The daily morning journal and courier., 1896-02-08
UPROAR IN THE HOUSE
MORE OF 1fI. TAIBERT'S UTTER
 ANCES ABOUT SECESSION.

I His Explanation of hem Objected to by | Representative Barrett-A Resolution of Censure Referred After a Breezy Debate. Washington, Feb. 1.-The debate on the free silver substitute for the bond bill proceeded in the house of represen- tatives this morning, the legislative day of yesterday being continued. The early hour of meeting, 1O:3O a. m., was not conducive of a large attendance, and there were less than thirty members on the floor when Speaker Reed called the house to order.
 MT New1ands, silverite, of Nevada, argued in favor of the substitute, and asserted that not single debtor nation 4 in the world had maintained the gold | standard except the United States, and I we had done so at the price of con- tlnued bond issues.
 MT. Hartman, rep, of Montana, and AIT. Rem, pop, of Nebraska, followed in favor of concurrence, and MT. Tucker, dem, of Virginia, in favor of 1 non-concurrence.
 At 11;59 the house adjourned and the legislative day of yesterday ceased. One minute later as the hands of the l clock pointed to the hour of noon Speaker Reed again ascended the ros- trum and called the house to order for l the session of to-day.
 l As soon as the journal had been read ! MT. Talbert, dem., of South Carolina, I rose to question of personal privilege 1 to correct what he said was an unin- l tentional misrepresentation of himself I in the public prints. His grievance lay in the report of a colloquy that occurred on Wednesday night between himself and MT. Pearson, rep, of North Caro- lima.
 T am not here," said MT. Talbert, ''to apologize or retract what said on that | occasion, but to re-echo and reiterate what uttered"
 1 He recounted the circumstances of his clash with MT. Pearson. There was instant attention on the floor and in the galleries. He said that MT. Pearson had made an unwarranted attack on the loyalty of his state, which he de clared was as loyal as any state in | the Union. MT. Pearson had said that North Carolina had followed South i Carolina out of the Union and had got whipped along with the Palmetto state l Tn jocular way, Mr. Speaker" con- tinued MT. Talbert, II declared that We were not whipped but had worn our Selves out trying to whip the other fellows. In the heat of the moment and impulsively I said that South Carolina was not ashamed of the part that she took in it; that she was proud of it. and that for one endorsed secession then; that I thought we were right that think so yet, and that, under the same circumstances, surrounded by the same conditions, I would do the same l thing again. Now, MT. Speaker, I re- peat it"
 MT. Barrett, rep, of Massachusetts jumped up at these words and asked l that the words be taken down. Several members appealed to him not to do so and the speaker asked MT. Barrett if he l insisted upon his demand
 l Mir. Barrett seemed to hesitate, wher 1 MT. Talbert again got on his feet anG 1 declared in a loud voice that he was willing to have his words taken down T will stand by them" said he. l These words seemed to clinch MT Barrett's resolve. He replied to the speaker with feeling: ''Yes. I insist. want to see if a member can violate his l oath in this fashion"
 I 'The chair understood that the gen l tleman from South Carolina was only repeating what he had said on former occasion, said Speaker Reed. I MT. Barrett replied that in that cast he had a point of order to submit
 MT. Crisp, dem., of Georgia, at thi. point crowded into the arena and nov
 ed that MT. Ta1bert be permitted to ex plain.
 The words were then read at tht
 clerks desk, and MT. Barrett formally l made the point of order that when { 1 statement made by member had beer called in question and he deliberately reiterated it, it constituted new state ment and a new offence.
 I "He has said and has repeated tn, statement that under certain circum l stances he believed in secession I pro pose now to offer a resolution of cen sure" said Mir. Barrett. By this tim the excitement on the floor was intense MT. Crisp, dem., of Georgia, said tha he had never known an instance whel member was called to order and tn,
 motion made that he be allowed to ex plain his utterance and the motion wa
 not considered.
 To this MT Barrett replied that h.
 had no objection to the gentleman iron
 South Carolina explaining at the prop
 CT time his statement; that the gentle
 man, having taken an oath to sustain
 the constitution of the United States
 said he would under certain circum
 stances attempt to overthrow and hu
 initiate the government.
 The speaker said that 1t was yer,
 desirable that the house should proceed
 in order, and then there was more par
 iiamentary sparring between MT. Cris]
 and Mir Barrett, over the interpreta
 ton of the rule.
 During this discussion there was al
 excited buzz on the floor, and he hous
 rapidly filled. The question was asked
 by MT. Cannon, rep, of Illinois, wheth
 CT MT. Crisp understood that MT. Tal
 bert was proceeding to explain his ut
 terances of Wednesday night.
 Both MT. Crisp and MT. W. A. Stone
 rep, Of Pennsylvania, answered tha
 they had so understood MT. Talbert
 MT. Barrett said that he was surpris
 ed that some older and more experienc
 ed member had not called MT. Taiber l to or5ar fn- INa6nacdou ,,io l,,