Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1890-03-12
NATIONS CAPITAL.
Calss Z LiIdy Diselislnst d Unit.
Il Slts Suais.



Il WAsuHo1oH, Mar. u.-Ths resolution
for ths exclusion from ths record Of the
sentences iateSpolaael b Cal, In the repor,
Of his rsnaSks in ~ discussion With
, Chandler some veske 80 ~ takAn up.
> GeofHe opposed The poeolu1ion - beins
, vishous . peecedsnt While is did not ex-
, pFessiy contain csususs, h uas certainly
, capable Of that intePpgseskon. He had
, looked over the reposS Of Calls remarks,
, and found what be did actually say contain
ed every alIsgatiou. diahealy and unequiv-
ocally. vas eesaaiasd . Shs ciause the com.
mittee recommended exDanxed from the
record.
Hoaf said he aeqsittsd The Senator from
Florida Of any design b escape esnsuss, or
the responsibility By q change Of language,
because the Language ths Senator did actual.
ly use, repelied any such idsa. In bic
judgment there vas . ssbstandal difference
between the words us1sssd end tAs words
printed.
Eussis said the complains In the resolu-
ton vas Of certain lan9uaae published In
the Record had never been uttered in the
chamber. That was the entire complaint
made BY the senator ffom New Hampshire,
and was the only question within the jufis-
diction Of the committee On privileges and
elections, and the demand made by him
was that the order should be reported cen.
suring the senator from Florida. No Gen.
sure was reported but the order implied 4
censure and had no other meaning. / ask
| what il 10 the committee found him guilty
Off IL it falsiHcation Of records Has he
violated the custom Of the Senate? On
this question the committee INDUCES in ab
solute and serene silence. There 10 not q
single exaggeration in what was inserted in
the Record - compared with what was
publicly uttered on the noor. The Ian
guage 10 not the same but the accusation 10
the same; the idea 10 the same the AZ
| raignment 10 the same.
Edmunds illustrated the question BY sllu-
sion to the elecdon in Louisiana Of the
| legislature to which the Senate 10 indebted
for the presence Of Eustis' pressacs. He
(Edmunds) might say on the floor Of the
Senate that he believed the Senator mis-
represents the state Of Louisiana and II it
had been an honest vots and honest count
in that State the Senate should not have
had that pleasure
Eustis-"Do you make that statement1"
Edmunds-I make it because l believe
it. because il 10 true, ~ believe now that
| il make that statement in the Senate and
| il tomorrow there appears in the record the
additional statement that this was accom-
plished in some way by the action Of the
Senator himself and that with bloody hands
and wicked intentions be managed by fraud
and violence to construct Legislature of
that character. l suppose my friend from
Louisians would say Of all that was said
yesterday. that it was very proper for me,
behind his hack, 70 have 1t inserted in
the record.
A point Of ordef was made by Daniel.
who asked that Edmunds words be taken
down.
The presiding officer (Ingalls) asked
Daniel to state the words to which he took
exec eption 90 the od1cial reporter might
know exactly the sentaEce 70 be written
down.
Daniel said he understood the Senator
from Vermont to impute distinctly to the
Senator from Louisiana defence Of murder
and to that language he took exception.
Edmunds Qn low tone To Cullom)-
"He is making . strong point on our side.
Daniel addressing Edmunds)-"i do
not make it, sir. on your eide or on my
side."
Presiding otlcer-"The Senator from
Virginia will address the Chair
Daniels-"The Senator from Vermont
did not address the Chair"
The sentence written out by the ofhcial
| reporter was read by the clerk but Daniels
said those were not the words excepted to.
The presiding officer intimated to Ed
muuds that he had now an opportunity OF
| Affirming or denying that the words ~ read
| were used by him.
Edmunds-"I stand absolutely mute"
Daniel and the reporter retired to find
out the Objectionable sentence. After q
few minutes Daniel said - it was di&cult
| to ind the sentence he would not press the
matter.
Edmunds explained the meaning Of his
allusion to the Louisiana election and the
point Of argument to which he applied it.
Coming back to the main question he said
he thought the Senator from Florida bad
90 far transgressed the right Of correction
and even Of embroidery that he ought to
stand up like . man and take Whatever WAS
implied 10 the resolution, saying that sort
Of thing should not be done any more.
| Daniel said the question addressed itrelf
to the sense of honor Of the Senate. He
had heard the remarks made by the Sena-
| tor from Florida, but did not regard them
- coming within the pale Of parliamentary
privilege. The Senate should strike at the
root of such personalities. and the order Of
the Senate should be lodged in its chair
man. 1t should pervale the whole body,
but he did not think it would be proper to
place on the records of the Senate . resola-
tiou inevitably to be construed ~ censure
on the Senator from Florida.
n"'ee y" p,,'Mese nv ..e
the resolution.
Pugh. another democratic member Of
tho COMMITTEES concurYed in what Gpay