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

he should have all possible light
on the subject, the Chair had con.
suited the Democratic members Of
the Committee on Rules (BlOuni
and McMillanj and the gentlemen
from Missouri aud Illinois bland
anu Springer, not for the purpose Of
throwing all responsibility upon
them, but in order that he NIGH
benefit by any light they might bt
able to give. After convensing with
those gentlemen it had seemed cleaI
to the Chair that the rules Of the
House covered the question, and
that his duty was TO treat the bill rs
he would treat any other. Accord
ingly the clerk was not directed O.
make any charge in regard 10 the
reference. The House must bear III
mind that this was not
A QUESTION OF POLITICS.
II not satisfied with Ae 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 90 he considered I'm COMMITTEES
OF the whole. There was = Drnvir-
ten In the. n~iyinci House bill by
e'hich oertain bullion was TO be
purchased and certificates issued
thereon. The Senate amendment
was for Tree Coinage and for this an
| Appropriation was made. IL any
thing was clear in parliamentary
usage, it was that this bill was one
Of those which would be properly
considered In committee IF the
whole, and this ieing 20, II was the
Obvious duty Of the Chair 10 refer il,
In thesnme manner in which hum
drels and thousands Ct bills had
been referred dn-irS lie present
@es-iCa. The point Of order raised
by the gentleman from Illinois
put the Chair in an embar-
rasSing position, because the pro-
posed action Of the House was a
declaration that au error had been
made in parliamentary law. TWAS
proposed 10 erase from the Journal
question Of fact. While the Chair
might have some doubt about the
points sf order, he felt IL was a ques-
ton the House ought 10 determine,
and he would therefore override the
points OF order and submit the ques-
liun to the House.
Cannon moved to table Mills res-
olutiOn. On a standing vote this
was carriel-la0 TO 10. Morrow
Call. Bartine tNev.l and Towns
end Cal. voted with the democrats.
TheywereOverlOOkedb by heSpeaker
in the first count, but Morrow called
attention 10 the omission ans it was
reCtified.
On vote 10y teile-s the shotion TO
table ;...s iO>C-yeas lis, nays l23.
TIE QUESTION REQUIRED
on Mills resolution and il was
agreed to-yels III, nays liz. At
the CON fusion Of the roll rail- the
vote stood yeas TO, n.ys III. \
rhar-g ~ one vote would be neces-
cary TO defeat the resolution, and
that change was made by Funston
kas.l amid the deTisive cheers Of
LAAE ANuAUGAAA-- HES 4NAA AAAN NNAlT
yeas lis, nays lis, but the change
proved unavoiling. Abbott ,Te&.)
and Bullock Fla, whose NAMES
were not recorded, stated that they
had voted in the affirmative, md
the Speaker, accepting their state
ment. the vote stood: Yeas l90,
nays lis. Then Mckinley arose
amt changed his vote 20 the AFFIRM
alive, and the vote vas finally an
nOuncei rs yeas III, nays liz.
, Mckinley was then rec6gllEedzI
TO move n reconsideration and also
10 move an adiOu9lment, Mills man.
aging 10 sandwich the motion 10 re-
consider on the tIhlc. On motion
10 lay Mills resolution on the table
the following republicans voted with
the democrats in tine negative:
Bartine, 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 n reCOnsiderl-
ton. The motion 10 adjourn was
lost-yeas no, nays l21.
The vote then recurring on Mills
motion 10 table the motion to recon-
slider, it was agreed to-yeas III,
nays ia.
MILLS THEN MOVED
n