The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-01-21
IT PASSED THE SENATE YESTER--
DAY BY A DECISIVE MA
JORITY.
NICARAGUA CANAL BILL HEARD FROM
Mr.. Morgan Attempted to Make 1t I'M
finished Business, but Quorum Was
Not nt-Oleomargarine Biz
Discussed in the House.

improvements ut the Pass of Arkansas,
Tex.
Mr.. Chandler (rep.) of New Hampshire
secured the adoption of resolution di-
recting the committee on interstate COM
merce to extend its inquiry rs to alleged
combinations heretofore ordered, to an in .
quiry as to the reported recent agree
mcnt Of the managers of vessels on the
great lakes to maintain rates established
| by the joint traffic association.
| Senate bill for bridge across the Col
umbia river in Washington state was
passed on the request of Mr.. Wilson of
| Washington.
Mr. Morgan (dem.) of Alabama intro
duced the following resolution:
| "Whereas, 1t is alleged that certain
bonds issued by the United States in aid
of the Central Pacific railway and also
the Union Pacific railway have fallen
due and remain unpaid and that by
reason of the default the property held
and owned by each of said companies
at that time became the property of the
United States, and said property of every
description so held and owned by said
companies, at tho time of such default,
now rghtfully belongs to the United
States,
Resolved, That the committee on the
judiciary is directed to examine into the
report whether such allegation is true iir
fact and in law and that they report the
nature and character of the right and
title of the United States in and to said
property and the descriptions of or
| II. g hat h,x, hmm
to the United States under the law and
whether either of said railway companies
has any lawful right of redemption of
said property"
The resolution was ordered to be laid
on the table, Senator Morgan announcing
that he desired to address the senate
on it.
The bill for free homesteads on pub
lie land acquired from the lidans was
taken up with n view to taking the final
vote at 4 p. m.
Mr. Jones (dem) of Arkansas support
ed the BILL saying it was for the benefit
of the body of the people, whereas most
of the legislation of congress was for IA
vOred interests
1t was refreshing, he said, to find Al
measure not supported by lobby repre-
scntng some private interest.
Mr.. Teller (rep.) of Colorado said the
bill would help build up the west, while
the defeat of the measure would result
in the humiliating spectacle of the United
States evicting those settlers from their
lands
Mr.. Allison (rep) of Iowa, speaking for
J the first time this session, made inquiries
: as to the extent of the lands covered by
the bill.
: Mr.. Pettigrew of North Dakota ex-
planned that it did not cover Indian iands
not yet acquired.
but another bill will come in inter
: posed Mr.. Cockrell of Missouri, giving
away the rest of the land"
II have no doubt of it, conceded Mr.
Pettigrew.
The latter explained that the measure
was restricted to agricultural lands and
did not cover the timber sections OF Min
nesota and other states.
Mr.. Teller resuming his remarks,
smoke in impassioned terms on the ten
dency to grant mines to favored inter
ests and withhold this small pttance from
the settlers. Congress wasted more than
the sum involved annually on the army
on rivers and harbOrs and on naval ex--
peEditures which brought vast profits to
the makers of armor. And. yet this bill
in effect giving a settler 500. was re-
stricted and the settler was to BE- turned'
out as Il tramp. The great danger to tina
republic, declared Mr.. Teller, was III its
; not encouraging the great farming COM
/, | L
the mills and factories. The idea of our
foIefathers that the people of the nation
should not be crowded into shops, was
being forgotten. Mr. Teller referred to.
the free homestead planks in the various
platforms and criticised the course OF
senators in opposing this principle OF pat
forms which they prOfessed to accept,
Mr.. Platt (rep) Of Connecticut said the
logical result of this bill was to embark
on the policy of donating LANDS to the
landless and homes to the homeless, not
!, only through the benefcient terms OF the.
, homestead law, but by buying lands ana
then giving them away. Mr.. Plat de-
, cleared that no sectional question or the
east against the west was involved.
, Mr.. Allison said the bill appeared to be
too sweeping and too general 1t had
come from the house relating to lands liz
: Oklahoma and was now broadened 10
cover all lands thus far acquired from
, the Indians. He did not believe in gong
, into this wholesale manner OF dealing
/ with these lands some OF them near
towns and worth up to 500 and possibly
! $500 per acre. He might vote Tor the'
hill hut it should be limited to those
: agricultural lands actually held by set
, tiers and not those valuable lands near
towns held by spectators.
: Mr.. Cockrell (dem.) of Missouri deciar-
ed that this bill was perversl0n OF the
: | homestead laws 1t was in the interest,"
of comparatively few as against a vast
number of people who were unable 10
get homesteads. The senator related the
circumstances of the scramble for home.
steads in Oklahoma, showing that small
proportion of those who sought homes
got them. 81.
: Mr.. Allison moved an amendment limit
ing the operation of the bill to lands
: acquired from Indians prior to the pass
!. age of this act.
After further debate, Messrs. Stewart
of Nevada, Allen of Nebraska, Carter OF
Montana and Pettigrew of South Dakota,
: speaking for the bill, a final vote was
taken. The committee amendment. ex-
tending the bill to all lands acquired from
Indians and also obligating the Unltes
,, States to pay the Indians all sums o.
money released by the change from exlsc
; ing laws. was agreed to. The amendment
, of Mr. Allison limiting the bill to lana
acqnired prior to the passage of this act
was agreed to
8 The bill, as amended, was then passed..
! 80 to IL. Those voting against the Diit
were, democrats: Bate. Berry. Brice'
, CocRrell. Faulkner, Gray. Hill, Vest,