Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1895-02-21

powerful. Their friends were power
full, and he did not, therefore, expect
TO carry his amendment
Mr.. Talbot closed the debate with a
fervent appeal to his Democratic
friends to continue the work OF build
Ing up the navy begun under Demo-
cratic auspices.
Mr.. Sayers' amendment was lost by
vote OF 40 20 1s1.
Mr.. Cannon offered an amendment
TO appropriate 22.000.000 for the pur-
pose OF carrying out the provisions OF
the paragraph authorizing the increase
OF the navy 1t was lost--7a to 30.
MIR, Cannon then modified his amend
ment so as to appropriate S5,00O00O.
The amendment was iost--56 10 1876.
This was the last amendment offered
to the paragraph for the increase OF
the navy.
Mr.. sayers offered an amendment to
the next paragraph, appropriatlng S5,-
2S1,6J0 for armor and armament, pro-
viding that no higher sum shall be
paid for armor or gun steel than is
paid the contracting Arm for like ar
NOR or gun steel by private parties or
other governments.
Agreed to.
Mr.. Durburrow (Dem) Of Illinois of
fered an amendment 10 the last section
of the bill, to direct the secretary of
the navy 10 transfer TO the Columbian
museum. Chicago, the reproduction OF
the caravels. Santa Maria, Nina and
Pinta. Agreed to.
When the committee rose and re-
ported the bill to the house, Mr.. Say
ers moved TO recommit to the CONF
mlttee on naval AFFAIRS. with instruc-
lions to report II back after striking
out the provision for the three battle
ships. The motion to recommit was de-
feated-67 to ls9-and the bill was then
passed without division.
Mr.. McCreary, chairman OF the COM
mittee on foreign affairs, then called
up the conference report on The diplo-
matte and consular appropriation bill.
He explained that the house conferees
had refused to agree to the senate
amendment appropriating 100000 for a
submarine cable to the Hawaiian Is
lands. and he would ask the house
to further insist on that disagreement.
Mr. HIT Oep) OF Illinois moved
that the house recede from its disa-
greement.
Mr.. Mccreary, speaking in opposition
to the motion, contended that It was
against established policy OF the gov
eminent TO embark In the enterprise OF
building a submarine cable.
He believed that 1t should be con-
demned and defeated. IL entered upon.
Mr.. Mccreary stated. this work would
ultimately cost S3.0OO0o0. No country,
he said, had caused us more excite
ment and annoyance than Hawaii We
mad lost $50 ,000,OO through the treaty
negotiated In 1876 permitting the free
importation of sugar and rice.
Mr. Boutelle challenged Mr.. McCrea-
RVS statement that we had not enough
commercial intercourse with Honolulu
to warrant submarine cable. More
American tonnage entered aud cleared
at the port OF Honolulu than at any
port OF the civilized world,
II prefer submarine cable" said
Mr.. Boutelle ito submarine diplomacy"
Q4aughter,)
Mr. Hit deprecated phrtisanship In
the discussion OF this question. The
provision for the cable had been placed
on the bill IN the senate by the Joint
votes OF patriotic Democrats and Re-
| publicans. He recalled The history OF
| past projected cable companies, which
contemplated the building Of sub
marine cable to Honolulu. All had
| failed because of the failure Of one
! government or the other to subsldlze
them.
The people were opposed to subsl-
dies. The cable would not be built by
private capital. II must be built, " II
is at all, by the government. He
Calleu hllenllon 70 tne Ieu"IhhheHuHNi''i
In President Cleveland's message OF
1885 that there should be cable com
munication between the Hawaiian Is
lands and the United States and to
his reiteration OF that recommendation
IN 1855. To-day battle ships costing mil
lions had been authorized. To make
ships effective. In case of war. cables
were necessary.
At the conclusion OF Mr.. Hits re-
marks. without action on the motion,
the house, at 5:l5 D. M, adjourned.