Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-03-07

always been granted, and that in democratic
Mouse, In case Ike this case. . refusal
anything that had been done in the last House.
TAKING SNAP yuDoxnxf.
Every parliamentary body in the world Cor
rscsed its own journal before IL proceeded to
the work Of another day, and il its rules au-
thorized such ruling as the Speaker had made
u was an innovation that ought to be changed.
Ihere was good deal of talk in his state
about premature or snap convention.
II there was ever anything premature or un-
islation. it was the Swapping of this resolution
81. them before the reading of tho journal.
The Representatives from New York would
stand by what they thought right with
tne same stendfastness and courage they had
ssood oy the present Speaker when, as the gen.
temsn from Georgia, he had pro-
tested against things that were no
more unjust than was the bringing
IN OF TINS resolution before the reading Of the
Iou.nai. Inc party owed something to the
thing to it.. 1t had no right to load them down,
anu from them 1t must expect, as il deserved,
the most emphatic protest
Mr.. Tracey then claimed the floor, but the
speaker had already recognized Mr. Bland and
stated to Mr.. Tracey that as he had reserved
his time the gentleman from Missouri was en-
titled to the foor.
Mn. BLAND HAS HIS SAY.
Mr.. Bland, proceeding, said that when the
committee on rules had reported the resolution
certain antisilver men had come to him and
had said that if the resolution we're postponed
ior the time being they would DO ready
to vote for IL today without Ali
clustering. 1t was fair square agreement
made by the gentlemen, who were Mcssrs.
Cochran and Andrew. He thought il fair
play and fair dealing that when thew came
to him and to the committee ON rules
and made solemn agreement that
hlibustering tactics ought not to be resorted to.
IL inc House proceeded with the reading OF the
Journal in the temper of the gentleman from
New York (slr. Tracey the opponents Of the
resolution could move to amend tho journal
from now until Christmas
There was nothing extraordinary in the
ruling of the chair. It was made in sccordonce
with the rules adopted by democratic House.
When gentlemen violated their pledges and
undertook to declare that rule was being dis
regarded it was very extraordinary exhibi-
ton on this floor. He moved to lay the appeal
on the table.
Mr. TRACEY DEMANDS THE FLOOR,
Mr.. Tracey then demanded the floor, but the
Speaker stated that the motion was not de-
batable.
Mr. Tracey have the floor.
The Speaker-The gentleman has not the
floor.
Mr. Tracey replied that II tho chair.at any
stage of the proceedings desired to make such
ruling he wanted to know it.
The Speaker suggested that If the gentleman
nad any objection to make IL should be made
in a respectful manner.
Mr.. Tracey replied that he would address the
chair in respectful manner.
The Speakcr-lhe chair wishes to be ad-
dressed respectfully.
Mr.. Tracey don't desire to DO looked ut in
that manner. Laughter He Tracey) claimed
mot hn toka Tro, xto d.
THE SPEAKERS STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Speaker-The gentleman must conform
to tho rules Of the House.
The gentleman will be quiet and the chair
will state the question and the gentleman him.
self Will see the impropristy OF his position
The gentleman reserved his time whereupou
the chair recognized the gentleman from Mis-
souri, and that gentleman made motion to lay
the appeal on the table, which cuts off debate.
After further discussion on this point Mr..
Bland withdrew his motion in order to enable
Mr.. Cochran IN. Y. to whom he had person
ally alluded, to take the floor.
Mr.. cocKRAN's DENIAL.
Mr.. Cochran said that the gentleman from
Missouri had stated that in an interview with
him he (Mr. Cockran) had undertaken to
bind any portion of the House to its
action today. That was not correct.
though it might be tho gentleman's under
standing; He bad appealed to the gentleman
from Missouri to consent that a vote be
taken today and the gentleman had refused to
make any agreement whatever, and there the
conversation had ended. 1t had been carried
On in the presence of Mr.. Andrew.
He Clr. Cockran) had to appeal to the COM
mittee Oh rules for this disposition, because the
gentleman from Missouri refused to consent.
RECoLLECTIoSs DIFFER.
Mr.. Bland inquired whether the gentleman
hadn't stated that there would be no opposition
by filibustering.
been referred to.
MIR. Bland-You said in that conversation
that you would vote without tilibustcrins.
Mr.. Cockran-My recollection doesn't cover
any such conversation.
Mr.. Bland-Mine does, most emphatically.
Mr. Cockran-Ihat the gentleman has said
once in order; there is no necessity FOR his say
ing it twice in disorder.
THE CHAIRS RULING DANGEROUS.
MIR. Cochran. continuing, expressed himself
as opposed to filibustering methods. When he
flibustered 1t would be when the government
OF his country was in danger and not when a
fiscal question came before the House. The
ruling OF the chair was dangerous one.
Until the journal was read no
member could tell whether the House was
legally IN session. recess for three days
might have been taken. The decision was an
erroneous and dangerous one-one that ought
to be cured; but whether it stood or fell,
his attitude Oh this question would remain the
same. lie did not believe that there had been
any intention Of flibustering over the Journal
He hoped that the journal would be read and
as soon as it was he stood ready to vote on the
question.
Mr. ANDREW sUsrAINs COCHRAN.
Mr.. Andrew (Mass.) stated that his recollec-
ton of the conversation between Mr. Cochran
and Mr.. Bland was in entire accord with the
recollection Of the former gentleman. He did
not think that the anti-silver men ever intended
to flibuster on the journal.
Mr.. Bland-Why not take o vote before the
reading of the journal if there is no intention
OF filibustering on the journal?
Mr.. Cockran-Becausc one is ORDERLY and the
other is disorderiy.
POINT OF ORDER SUSTAINED.
MIR. Tracey was proceeding to make further
remarks, when Mr.. Richardson Glenn made the
point Of order that the gentleman from New York
was making n second speech, whereas the rules
expressly provided that no gentleman should
speak more than once on an appeal, except by
unanimous consent. The chair held this
point well taken. despite the protests of
Alr. Tracey that, no had never yield cd
the floor. The point not being pressed,
Mr.. Tracey. in a few words, concluded his
remarks by again protesting against the de-
cision OF the chair and expressing regret for
anything he had said which might have been
considered disrespectful to any member
Mr.. GRAINS INQUIRY.