The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-12-21
WORK OF CONGRESS.
A Measure to Do Away With Super
yisOrs of Elections.
The Anticipation Bill Again Discussed il
the senate-senator Palmer Opposing
1.-THE House Deserted.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 2O.-In the Sen
ate the army appropriation bill from
the House was presented and referred to
the committee on appropriations.
a large number OF petitions for anG
against the anti-option bill, were pre-.
scented and referred to the committee or
agriculture.
Mr.. Sherman introduced bill to ex-
tend to the North Pacific ocean the pro-
vision of the statutes for the protection q
fur seals and other fur bearing animals,
which was referred to the committee Oh
foreign relations.
A resolution for the assembling of both
houses on February Sth to witness the
count of the electoral vote was presented
and referred.
The McGarrahan bill was laid aside and
the Hoar bin for the sale OF navy yard
lands in Brooklyn passed.
Before taking up the anti-option bill
the bill introduced by Mr.. Bate of Ten
nessee to repeal the statutes relating to
supervisors of elections and special depu-
ties was taken up and MIR. Bate made an
argument in its favor. These laws, he
said, had been IN operation over twenty
years and were not reconciled with the
people to their harsh interference with
affairs belonging exclusively TO the states
/ 1t was not surprising that the late politi-
cal revolution had swept from power the
/ party which enforced machinery for in
| terfering with elections of the states. The
force bill had been potent in the late
! overthrow OF the Republican party, and
the law which he proposed to have re-
pealed was the germ OF the force bill.
These laws had no constitutional war
rant, serve no good, and their remaining
on the statute books was direct disre-
gard of the spirit and purpose of the late
elections and the peace and quiet of the
country. The bill went over without
action.
After brief struggle with the attempt
of Mr.. Blackburn, of Kentucky, to dis
place the anti-option bill with the Hudson
River Bridge bill, the former was taken
tup, and Mr.. Palmer, of Illinois, addressed
the senate in opposition to the bill. He
argued that the meaning and effect of the
proposed bill was to give collectors of in
ternal revenue absolute authority over all
contracts made by any persons for the
sale and future delivery of property. 1t
gave a most extensive and alarming iuris-
diction to collectors of internal revenue.
Gave them authority to look into the bus
mess of every and any man in the coun-
try; the power which, heretofore, only
permitted under very limited and re-
stricted circumstances, for mere revenue
purposes. The bill was Objectionable on
broader grounds. No senator, he APP
pretended, would risk his reputation as a
lawyer iand legislator by claiming con-
gress possessed power to prohibit dealings
/ in options on futures in the states.
The attempt, however, was but thinly
disguised in bill to thrust the jurisdic-
ton OF the federal government into the
states to define and punish crimes. A
Senator who called the bill a revenue
measure knew the term was a misnomer
| because there is no purpose to raise reve-
nue. under the bill. The Democratic
party when it comes into power will not
tolerate fraud of the character of the
pending bill Gambling in states will
never be prohibited by federal action.
But the Democratic party will endeavor
to suppress such vices by state action.
After further argument in the same line,
but without concluding his speech, Mr..
Palmer yielded the floor, the anti-option
bill going over without action, and the
Senate adjourned.