The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-05-09
TRUTH VS.. SENATORIAL COURTESY.

Senatorial courtesy went glimmer-
ing in the senate on Monday and it
went most righteously. Mr. Aldrich and
Mr. Hill started a discussion on the
right to introduce certain amendments.
which were not offered, and which men,
bers of the finance committee said did
not exist. The discussion was plainly
improper, but the vice-president said
he had no authority to stop it. Senator
Allen then stopped it by call for the
regular order. This was a violation of
senatorial courtesy, but it was right.
1t was common sense. 1t was justice
to the country. When a senator abuses
his privileges and delays the business
of the country. for plain and palpable
claptrap, he ought to be called down.
and the senatorial courtesy that would
prevent it ought to be relegated to OBJ
livion.
Mr. Aldrich was not satisfied with one
rebuff. He proceeded to read an alleged
Carlisle. In the course Of his remarks
he was informed by Senator Vest that
he had been falsely informed concern
ing the proposed amendments to the tar
if bill. and if these statements were
repeated it must be on his own respon-
sibility." Mr.. Aldrich took the respon-
sibility. He declared that the amend
ments had been prepared, and were in
print, and would shortly be submitted
to the senate. We do not know
whether senatorial courtesy admits of
this practical denunciation Of the sena-
tors in charge of a bill as liars, or not,
but Mr.. Aldrich old it. and invited a
plain ans yer. Mr.. Mills, Mr.. Palmer
and Mr.. Voorhees,, following, denied
knowledge of any such amendments,
but Mr.. Aldrich's remarks were allowed
to remain. Then Mr. Turpie an
nounced his opinion on the question of
veracity that had been raised by Mr..
Aldrich and Mr.. Aldrich will not proba-
bly, forget it soon.
Mr.. Turpies remarks were doubtless
violation of senatorial courtesy. but
they were absolutely right, as we be-
lieve. The Sentinel expressed it's opin-
ion several days ago that all this talk
about further concessions to the sugar
trust and other tariff beneficiaries is
scheme Of republican senators and dem
ocratic traitors. for two objects-to give
further opportunity for stock specula-
ton, and to build up an excuse for trait
ors voting against the bill the
ground that there had been an agree
ment with them for further concessions,
and it had been violated. There is more
back of this renewal of conflicting ru-
mors about favors to trusts than APP
pears on the surface, and we again
warn the democrats of Indiana and of
the country to prepare for an effort on
the part of the Mckinley senators and
their democratic allies to prevent any
tariff legislation whatever.
The other event of the day was Mr..
Voorhees, exposure of the falsehoods
of John Sherman, who had asserted that
the republican members of the finance
committee had not had the usual OPP
portunity to offer amendments to the
tariff bill in committee, and that this
bill has never been considered by the
finance committee" There was one
complete answer to the falsehoods, and
that was the minutes of the committee,
which showed that the bill had been
before the whole committee for twelve
days, and that the republican members
had offered such amendments as they
desired. 1t was a, breach of senatorial
courtesy to read those minutes, but it
right. If Mr.. Sherman was telling
the truth the country was entitled to
know it. If he was not, the country
was entitled to know it. What lis needed
in the senate is the turning on of the
electric light. The country is tired of
a senatorial courtesy that is a mere
cover for deceit, and hypocrisy, and
false pretense. Let the country know
who is responsible for favors TO the
sugar trust, and whisky trust, and other
trusts. To Halifax with senatorial cour-
tesy.