New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-04-28

FOR THE CANAL INVESTIGATION
REsoLUTIoN-THE ASSEMBLY
PASSES THE BILL BY
STRICT PARTY VOTE
rrf TELEGRAPH TO TnIBUSEI
Albany, April 27.-The Democrats are suh
protecting the Canal Ring and they propose "
all their power in the Legislature to carry OUT
this purpose, even il the most important leglS
lative measures fail TO pass. Their oniy nope Is
that Governor Hill will call special session OF
the Legislature and recommend so many subjects
for its consideration that in the resulting conflict
over these matters their defence OF the Canal
Ring may in a measure be forgotten. 1t is semi
officially announced that, if the deadlock IN the
Senate over the Republican resolution for the in
veStigation OF the Canal Department continues
until the hour set for the final adjournment of the
Legislature on Thursday at noon, the Governor
will direct the Legislature to reconvene on Thurs
day afternoon for the consideration of various
subjects
The Republican Senators meanwhile are push
ing the canal investigation resolution, and do not
intend to drop it before the moment when Lieu
tenant-Governor Jones. on Thursday, declares the
Legislature adjourned without day.
The Democrats put forward Senator Linson To-
night to make a long speech in defence of their
position of opposition to the investigation. MIR.
Linson referred frequently to the example OF
Samuel j. Tilden, forgetful of the fact that Mr..
Tilden was the assailant of the Canal Ring. while
David b. Hill is its champion. Mr.. LinsOns
argument, therefore, that following the Tilden
precedent, Canal Investigating Committee should
be appointed was entirely misplaced; and he
evidently felt that it was. he made his argu-
ment without any air of conviction.
Mr. ruin do fhn DDin of ride
LinsOns bill for a canal investigating commission
could not be substituted for the canal investigating
resolution.
The point of order is not well taken," said
Lieutenant-GOvernor Jones.
j appeal from the decision of the chair said
Mr. Erwin.
Thereuuon Mr. Linson resumed his argument
for the Democratic bill, In the course of his
speech he said:
al am surprl1ed at che obstruction tactics of
the Republicans. I'D by the Senator from the
XXth Erwin. We farmers are anxious 10 have
business transacted. l have not introduced
bill it is simply instructing the Canal Committee
TO do a certain thing. We make objection to the
investigation of specific charges against the Canal
management. We claim that no investigation IS
necessary; but that, if one is made, it should be
made by nonpartsan commission 1t is said
that the Governor should not investigate the con-
duct of his appointee by other appolntees
That doesn't seem TO me to be fair objection
We deny that there is any corruption in the Canal
Department"
IF there is not corruption, your action bellies
it," said Mr.. Laughlin.
Mr.. Fassett followed with an able dissection of
Mr.. Linsons argument He said in part
"Senocor IiDscn says that the position OF the
hot ic
ple understand it. Mr. Lnson is not accustomed
to criminal law and criminal practice. lie
isn't accustomed to the defence of criminals ana
he cannot argue, therefore, with any sincerity
He saws first that the resolution is of doubtful
legality: and secondly that the investigation
| would be an ey-parte one and should not he per-
mitted during the heat Of o campaign When does
n campaign exist? David b. Hill conducts bis
campaign the year around. He never writes
| public document but he is in the midst OF red
| hot campaign. There is no time of the year when
we could find ron-politcal period in
which to make an investigation of the
Canal Department. The Constitution directs us
! TO investigate State departments and learn how
they are managed. We are seeking to learn
whether the canals cannot be managed with less
expense Governor Hill dares not trust this Sen
ate TO make this investigation. The Governors
! attitude is this: Let me. who have been the
| administrative head of the canals, appoint the
investigating committee. But. although | shall
appoint the jury. | will not permit them TO con-
tinue their investigation for jhrcc and a half
months, for fear that they will discover something.
II is gratuitous insult to this body to assert that
its Senators cannot make fair investigation.
Why should we leave this right to five private
citizens? 1t is an outrage upon the dignity Of
| the Senate"
The Senate then overruled Lieutenant Governor
Joness dcision that Senator LinsOns bill could be
substituted for the Canal investigation resolution,
and took a recess until tomorrow, with the dead
| lock still in existence. .-
| the Assembly at the last minute, Mr. McCIelland
moved tonight at late hour call OF the AS,
scmbly. so that the Democratic majority cOuti
| force through the Hill Canal Commission DliI.
| The call was ordered, and it was found that the
| Democrats had sXty-fve votes, just enough TO
suspend the rules a rol-cal on the motion TO
suspend the rules and read the bill out OF its oraer
showed siXty.five Democratic and tifty-one Ke-
Mr.. Acker the Republican leader, moved to
strike out the enacting clause of the bill lie
said that the action of the Governor was
| hypocrisy of the bodest kind.
| Mr. Fish declared that it was an outrage ior
| Hill TO ask for power to appoint a commission to
| investigate the Canal Board, Of which he IS a
member The bill provides for holding the In
vestigation Of the canals with closed doors. In
the present critical cOndlton OF ule IeeIlhS vi te
people, it would not do. Why should the IN
| vestigaton cease during the election? he asked.
Was it because the Democrats were afraid of an
| investigation at that time? The man who wrote
| tho hiil knew his business we'll. He knew how
| 70 draw il 80 that it would do the least harm
Mr. Ackcr moved to amend the bill by making
tbe Canal Committee of the Senate the commits
| sion m make tbe investigation. He said that if
the Democrats were willing TO make an honest
investigation they would adopt the amendment. .a
The bill was then ordered to thlrd reading ana
| .Lo cnaoLor declar rcd that the question on
the the fTal -" passage Of the bill Mr. Acker raised
the point Of order thet the bill was INTRODUCED ,o
after March 10 and theeIoFe under mnf .e n otber LS
i' 6iIS preyoGsy %ey on introduced had been read OF
course the Speaker ruled against the point; al
though the rules were directly aTqlnst Ine