The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1890-03-13
VERY ARBITRARY.
FEATHERSTONE DECLARED BY THE RE-
PUBLICANS ENTITLED TO THE
CONTESTED SEAT.
SPEECH OF MRAE OF ARKANSAS.
Houk of Tennessee Tries to "Out-Herod
HerOd" and Denounces the People
of Arkansas.
SPEECH OF MRAE OF ARKANSAS.
FIFTY-FIRST CONGRESS.
SENATE.


WASHINGTON, March 5.-The chairman
announced that as there was quorum
present and as the hour of 2 o'clock ar
rived, the educational bill was before the
senate as unfinished business. Senator
Barbour addressed the senate in advocacy
of the educational bill. Senator Plumb
addressed the senate in opposition to the
bill. In the first place. he said, the meas
ure had not been asked for. The bill, he
declared, was the conception of the senator
from New Hampshire (Blair). No South
ern State and no Northern State had ever
said that it needed Federal aid for its
schools He ventured the assertion that if
the bill went over for two years longer
every Southern State would say that it did
not want it.
Commenting upon Senator Blair's remarks
as to making Southern States fear the bur
den of additional pension measures, Sen
ator Plumb said that if the bill became
law the Southern people would be war
ranted in believing that the money was the
grant of the aroused conscience of the
North on account of the great wrong done
to the South in and after the late war 1t
would be regarded in the form of an expia-
ton Just as conscience money was sent to
the treasury from those who had defrauded
it.
After an executive session the senate ad-
journed.
HOUSE.
Immediately after the reading of the
journal the consideration of the Arkansas
election case of Featherstone VS.. Cate was
resumed and the contestee was accorded
the floor to speak in his own behalf 1t
was the duty of members, he said, not to
elect today representative from the First |
district of Arkansas, but, laying aside party |
prejudice, laying aside every sentiment of
possible party eXigency, past present or to |
come, to determine whom the people of |
that district had chosen to represent them. |
He was not seeking personal vindcation |
nor dreading personal denunciation. He |
was standing here as the representative of
1900 freemen and asking justice for
them.
Mr.. McRae of Arkansas, in four min
ute speech, defended and eulogized the
people of his State These people, he said,
were not in favor of violence, they were tor
law and the constitution and every iInpu-
tation that had been against their repute
was without foundation. If he were to
charge great State like Kansas with
crime and in the manner that his people
had been charged. the people of that State
would say that he had the spirit of assassi-
nation about him; if he were tried by his
own people, he would be convicted of the
charge.
Mr.. Houk Of Tennessee, who has charge
of the case for the majority of the commit
tee on elections, made presentation of the
claims OF the contestant He charged that
the Arkansas bulldozing community had
entered into a conspiracy to prevent the
return of Featherstone to congress, and
dwelt upon frauds, which, he asserted, had
been perpetrateG in Crittenden county.
There, he asserted the Democratic election
officers had been appointed IN violation of {
the law, an assertion which was responded
to by Mr.. Cultivate of Ohio with the de- I
NAL that there was any evidence in the case
TO prove it, Ii
Mr., Hcuk said the gentleman would de-
ny the ten commandments and he as
serted his charge of fraud and intimidation.
In conclusion he urged that the cooTed
people of the South should be given fair
chance. If the white people of the South
would not take its hands of the govern
ment must take it off, Let no man hold a
seat on this floor who was returned by
means of Winchester rifles, clubs and fraud
ulent ballotc. He was in favor of ma
tional election law. He was in favor of the
government becoming so strong that it
could protect the black man in the South rs
well as the white man in the North. At the
conclusion of his speech Mr.. Houk de-
manded the previous question. The vote
resulted-yeas 1i5 nays al. The previous
question was ordered.
Mr.. Cultivate then offered as a substitute
for the first resolution reported by the
majority declaring Cate not entitled to the
seat The resolution declaring Feather
stone not entitled to it was rejected-yeas '
13s, nays 144 Mr.. Hill of Illinois voting ,
with the Democrats.
Mr.. Springer of Illinois moved to recon-
nit the case to the committee on elections
with instructions to the committee to APP ,
point q subcommittee of five members to
proceed to Arkansas to investigate the
election in the First district of that State [
Mr.. Springer's motion was defeated-yeas
1873; nays. 146. The vote declaring Cate
not elected was-yeas, 147; nays, 1879; and
Featherstone was seated by vote of yeas,
las; nays, 1876; and the oath of Office was
administered to him by the speaker.
The hnusa than ad iourned {