Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1892-01-27
WHEELING W. VA WEDNESDAY MORNING, JANUARY q.
congressional liberty under constitu-

congressional liberty under constitu-
tional guarantee"
Mr.. Herbert then spoke for FIVE min
utes in opposition to Mr.. Brecken-
ridges resolution. He was followed by
Mr.. McCreary, OF Kentucky, and Mr.
Hit, Of Illinois, members of the Com
mittee on Foreign Affairs, both repre-
sentatives urging that the resolution be
referred to the committee.
Mr.. Breckenridge said he was sur
prlsed that a resolution which sought
for nothing but information should
have met the opposition it had. The
resolution did not touch the merits Of
any controversy but between Chile and
the United States. 1t did not critlcise
anybody, executive officer, or Minister,
or any one connected with the transac-
tion. 1t simply asked for light.
Mr.. Burrows, Of Michigan, inquired
whether the gentleman thought that
the President, when he received the
dispatch, would decline to communicate
it to Congress.
~ think" replied Mr.. Breckenridge,
'that when the President of the United
States receives this communication
from the House, he will not decline
Applause on the Democratic side.
That is precisely the object Of this res
olution."
Continuing, Mr.. Breckenridge said
that the gentleman who had spoken
had no sense of the gravity Of the crisis
now upon the country, deeper than he
had himself. 1t was because he feared
that war might be forced when it was
not necessary for the honor Of the
American republic, that he had offered
the resolution.
Mr.. Blount, OF Georgia, said: The
power lay in Congress, not in the Presi-
dent, to say whether or not war should
be declared. The Executive could not
compel this body to do anything but
what it willed, and therefore he trusted
that the House would proceed with de-
liberation and courage from the begin
ming to the end of this matter.
On motion of Mr.. Blount, the resolu-
tion was then referred to the committee
on Foreign Affairs with objection.
Mr.. Catchings, Of Mississippi, now
called up the report Of the Committee
rules. General debate being limited to
seven hours, Mr.. Catcnipgs made brief
explanation of the new code, stating
that il was composed substantially OF
the rules governing the Fiftieth Con-
gresS, the notifications being in the
interest OF the dispatch Of business and
a retrenchment Of public expenditures.
Mr.. Reed, of Maine, criticised the
proposed rules and extolled the rules Of
the Fifty-irst Congress. AS far as the
introduction Of bills was concerned, the
proposed change would result in a
consumption of the time OF the
House, an annoyance to members and
exceeding irregularity. He sarcast-
cally congratulated the Democratic
party on taking a step forward in advo-
eating rule making 1t in order TO call
up for consideration a report from the
Committee on Rules, and pending the
consideration the Speaker may enter
tain one motion to adjourn, but after
the result is announced he shall not en-
tertain any other dilatory motion.
He was glad to know that it had
ceased to be tyranny for that committee
to present bills for the consideration Of
the House. But even this advance was
one sided. Under the proposed rules
whenever the Committee on Rules
wished to cut off filibussering it could
do so, and it was right that it should.
But the majority of the House should
at all times have the same right. Under
the rules the minority might rule eX-
cept where the Committee on Rules
took the initiative. The minority was
sacred when it had the Committee on
Rules on its side, and it was Of no ac-
count when the committee was opposed
to it.
Mr.. Bowers, Of California, criticised
the proposed rules. His people wanted
some appropriations for their harbors.
If he understood the report Of the COM
mittee Alright, unless he could get pull
on the Committee on Rivers and Har-
bors, he was mot In it," Laughter.
Mr.. Burrows, OF Michigan, brought
the debate back to the subject under
consideration and entered into criti-
cal analysis of the proposed rules and
Mr.. Mills, OF Texas, made brief reply.
Mr.. McKenna, OF California, also ad-
dressed the House in criticism Of the
new code, and then the House ad-
journed until tomorrow.