Los Angeles herald., 1890-06-20
every effort to secure legislation on this


Crisp said the committee on rules
might interfere, as it did to prevent a
vote on the free coinage of silver.
Mills, of Texas, made the point of
order that under the existing rules, the
silver bill remained upon the speakers
table to be disposed as the house, and
not the speaker should determine.
Breckinridge, of Kentucky, argued
that if the speaker went beyond the
scope of his authority in the reference of
the bill, his action was not erroneous
but illegal apd void.
The speaker in rendering his decision,
said he desired the members of the
house to divest themselves OF the idea
that any unusual proceeding 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 rules. The chair desired, also,
that the house should know that this
particular transaction did not take
place in corner. In the regular
course of business the journal clerk was
informed by the speaker that among the
list of bills to be referred under the
rules to appropriate committees was the
silver bill, with the senate amendment.
The speaker had been asked whether he
had any particular direction to make in
regard to it. Knowing the bill to be one
of grave public Importance, and anxious
that he should have all possible light on
the subject, the chair had consulted the
Democratic members of the committee
on rules and the gentlemen from Mis-
souri, and Illinois (Bland and Springer),
not for the purpose OF throwing any re-
|
that he might benefit by any light they
might be able to give. After conversing
with these gentlemen it had seemed
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 the reference. The house must
bear in mind that this was not ques-
ton of politics or currency. 1t
was a question of parliamentary
law, and on the decision of the house
depended the carrying out of the system
of rules the house had adopted. If not
satisfied with the reference directed by
the speaker under the present system of
rules, the house could change the refer
ence. Did this bill contain provisions
which under the rules ought to be con-
sidered in committee of the whole
| There was provision in the original
house bill by which certain bullion was
to be purchased and certificates issued
thereon. The senate amendment was an
amendment for free coinage, and for this
an appropriation was made. If anything
was clear in parliamentary law, it was
that this bill was one of those which
would be properly considered in commit
tee of the whole, and this being so, it was
the obvious duty of the chair to
refer it in the same manner in which
hundreds and thousands of bills had
been referred during the present session.
The point of order raised by the gentle
man from Illinois (Cannon) put the
chair in an embarrassing position, be-
cause the proposed action of the house
was the declaration that an error had
been made in parliamentary law. 1t
was proposed to erase from the journal
question of fact. While the chair
might have some doubt about the point
of order, he felt it was question the
house ought to determine. He would,
therefore, overrule the point of order
and submit the question to the house.
Cannon moved to table Mills's resolu-
ton.
On standing vote this carried, 12O to
ITO. Morrow, of California, Bartine, of
Nevada, and Townsend, of Colorado,
voted with the Democrats. They were
overlooked by the speaker in the first
count, but Morrow called attention to
the omission, and it was rectifed.
On the vote by tellers the motion to
table was lost-yeas III, nays 1913.
The question then recurred on Mills's
resolution, and it was agreed to-yeas
121, nays III.
At the conclusion of the roll-call the
vote stood: Yeas 119, nays III. A
change of one vote would be
necessary to defeat the resolution
by tie vote, and that change was made
by Funston, of Kansas, amid derisive
cheers by the Democrats. This left the
vote: yeas 11S, nays 11S, but the change
proved unavailing. Abbott, Texas and
Bullock, Florida; whose names were not
recorded, stated that they had voted in
the affirmative, and the speaker accept
ing their statements, the vote stood
Yeas, 120; nays, 11S.
Then Mckinley arose and changed
his vote to the affirmative, and the vote
was finally announced: Yeas, 121 ;
nays, III.
Mckinley was then recognized to
move reconsideration, and also to move
adjournment.
Mills managed to sandwich in mo-
ton to lay the motion to reconsider on
the table.
On the motion to lay Mills resolution
on the table the following Republicans
voted with the Democrats in the mega
tive: Bartine, Carter, De Haven,
Ewart, Kelly, Morrow and Townsend, Of
Colorado. On the resolution itself,
Ewart did not vote, but the Others
named voted in the affirmative. Nc
Kinley also voted in the affirmative, but
only for the purpose of moving recon
sideration.
The motion to adjourn was lost-yeas
119, nays 100.
The vote recurring on Mills motion
to table the motion to reconsider, it was
agreed to-yeas 12l, nays LA.
Mills then moved to approve the
journal as amended, asking to withdraw
the preamble, which reiterates that the
order of reference made by the speaker
referring the silver bill to the
committee on coinage, weights anC
measures, was incorrect under the rules
of the house, and done without authority
under said rules.
Mckinley objected, and the question
recurred on the adoption of the pre-
Ill Loaf