The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1894-03-29
HOUSE.

speakers gavel fell today there were less
than eighty members on the floor. The
house proceeded with some routine bust
ness pending report expected from the
rules committee for the disposition of the
contested election cases of O'Neili VS. Joy
and English VS. Hilborn. Letters from the
secretary of the treasury and attorney gen.
eral were transmitted asking for addition
al appropriations for the secret service and
the United States court.
Mr. Cultivate Dem. Ohio,) from the
committee on rules, reported a rule limit
ing debate to two hours each on the two
election cases, the final vote to be then
aiken.
Mr.. Cultivate demanded the previous
question on the adoption OF the rule. The
vote on ordering the previous question re-
suited 1874 to 0. Mr.. Reed made the point
OF no quorum. The vote resulted 179 yeas
and one nay one more than a quorum.
The speaker voted in the affirmative. The
result was greeted with applause. This is
the first time for a week the Democrats
Eave mustered a quorum. Mr.. Reed crItl-
cized the disposition to hustle through
these cases without discussion. He said
the purpose of the Republicans had been
to call attention to great outrage, the
house and the country being in the habit
of paying little attention to election cases.
Mr. Cultivate replied 10y saying that
more time for discussion of these cases in
the first place had been offered.
He also reviewed the action of the Fifty
first congress on election cases, and point
ed out the quick manner in which cases
were then disposed Of.
Mr.. Reed moved to recOmmit the rule
with instructions to report rule allow
ing further time. The speaker was in
clined to think this motion could not be
entertained.
Mr.. Reed argued the case on technical
grounds. The speaker ruled that the
motion to recommlt was equivalent to
proposition to amend. Amendments were
had been ordered. Therefore, the motion
of the gentleman from Maine (Reed) was
not in order.
On the question of adopting the report
of the committee Mr.. Cultivate demand
ed the yeas and nays, the division having
developed the lack of quorum, the Re
publicans again refraining from voting.
The vote on the adoption of the special
rule was 172 to z, including the vote of the
speaker, and it was agreed to, bare
quorum voting.
The resolution of the committee on cleo
ton declaring John J. O'Neiil entitled to
the seat for the Eleventh district of Mis-
souri, was read and Mr.. Patterson of Ten
nessee was recognized OH the side of the
majority report aud Mr.. Daniel of New
York on the side Of the minority. Mr..
Patterson's statement involved very
elaborate and extended explanation of
the Missouri ballot law.
Representative Daniel of New York (Re-
publicap), in charge of the case for Mr..
Joy, followed Mr.. Patterson with p review
of the Australian ballot law in Missouri
as applying to the Joy ballots. As to the
objection that the initials of the election
a. L.ll 4
contended that this WAS an error to be
charged against the judges and not against
the voters.
Mr. Painter of Kentucky followed, argu-
ing that the absence of the initials Of the
Judges from the ballots invalidated them.
Mr.. Bartholdt (Rsp. Mo- contended that
the Republican vote of Missouri amounted
TO So per cent of the Democratic vote aid
the gerry msuder had enabled them IL
secure a representation OF Only so per cent
of the Democratic vote. Now it was pro-
posed 10 cut this down one-half. The
election machinery was all in the hands of
the Democrats
Mr.. johnson Dem. Ala.) argued for the
contestant and the majority report, while
MIR Griffin Dem. Mich argued against
the ms jority report. A request for unani-
refused. lie asserted that he would de-
cline TO vote TO disfranchise any OF the
citizens of Missouri by reason of n failure
of the election ofne to put their initials
on the ballot, the intent OF the vote being
plain.
Mr. Joy, (Rep., Maine) whose seat was
the question at issue argued the recount
of tine ballots had built up his majority.
The grounds of the contest he claimed, -
finally made. were not valid IN .he note Of
contest served upon him as required by
law
Mr.. Reed rep, Mainel pointed out that
the Missouri statute provided that judges
are required TO put their initials on ballots.
Further. that judges shall not deposit the
ballot unless Il has the initials. lie held
this was intended 10 give tie voIer a
chance to rectify the omission II the iui-
tial was az fret omitted. Re said il WAS
proposed 20 disfraBchise over 900 voters on
account of the fault OF tue judges
Mr.. Cali rep, Mass closed for the
minority report
Mr.. Brown Dem. Ind consumed the
balances of the time for the majority re-
port. he claimed that they were bound 10
observe the statute o. Missouri vhetaer
il gave power to election judges 10 dis
franchise voters or not.
The vote then recGrresi on the substi-
tu,e for the report of the ma O-ity OK the
COMMITTEES presented by the minority de-
clariag MI Joy emitted 20 his seat.
The vote resulted: Yeas. iI-; nays, lao.
The substitute was eieeted-
Mr.. Barrow rep. Mlch.) moved 20 re-
consider and Mr.. Springer Dem, Ills }
moved % lag the motion o. the table.
The Repu b.icAas thea precipitaied an
ether n4ibuSter by making The poin. %
20 quorum on The division. AID tins roll
was taken, the Republicans Tefraiains
from vo lag. The vote wss yeas, lS8. nays,