The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-03-30
let the slate APPLY it as wisdom di.

rected
The Mills substitute was adopted.
Mr.. MoGehee spoke in favor of the
bill. Though opposed to bounties
they existed, and the state should get
back what she could.
Mr.. Smith of Smith aud Rogan OF
Caldwell both opposed the bill as un-
democratic to accept money from the
| federal government under the terms
required by the act of congress which
violated the principles of state rights.
MIR. Rogers of Anderson to Mr.. Ro-
gan: "Did you not vote for this bill
two years ago?" (Meaniug when it
was vetoed by Governor Hogg)
Mr.. Rogan: Yes sir, when L had
no idea OF the require ments from the
federal government, and have been
ashamed of it ever SINCE"
Mr.. Onion opposed the bill and de.
nounced the bounty as robbery.
There was no difference in law in re-
ceiving stolen property and stealing
If we receive this money how can we
consistently denounce the Nc
Kinley law and the Re-
publicans for passing the law.
The bill served finely to mount up
the speakers generally on high polit-
ical horses to ride down what Mr.
Onion declared to be Republican and
principles such as are
denounced by every true Democrat in
the union. 10 strike down the sacred
principles of state rights, he argued,
was to assassinate the Democratic
party. The iniquitous Mckinley bill
had led to the hurlirg of the Repub-
licans from power and consigning their
party TO disgrace in the estimation OF
the great majority of the people
What Democrat, he asked, will
stultify himself for the sake of SAL, 900
to have the great state of Texas to ac-
cept this blood money wrung by ex.
tortion from the people of this state
and in violation of our constitutional
rights and the principles of the DEM
ocratic party.
Mr.. Dashiell argued that there was
not scintilla of principle as a party
matter in the bill The opposition to
it was based ON political clap trap. He
claimed to be as good Democrat as
the gentleman from Smith and could
not concede to him the right to con-
stitute himself the interpreter of pure
il debating as to our
rights by continually pulling the
Democratic platform upon US. He did
not understand how the members
could vote agsinst the bill and yet
sanction other appropriations which
had been accepted as bOunties from
the federal government, such as the
donation accepted for the Agricultural
aud Mechanical college and the Agri-
cultural Experiment station at Bryan.
He believed in taking the sugar
as we'll as the other bounties
Mr.. Smith of Smith-But the college
donation wac in aid of education and
such requirements.
Mr.. Dashiell- There were require
ments with which the state mad to
to get the college donations
and as to the sugar bounty, it will be
that much in aid of the tax payers Of
Texas, from whom it is contended the
money has been taken by taxation.
Then why not get back all we can.
Mr.. Dills, like Mr. Rogan, had voted
against the bill and opposed it now
because the bounty could only be
gotten by special act of congress,
which would be retroactive an not
likely to pass, and he did not believe
n the states complying with such
terms as the act of congress had pro-
posed for accepting the bounty, and
any assurance that congress
would pass an enabling act for the
state to get the money. Texas should
not stoop to such action for the sake of
jhe money.
Mr.. Turner spoke in opposition to
The mea' ure, arguing that the state
hould rise up and say we are against
he principle OF bounties and being
against it we should refuse to accept
his bounty.
Mr. Henderson of Milan said there
we're but two 6jections-One, opposi'
ion to bounties and the other the al
eyed humiliating terms of the accept
lDce of the bounties. He could see no
in the legislature doing a
plain duty, which he believed the
people expected them 10 do, to accept
INTO the treasury revenue, provided in
he processes of the general govern
nent. No matter how we may be OPP.
posed to the principle of bouuties, we
ire confronted with the supreme law
which provided the bounty with no
intent to insult the people; 30 there
vas no good reason to refuse the
Mr.. Rogan read from the journals of
he previous session of the Legislature
o show that Mr.. Kirk, author of the
PRESENT bill, voted against receiving |
he bounty because it involved the
anne principle of paternalism pre-
ented in the Blair educational bill.
Mr.. Pagan of Lamar read from the
anne source to show that Mr.. Rogan,
low approving the bill, then voted fol
t, and contended that Mr.. Kirk had |
Is much right to change when con-
yinced of error as Mr.. Rogan had.
Mr.. Pagan deprecated the idea of
rying to defeat the bill by making
his body defend the act OF congress,
when the only question was as to &C.
;epting so much money due the state
~ the federal act. Texas may OF be
! beggar, as stated by the gentlen an
rom Smith, but as q deficiency con-
ronts us why not accept what we can
ret by holding out our hands for what
congress has granted? Why not
crush away mere sentiment and &C
sept the money! The people expected