The daily state chronicle. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 188?-1891, 1890-07-02
TO STIR UP RACE TROUBLE.
THE HOUSE STILL DEBATING
THE FELERAL ELECTION LAW.

THE HOUSE STILL DEBATING
THE FELERAL ELECTION LAW.
The Honest Treasury Watchdog
From Indiana Declared That Every
Representative Who Had Spoken
Repudiated the Bill so Far as His
District Was Concern ed-- Lehiback
Proposes to Apply it to Every Dis
trict, And if The Republicans Are
Honest They Must Adopt 1t, But to
Do so Would Kill the Measure For
The Northern People Would Not
Stand it.
[By United Press.l
WASHINGTON, July 1.-(House) The
House Immediately after the reading Of
the journal, resumed the debate On the
Federal Election bill, the pending
amendment being that offered by Mr..
Lehlback, of New Jersey, providing that
the chief supervisor of elections of each
judicial district in the United States
shall take such action as is required to
secure such supervisor in every congress
sional district as is provided by the laws
of the United States.
Mr.. Holman, of Indiana, contended
that there was no occasion for the en-
actment of the proposed law. Every
member who had spoken had repudiated
the bill as far as his own district was
concerned.
Mr.. Stone, of Missouri, made con-
stitutional argument against the bill.
He asserted that its promoters were as
guilty of high treason as those who,
thirty years ago, took up arms against
the government.
Mr.. Buchanan, of New jersey eX-
pressed regret that the amendment ema-
mated from the Republican side, because
it did not tend to perfect the bill.
Mr.. Hemphill, of South Carolina, said
that if the bill was so bad that gentle
men were afraid to vote for its general
application. why we're they such cow
ards as to throw upon the people of
particular district the odium of the law.
Congress should take the responsibility
and not place it in the hands of fifty or
hundred men in any one district.
The amendment was rejected, yeas
1872, nays 1873.
Mr.. Hemphill, of South Carolina,
offered an amendment eliminating from
the bill the provision for the United
States boards of canvassers, and provid-
| ing that from the returns of SUPERVISORS
forword to the Speaker Of the House, to
be subm tied by him to the House, the
results as they appear therefrom in each
congressional district under his jurisdic-
ton in which this act has been in force.
Mr.. Buckalew, of Pennsylvania, ia
vored the amendment as preserving q
system which in substance had been al
ways in force, and under which (witE
very few EXCEPTIONS had there beer
any complaint Of the action of the State
authorities.
Mr.. Rowell, of Illinois, opposed the
amendment and favored the bill.
Mr.. Breckenridge, of Kentucky, said
that the bill put it in the power of the
U. S. courts to substantiate the contro
of the House of Representatives
Mr.. McCommas, of Maryland, opposed
the amendment and favored the bill as
in the interest of free and fair elec
tions.
Mr.. Mills, of Texas, pointed out tht
dangers which might arise from the ap
plication of the law.
Mr.. Caruth, of New York, said tha
he had heard good deal about a free
ballot and fair count. According t
the Republican doctrine "a free ballot il
one that elects our ticket and fai
count is one that counts Us in." Tn,
purpose of this bill was to perpetual
~ d IN
Mr.. Oates, of Alabama, IN opposing
, the bill, criticised severely the power
given to hundreds of courthouse round
ers to have the elections placed unde
+ Federal control so as to have the,nselve
made supervisors.
Mr.. Mason, of Illinois, said the Soutf
counted the negro a voter when tn
census was taken, and Republicans PRO
q posed now to do him justice and let hir
| vote.
! Mr.. Wilson, Of West Virginsa, sal
= there never had been and there neve
. could be any bill which would strike
more dangerous blow at the very elt
ments and foundations Of free govern
ment.
The debate was further participate
in by Messrs. Lodge, Buckalew an
. Tucker, and the House adjourned
meet at P. %.
Senate.
WAsHINaToN, D. O., July IN
Dawes, from the conference committe
J on the legislative bill, reported that tt
g committee had been unable to agr'
- - with the House conferees, the particul
item of disagreement being that
clerks for Senators and their compens
ton. He doubted if any agreeme
could be reached on anything but Il
House bill
J. After some discussion a new confe
10 ence was ordered.
~ The Idaho bill was taken up and N
N ~ Vance made long speech in opposite
10 to the bill He claimed that the prop
H. constitutional steps by the people
v: Idaho for admission to statehood, b
OF not been taken, and that the terrific
go did not have population sufficient
large to entitle it to admission to t
Union.
At the close of Mr.. Vance's speech
opposition to the Idaho bill, the bill "
:. passsd without division.
The conference committee appoint
,er 'er on the part of the Senate on the disagrt
~ r(rapI 10 I