The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-02-06

ends were the suDJecb OF the TWO hour6
spirited discussion In the House to-day.
While the discussion. in q general way, was
upon party lines, the superintendent of the
Census as not without supporters on the
Democratic side-Representative Stone Of
Kentucky being among the warmest cham
pions of Mr.. Porter's efficiency and official
zeal. The debate was on the census de-
fciency bill. which came up In committee
of the whole.
Mr.. Sayers of Texas. in charge of the
bill made an explanation as to it's pro-
visions, and brought charge of extrava-
ganey against the administration of the
Census Bureau. He said that hnn dreds Of
men and women who never ought to have
been employed had been employed in that
office ct the instance of members of Con-
gress. Had the Superintendent of the
Census been left to operate his bureau
without pressure from the outside to put in
Office large number of incompetent per-
sons, the expenditures would have been
very much less.
Mr.. Henderson of Iowa-Do You refer to
the number or the qualityf
Mr.. Sayers-To both.
Mr.. Henderson inquired whether the gen.
tleman had any evidence TO justify his
statement.
Mr.. Sayers insisted that he had. That
evidence had come to HIM from outside
sources. 1t had been stated to him that
been largely increased. There had been o
useless expenditure of public money.
Mr.. Henderson contended that the Office
had been economically administered, and
asked Mr.. Sayers to bear him out in this
contention.
This Mr.. Sayers declined to do, stating
that from the information he had received
he could not indorse the declaration. Many
of the employees who were drawing q sal
ary of 500 month were unable to dis
committee should be appointed to investi-
gate the administration of the Office. Such
an investigation would justify him in his
statement as to the extravaganza of the
bureau.
Mr.. DIngley of Maine regretted that the
gentleman from Texas had made charges
against the Superintendent of the Census.
which had never been made before the
committee on appropriations 1t seemed
to him that such charges made by the
gentleman from anonymous sources should
have been brought to the attention of the
committee. He was sure that had this
been done the minority of the committee
would have insisted that an investigation
be made. 1t was unfair to the Superin-
tendent that such charges should be made
against him on the floor Of the House. If
there had been any mismanagement of the
Census Ofhce-if any employees were unit
to perform their duties-these allegations
were matters which should have been
brought to the attention of the committee
and not launched on the House when the
members of the committee. could not
=
whether there was any foundation for
the charges. He believed that the super
intendent had faithfully performed the
duty that had been intlusted to him. If
the expenditure of the Census Bureau had
been increased this was Que to the fact
that Congress had imposed upon it the new
and unheard-of duty of Inquiring into the
private business of citizens and compelling
them to disclose the amounts of their farm
mortgages.
Mr.. Dugan of Ohio opposed an appropri-
alton for the Census Bureau until tho
charges made against 1t had been answ cred
satisfactorily. IL had been said that tons
and tons of statistics had been destroyed
after compilation. and that lot of punch
ing machines-the invention of relative
which could be purchased for $40, had
been employed at q royalty OF three dollars.
Mr.. Cooper of Indiana criticised the
Census Office on the ground that it had
discriminated against certain limestone
industries of Indiana and in favor Of others.
In the taking of the census great inac-
curacy If not dishonesty, had been COM
mltted as far as the limestone workings
were concerned.
Mr.. Stone of Kentucky paid high trib-
uts to the ability aud Efficiency Of the
Superintendent of the Census.
Mr.. Sayers of Texas offered an amend
ment appropriating t115,614 for the sub
sistepce of the Sioux Indiana, and calling
port to the House the names of all en-
ployes under the direction and supervision
of the Indian Bureau. The latter clause Of
the amendment was the first general legis-
latiOn to be incorporated upon an appro-
priation bill. but no objection being made,
the amendment was adopted. The commit
tee having risen the bill was passed.