The daily morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1883-1899, 1893-02-22
A Reply from
President Fulton.

An Astorian representative interviewed
Senator Fulton yesterday relative to the
Durham Ballot Bill trouble in the sem
ate.
MIR. Fulton said:
Il notice that some OF the democratic
papers charge that I forced Durham's
ballot bill out Of It's regular order, and
that also caused to be counted as pres
ent. members who were absent. These
charges are wholly untrue. It was
claimed that the bill came up too soon,
and that there were other bills ahead of
I, This 1 know nothing about, and had
nothing to do with. Every clerk OF the
senate will say that never mentioned
the bill to them. had nothing whatever
| to do with placing the bill before the Sem
ate. II Is also certain that numerous bills
had been read and passed that day that
were reported back from committees sub
sequent to the time the ballot bill was
reported back.
mo objection was made to considering
any Of these bills. Members had been
calling up bills out OF their regular order
all day by consent OF the Senate. At
the reading clerk and he commenced read
Ing It, Objection was made that there
were other bills ahead OF 1t.
[ stated that | had no means Of knowing
hat. 1t was wholly matter with the
clerk A motion was made that the bill
lay on the table, and the motion was lost
by vote of Il ayes and l6 noes After
number of minor motions hod been
made the previous question was ordered
by vote of l6 for and IA present but not
voting.
'vrhe question was then on the passage
Of the bill The roll being called the
Democrats refused TO vote. / asked sew
erai, when tneIr nitrnrs wrrvr 7Ve,,vd, ~
they would vote. but none answered. /
then instructed the clerk to proceed with
the roll call, and ordered that all who
were present and refused to vote should
be considered as voting in the negative.
| stated, however, that the journal should
show the exact facts-that they We're
present and refused to vote The charge
that they were not present Is certainly
not true.
Now, as to my right to do as did, I
nave no doubt. In fact was compelled
to do so. The rules of the Senate provide
that every member shall vote on every
question. unless excusI-1. Not one OF
hem asked TO be excused. The object of
the move that is. not voting. was TO make
II appear that the constitutional number
(twenty) were not present. and conse-
luently no business could be transacted.
Yet they were present, and in open vio-
alton Of the constitution and the rules,
refused to vote. II such a proceeding Is
proper then minority could absolutely
control the majority. certainly had 10
act. What could l do? Did l do anyone a
wrong by directing that the Journal should
show the exact facts. viz.-that they were
present and refused to vote. My saying
that they should be considered as voting
In the negative was possibly unnecessary.
but It seems to me that where the rules
require them to vote and they refuse to
do so that is the effect. They certainly
did not vote In the affirmative.
II was Informed afterwards that one
senator, MrS Huston. had stepped into
the cloak room when his name was
called. That possibly may be true, and
Il may have been overlooked by the clerk
but II so, II was only one instance. and he
certainly acted as he did to avoid voting.
"As to the charge that the democrats
md populists considered my action un-
air. | have only TO say that / am will
ng to leave that to the members them
elves. Several of the leading democrat
c senators told me after II was all over
hat they did not consider I did other
han my duty under the circumstances;
hat / allowed the record to show the
acts and that no one had any right to
omplain. AS for the populist senator.
ar. vanderberg. he personally told me
fter the legislature adjourned. that there
ever had been better or more fair pre-
iding officer than myself"