The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-01-28
HOT SHOT FOR HIM


/ were the center or an animated group
in the rear OF the chamber, where the
senators gathered to extend them a
| warm welcome.
Rev. DR.. Milburn, the blind chaplain.
prayed eloquently for bleeding Arme-
MIA. Hear her cry of agony" he pray
ed on behalf of the people of Armenia,
"despofled, tortured, their homes in
ashes, their men and women and chill
dren slain at the edge of the sword.
their women dishonored: arouse and
unite the powers of Christendom. queen.
car, kaiser. kings and princes, their
ministers and people, that the sultan
shall be forced to sheath his bloody
sword and stay the frenzied rage Of
his fanatic soldiery and subjects"
The Introduction of the Utah senators
occurred immediately after the chap
lains invocation. Dubois, republican,
Idaho, presented the credentials of Cam
non, and Burrows, republican, Mfchi-
gan, those of Brown. The credentials
were read and the two new senators
proceeded ito the desk of the vice presi-
dent where, with uplifted hands. the
oath of office was taken. Brown was
assigned "a desk in the rear and on the
extreme left of the chamber, Cannon
Immediately before him.
Baker of Kansas presented petition
from Mrs. aWller, wife of the ex-
United States consul in Madagascar, re-
citing her husbands arrest, trial by
drum-head court and transportation in
chains to a French prison. Mrs. Wal
ler's petftion recites: by these acts
France has held my husband, an Amer
lean citizen. as an imprisoned felon the
past 10 months, and l believe and am
sure had my husband been a subject of
Great Britain he would long since
have been released" Mrs. Waller asks
the American congress to take suitable
action.
PETER offered a resolution calling up
on the interstate commerce commission
for information as to the dfscrimina-
tion on passenger and freight rates to
and from Missouri river points. The
resolution went over.
The Utah senators then drew lots.
Cannon won the long term, expiring
March 8, 1899; Brown the term until
March 3, 1897.
At l o'clock Hansbrough, republican,
North Dakota, addressed the senate on
the resolution instructing the secretary
of agriculture to execute the law con-
corning the Distribution of seeds, etc.
Hansbrough said 1T is an unpleas-
ant duty to be obliged to criticise the
acts of a cabinet minister, but in this
case II seems there is a great principle
involved The essence of controversy
lies in the proposition whether an
executive official of the government
has the right to wilfully, deliberately,
designedly and, as in this case, premed-
itatedly, ignore a solemn statute of
congress. 1 believe ii can be shown
that the honorable secretary of agri-
culture has disobeyed the mandate of
the legislative branch of the govern
ment. 1t is part of his departmental
functions to carry into effect any law
appertaining to the affairs of his de-
partment which congress sees fit to
enact. The last congress made an APP
preparation of $3.50, 900 to be used in the
puchase and distribution of seeds,
bulbs. ETC., as required by law"
Hansbrough proceeded to show that
the secretary advertised for seeds in a
technical way and received no bids.
The senator continued 1T was the
plain duty of the secretary, If he de-
sired to execute the laws, to have re-
advertised and to have earnestly en-
deavored to get bidders. Instead of
this he rejected all of the bids upon
technical grounds, forthwith abolished
the seed division of his department,
and announced that there would be no
seeds purchased and distributed under
the appropriation bill for the fiscal
year ending June 80. In his statement,
made before the committee on agricul-
ture few days ago, the secretary
said he was not opposed on principle
to the purchase and distribution of
seeds Later in the proceedings he adj
mitted that, from his view of the case,
such distribution would be in conflict
with his party creed. l leave the sec
rotary to justify the statements.
Altogether the position of the secre-
tary in this matter is exceedingly
lame. That he deliberately set out to
disobey the mandate of congress there
can be no doubt. That he is personally
opposed to the purchase and distribu-
ton of seeds of any character, there is
no question, and so we have here
case in which a high executive official
deliberately sets aside the law of con-
gress, and / say that IL is not so much
the value of the seeds or the good re-
suits from their distribution as the
question as to whether a department
official shall dlsobey the legislative
authority.
He was opposed to this appropria-
ton at the outset. 1t was his clear
duty TO do everything in his power to
carry out that law. yet he has laid OBJ
stacles in its way and finally refused
20 execute it, The proper time to dis
cuss the proposition of the govern
ment distribution of seeds is when the
act of the appropriation of money
comes before the proper committee of
congress The great question, above
all others, is the contumacious conduct
of the secretary. Can an officer of the
executive branch of the government.
who is in effect high salaried clerk,
defiantly and stubbornly refuse to car
ec--.. AL. - he cor, .r.,.as.s.