The daily morning journal and courier., 1898-03-26
MINORITY IS TURBULENT
EXCITING SCENES IN THE HOUSE
 OFFER 4 RULING.

EXCITING SCENES IN THE HOUSE
 OYER 4 RULING.
 Bailey Makes Reference to Dishonest Men Who Have Occupied the Chair Thereby Destroying the Last Safeguard of the Minority-A FIlibuster Inaugurated Against Naval Appropriation Bln.
 Washington, March 25.-The stirring scenes of the Fifty-first congress when members of the minority were charging down the aisIes protesting against the rulings of Speaker Reed were recalled to-day in the turbulent protests made by the minority against a ruling of the chair during the consideration of the naval appropriation bill. The ruling, in effect, compelled members to confine their remarks, under the five-minute rule, to the subject before the house, and was made against MT. Hartman, silver rep, who attempted to make a political speech. The ruling was de- nounced as a uSurpation, and appear after appeal was taken.
 MT. Bailey appealed from the decision of the chair, and in doing so he warned the republican members that such a ruling, if not reversed, would come back to plague them. From time inn memorial 1t had been the custom to make pro forma amendments. It was impossible to make remarks to pro forma amendment pertinent
 MT. Sherman, rep, of New York, who was in the chair, cited several prece- dents in support of his ruling.
 MT. Boutelle and MT. Bailey had sev- eral lively exchanges, at the conclusion of one of which MT. Bailey said that he had noticed ever since the disaster to the gallant ship which bore the name of the state from which he hailed that the gentleman from Maine had been laboring under great excitement. T have fears" said he, that a similar man himself. If 1t should occur there is no doubt that the explosion will be from the inside.' Laughter and ap- plause.)
 T hope it would not be as disastrous to me as 1t seems to have been to he gentleman from Texas" retorted Mir Boutelle.
 After the debate on MT. Bailey's ap- peal had run on for an hour MT. Bou- telle moved to close the debate on the appeal. Instantly a point of order was made against Mr. Boutelle's motion, which was overruled. Party feeling ran high. The vote was taken on MT. Boutelle's motion to close debate on the appeal and carried-111 to 95. The vote then came up on the appeal from the decision of the chair and the chair was sustained-120 to 92.
 Mr Hartman, after this two hours wrangle, again got the floor and was proceeding with the speech which had been interrupted, when MT. Boutelle again interposed a point of order. It was again sustained and when MT. Bailey again appealed the poinr was made that the appeal was dilatory and the chair declined to entertain the ap- peal.
 MT, Hartman then changed his tac- tics and rose to 8, question of personal privilege. MT. Ringley made the point that no question of privilege could be raised in committee of the whole. Pening decision upon MT. Dingley's s point of order, Mr. Hartman was al- lowed to proceed but MT. Payne ob- iected. Whereupon with flushed face Mr Hartman shouted out that he would refuse to be intimidated by the gentleman from Maine. Thereupon MT. Payne called him to order and the chair ordered him to take his seat. MT. Bailey moved that he be allowed to proceed in order. The motion was opposed by the majority and defeated 91 to no. The minority then inaugur- ated a filibusterer demanding vote by tellers on the pro forma amendment to which MT. Hartman had been speaking MT. Payne made the point that the demand was dilatory and was sustained. The chair also sustained a similar point against an appeal. moment later, when a demand was made for tellers and it was denied, MT. Bailey denounced the ruling. If you do not permit us to verify the count, '' he declared you destroy the last safe- guard of the minority. dishonest man in the chair, (and there have been dishonest men in the chair), could de- feat the will of this house. I am frank to say that my purpose in inauguratine this filibuster was to consume twice as much time as you denied the gentle man from Montana and I intend to dc it every time you deny reasonable demand" Democratic applause).
 MT. Grosvenor contended that the real test of whether a demand was dilatory depended upon whether the amendment was offered in good faith The chair finally announced that he would state for the benefit of the gen. tlemen from Texas that the amend ment was offered in good faith. 'The chair has no right to make such de- cision," said MT. Bailey. Thereupor the chair insisted upon his ruling and the reading of the bill proceeded. At the end of the first paragraph read MT Hartman again offered a pro forma amendment and after some predatory remarks in denunciation of what he characterized as ''an attempt to throt- tie free speech" was proceeding witf the speech he began hours before wher he was again called to order.
 Mr. Hartman was obliged to take his seat, while the confusion and the par Iiamentary struggle went on. At las