The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-10-17

ut is sufficient" Mr. Vest replied.
eve are confronted with a condition
and not q theory"
TINE TO AMEND THE RULES.
Mr. Hill-If the rules of the Senate
absolutely prevent the passage OF bill
which a majority desire to pass, then II
strikes me that the best thing for the
Senate to do is to endeayOr to amend the
rules so that majority can pass bill
that they desire to pass.
Mr.. Vest-Yes, Mr.. President, l heard
that when we were discussing the Force
bill in varied intonatiOn and with much
rhetorical utterance, but the rules were
not changed.
Mr.. Aldrich-Does not the senator be-
Ieve that if a majority of the senate had
been in favor of what he chooses to call
the Force bill. the rules would have been
amended and the bill would have passed.
GAG LAW THE ONLY WAY.
UMr Vest-Why, no. As the rules exist
until YOU get in the chair an occupant
who viii strike down the rule permitting
one-ffth of the senators present TO de-
mand the yeas and nays, and who will
put a question and carry it without re-
gard to the votes of the senators, you can
not effect. against the opposition Of one
fifth of the senators present any legislation
which is so OdlOus as to require and de-
mand such action. If any oracle can be
found who will solve the difficulty and
tell us how we can pass the pending meas
ure or any other with the opposition that
exists to it in this body, l shall come TO
the conclusion that Omniscience has i'm
parted itself to an individual and given
him a solution which has not yet been
found.
THE DEMOCRATS RESPONSIBLE,
Mr. Aldrich-The party of the senator
from Missouri is charged with the respon-
sibility of legislation not only in this body
but in every department of government.
If one-ifth of the Senate can prevent any
action upon any subject how does that
senator expect to pass the bill reported
by the senator from New York (Mr. HilD
to repeal the election laws2 How does
the senator expect that his party will
carry out its pledges for tariff reform if
the doctrine laid down by him is to pre-
vail, and is the correct doctrine for the
government of the Senate. Would not
one-ffth of the senators upon this side be
justified in preventing what we believe to
be ruinous legislation}
MIR. Vest-A second Daniel come to
Judgment. laughter. l have not said
1t is the correct doctrine. 1 have simply
called attention to the fact, which every
one knows to exist, that certain statute
Is upon US. If it is not so l will be obliged
TO the senator from Rhode Island if he
will tell me what he would do.
Mr.. Aldrich-1f had my way the Sen
ate would change its rules
MIR. Vest-But you have not got your
way. Laughter If the senator had
his way he would have passed the force
bill, but thank God he did not have it.
NO MAJORITY FOR THE FORCE BILL.
Mr. Aldrich said the reason he did not
have his way was because a majority of
the Senate voted the other way. If a
majority of the Senate had been in favor
of changing the rules at that time they
would have been changed and the force
bill would have passed.
1T would not have passed." said Mr..
Vest, land every intelligent senator, here
] undertake to say, will admit it to him
self, if not publicly
Mir Vest said that when the election
repeal bill and the tariff bills were re-
ported the democrats would attempt to
solve the question and the responsibility
of defeating the will of the majority
would rest where 1t belonged Mr. Vest
closed by saying ''When the time has
passed, and when the debate is such that
a compromise is considered surrender,
we may take up the question of changing
the rules
HILL RFPUDIATES THE DOCTRINE,
Mr. Hill said he repudiated the doctrine
that one-ffth of the Senate could abso-
lutely prevent legislation. The power to
make rules implied the power to change
them and the Senate could not by the
adoption of any set of rules absolutely
not tie itself up 50 that by reason of its
rules it was impossible for the majority to
legislate and the minority could dictate
legislation.
Mr.. Vest inquired whether the senator
from New York meant to say the major
ity in the Senate could change the rules
without debate.
Mr. Hill replied that the question of
limitation of debate was within the
discretion Of majority of the Senate.
That solved the question, He had heard
a great deal in the debate about the
tyranny of the majority in its bona fide
efforts to pass the repeal bill and it had
been repeatedly asked what could be
worse than the tyranny of the minority
He averred that the failure of the bill
would have TO be attributed to both pO-
litical parties and not to only one
Has it come to this" asked Mr.. Hill,
in closing, that the Senate is powerless-
first to legislate, and second, to change its
rules so that it can legislate hereafter. If
it is it might as well disband"
MIR. Call, dem, of Florida, rising to
personal explanation, said he was willing
whenever the debate was exhausted to
vote
JONES OF NEVADA TALKS.
AT l o'clock the repeal bill was laid
before the Senate.
Mr.. Jones, rep, of Navada, then took
the floor and proceeded to deal with the
functions of money, its value and how it
was regulated. Mr.. Jones occupied the
floor until 3 O'Clock, and then, as he was
not well, said hewould resume at another
time. He was astonished that men cred
tied with intelligence should have said
that the debate was simply consump-
tion of time. That was not true. At
S;45 he asked the indulgence of the Sen
ate and said that in a day or two he
would reply TO what he called 1.-The
rather fiippant statement of the senator
from New Jersey, Mr. Mcpherson, con
corning the cost of the production of sill
YER"
Mr.. Mcpherson cited as authority for
his statement, certain English writer's
and the director of the United States
mint, and inquired of Mr.. Jones where he
could ind any better authority
Il will tell YOU said Mr. Jones' "The
Senator from Nevada who is now on the
floor and who is not very high authority
either
PARLIAMENTARY sQUABBLE.
Mr. PETER then took the floor.
Mr.. Palmer of Illinois got into a par
iamentary squabble with Senators KYLE