The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1896-04-09

to incur the loss of our own self-respect
as well as to receive the contempt of
all foreign countries.
Mr.. Gillette CRep) of Massachusetts,
spoke in opposition to the resolutions.
He admitted that popular sympathy was
with the Cubans but he argued that the
question at issue was one of wisdom and
justice, saying he did not consider it ex-
pedient to embroil the United States in
a matter of this kind and especially
when the resolutions could be of no
avail. Further. he considered that the
recognition of belligerency should rest
with the executive. The resolutions Of
sympathy, he declared, were merely a
cloak for our ambition.
Mr.. Cockrell Oem.) of Texas told of
letters he had received imploring con-
gress to stop the hue and cry about Cuba
because it was running the moneyed in
these people could be compressed into
the size of nickel. They had forgot
ten the duty owed by this republic to
a struggling people. Maceo and Gomez
had exhibited a degree of generalship
never excelled, for Spain had been for
year endeavoring with 135,000 troops
to conquer 10000 patriots in an island
not so large as his (Cockrelrs) district
and had never been able to hold foot
of ground beyond the range of her can
non and gun boats Mr.. Cockrel said
Cuba was entitled to her independence
and If he could have his way he would
take this old wolf Spain by the throat,
force her to pull her Weylers and her
murderers off and concede the absolute
Independence of these brave people,"
This declaration was received with ap-
plause.
Mr.. Woodman (Rep.) of Illinois advo-
Gated the adoption of the resolution and
protested against the cruelty which he
said had characterized Spains conduct of
the war.
Mr. Ellet Dem.) of Virginia said the
question of belligerency was one of fact
and he did not consider the Cuban insur-
gents had shown themselves entitled to
recognition.
Mr. Newlands, silverite, of Nevada and
Mr.. Stewart (Rep) of New Jersey favored
and Mr.. Russell Dem.) of Georgia op-
posed the resolutions. The after said
the Cubans did not fight like soldiers and
were not worth shedding crocodile tears
over.
Mr.. Walsh Dem.) of New York spoke
briefly in defense of Senator Hill.
Mr.. Adams of Pennsylvania had inti-
mated that Mr.. Hill had reflected the
attitude of Wall street in his position ON
thS Nupdh itsOlutlOls w ulSH COu-
tended that Mr.. Hill had been, through
out his entire career, in touch with the
plain people and often opposed to Wall
street. He said the senator's personal
integrity could not be questioned.
Mr. Turner Dem.) of Georgia opposed
the adoption of the resolutions. He did
not deny that the Cubans were engaged
in just cause, but he insisted that we
should know something about the con-
dition of affairs before taking position
which might result in disastrous conse-
quences. In case of war our commerce
would be driven from the seas. He had
no fear of Spain, but any war was sure
to result in distress and irreparable
horror and disaster. He declared his
opinion that since the senate had come to
it's second sober thought not even the
senate resolutions could pass that hody
and said the vote in the house, when
taken, would show that there had also
been a change Of heart there. He said
that in Cuba there was far worse con-
dition of affairs, so far as the mixture of
races was concerned, than existed in the
South after the war. He said that the
Spaniards had not the instinct of self
government equal to the Anglo-SaXons,
with whom self-government was an in
stinct.
Mr.. Quigg Rep.) of New York con-
tended that the position of the American
people. on the Cuban question was due
to sincere desire to do unto others as
we would have them do unto u.s.
1T is not for u.s." he said. "sons of the
miserables who starved at Valley Forge,
to sneer at the distress of the Cubans
who were fired with the same passion for
liberty and fighting for the same end"
Mr.. Quigg was loudly applauded when
he finished.
Wheeler Oem) of Alabama declared
that he believed in new policy for the
American government. The Monroe
doctrine was good enough for 100000
people but now it should be the Ameri-
can doctrine that wherever a people are
struggling for liberty they should have
our sympathy, and, if possible, our aid.
AT this point Mr.. Bartlett Dem.) of
Georgia made personal explanation
concerning the electioneering circular of
Mr.. Gibson of Tennessee, which had
been exhibited by Mr.. Sulzer of New
York in a recent speech and which Mr..
Gibson had charged was furnished by
that the circular had been given him by
a printer and he had shown it to other
members, one of whom had given it to
Mr.. Sulzer.
Mr.. Gibson thereupon expressed salts
faction with the explanation and with
drew any lmputatiOnS which he might
have made against Mr. Bartlett.
The course of the foreign affairs COM
mittee was criticised by Mr. Mahaney
(Rep.) of New York. Mr.. Mahaney ac-
cused the committee of rushing the
Cuban resolutions through. Under in
ternational law this government could
not treat with one whose capital was
in the saddle and whose chief executive
was an officer in the field.
Mr.. Buck Dem) of Louisiana had read
a telegram signed by the editors of the
four leading papers in New Orleans, in
Guiding the Picayune and Times-Demo-
crat, declaring their support of the reso--
lutions. He said this was a partial
refutation of the charge of Mr.. Boutelle
that sentiment on the question was
changing. He spoke eloquently for rec
ognition.
At 5 o'clock the house took a recess
until 8 p. m.
EVENING SESSION.
Mr.. Mccall of Massachusetts presided
at the evening session of the house,
which was devoted to debate on the
Cuban resolutions. Mr.. Quigg had
charge of the time in favor of the reso-
lutions in the absence of Mr.. Hit.
Only dozen members were on the
floor, though the galleries were well