The advocate., 1892-04-27
see itH" "Doncher know lt?"
The gentleman from Illinois, referred
TO by Mr.. Burrow, thus spoke:

Mr.. Fithian--The gentleman from Iowa
had, previously TO publishing this letter of
Mr.. R. G. HOrr in the Record, occupied the
floor of the house for an hour or more, and
had published in the Congressional Record
a lengthy speech on the subject of the re-
vision of the tariff. After he had taken
up the time of the house, after he had occu-
pied the space in the Record by the publica-
tion of his remarks, he now publishes a
second speech which is wholly composed of
this letter of R G. HOrr on the subject of
farm implements IN the Record as a con-
tribution upon the subieCs of the tariff,
with a heading, "Duties Upon Wool and
Woolen Goods" to which it bears no refer
enCe.
Now, I want to say to the House and to
the speaker that during the discussion of
the tariff question had put my name down
early on the list with the chairman of the
committee of the whole, and requested that
time be allotted me, to be occupied on the
floor in the discussion of the pending sub
ject. was denied the right to be heard,
because, suppose, the time allowed for the
general debate was not sufficient to aCoOmo-
date all who wanted to speak upon the sub
ject.
had no opportunity, Mr.. Speaker, to
make any remarks during the discussion Of
this question upon the floor, and I thought
and still think had the right insist l
had the right-in the absence Of any re-
marks Of my own, to submit remarks or
writings of other gentlemen, especially the
eminent gentleman from whom l copied
the extract, for the purpose of expressing
clearly the views that entertain upon the
question; and if it were not for the fact
that the argument serted in that speech
goes to the very vitsls " This question, il il
were not for the fact that the argument
inserted in the Record was complete refu
tation of the position of gentlemen on the
other side on the tariff question the question
that was under discussion at that time, M
objection whatever would have been made to
it even if it had occupied twenty pages of The
Record instead of few columns. It was
not because of the space occupied IN the
Record that these gentlemen complain, but
it was because of the facts the cold facts
that are LAID down for the people TO read on
this question, an argument which reviews
and lays bare the position of gentlemen
upon that side, that the complaint against
these remarks being inserted in the Record
is heard now upon this floor.
While the debate upon this matter
was pending, Mr.. GoOdright,of Kentucky,
said:
Gentlemen have exercised the right here
complained Of from time immemorial, and
as precedent, which 1 think the gentleman
from Michigan Mr.. Burrows] will hold to
be perfectly good, l call attention to the
Congre sional Record, Forty eighth con-
gress, first session, page 264 Of the appendix,
where Mr.. Brewer, Of New Jersey, printed
as his speech upon the tariff chapter from
Mr.. Blaine's Twenty Years in Congress, u
giving thirty.six pages of that book, cover
ing over nine solid pages Of the Record,
this quotation constituting his entire speech.
That book was copyright also, aud the
case is exactly in point. The same objec-
ton could have been raised to 1t, but the
Record does not show that the gentleman
from Michigan or anyone else objected. II
precedent were needed in aid of the present
order of the house this would be justl6ca-
ton for my colleague from Kentucky [Mr
Stone] and other members.
Mr.. Washington, OF Tennessee, re-
ferred to by Mr.. Burrows, made these
remarks: