The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1892-01-27


Lanham Makes the Rules the Excuse
for Silver Oration-AIr. Breckenridge
Wants the Power to Tack Whole
Tariff Revision Scheme to an Appro-
priation BilI-Bi-Metallism in the SEN
ate.
WASHINGTON, January 27.-Mr. Catch
ings called up in the House, today, the
report of the committee on rules contain
ing the proposed new code of rules. Cen
eral debate was limited to seven hours.
Mr.. Catchings made a brief explanation
of the new code, stating that it was COM
posed substantially of the rules govern
ing the 50th Congress, the notifications
being in the interest of the dispatch of
business and the retrenchment of public
expenditures.
Mr.. Reed of Maine criticised the pro-
posed rules and extolled the rules of the
ton of bills was concerned, the proposed
change would result in the consumption
of the time of the House, annoyance of
ulelIlUcIS dHu eACGcCllIlS5 lIISS uldIloy. IIO
sarcastically congratulated the Demo-
cratic party on taking step forward in
advocating rule making it in order to
call up for consideration report
from the committee on rules while,
pending it's consideration, the Speaker
may entertain one motion to adjourn,
| but, after the result is announced,
may not entertain any other dilatory mo-
| ton. He was glad to know it had
Ceased To Be Tyranny
for that committee to present bills for
the consideration of the House. Even
this advance was one-sided under the
proposed rule. Whenever the commit
tee on rules wished to cut off filibuster-
ing it could do so, and it was right that
it should; but the majority of the House
should, at all times, have the same right.
| Under the rule, a minority might rule
except where the committee on rules
| took the initiative. A minority was sa-
cred when it had the committee on rules
| on it's side, and was of no account when
the committee was opposed to it. The
House had the right, at any time, to in
sist that obstruction to it's onward
march of legislation should be moved
| out of the way. The Speaker of the
House, the organ of the majority and the
House, should have not only the right
but the dutyssdevolved upon him to sup
| press filibustering, just as he had the
right to suppress any other disturbance
that might occur. A question which the
people presented ought to be decided by
| their representatives. 1t was not neces-
sary for him to discuss the question Of
what
| Constituted Quorum in the House,
The Supreme Court of the United States
would soon, he hoped, pass upou that.
He entertained an unfaltering faith that
the Supreme Court would follow the de-
cision of every supreme court that ever
passed upon the question. A quorum of
this body was constituted by the mem
bers present. Mr.. Reed proceeded to ar
que against the power given to place rid
ers on appropriation bills, provided the
amendments offered retrenched expendi-
lures. He was opposed to anything
which lowered the power and dignity of
the House. The power the House took
away from itself was power it
could not take away from the Senate.
Mr.. Lanham of Texas availed himself
of the wide scope given by the debate to
make an earnest but brief speech in
favor of the free coinage of silver. He
said that if Congress failed to pass free
silver coinage measure, condemnation
could not be avoided. Silver had been
covertly if not fraudulently demonetized
against the peoples interest.
Mr.. Bowers of California criticised the
proposed rules. His people wanted some
appropriations for their harbors. If he
understood the report of the committee
Alright, unless he could
Get Pull ON the Committee
on rivers and harbors he twas not in it."
Laughter
Mr.. Raynor of Maryland replied to Mr..
Lanhan. History had been read in ruin.
The cardinal doctrines of political econ
omy were misapprehended if it was be-
ieved there was any truth and logic in
the proposition for free silver coinage.
Tho sort Of money it was proposedNto
give the people was a fluctuating medium
against the coinoge of which the
| doors of every European mint had been
closed for IL years, and which had been
repudiated as a standard of value in ev
cry well regulated government of the
| world. He was in favor of bi-metallism
III tilG VI UllG b0Iul. 1t
was opposed to the mono-metallism of
| gold, and the mono-metallisn of silver.
No possible benefit would accrue
From the Free Coinage of Silver
to any class Of people except the syndi-
Gates which were getting immense bene-
fits from their mines. The laborer would
never participate in any of the benefits
of any such measures. [Applause]. He
denied that a free coinage bill must be
passed from party standpoint. The
Democrats dare not, and would not,
place in their national platform free
silver plank. The banner which bore
such strange device as that would be-
come the harbinger Of defeat.
Mr.. Burrowes of Michigan brought the
debate back to the subject under consid-
Grafton, and entered into a critical analy-
| -, - 41,o,