New-York tribune., 1895-12-11

Of the United States that their Ambassadors abroad
should make al r violent Sasse poey upon foreign so
Resolved. That the President be. and he hereby
ves. Il not Incompatible with The public nersss
whether said Bayard made said speeches; ard II ne
has ascertained that ne did make said speeches ~
what steps II any, he has taken to recall OF u
censure said Bayard.
Mr. Crisp Dem. Ga) objected to its consideration
| and IT was referred to the Committee on Foreign
Affairs. -.
Mr.. Barrett (Rep, Mass) offered matter OF
privilege resolution reeitins tha, Thomas F. Bay s,
ard United States Ambassador to Great Brta'l, 81 ha w.
been reported by the Of spsash in
he had stated that the President OF the United re-.
sss rSsn, Ssa in peope 9f mGs and G It the
hand of certain man to govern inem ma ana m
spessn spon the as nieseac Of the people that
the Committee Foreign Affairs be direcIeu t ~
iielv made. and if So to report to the House such
action. by Impeachment or othtrwise ,s ,aso a nf this
INQUIRY the committee is authorized 10 send for per-
sons and papers. o. oao min, % order
against the resolution that did not present qnes-
ton OF privilege and quoted decision rendefea III
Mr. Barrett, In discussing the point of order
pointed that subsequently in the M same Con- con
and had held that all propositions for the impeacn-
ment OF public officers were privileged
CRIsP's POINT OvERRULED.
Speaker Reed overrued the point of order made
bv Mr. Crisp, and MIR. Barrett explained his reso-
luton and severely arragned Mr.. Bayard for his
criticism Of the system Of protection
Mr. Crisp (Dem Ga.) defended Mr.. Bayard ana
reviewed the history OF the Mckinley and Wilson
tariff bills. uphodins the latter ana eonuemi,S ,a x
from Massa chusetts was serious in his proposition,
but thought tha, he simply wished to air his views
ton he credited the gentleman from
with being good proectionist AZ tne t o. ihs
they a "A
House House and could pass iarl h He doubted teS
they would do this THY T nv, won baye
acsnt power, and ask them TO wait, He asked
and psss BIZ G hs d"d senate 9 S
the President. Regarding the speech OF M Mr. bay BAY
ard he had no doubt was clear ana a0s and he
acquitted him Of any charge Of impropr5ey. VI, II
nayara t they must also mpeach majority Of the
American people democratic appiause)
AN AsTOUNDING BREACH OF PROPRIETY.
Mr.. Mccall (Rep, Mass) thought this country
was the place for Mr.. Bayard TO ventiate his
Views on such subjects 1t was obvious impro-
prIey and unbecomng to the dignity of the , repre-
country to utter such sentiments from puDnc
ed TO do such a thng. 1t was such an astound-
ing breach that interna ,onal law had no name lor
IT, An Ambassador could fehuer wb,nb fe Se Vas ac
credited. hut here an Ambassador had mace nm
Se s reeaed ho% no% SSo
West was recalled. at the request of Mr.. Bayard,
then H of saf b od iod
that British interests in the United stales wouiu
psr,v mar IN the Election soon to occur He referred
the speech made at Boston, England, BY Mr. Bay
ard on August ., in which he said the Americans
were a turbulent and ofttnes vioient people. who
needed a master hand to guide them In doing
tradueed tnas @ the people Of America order praise
the President Mr.. Bayard had found IL necessary 10
abuse and insult the people he was supposed 10
represent. . ,. ~, cr,s,, bod
entirely Avoided the question al Issue and had en-,
deavored to befog it by bringing up ne gncs9n @ OF o
the wilson Bill Nj Bayard had so far forgotten
that he represented the entire people OF the country
system Of Protection they had at one time adopted
was everything that was bad.
Mr. Crisp regarded the question OF free trade or
protection academic one, woridwide dis-
9sksd ME G5P he wSn5 sRoss
denounce them in term. as s being nS1e qs
Mr. Ding,ey also asked that gentleman whether ne
believed that an Ambassador of all the people OF
the United states had the right to go on foreign o iS
p%5H''t people Of the the Tnited states. ,o,,.,,,n
way. We" II NJ "a pau pause hIled with laughter from the
Mr. Crisp resumedam not dIpoma,ist and nd, do 10
seems to me that any citizen OF me theu it % gir
his honest conviction on any economic question
(Appiause on the Democratic side)
people Of ihe United States that right on foreign
Mr. crsp-He should always tell the truth
Mr. Dine:ey- must say that ] am surprised that that
the gentlemen from Georgia wSud aRproye the % con
nSG pqor,% in 2TdSn and had %s 9Sh On such p
the free coinage Of silver at the ratio ls he
Moa OF hdRe Re eeh at ohce cem ana s
would have seen the impropriety OF such conduct
whether M he he believed that the language cited in
the resolution M furnishes good grounds for the i'm
AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENCE.
Mr. Dingley-I am not arguing that question
CDerisve laughter from the Democratic sidc) But
! may say that, in my persona. judgment Of this
matter. 1t is a case in which perhaps impeachment
may not be the proper remedy; but this House.
sueh action on m" the part Of lis Rmbassador to Eng
land. Repnblican app.ausel .,
used in foreign country by an Ambassador OF thc
pabean a s5e apes 1 hhr Has Tse to ke @
peach Mr. Bayard was another question But ne
on na G and ought be II
dors violated the propriess Of their position n
Ing Ing; one me- of them He regretted that question Of
s qusaon beween a the Of and
the advocates OF free trade; but simp.y as TO the
Bassad6r in a foreign country He cou.d not be-
e Ss s II sr m was gneg no e on gene e
tleman from Georcla-who would approve Of the
principle. OF a United States Ambassador going IN
the platform in foreign country and denouncing
q. policy SUSTAINED by a, least one.ha:f of the peo,
should be made By the House or Representatives
condemning such course by a United States Am
bassador that person violating the proprietes
OF his position should b. recalled and that one lie
sent in his pace who would have some regard for
the prophecies OF his official position. There ought
to be no difference OF opinion as TO the propriety
and necessity OF condemnng H.
THE PRESS AGAINST THE PRESS.
Mr. Cummings dem. ~ W said he could not say
whether the resolution had been offered under false
pretences not. but he congratulated himself on
knowing that II was based only on the newspaper
report Of a speech that 1t was brought before the
House by the editor of n newspaper: was backed by
the editor OF another newspaper printed In Boston
and that IT was backed up a second time by the
Editor Of The Lewiston Journal" 1t therefore
seemed manfestly fitting that newspaper writer
the Democratic side OF the House. meaning him.