Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1898-06-15
DEMOCRATS IN CAUCUS. IS.
Declare, by . Vote Of 81 to II
Against the Annexation
0N Ha~aM

WASHINGTON. June H.-At caucus
Of the Democrats Of the house. held i'm
mediately after the recess of the house
was taken, resolutions were adopted declar.
ing the sense Of the Democrats Of the
house to be opposed to Hawaiian annexa-
tion az a contamination that would prove
Injurious to the interests Of the United
States and contrary to the long-established
and generally recognized policy Of the gov
ernment. The action vas taken after an
hour had been consumed In discussing
the advisability Of adopting any resolu-
tions upon the proposition Of annexation.
Mr.. Bailey of Texas. Mr.. King Of Utah,
Mr.. Williams Of Mississippi. and Mr.. Dins-
more Of Arkansas were the prominent
speakers in advocacy Of caucus action, and
Mr.. sulzer of New York. Mr.. Cochran Of
Missouri and Mr.. Devries Of California
led in opposition. Prior to the caucus.
there was a likelihood of several Democrats
favoring annexation. declining to go into
the caucus, fearing lest they might be
placed In a situation that would require
their votes to be cast in accord with the
caucus action and contrary to their con-
victions.
All finally entered the caucus, however,
upon the distinct understanding that the
action to be taken would be advisory rather
than mandatory. and no Democrat should
be bound by the resolutions. Mr.. Bailey
said he had not urged the call Of a caucus
to consider annexation, believing all possi-
Bile party advantage could be secured by
the majority vote Of the Democrats oppos-
Ing the proposition without the formality
and possible development of inter-party
friction incident to a caucus. However. he
said, the caucus having been called, he
believed some action should be taken.
Mr.. King, of Utah, in minute speech
boldly advocated making the caucus action
absolutely binding upon all Democrats
participating. but withdrew his suggestion
upon his attention being called vigorously
to the fact that such effect Of Democratic
caucus action upon policies had not been
enforced since the civil war.
Mr.. Sulzer, Of New York, strongly op-
posed any action, declaring 1t was now too
late to endeavor to influence or direct the
attitude Of Democrats by caucus. He
called attention to the caucus held in
December and the failure then to consider
the Hawaiian question. notwithstanding
the likelihood Of 1t coming up at the pres
ent session was recognized. Since then
some Democrats had taken position favor
able to annexation and had become no
tortously committed to II, and for the party
now to act upon the question in caucus snd
give those Democrats the alternative of
changing front or appearing in the role Of
party insubordinates would be impolitic
and unjust
Mr.. Cochran, Of Missouri, argued against
the proposed caucus resolutions. chiefiv
on the ground that they were not in accord
with Democratic policy. and in a some
what extended speech he contended that
annexation was really in accord with the
original and recognized principles of
democracy. providing for the development
OF the country's welfare. He cited the
question as having been mooted in the time
OF Pierce and urged by Marcy.
Messrs. Williams and Dinsmore argued
for the adoption Of the resolution, CON.
tending annexation meant a beginning of
colonization which never would prove bene.
hcial or popular and Democratic position
In opposition to its initiation should be
emphasized in caucus action.
Mr. De Vries, of California, opposing
caucus action, denied the power Of a
caucus Of house members to formulate
party policy affecting a new question. The
national platform was silent upon Hawaii
and In the absence Of platform expression
caucus action would be a usurpation of
state and national convention prerogatfyes
and could not be binding. House members
were, ne insisted, to carry out platform
pledges and not to provide new ones ON
great national questions.
The resolution was adopted finally, 81 to
II.
AS to the effect Of caucus action, the
Democratic advocates of annexation ex.
pressed the opinion that some votes would
De lest Prior to the caucus. it was claimed
that twenty-three would vote for annsxa-
tion. but now 1t is believed that fourteen
Will more nearly represent the Democratic
vote in support of the resolution.
The resolution adopted is as follows:
democratic party, as represented in ths
national house. that annexation Of Hawsij
Is dangerous and unwise; that It reverses
It may lead to colonial aggrandizement and
institutions" eS""eaH