do not know" replied Mr.. McMillin.
MIR. Hemphill retorted that that was the way
gentlemen were speaking without information.
He did not think it right to give the institution
a black eye on supposition. He asked Mr..
McMillin if he had ever been at the institution.
Mr.. McMillin replied that he had not.
"Have you?" he said
Il have" replied Mr.. Hemphiu. 81 know
much about the institution"
Mr.. McMillin said there were certain men in
the House who thought they knew vast
deal.
There are," re tprted Mr.. Hemphill; Il can
point to one of Them" waving his hand to-
ward Mr.. McMillin.
MIR; Cannon. Mr.. Hitt and 9th ers opposed
Mr.. RandalPs amendments and defended the
institution and its methods.
MIR. RANpALLs AMENDMENT.
Mr.. Randall's amendment was adopted by
vote of 30 yeas to ~ nays.
THE ELECTORAL MESSENGERS.