The times., 1897-04-11
Mr.. .eBaiIey Will Not Act as an
g aObstructionist.
HE { ASSIGNS HIS REASONS
Mr.sSimpson Makes His Motion of
N0Quorum and Provokes an Inter-
esting Debate Strong Arguments
Against Republican Program-Mr.
Bailey's Remarks.


the House yesterday Mr. Simpson Iaiset
the point Of no quorum. 1t was expected
and produced considerable debate, in which
Mr.. Simpson attacked Mr.. Reeds policy
again, and Mr.. Bailey outlined effeetoaliy
the views lie desired TO make I he policy ci
the minority.
Mr.. Reed counted the House and declared
1S1 to be present. Mr. Dingley moved that
when the House adjourned it be TO Wcdnes
day next.
In reply to q question from Mr.. Bailey
as to the purpose of the three days ad
journment, Mr. Dingley said that he was
not aware of any business except waiting
for the return of the appropriation bills
from the Senate.
Mr.. Bailey said thatth Democrats would
not insist on the Republicans legislating
because the country suffered when they
legislated He merely asked the question
to know the purpose of the other side.
Mr.. Simpson made the point that the
motion to adjourn was not debatable, but
the debate went on, Mr.. Dingley declining
to give any other reason than the one above
stated. He said, however, that matters
might come up by yunanimousConsent. Asked
by Mr.. Simpson if it was the purpose OF
the Republicans not to appoint the com
mittees, Mr, Dingley said it was u mat
ter entirely for the Speaker.
THIS was followed by running debate
involving the sdebatability Of the motion
to adjourn, during the course of which
Mr.. Simpson took occasion TO again attack
the policy OF Mr.. Reed and severely ar
rrt, nf
in which position he was joined by several
other speakers. Those who spoke on the
various subjects were: Dingley, McRae,
Walker, DeArmond, and several others
Mr. Bailey, who had previously given his
views at times during the debate, summed
them up il the following statement:
Mr.. Speaker, the Republicalleadecsh have
so often arraigned the Democratic party
for what they have been pleased to call It's
incapacity to deal wthimpOrtant questions
that we naturally feel tempted now TO in
dulge ia the same line of assault. But look
ing beyond this opportunity for partisan
criticism, looking beyondthe cheap applause
which il, rsli ght win for the time, and re-
garding our duty from the higher and
broader standpoint OF unseifish service to
the country, i think IL wisest for US 10
follow out our often-repeated declaration
that Republican Legislation S injurious 10
the public welfare, aud We will not urge
the Republican, party to do what ought not
to be done.
'Tfthey would pass the non -particanmeas
ures suggested by the gentleman from
Arkansas, then there might be some sense
in urging them to proceed. But If they
legislate upoa the financial question, sir,
YOU know as well as | do, ana | know
as well.as that live, that they Will not
propose or. support a measure that can
command our votes If they do anything.
1t Will be to perpetuatc the national bank
ing system and to provide for the retiIe-
ment OF the iegaI-tender notes OF the
Government.
Have we been honest when we have
denounced Republican laws? II we have,
let us be honest and candid still What
will the country think OF our wisdom or
our sincerity y II we demand that the ma jority
shall proceed to legislate, knowing that
you will make bad laws and that we have
no power to prevent your making them
when you attempt to do so? The country
under such circumstances must doubt
either our wisdom or our sincerity, and it
probably Will doubt both.
For my part | have never seen time
when | wanted the Republican party to
legislate have never seen the time whenl
thought he country was as well Off with
Republican Congress in session as when it
had adjourned We would have very much
less to complain of if the Republican party
had simply passed the appropriation bills
and gone home. / know that you do not
intend TO pass any new laws which are
good or to repeal any old laws that are
bda.
What, then, is my duty? To urge YOU
to go when we know you are going to do
wrong? If we urge you TO make bad
laws. we are fools; and if we pretend
that we want you to legislate when we
do not, we are hypocrites. There might
be some partisan satisfaction In criticising
YOU from day to day, but in the end such
petty-fosging politics redound neither to
the advantage of individuals nor of n party
The country is tired of cheap politics. The
people want to know what party canlegis-
late to their best advantage; and finding
that. they are ready to reward that party
with it's confidence.
-..During the last campaign you said that
all the country heeueu W fesoore prosperity
was that confidence should be re-estab-
lshed, which, as you claimed, Republican
success would do, and to increase the
tariff duties.
I'VE said that your tariff legislation can
not make the country prosperous, and that
there must he revision of your financial
system before the country will ever en-
Low the prosperity which it deserves.
"The country gave you the power to pass
laws, and you have attempted to restore
prosperity by increasing taxes. If you
succeed. the democratic party might as
well not make "a nomination in the next
Presidential election. IL you fall, you
might as well not make a nomination in the
next Presidential election. Now, let US