Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1890-02-08

the United States.
He acknowledged that the millennium had
/ not yet dawned upon the south, and that the
land OF reconstruction was not yet land OF
perfect righteousness.
The senator then expended much time in
sarcasms. After this froth was disposed OF
ne resumed his argument.
How (he asked) should the two races be
made TO dwell together In peace and fratern-
lty. This was the question. It was fund
amental principle IN American law that the
I majority or those to whom the franchise Is
committed shall rule, (within lImits), but it
was a principle OF natural law as old as
man himself. that the stronger must rule
without limit. He affirmed not that the ne
! gro was incapable of civilization, but that
/ ne was incapable of keeping uD with the civ
1hzatlon of the white race. HIS solution of
| the problem was simply Glands off," He
could not support Senator Buffers bill 1t
o1d not reach the case. There was ample
room Tor the negroes IN the northern and
northwestern states, and it was entirely
practicable to induce them to settle in those
| states. If, said he, the negro is a GOOD
thing let US divide him out.
| In conclusion he said, addressing him
self to Mr.. Ingalls,: eff you cannot help
either black or white. common decency re-
quires that you should hold your peace"
THE APPEAL AGAIN.
Mr.. Mckinley spoke upon the appeal taken
and supported the speakers decision.
The action of the democrats, he SAID, had
never been dreamed off by the fathers of
the constitution. They has never dreamed
OF sullen silence as a statesmanhke way of
deciding quorum. He was not saying that
the democrats were doing differently from
what the Republican party had done for
years. He, himself, had stood here and fiji
! bustered day after day in silence refusing to
vote, but he could not now recall that he
g hn0 ear-0 n . E.. l. 4 =
worthy purpose.
No minority had ever carried on filibus-
tering that it was not afterward ashamed of
the whole proceeding.
The gentlemen On the other side wanted
to perpetuate fiction which declared that
although members were present in their
seats, they should be held to be oonstruc-
lively absent. The republicans were con-
tending that this should be fact and a
truth and not fiction, and that members VINO
sat in their seats should be counted as pres
ent because they were present. The demo-
craLs wanted the journal to declare a lie.
The republicans wanted tine journal to de-
clare the truth. The position of the gentle
men on the other side meant that they would
either ruin or rule, though they were in the
minority. The republicans insisted tina
while they were in the majority the other
side should do neither.
Mr.. Butterworth, of Ohio. said this ques-
OiOA was dS W llC power Vi bllS TO
rule in this country. This was a govern
ment of the majority. The majority must
exercise that authority in legislation and
government, which was IN keeping of tie
turtherance Of the provisions of the consti-
tuition. 1t had been urged that it was for a
member to answer to himself and his con-
stituents alone. whether he would vote and
discharge his duty here or not. He utterly
denied the souudness of that proposition.
That would have done when it was held that
members were ambassadors from the states
it would not do in January, 1880.
Suppose the minority should decide that
they would not participate and refuse to
vote for general appropriation bill. What
would the effect of their action be? Under
the constitution the government could not
use a penny though the wheels of govern
ment stood still in the presence of an unex-
ampled and unequalled surplus and over
taxed people. Gentlemen on the other side
sat here in flesh, bodily present He saw
them, nay, the country saw them, and vet
the country might starve to death by their
inaction. He insisted that by every rule of
common sense the members present were
participating"
LAID ON THE TABLE.
Mr.. Mckinley moved to lay on the table
the motion to appeal from the speakers de-
cision.
This was denounced and INSTRUCTED by
roll calls upon motions to adjourn, and
when a vote was reached the democrats
again refused to vote.
Again those present and not voting were
counted to make quorum, and the vote de-
clared as carried 160 to 0, and so the appeal
was declared as tabled.
The house then adjourned amid great con-
fusion.
TIE THIRD DAY.
The third days fight in the house over
Speaker Reed ruling, that members pres
ent shall be counted in determining the
presence of quorum, whether they vote or
not, resulted, after. mob like session. In
the still further assumption of the majority
of its power to do business despite tlibus-
tering; in that the speaker ruled that the
action of the majority in this fight settled
that no dilatory motions, in obstruction of
business, would be entertained.
At the close of the third day the disorder
was finally quelled sufficiently to take up the
matter pending when the fight begun-the
contest case of Smith, ackson, from West
Virginia.
Upon this Mr.. Dalzen was heard in an
argument in support of Smiths claim to
his seat.
During the contest, and prior to Mr.. Dal-
zell's speech, the speaker made the follow
ing statement:
1.-THE chair will make statement to the
house. The house will not allow itself to
have transpired during the last few days
have transpired in the presence of this house
and very large auditory. No man can
describe the action of the occupant of this
chair in language which will suhce unless
that description be truthful. The proceed
ings of this house, so far as the chair is
concerned, have been orderly, suitable 10
conformity to the rules of parliamentary
law and the refusal of the chair to entertain
motion to adj urn at this iuncture Is
strictly in accordance Herewith. There is
no possibility 10y which orderly methods of
parliamentary procedure can be used to
stop legislation. The OBJ ection of parlia-
mentary body is action and not stopping of
action. Hence, if any member or set of
members undertakes to oppose the orderly
progress of business, even by the use of
ordinary recognized parliamentary motions
it is the right of the majority to refuse to
have those motions entertained, and to
cause the public b. siness to proceed"
This was followed by an appeal to the
house, and majority sustained the speaker
IN refusing to entertain dilatory motions.
The FOURTH DAY.
The fourth day of the fight in the house
was q continuation of members of the one
party to obstruct. delay and preyent doing
any business whatever until the adoption of
a code of rules for the government of its
procedure; and the determination of the
speaker, sustained by the members of the
other party, to break down the presidents
which have grown to such an extent as TO
OarunIt a GinOlQ u1anhar 10