The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-03-08
will meet, as you deserve. with an emphatic


ccedings with amazement Last Tuesday he
had been approached by Mr. Cochran Of
New ork, and Mr. Andrews of Massachu-
sets. and asked 90 agree 20 a pOstp0nement
oi the vote on this question until Monday
next, to-day. they promising 20 have their as
sociaics present and proceed 10 a vote to-day
without nlibustering. Now upOn n ruling Of
the Speaker made in strict accordance with
the rules. which Is that a report from the
Committee on Rules Is always in order the
opponents If the Silver bill proceed TO fill
buster in violation Of the agreement made
Mr. Bland said the rule was well considered
when made and was intended TO meet lust
such case a. this. Ii the journal be first
taken mp motion TO amend may be made.
and debated from now until Christmas and
the order bc defeated.
CONTROVERSY KNsurs
4 controversy then ensied between the
Speaker and Mr.. Irncy over the right Of the
latter TO have an hour for discussion of his ap-
peal and yield such portion Of that time rs he
desired 60 other members. Mr.. Tracy warmly
resented the attempt of the Chair. As he OK
pressed 1t. TO take him OF the floor and
said he did not intend TO be looked at that
way, whereat there was "A great laugh. The
matter passed over without decision by the
Char upon the point involved.
Mr. Cochran stated that his recollection OF
the conversation between himself and Mr..
Bland WAS widely different from that stated
by the latter gentleman. lie said he had ap-
pealed TO the gentleman to consent to a vote
being taken to-day and Mr.. Bland had re-
fused TO give the consent and there was no
agreement made Upon the question of fill
clustering Mr.. Cochran said It WAS not neces-
saiy for him to assure the House that he was
opposed 10 that practice But he desired 10
say that IN his opinion the ruling OF the Chair
was erroneous and fraught with danger. For
himself be could not tell until after the Jour
nal had been read under what condition tho
House assembled, or whether the last legisla-
tive day expired. 1t was dangerous ruling
and he protested against It,
Mr.. Andrew. Of Massachusetts. said that in
the arrangement proposed last week to Mr..
Bland. in which he had taken part. there
was no intention on the part OF himself or
friends TO filibuster.
Mr.. Bland: Then why do you flibuster
against 1t
Mr. Cochran: Because we want TO con-
slider it IN order and you want to proceed IN
disorder.
Mr.. Blount. Of Georgia. argued that the
motion % proceed with the consideration of
the order prior 10 the reading of the journal
was strictly in order in rules that the right 10
call up report from the Committee on Rules
is placed Oh the same equality with motion
70 adjourn.
TIE SPEAKER EXPLAINS.
Mr.. Lockwood, of New York / rise to a
parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker The gentleman from New
York will state It.
Mr.. Lockwood do not remember any oc-
casion during the iftY-frst Congress when an
appeal 70 read the journal of the House was
denied. / want TO know IL the rules we have
adopted. as construed by the Speaker. are
more arbitrary than the rules OF the Fifty
first Congress as construed by the gentlman
from Maine, Applause by the anti-free sill
yer men,.
ln CLOSING the debate. Mr.. Catchings from
the Committee on Rules, said the rules under
which the report was called up was adopted
for the purpose of enabling the committee 10
do lust what IT was attempting to do IN tins
case. He moved 10 lay the appeal on the
tabe
Sneaker Crisp. stating the question. called
attention to the rule which governed the re-
ceipt of communications from the senate.
that they should not be IN order while the
journal was being read. while the yeas and
nays were being called or while tho House
was dividing upon any question. There was
10 such restriction upon the right of the
Committee on Rules to call up report. Not
finding any he had construed the rule TO per-
init the order regarding the Silver bill TO be
taken up at the time it was. He desired only
however, 10 enforce the rules as he found
them if the House desired to change them
or was not satisfied with his construction of
them It could do so. and he would enforce
them according TO the construction adopted
bv the House On the motion 20 Law the appeal
on the table the yeas were ly4, nays -.
RrrUmIcANs HoLD ALooF.
The Republicans took no part in the con-
trOversv the contest being confined entirely
10 the silver and auti-silyer wings of the Dem
ocratic party IL was marked by great con-
fusion and intense feeling. the passages at
arms between the two being attended with
.l., liza
mentarv between Cochran and Bland was
notable scene the latter gentlemen being
white with passion as Mr.. Cochran observed,
'Once in order and twice IN disorder" the
statement OF his recollection of the cOnyersa-
ton relating to the consideration OF the order
to-day.
MIR. Pierce. of Tennessee. Mr. Blands able
lieutenant. confirmed his principals state
ment in every word and inference"
After the announcement OF the vote on bis
appeal Air. Tracy raised the question If con-
sideratiOn. This was promptly declared out
of order by the Speaker TO the apparent
nstOnishihent OF Mr. Tracy, who calculated,
"Why Mr.. Speaker In support oi his de-
mand Mr. Tracy read the sixteenth rule,
which he asserted gave to any member the
right 10 raise the question of consideration
upon any matter.
The Speaker explained that by the rules as
understood the motion made by the Gentle
n
fore out Of order.
Mr.. Reed Does this Chair hold that to
raissthe question Of consideration dHatory
motion
The Chair: The gentleman ought to know
that it was so held in the last Congress.
Mr. Reed Does the Chair lndorse the
method OF procedure IN the last Congress
Laughter on the Republican side.
The Chair. Part OF 1t doubtless IS worthy OF
Endorsement: the course of the Speaker OF
the last Congress does not meet with the IN
dorsement of the present occupant OF the
chair. Laughter on the Democratic slde.I
Mr. Reed with much impressiveness)
may saw neither expected nor desired that
Endorsement.
From the ruling of the Chair Mr.. Tracy
took an appeal ,
Mr. Warner. of New York, protested
against the ruling of the Char, which he char
acterized as more arbitrary than anything
that occurred during the Fifty-hrst Congress-
by virtue of whose crimes most OF US are here
to-day.
lie appealed TO the House TO so construe
the rules as to permit the majority to go
home and say that when they found they
had perpetrated such mistake rs the ruling
OF the Cnalr indicated as the opportunity for
such action.
Mr.. Catchings moved to lay the appeal on
the table.
sPEAKFR cApLIeLZ REcAII.FD.
Mr.. Rayner desired to be permitted to read