The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-01-30
EXCITEMENT OF The DEBATE.
A Detailed Account OF the Great Fight
Against Cse 5arism,

0AeNSOAJ cAAOCA bhC AAOuo5 AiACA bAAo
Mr.. Dalzell of Pennsylvania called up the
election case of Smith vs. jackson, from the
fourth West Virginia district.
Mr.. Crisp raised the question of con
slderation. On this vote, the demo
Gratis, with the exceptions of
(Messrs. Breckenridge, Covert, and
Cowles) refrained from voting. While the
clerk was calling the roll, the speaker was
carefully noting the names of those demo
Gratis who were present, and not voting
Before the announcement of the vote, Mr..
Rogers Of Arkansas, who had Inadvertently
vo,ed in the affirmative, decided to with
draw his vote, but he was met with storm
of objections from the republican side. Mr..
Rogers endeavored to secure ruling from
the speaker on the question in order that he
might enter an appeal. but the speaker de-
clined to rule.
Mr.. Covert of New York changed his
vote from the negative to the affirmative.
Mr.. Rogers was then given permission to
withdraw his vote, as was also Mr.. Co owles.
The vote was then announced as stand
ing: Yeas 161, nays 2.
Mr.. Crisp raised the point Of no quorum.
The Speaker-TEe chair directs the Gle k
to record the following names of members
present and refusing to vote
THE HOUSE IN UPRoAR.
This statement was the signal for burst
of applause from the republicans and of
jeers from the democrats.
The clerk then proceeded to name the
democrats whom the speaker had jotted
down as being present and not voting.
When the name of Mr.. Breckenridge of
Kentucky was called, he stepped into the
aisle, and in re5oundiDg voice said: II
deny the power of the speaker TO do this,
and denounce it as revoluti nary" Cneer
after cheer, characterized by the republicans
as "the rebel YELL" went upi from
the democratic side, and it was several min
utes before sufficient order was restored to
enable the clerk to continue the rea ling of
the list of names. But the order was only
comparative, for while the clerk was pro-
ceeding with the reading half dozen dem
ocrats were on their feet, denouncing the
action of the speaker
Mr.. Bland of Missouri roared out that he
was responsible for his action only to his
constituents a d not to the speaker; and Mr..
OFerrall of Virginia, protested in the name
of his state against this action.
A JOKE ON M'CREARY.
Mr.. McCreary Of Kentucky denied the
right of the speaker to count him as present.
The Speaker-The chair is making a
statement Of the fact that the gentleman is
present Does the gentleman deny that he
is PRESENT. Applause and laughter on the
republican slda.]
The name of Mr.. Cultivate of Ohio hav-
ing been called, that gentleman, amid great
uproar, declared that he had. mot been pres
ent when his name was called on the roll
call, and that what the speaker was stating
was not true.
Mr.. O'Ferrall inquired by what parlia-
mentary rule the speaker had a right to
declare person present if he did not vote.
The speaker replied that he was now
making statement of fact.
Mr. Breckenridge of Kentucky declared
that the action of the speaker was dis
orderly, and that the speaker had no more
right to make the statement from the chair
than he would have were he on the floor.
Mr.. Crisp desired to appeal from the de-
cision Of the chair.
PROMISED TO ALLOW AN APPEAL.
The speaker replied that in due time he
would allow the ge item In every proper
appeal to the House in an orderly fashion,
as the chair would demonstrate to the salts
faction of the House.
Mr.. Blount of Georgia. understand the
chair to direct the names to be put on the
roll by the clerk.
The Speaker-To be put on record by the
clerk.
Mr. Cowles demanded recognition. He
was standing in the aisle in front of the
speaker. The speaker declined to recognize
him. and said: "Will the gentleman have
the kindness to take his seat Ii he does so
the speaker will be greatly obliged"
[Laughterl. For a moment Mr.. Cowles ap-
peared to hesitate whether or not he would
resent this invitation, but finally went
quietly to his seat.
REED MAKES STATEMENT.
The speaker proceeded to make state
ment The clerk, he said, had announ ed
the vote of the mem )ers voting l61 yeas
and navs The chair thereupon having
seen members present, having heard their
names called III their presence, had directed
record to be made of this fact. Accordingly,
that question was now before the house,
and the chair prop sed to give the state
ment, accompanied by ruling, from which
an appeal could be taken if any gentleman
was dissatisfied Herewith
Mr.. Crisp-In advance, enter an appeal.
[Laughter.]
The speaker, continuing, said that for
some considerable time a question of this
nature had been raised III very many par
liamentary assemblages, and there hal
been great deal of doubt. especially in
this body, on the subject. The chair we'll
recollected a proposition of this kind made
by Randolph Tucker of Virginia, an able
constitutional lawyer, as we'll as an able
member of this House. The matter had
been somewhat discussed and the PROPOSE
tion was made with regard to putting it in
the rules.
HELD TO BE INEXPEDIENT.
The general opinion which prevailed at
that time was that it was inexpedient to
do so. Some man had grave doubts
whether it was proper to make an amend
ment to the rules that would constitute
persons present part of a quorum. The
evils which have resulted from the other
course had not been apparent then as now,
and no such careful study had ever been
given to the subject as was given at the
present time. They had large place in
1850. Since then there had been var
ious arguments and various mo-
tions by very eminent statesmen, and
those decisions had very much cleared up
the question and re dered it much moro
apparent what the true rule was 0 le of
the first places where the question had been
raised was the Senate Of the state Of New
York. T present governor OF New York
had been the presiding officer, and upon
him had devolved a duty similar to that
which now devolved upon the speaker. He
had met that duty IN precisely the same
manner.
THE BASIS OF THE ISSUE.
The question in New York had arisen on
the constitutional necessity of having three
ffths of the mem ers to constitute a