Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1889-04-13
rrRon A srArr CORRESPONDENCE

HARR RIsBURG, April 12.-Mr Wherry's
anti-discrimination bill having been
roundly denounced BY Mr.. Capp, of
Lebanon, as Democratic clap-trsp, gotten
up purely for political effect, was permitted
to die with comparative ease. His motion
for Especial order received 81 votes, after
Mr.. Hall, OF Mercer, had come in late and
placed himself on record. The negative
vote was 7S. Mr.. Wherry, therefore, had
majority of 8 votes, but he needed two
thirds vote to score complete success. The
moral effect, however, is an Endorsement Of
the principle Of his bill.
Mr.. Kaufman, of Lancaster, made
happy hit when, speaking from Republi-
can standpoint, he declared that Mr..
Wherry's measure should not be rejected
because of its Democratic origin, but should
be considered purely on its merits. The re-
sponsibility lay with Republican Legisla-
ture, and the Republican party would OBJ
tain whatever credit there might be in its
passage, as it must shoulder whatever OF
discredit attached to its defeat. Mr.. Kauf-
man was, of course, moved as much by
personal interest asby political sagacity.
He is interested in large rolling mill at
Columbia, and has suffered with his part
ners from the inroads of shippers more
favored by the railroads.
LIFE IN IT YET.
But INSTRUMENTATION is not, after all,
killed for this session of the Legislature. In
the Harrisburg correspondence in to-day's
DISPATCH it was stated that the Repub-
lican leaders were promising an anti-dis-
| elimination measure of their own. Mr..
Capp boldly inquired this morning why
Mr.. Wherry wanted to take up the time
of the House and block other legisla-
ton for several days when a measure
similar to the one he was championing
had been killed in Senate committee, and
the passage of a bill through the Senate
was therefore an improbability thatamount-
ed almost to an impossibility.
Mr.. Wherry may be able ere long to turn
the inquiry on Mr.. Capp, for it is more
than likely some measure will be presented
to the Legislature from q Republican
source, and that quickly. Whether it will
be honored with special order and passed
is another question. But whether it is
passed or whether it is not, it will be in
dorsed by the Republican leaders, and the
word will 60 out to the people of Pennsyl-
vania that the grand old Republican party
is determined to shield them from the op-
pICSSlOub VI SEdSpAuS AuOuOpOAACSs
HOW THEY VOTED.
The yea and nay vote on Mr.. Wherry's
motion was as follows:
YEAS Messrs. Bachert, Baker, Baldwin,
Beatty. Bentley, Blackburn, Blair, Bliss. Boyer
| David A.; Brown, n. Wallace; Brown, John B.;
Burdick, Caffrey, Cole. Collins, Coray, Culver,
| Davis, Dickinson, Dodge, Donahue, Eugene;
Elliott Evans, Lewis H.; Farrell, Flad, Fow,
| Fox Gaffrey Gallagher Graham, Haines Hail.
Harwick, Helfrich. Hertzler, Hickman, Hind,
enach, Hofa, Holt, Jones, d. R.; Jones. WILL
lam E.; Kaufman, G. c.; Kelly, Kreps, Krick-
baum, Kutz Lenker, Lesh, Losey. Lytle, Max
ey, Miller, Morrison, Morrow. Muliin, McCor-
| mick, Mcdonald, M. E.; MeKinnon, Nearick,
Pautsch. Quig.ey, Randall, Rhey Roper. Rose,
John M; Rowland, Sando. Shillito. Smiley,
| William F.; Taggart, Thomas William h.
Thompson, Titman, Waddell. Walter, Weber,
Wherry, Whitney, White. Williams. Wood
| mansee Zeigler.
NAYs-Ailen. Andrews Balm, Barnes, Bean,
Billlngsley, Brooks, Brewer, Brown. Hartford
p; Bunch, Campbell, CaPp. Chalfant. Chap
0fa ns Rnsse
Foight, Follmer, Franklin. Garrett. Gatchell,
Gentner, Hager. Hassett Mays, F. W: Hos
kins, Johnson, Jones. Benz; Jones, G; 8. W;
| Keeper, Keyser, Kidd. Knight. Lafferty,
| Loomis, Mackey, Marshall. Missimer, Moore,
Myers, Macdonald, A. P; Mcconnell, Nc
Ranck, Reed, Richards, Richmond, Rebel,
Ritter, Robson, Rose, William B.; Russell,
| Scott Shaffer, Shoemaker, Smith, John NJ !;
| Struen, Swartz, Talbot, Thomas c.; Wesley,
| Walk, Weaver. David E.; Weaver, Francis A.
| Boyer, Henry K, Speaker.
A POLITICAL NECESSITY.
Anti-discrimination was a prominent feat
ure among the legislation that didn't get
through the last Legislature. There were a
number of bills. One, known as the Watres
bill, was Endorsed by the Grangers. Another,
the bravo bill, was known as the caucus
measure. As the former appeared in the
Senate this session as the measure of Sen
ator Brown, of York, q Democrat, it will
probably not be considered.
The Dravo bill is the more likely of the
two to be approved. But new bill may
appear, or some other measure may be in
dorsed, or the railroad commission bill in
troduced early in the session by Mr.. Will
Jams, of Luzerne, may be taken up, In spite
of the fact that it was negatived in commit
tee Something will be done, because it is
felt there is political need for measure
of the kind, and the prospect lends interest
to the closing days of the session.
SIMPSON.