People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1892-07-15

chairman or the cOmmlJUe0 VINO dd-
dressed the House today, / beg to
say that they do me injustice when
they put me in the attitude that |
have neglected to push this resolu-
ton with all the power have. Why,
Mr. Speaker, it is said that furnish
ed tie committee nothing, and the
impression will 60 out that the COM
mittee followed me around the city
with a search warrant for me to come
and address them upon this matter.
Why, sir, [ was told by the gen
tleman from Alabama Mr.. Oates
that the committee would hear me
on a certain morning. | went there !;
the watch was promptly drawn on
me, and they gave me, according to
my recollection, fifteen minutes. Dur
ing that fifteen minutes | did the
very best [ could. It was not enough
to satisfy the gentleman from New
York Mr.. Ray /; it was not enough
to convince the gentleman from In
diana Mr.. Bynum and it was not
enough to convince thechairman Of the
committee. But it was the very best
[ could do. l occupied the fifteen
minutes was called down at the ex-
piration of the fifteen minutes by the
chairman and was bowed out OF the
room. Some time afterwards I was
told that the committee would again
hear me.
[ again went before the commit
tee, again | had my time limited to
I think fifteen minutes, and [ again
occupied it. Again I had slime"
called upon me, and was courteously
bowed out of the room. In other
words, / occupied every moment that
the committee allowed me to occupy,
and the gentlemen of that committee
will bear me out when [ make the
statement that | took the position
that the Federal Government had
the right to interfere, because these
men were doing militia duty, and be-
cause the Pinkertons were keeping a
standing army. 1t was from the dis
tingulshed chairman of the commit
tee that I got the suggestion that |
could bring in the interstate com
MERGE question at all. If | under
stood the gentleman from Texas cor
rectly, he said that I had abandoned
every idea except that the Interstate
commerce law would give us juris-
diction.
Mr.. Culberson. No.
Mr.. Watson. Well, there was some
confusion, and | may not have heard
the gentleman correctly.
Mr.. Culberson. | made no such
statement. What I said was this,
that under your resolution we could
not discover any Federal question,
and [ suggested that perhaps the in
vestigation could be based on a Fed
eral question involving the inter-
state commerce.
Mr.. Watson. That is quite cor
rect.
Mr.. Culberson. And the gentle
man adopted that suggestion.
Mr.. Watson. I adopted that sug-
gestion because that was the only
point upon which I could get in;
but, | claimed the right 10 come in
under the others, and in the public
newspapers where I discussed this
question and upon the floor Of this
House, when we debated the mat
ter, gentleman will bear me out, and
the Record will bear me out in the
statement, that [ then and there took
The position that this Government
had the right to forbid any State or
any corporation to keep standing
army in time of peace.
Why, Mr.. Speaker, the committee
say [ furnished them no proof. That
was not the time for proof. That
was the time for argument on the
question Of jurisdiction. When they
decided the question of Jurisdiction,
[ gave them a list of witnesses
promptly. I gave them the name of
Mr.. Powderly, of Scanton, Pa. I
gave them
Mr.. Ray. May I ask you ques-
ton, please?
Mr.. Watson. Certainly.
Mr.. Ray. [ desire to ask the gen
tleman whether he thinks that this
Congress would have the right to in
vestigate the police force of New
York City unless it was alleged that
that force in some way had either
the Constitution of the Uni
ted States or some statute of the
United States?
Mr.. Watson. No; do not But
that IS a very different case from this.
This Pinkerton Detective Agency is
operating body of armed men which
is not the police force of any city.
This same William Pinkerton is the
man who denounced in the public
press a member of this House be-