Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1890-03-28
FlFTY-FlRST CONGRESS.
WASHINGTON. ID. c.. March 27. 1890.
Senate.

House bill 10 amend the census act
Of March 3, 1882 was reported from the
Census Committee, the effect of 1t being
TO allow special agents SO per day for sub
sistence when travelling, and after an ex-
planation by Mr.. Hale was passed.
Mr.. Hawley. from the Committee on Mill
tary Affairs, reported back House bill au-
thorizing the purchase OF 1900 tents by the
Secretary of War for the use of people
driven from their homes in Arkansas, Mis-
sissippi, and Louisiana by the present
floods and appropriating $4,000 for the
purpose. Mr.. Edmunds, while declaring
himself in favor of tho bill, called tho at,
tention Of senator's who were troubled
about the Constitution in the epproprla-
tion of money for objects not specifically
named in that instrument.
Mr.. Hawley, assuming that the remark
was partially directed 10 him. said that he
considered that this bill and not the Blair
bill came within the clause of general well
fare" After brief discussion, in which IL
was stated that there had been no request
for tents from either Arkansas OF Missis-
sippi and only indirectly from the Cover
nor of Louisiana the bill was passed.
Mr.. Frye, from the Committee on Com
merce, reported Senate bill suspending
for ono year the statutes that require
steamers TO be provided with certain life
saving appliances guns for throwing lines,
rockets. DC. lie spoke of the bill reported
by him on the same subject two or three
weeks ago, and which proposed To repeal
the law. That bill, he said. had been re-
ported on information received from the
Treasury Department. IL had attracted
the attention of the people Interested, ana
he had received since then such lnforma-
tion as left him in donbt rs 10 the propre-
ty of passing II. The committee mad,
therefore, agreed to the bill suspending
the law for year, and there were reasons
why il should be- passed Immediately.
After this statement tho bill was
passed.
The antitrust bill was then taken up,
and the amendments 10 IL as reported from
the Committee of the Whole were brought
before the Senate. The first amendment
that gave rise to discussion was PROV.
sion excepting from the prohibitions OF
law combinations ot workmen and farm
ers
Mr.. Rdmunds opposed it incidentally in
n speech that was mainly IN opposition TO
the bill ITSELF lie illustrated his objection
TO the amendment by relating the story OF
a case which occurred hero only few
months ago, when skilled printer, citi-
zen of the United States, man of good
character and with little money (such
things sometimes went together, even IN
the Senate of the United States) applied
TO the Public Printer for employment, and
although he was Just the man who was
wanted to fill the vacancy. the Public
Printer was not permitted to em-
ploy him because be was told that
If lie did nine tenths of the print
ers employed in the Office would
cease work and the country would go To
destruction because il could not read to-
day what had been said in Congress yes
terday. And this was because the man
did not belong to aparticular combination.
IL that was not tyranny Mr.. Edmunds did
not know what tyranny was. The tyranny
of thousand men was infinitely worse
than the tyranny of one man, just as the
tyranny of the Commune in France was
worse than that of the monarch who bad
been overthrown.
Looking 10 the iron industry for another
illustration, Mr. EdmuDds went on 10 argue
that If the labor combinations put up the
price of wages SO per cent. the people who
owned mines and furnaces and torges had
the right to combine to protect themselves
so AS to get such prices as would make up
for the increased cost of production. He
was willing to go as far as Congress bad the
power TO go in the way Of breaking up
great monopolies that existed to the detri-
ment of the country. SO Tar as the consti-
tutional question went, he believed that
the safety of the nation depended more
LARGELY on the preservation of what were
called rights of the States than on any
other one thing. He. therefore, should DO
slow about voting for any act of Congress
which he thought went over the boundary
which the Constitution prescribed. lie
believed IL 10 be better to endurea partial
evil Of even the most grinding monopolies
than to attempt 70 step by one inch oysr
the clear boundary line that had been es-
tablished and maintained between Con-
gress and the legislative power Of tho
States.
Mr.. Platt made an earnest attack upon
the bill, bill that was aimed at eyery
business in the United Stetee. There was
but one constitutional provision IN the
bill, and that was the amendment offered
by Mr. Reagan which confined the bill TO
persons engaged in transportation. That
was the effect of the amendment, and IL
would uproot the interstate commerce law
Mr. Platt gave the business figures for
last year of eight representative >woollen
establishments in Connecticut, showing q
net loss of SASH. and said that under the
bill II the owners of these establishments
came together and combined to get q fair
living profit on their business that agree
ment would be unlawful and void.
Mr. Walthal moved to refer the bill and
the amendments to the Judiciary Commit
tee. with instructions to report back with
in twenty days. The motion was agreed
to--yeas. 81; nays, 2s. The Republican
senator's who voted in the affirmative
were Cameron, Higgins. Plat. Stanford,
Stockbridge, Teller. and Wolcott. The
Democrats who voted in ths negative
were Messrs. Berry. Cockrell, Pugh, Tur-
pie, Vance, and VOORHEES,.
Mr.. Edmunds sent to the Clerks dsek
and had read the report Of J. r. Dodge,
statistician to tho Agricultural Depart.