Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-06-20

suited the Democratic members o
the Committee on Rules BlOun
anu McMillanJ and the gentlemen
from Missouri and Illinois Bland
anu Springerl, not for the purpose o.
throwing all responsibility upoI
them, but in order that he NIGH
benefit by any light they might bI
able 10 give. After convensing with
those gentlemen il had seemed cleal
to the Chair that the rules Of the
House covered the question, and
that his duty was 10 treat the bill n:
he would treat any other. Accord
ingly the clerk was not directed q
make any change I'm regard TO the
reference. The House must bearIu
mind that this was not
ACQUISITION or POLITICS.
II not satisfied with eie reference
directed by the Speaker and the
Present system Of rules, the House
could change this present system Of
rules. The House could change
this reference did this bill contain
| provisions which, under the rules,
| ought % be considered I'm COMMITTEES
pf the whole. There was = brnviS-
Ten In the. o~iginc' House bill by
e'hich yerlain bullion was to lie
purchased and certificates issued
thereon. The Senate amendment
was for iiree Coinage and for this an
| Appropriation was made. If any
thing was clear in parliamentary
usage, il was that this bill was one
Of those which would be properly
considered ln committee pf the
whole, and this lping 20, IL was the
Obvious duty Of the Chair tO refer il.
In thesame manner in which hun
dreds and thousands cf bills had
been referred dn-'rS lie p1esent
'es1iCu. The point Of order raised
10y the gentleman from Illinois
put the Chair in an embar-
rasSing position, because the pro-
posed action Of the House was n
declaration that an error had been
made in parliamentary law. II was
proposed 10 erase from the journal a
question Of fact. While the Chair
might have some doubt about the
points IL order, he felt IL was a ques-
ton the House ought to determine,
and he would therefore override the
points Of order and submit the uues-
uun to The House.
Cannon moved 10 table Mills res-
olutiOn. On a standing vote this
was carrieI-l2D to 10. Morrow
fCaLl Bartine iNev. and Towns
emf Cal voted with the democrats.
They wereOverlOUked by the Speaker
in the iirst count, but Morrow called
attention TO the omission ant il was
rectified.
On ! vote Icy te,le-s the .hOdon TO
table ;.Ss iO>C-yeas lis, nays 10.
TIE QUESTION REQUIRED
on Mills resolution and it was
agreed t0-ye1s III, NAYS III. Att
the con fusion OF the roll rRll the !
vote stood wees 40, n5ys III. \
rharrp %. one vote would he neces-
cary TO defeat the resolution, and |
that change was made by Funston |
kas. amid the deTisive cheers Of |
the democrats. This left the votes |
yeas lis, nays lis, but the change /
proved uuavailing. Abbott fTeE. |
anu hultbEh IL. h hLNtt ltailltH Il
were not recorded, stated that they /
had voted in the affirmative, and |
the Speaker. accepting. their state
ment, the vote stood. Yeas TO,
nays lis. Then Mckinley arose
and changed h's vote 20 the affirm
alive, and the -Ut. was finally an
Is yeas I2l, nays III.
Mckinley was then rec6ghizedll
to move n reconsideration aud aIs9 4
TO move an afiOu7lment, Mills mani
aging 10 sandwich the motion 10 re-
rOusideF un the table. On motion
10 lay Mills resolution on the table
the following republicansvOted with
the democrats in tine negative:
BaTtine, Carter, De Haven, EwaTt.
Kelly, Morrow and Townsend. On
the resolution itself EWart did not
vote, hut the others named voted in
the affirmative, but only for the
purpose Of moving \ recOnsidera-
ton. The motion 10 adjourn was
.Ost-yeas no, nays l21.
The vote then recurring on Mills
motion TO table the motion to recon-
,ider, it was agreed tO-yeas III,
nays ia.