The Sauk Centre herald. (Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minn.) 1886-current, 1897-12-09
Senators and Representatives
POlled on Live Issues Be-
fore Congress.
No Radical Financial Legislation
Will Stand Any Show
at All.
Republican Senators Favor An.
nexation of Hawaii, But Dem
ocrats Are Opposed.

NEW YORK, Dec. "a special to
| The Journal and Advertiser from Wash
ington, D. c., says: A reporter having
| made poll of congress upon the most
vital questions likely to come before
that body at this session, below is given
the exact questions submitted to the
| members.
The following proposition was sub
mitted to the members of the house:
Do you favor the retirement of the
| greenbacks?
The surprise in the vote upon this
| proposition was in the fact that such
Republicans as Belknap, Dollivsr,
Odell, Henderson, Mesick, Bruce and
| Hopkins were found in opposition. Not
single Populist, of course, favored the
| proposition while Bremen of Ohio and
Kitchen were the only Democrats in its
favor The following propositions were
submitted to the senate:
Can any radical financial legislation,
| involving the retirement of the green
backs, the limitation of the legal tender
quality of silver, or the issuing of gold
| bonds for the retirement of green backs,
pass the senate?
There was practically unanimous
sentiment that nothing can be done.
On this poll there was not an affirma-
| tive vote.
The negatives were largely in the
majority and the doubt expressed by
certain senators virtually meant neg
alive.
Annexation of Hawaii.
To the senate upon the matter of an.
nexation this proposition was submit
ted:
Do you favor the annexation of Ha.
wall?
Not single straight Republican was
found in opposition, but Cannon and
Pettigrew, the silver senators, voted in
opposition. All the leaders Of the Dem
ocratic party were opposed, with the
exceptions of Morgan, Pettus, Rawlins
and Turpie. So.
The exact form of vote taken upon
the question of arbitration was thus:
Doyou favor the adoption of a gen.
eral arbitration treaty with Great
Britain?
Among the Republicans found in the
negative here were Elkins, Frye and
Baker, going with Cockrell, Mills,
Morgan and Murphy, among the lead
ers of the Democrats. The greater
lights in the Republican party who
leaned toward an affirmative view were
Allison, Foraker, Hale, Hanna, Haw-
ley, Morrill, and Hoar. But many of
the senators who wished to be recorded
in the affirmative qualified their declar-
atoms by conditions and limitations as
to exactly what such treaty should
comprise and what its exact conditions
should be.
The Cuban Question.
Upon the Cuban question these two
/ propositions were submitted to men,
bers of the house of representative: Do
you favor the joint resolution passed by
the senate at the extra session declaring
that state of wan exists in Cuba? Do
you favor a resolution acknowledging
the independence of Cuba?
The first proposition seemed to meet
with the views of the greater portion
OF the known friends of the insurgents,
although the Republicans were far be-
hind the Democrats in numbers.
Among those on the Republican roll
who voted for the proposition were Bel
KNAPP, Boutelle, Danford, Davenport,
Dorr, Grow, Henry of Indiana, Rob-
bins, Stevens and Overstreet. All
the Democratic leaders favored
it. Such men as Bailey, Benton,
Bland, Ermentrout and Taylor of Ala
bama, being found among the positive
friends of belligerency for the gallant
patriots of SPANS beleaguered colony.
Friends Oh :, uba appeared to be bit
shy of the bold suggestion of Cuban in
dependence, probably for the reason
that the first proposition having passed
the senate, affords the means of more
direct action, and through the fear that
the congressional recognition of Cuba's
Independence might lead to complica-
tions with Spain which the other move
would avoid.