The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-06-20


That would place the bill on the speakers |
table and again allow the House to get |
at it.
Butterworth, of Ohio, said the time had
not come when the Republican party was
willing to abdicate its control over the
business of the House The question
would be put next fail, not in time to affect
this question.
McAlillin, of Tennessee-But will be in
time for this question to affect it. Demo
cratic applause
Continuing, Butterworth held that the
real question before the House was
whether or not the speaker referred the
bill to the committee, not that it was or
was not properly referred. A question
arose whether the speaker was authorized
to make the reference He contended that
he was so authorized. Rule 81 gives the
! speaker authority to refer public bills to the
appropriate committees.
Springer argued that the silver bill was
not properly ''unuer the ruleS'' before the
House yesterday, because the business on
the speakers table had not been reached.
Butterworth said the pending PROPOSE
ton sought to unhorse the Republican ma
Jorlty and to put the Democratic minority
in the saddle. The Republicans should not
abdicate in favor of the Democrats until at
least they should determine they were I'M
able to conduct the business of the major
Ivy. ANSpuDllCdn dpp1duSt. he WAS III
favor of an early consideration of the silver
| bill.
! Anderson, OF Kansas, while declaring
| himself an earnest advocate of free coin
age, maintained the correctness of the speak
er's ruling. He wanted to ask the chairman
! OF the committee on coinage, weights and
measures whether the committee would
give the House chance to vote upon the
measure.
Conger, of Iowa, chairman of that com
mlttee, replied that so far as he was per-
Sonally concerned, he would make every
effort to secure legislation on this subject
Crisp said the committee on rules might
interfere as it did to.prevent vote on the
free coinage of silver.
Mills, of Texas, said the point he made
was under the existing rules that the silver
bill remained upon the speakers table to
be disposed of as the House. and not speak
er, should determine.
Breckenridge, of Kentucky, argued that
if the speaker went beyond the scope of his
authority In the reference to the bill, his
action was not only erroneous but illegal
and void. The speaker in rendering his
decision said he desired members of the
House to divest themselves of the idea that
any unusual procedure had taken place in
connection with this bill. The reference
of bills of this kind and in this way had
been daily occurrence since the adoption
of the present bills. The chair desired also
that the house should know that this par
tlcular transaction did not take place in a
corner. In the regular course of business
the journal clerk informed the speaker
: that among the list of bills to be referred
under the rules to the appropriate committee
was the silver bill with the Senate amend
ments. The speaker had been asked
whether he had any particular direction to
make in regard to it. Knowing the bill to
loa a l,1i
J anxious that he should have all possible
, light on the subject, the chair had consulted
the Democratic members of the committee
on rules (Blount and McMillin) and the
: gentlemen from Missouri and Illinois
/ (Biand and Springer), not for the purpose
of throwing any responsibility upon them,
but in order that he might benefit by any
; light they might be able to give After
conversing with those gentlemen it had
} seemed clear to the chair that the rules of
) the House covered the question and that
his duty was TO treat the bill as he would
treat any other Accordingly the clerk
was not directed to make any change in
regard to reference. The House must bear
In mind that this was not a question of policy
If not satisfied with the reference directed
by the speaker under the present sytem of
1 rules, the House could change the system
3 of rules and the House could change the
reference, did this bill contained provisions
which under the rules ought to be con
. sidered in committee of the whole. There
q was a provision in the original House bill
e by which certain bullion was to be pur
+ chased and certificates issued thereon. The
= Senate amendment was an amendment fol
!, | free coinage, and for this an appropriation
was made. If anything was clear in par
e liamentary law it was that the bill was ous
: of those which would be properly con
sidered in committee of the whole, and this
- III olo,,,
~ chair to refer to 1t in the same manner il
: which hundreds and thousands of bills haC
been referred during this session. The
q point OF order raised by the gentleman
q from Illinois Cannon put the chair in al
y embarrassing position because it proposed
action by the House and was declaration
:, that an error had been made in parlia
), mentary law. 1t was proposed to erase
e from the journal a question of fact. Will,
a the chair might have some doubt about the
point of order he felt it was question thu
. House ought to determine and he would
II therefore overrule the points of order ant
y submit the question to the House.
Cannon moved to table Mills resolution
S On a standing vote this was carried 120 toll
C Morrow, of California, Bartine, of Nevada
and Townsend, of Colorado, voted with tn,
b Democrats. They were overlooked by tn,
). speaker in the first count, but Morrow
i; called attention to the omission and it wal
}. rectified.
t On a vote by tellers the motion was lost
r yeas lis: nays, 123. The question then re
e CURED on Mills resolution and it wa
S agreed to, yeas, 12l; nays, III. AT the con
e clusion of the roll call the vote stood, yeas
T 1l9; nays, III. a change of one vote would
: be necessary to defeat the resolution by
s tie vote, and that change was made b,
Funston, of Kansas, amid the decisiv,
/ cheers OF the Democrats This left tn,
/ vote, yeas, lis; nays, us; but the chang,
1t proved unavailable. Abbott, of Texas, ant
r Bullock, of Florida, whose names We're no
s recorded, stated that they had voted il
o the affirmative, and the speaker acceptin.
their statements, the vote stood, yeas, 100
S nays, lis. Then Mckinley arose an,
d changed his vote to the affirmative, and tn
ID vote was finally announced, yeas, 12l
l. nays, III. Mckinley was then recognize,
e to move a reconsideration and also to NOV
5 an adjournment Mills managing to sand
y witch the motion to reconsider on the table
N On motion to lay Mills resolution On tn
lie table, the following Republicans vote
e, with the Democrats in the negative: Ban
&c tine. Carter, DeIdaven, Ewart, Kelley
IS Marrow and Townsend, of Colorado. o.
is the resolution itself Ewart did not vote
e but the others named voted in the affirma
s tive. Mckinley also voted in the affirma
u tive, but only for the purpose of moving
reconsideration of the motion to adjourn
n Lost, yeas, 1l9; nays, 100. The vote the
ne recurring on Mills motion to table the nc
ne ton to reconsider, it was agreed to, yeas
le 121; nays, ia. Mills then moved TO al
prove the journal as amended asking t
II Withdraw the preamble which recites tina
w the order of reference made by the speake
as referring the silver bill to the committe