Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-02-03

ieoes and Elections. made report in the
case az the Cla4ge.t-Dubois contest
for seat in the Senate from
the State of Idaho. The resolu,
tions declare that Mr.. Dubois is entitled
TO retain his seat and that Ar. Ciaggeu -
not entitled to the seat. ne asIed . .l1s
and pave notice that he would call them
up at very early day.
Mr.. Vance gave notice of minority re-
mort which. he said, would probably be
presented the day after tomorrow.
Mr.. Palmer introduced q joint resoiu-
ton to amend the Constitution SO
as to have United States senators eiecteo
by popular vote, and gave notice that ne
wonId On some convenient occasion adj
dress the Senate on the subject,
Among bills introduced and referred
was one BY Mr.. Vance to repeal al acts
discriminating in taxation against the cir
culsting notes of State banks =, 80,
When the calendar was taken, up the biii
to prevent the adulteration and misorand,
ing Of food and drugs was laid aside until
the printing bill IS alspUseo 0 srnropri.
atine 500, 900 for public building at Fer
The public printing bill came mp at 2
O'clock as special order. The bill was dis
cussed for over two and half hours. was
amended in some particulars. ana went
over without final action.
The Senate went into executive session;
In which some nominations were referred
to committees, and then, at4:3C, ADJOURNED.
House Of Representatives.
After a short personal controversy be-
tween Messrs. Morse and Hoar, of Massa-
chusetts. the consideration Of the rules
was resumed.
The Burrows amendment, giving the
Speaker the right to count quorum, was
rejected. the demand for the yeas and nays
having been withdrawn.
Mr.. Reed, of Maine, offered ap amend
| ment providing that whenever quorum
| fails to vote on any question there shan Dc
call of the House and the yeas and nays
shall at the same time be ordered. AS
each member answers TO his name he
shall vote on the yeas and nays.
Mr.. Reed stated that the amendment
| was similar to one offered some years ago
| by Mr.. John Randolph Tucker.
Mr.. McMlllin opposed the amendment
aud inyeighed against the action OF the
| last Congress III locking the doors during
call of the House. lie referred 70 .ne
| open the door and declared that he had
done perfectly right. Lauzhter.] Inc
| free representatives OF free people should
never be called upon to legislate under
lock and key. Applause
MR. MILLS
| said that it showed the adherence OF the
Democrats party to freedom that go great
| a man as MIR. Tucker could not induce It
| to depart from the fundamental princi-
| pies of representative government.
| democratic applhuse.l He was a Demo-
crat: lApplause.l lie went back TO the
| fundamental principles of representative
government. What was the fundamental
| truth which underlay the whole system OF
| government? That was government
| not of force, but of consent. IApplause.I
| Its power came from the will of the peo-
ole. Were tho people to be compelled 70
vote? Congress had the same right to do
that as TO compel their representatives to
vote.
MIR. Reed quoted from remarks made by
| Nr. Springer and Mr.. Blackburn IN favor
| OF the Tucker amendment when 1t was
| first offered.
Mr. Springer, in retort, quoted against
| Mr.. Reed his utterances upon that occa-
| sion in opposition to the amendment.
Mr.. Allen, of Mississippi, suggested as
compromise that the gentleman from
Name adopt the speech OF the gentleman
| from Illinois, and that the gentleman from
Illinois adopt the speech, OF the gentleman
| from Maine. That would save time anu
| put an end to the controversy.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr.. Bynum, of Indiana, offered an
amendment striking out OF the list OF
privileged motions which may be made,
when any question is under debate, mo-
| lions TO fix day TO which the House shall
adjourn and to take recess. Alter de-
bate the amendment was lost-yeas. 81 I;
nays, l6l.
DILAToRY MOTIONS.
Mr.. Burrows, of Michigan. offered an
amendment providing that no dilatory mo-
ton shall be entertained by the Speaker.
| Rejected.
Mr.. Boatner offered an amendment
| striking out all that part of the rules CIV
| ing permission to legislate on an appro.
| priation bill when in the interest OF
| retrenchment in expenditure. He said he
did this in order to test the sense OF the
| House.
Mr.. Holman sustained the provision,
and was replied to by MIR. Dingley. who
predicted that if the proposition were In.
corporated in the rules October would
find tho House still in session.
MIR. Blount. of Georgia, advocated the
rule. The only way to retrench expendi-
lures was to retrench them, and the only
way in which this could be accomplished
was by legislation on appropriation biils.
RIDERS ON APPROPRIATION BILLS.
Mr.. Tlllman. of South Carolina, In sup
porting the rule. advocated the doctrine
of riders upon appropriation bills. These
riders constituted bayonet In the hands
| of the majority of the House of Represen.
tatives and they ought to be exercised. BY
the adoption of similar rule in the Forty.
fourth Congress saving, of over s6o,oO0,;
600 had been made, and on that record
Tilden had been elected President. The
Republicans had stolen the office. but il
this rule were again adopted the next
President would be Democrat.
Mr.. Picker. of South Dakota. in opposing
the rules. alluded to the power which
| would be given to the Committee on Rules
Three men now living IN the SOUTHEASTERN
portion of the country absolutely con.
trolled the legislation OF the government
under the rules which it was proposed te
adopt. He was opposed to the concen
tration of power IN the hands OF lew
favored committees.
Pending action the House adjourned.