The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-03-20
GAG LAW IN THE SENATE
THE RESOLUTION TO RESTRICT IN
CURRY UNDER FIRE.


the Present Rule-The Resolution
Recommitted
WASHINGTON, March 19.-In the Senate
this morning Vice President Morton an
nounced the appointment Of the following
select committee on the April centennial
celebration in New York: Senators His
cock, Sherman, Hoar, VOORHEES, and Eustis.
Mr.. Sherman called up the proposed
amendment of the rule requiring resolu-
tions that call for information from the ex-
ecutive department to be referred to the
appropriate committee. He said that the
adoption of such resolutions without in
quiry sometimes involved very large and
unnecessary expense, and that such change
of the rule was desirable.
VOORHEES, OPPOSES 1T.
Mr.. Voorhees, opposed the change. He
understood that no assent to it had been
given on the democratic side of the cham
Der. He called attention to the fact that
the governm snt was within few weeks of
closing its first 100 years of history under the
constitution and that during that century of
national life no such rule as that now pro-
posed had ever been found necessary. He
could see no object that it was likely to ac-
complish except to stifie investigation, and
obstruct inquiry into the conduct of any
executive department.
BAD BEGINNING.
He submitted to the senator from Ohio
and to all the senators on the other side,
whether they could afford at the threshold
of a new administration, to give notice to the
world that investigation aud inquiry into
the proceedings of the departments shall be
less free and less untrammeled than had
been the case heretofore.
NO RESURRECTION IN 1T.
The pending proposition had no resurrec-
tion it. 1t did not require the resolution to
be ever reported back. 1t Unsigned it to
the tomb of the Capulets. if such should be
the mind of the committee to which the
resolution went. The administration Of
affairs of the government was now in new
hands, and he wished to those hands success
and prosperity. He had no desire to drag
down or to destroy that administration.
But the ma jority Of the Senate could i'll
afford to let it go forth that it had put up
bars to stop the pathways by which wrong
doing could be found out. The proposition,
when he first heard of it, had star led him.
sHERMHN EXPLAINS THE OBJECT.
Mr.. Sherman, a member of the commit
tee on rules, from which the proposition
had been reported, said it had been agreed
to unanimously in that committee. The
evil which it was proposed to remedy was
calling for information at the request of
single senator without any inquiry as to the
expense involved or as to whether tue in
formation was not already printed and
available. Such a resolution left no
discretion with the heads of depart
ments, who were required to comply with
taem, although the furnishing of the in
formation sometimes necessitated the en-
ployment of forty or fifty clerks for a
month or two. He knew of one case where
100 clerks had to be employed for two
months in copying papers called for un-
necessarily. The committee on rules felt
that some restraint should be made on the
passage of such resolutions.
NO DESIRE TO RESTRAIN.
The committee had no desire to restrain.
in the slightest degree. the power of the
Senate to examine into any question what
ever. No one had dreamed of such thing he
knew very well that, if any attempt were
made to smother inquiry, it would be nee
essarily exposed, aud that when a charge
was made against an executive officer,
the only way was to meet
it at once by prompt investigation.
Resolutions of inquiry involving expense
should not be adopted except for some
reason that could be fairly given to the
committee to which they were referred, and
the committees could always be trusted on
questions of that kind. If committee
should think that the resolution invol Ved
unnecessary copying and printing of docu-
ments already on the files of congress, the
resolution could be modified.
A SERIOUS MATTER.
Mr.. Hoar regarded the proposed amend
ment to the rule as a very serious matter,
and one which ought not TO be dealt with
without careful raHactipp and nd
ing. The difficulty which the senator from
Ohio had spoken of would not be remedied
by a change of the rules; for resolutions of
inquiry could still be adopted las now by
unanimous consent. Putting check upon
the Senate's right of inquiry into proceed
ings in the executive departments would be
q very serious impairment Of the dignity Of
the Senate.
GoRMAN'S OPPOSITION.
Mr.. German opposed the new rule as be-
ing an attempt to prevent the minority, or
a single senator. from getting information
as to the conduct Of public business. Such
would be its effect, whether such were its
present intent or not. He moved to amend
the proposed rule, frs t. by emitting from
it reference TO inquiries from the President
of the United States; and, second, by add
ing to it the words: (Which resolution shall
be reported to the Senate within one week
thereafter"
Mr.. Butler argued against the proposed
rule, holding that the good resulting from
the rule as it had stood heretofore far ont
weighed its disadvantages.
HoAR's AMENDMENT.
Mr.. Hoar proposed as an amendment that
whenever any inquiry for Information shall
be addressed by the Senate to any head Of a
department, If 1t shall appear to such officer
that the same has been already furnished,
he shall be at liberty to communicate such
opinion to the Senate and await its further
pleasure.
Mr.. Teller had no doubt that great ex-
travagance had been committed under the
existing rule. He had some knowledge Of
it himself But he did not think that the
ma jority could afford to adopt rule which
looked like a restriction on the minority
The Senate should not put itself in the
position Of having it said with any
show of right that it was willing to stihe
any investigation with reference to the in-
coming administration.
sPooSER AGAINST IT.
Mr.. Spooner said he would vote against
the pr opposed rule or any rule like It, The
Senate had always treated with the utmost
liberality resolutions of inquiry presented
on either side and he believed it wise tn It
the Senate should continue 10 do so, and
that no obstacle whatever should be put in
the way Of the exercise Of the inqui sitorial
power Of the Senate. He say no good Ia
recommitting the proposed rule; and be
should vote against it.
Mr.. Sherman 70 aid that he had called mp
the propOg Il rule In the absence of the