New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-10-17


"Tantvv, Tantvy.
This day stag must de
Mr. Vest disposed Of the Webster reminiscence
another Webster 20 the Senate his utterances would
be listened to whether they w.re oral or writer en-
discussion h. declared his honest belief that the
solution Of the question now harassng the sen IN
parties were satisfied. he satisfied. that the
unconditional repeal of the Sh ,rman act couia not
be had at this session.
Mr. HILL DOESN'T SEE THROUGH IT.
Mr. Hill dem. n. Y)-Why cannot bill for
unconditional repeal pass if there be majority
of the Senate in favor of it?
Mr. Vest-If the Senator from New-iork. having
read the rules and having witnessed our proceedings
under those rules for two months cannot answer
that satisfactorily to himself it would be arrogant
vanity for to attempt ii: LaughterI
MIR. Hill-And that Is the only answer which the
Senator from Missouri give?
Mr. Nest-And it is sufficient. We con
frontod with condition. hot theory
Mr. H-If the rules of the Senate absolutely
prevent the passage of bill which majority de-
sres to pass then it strikes me that the best thing
nor a9 a 10 90 to n its Iss 80 ps
Mr.: Nest-Yes; heard that when we were discuss
Nothing is truer than what was said by the senator
from Pennsylvania Nir. Cameron tha; no bill can
appreciation Of the entir" Senate OF course. when
] say "the entire Senate ] mean that one-ffth Of
the Senator'S present can have the yeas and NAYS
pant in the presiding officers chair who will strike
down that rule and put question TO vote and de-
clare it carried withou, regard to the votes of
Senator's cannot effect against the opposition
of oLe-ifh the Senators present any legisls tioh
odioLs to require demand that action.
CAN PARTY PLEDGES RE- REDEEMED
Mr. Adrich Hep, Il. I)-If onc-lifth OF the
Senate prevent any action any subject.
how does the Senator from Missouri expect to pass
the bill TO repeal the Federal Election laws re-
ported by the Senator from New York? How does
he expect his party to carry out its pledges for
tariff reform. any othe? legislative matter?
Would not one-fftn of the Senator's. on this side
df the Senator's doctrine Is TO prevail and Is the
correct doctrlne,. be justified in preventing what
We. believe to be such dangerous legislation?
Mr. Vest-A second Daniel come to judgment.
correct doctrine. l have simply called attention
of the Senate TO the fact that a certain status Is
on us. do not pretend TO defend il. have
simply said that IL Is here
Mr.. Hill regulated the doctrine that one-hfth
of the Senate could cgislate for it, and could alb
soiutely prevent LEGISLATION The Senate could not.
by the adoption OF any of rules. absolutely
prevent itself from legislating tie itself up.
Mr. Nest-Does the Senator mean To say that a
majority OF the Senate can change the rules with
out debate?
of the majority OF the Senate. Has II come TO
this: That the Senate Is powerless, first to legs-
late, and second 20 charge its rules so that u
hereafter legisatc? If so. II might as wen
disband
After some little proonsation Of the discussion:
the Lodge amendments TO the rules went over III
tomorrow. and the Silver Purchase Repeal bill
taken up.