The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1894-02-07
CONTROL OF The POLLS.
Lively Fencing in the Senate Over the
Repeal Bill.


Bipartisan Prejudice-DanieIP Proves
a Powerful Champion for the Demo-
crats-Frye Badly Done Up by the
Virginian.
Washington, Feb. Immediately on
the conclusion of the routine morning
business the Senate resumed considera-
tion of the House bill to repeal the fed
eral election laws, and MIR. Hawley, rep,
Of Connecticut, made an argument against
it. Everybody, he said, knew the fate Of
the bill. The moment that the Demo
cratic party secured national control it
had been evident that the repeal of the
federal election laws would be one of the
first tasks to which it would set
itself. Except the emergency bill,
relating to the repeal of the
Sherman silver-purchasing act, this bill
was the first distinctive party measure
of the Democratic party The laws now
to be repealed were not, Mr.. Hawley
said, made merely for the southern states.
While notification of the right of suf-
frage was, in some sense, triumphant in
the south, it was progressing in the north !;
ana the federal election laws were Just
as much needed in certain sections of the
north as they had ever been needed in the
south There had been as audacious
crimes against the suffrage committed
within the last few years in the north as
in the south.
PERKINS PIRATES OF PREJUDICE.
Mr. Perkins, of California, made an ar
gument against the bill. 1t seemed to
him that those who had spoken in favor
of its passage had done so from a feeling
of partisan prejudice. They had done so
not influenced by any motive of the public
good He had waited patiently for some
reason to be givenlwhy the Naturalization
laws should be repealed. He had waited
TO hear that they had deprived some Amer
lean citizen of the right of fairly cast
ing his vote and of having that vote hon
estly counted. He had been waiting co
hear that they were un-American, and
that they were calculated to subvert the
rights of American citizens. But up to
this time only two reasons had been given
that had impressed his mind One of
those reasons was that given by the sena-
tor from Illinois, Mr. Palmer that the
laws had not been enforced; and the
other was that they had been passed by
the Republican party for the purpose of
perpetuating itself in office.
DANIEL COME TO JUDGMENT.
Mr.. Daniel, dem, of Virginia-re-
ferring to MIR. Perkins remark that he
had heard no reason given why the cleo
tion laws should be repealed, asked him
where he had been living during the last
two years. Had he been out of the cCun-
try that he had not read in the news
papers, or read in congressional debates
that those laws were to be repealed "by
the kings mountaineering by
''king'' the sovereign people of the United
States? They had put up their candi-
dates, and given them their instructions.
Those candidates had gone before the
great jury of the national commonwealth,
and had received it's orders to repeal
those laws
MIR. Allison, rep, of Iowa, asked Mr..
Daniel to read the section in the demo-
cratic platform which called for the re-
peal of the federal election laws.
Mr.. Daniel said that he did not carry
that platform about with him.
Mr.. Allison said that he had failed to
find any such section in it.
AN ISSUE OF THE CAMPAIGN.
Mr.. Daniel supposed that the senator
from Iowa had not failed to hear the dis
cussion of the question in the presidential
campaign and had not failed to hear the
result of the election, in which the repeal
of those laws was an avowed
and open issue. If he had done
so, he would regard Mr. AIlison's
case as incurable, and he would not vent
ure to suggest remedy. He (Daniel)
favored the repeal of the federal election
laws, because they were useless,
were very expensive and had a tendency
to sectional friction, sectional irritation
and sectional antagonism. These laws
had been the outgrowth of an old section
al antagonism, and as that antagonism
had now ceased, as the parties every
where attempted to ameliorate it, this
relic of the old antagonism should be
laid aside, and new era welcomed-an
era of peace and harmony, compromise,
comfy and fraternal consideration.
FRYE OPPOSES THE BILL.
Mr.. Frye, rep, of Maine, opposed the
bill, and quoted from Richmond, Va,
papers the head lines 10 reports of election
frauds in a recent election in that state.
He was asked by Mr.. Daniels whether the
federal election laws had anything to do
with those frauds.
They had, Mr.. Frye declared. The
claim had been made that the federal
election laws ought to be repealed, be-
cause the states, the whole of them,
could be trusted to prevent election
frauds. He was asked by Mr.. Daniel if
there had never been election frauds in
Maine; and he denied that there had
been although there had been an attempt
by democratic governor to steal legis-
lature. But he had taken the floor, not
to make any attack on the state of Vir-
ginia. but to defend the character of John
l. Davenport. who has been the subject of
and calumnies in the two houses
for the last sixteen or eighteen years.
THE DEBATE EXTENDED.
Mr.. Frye yielded at 2:8O o'clock in
order to allow proposition to be made
for an extension of the time for debate
several senators having intimated desire
to speak. After many obstacles a propo-
sition was agreed to- that the general
debate on the bill shall close at 3 O'Clock !
D. m tomorrow. and that the vote on its
passage shall be taken before adjourn
ment.
Mr.. Frye's speech was almost wholly |
devoted to the purpose announced, the !
defense of Mr. Davenport.
HARRIS REVIEWS HISTORY.
Mr.. Harris, dem, of Tennessee, said
that if he were to consult his physical |
he should be now in his bed at |
home and that nothing short of his appre- |
ciatlon of the Importance of the pending |
question should have induced him 10 be |
in the Senate chamber to-day. He .
went on to describe the result Of the fed /
eral government from the "Boston tea |
party down 20 the present time. In the |
course of his historical review Mr. Harris |
referred 10 the opposition made by the /
of Massachusetts in the I