The Anaconda standard., 1898-03-04


| United States to-day who can do more
| than guess at the cause; il his guess is
| wrong. he has committed no crime, and
| has another guess coming. But If the
/ administration viii have the battieship
/ raised and placed In a dry dock il will
| not be necessary to indulge in further
guessing. If the explosion was caused
/ from the outside the armor will be bent
/ inwardy, il from the inside the armor
| viii be bent outwardly. The American
/ people will then be satisfied. as he who
! runs can see as well as he who walks.
| The house BILL granting right of way
| through public lands, heretofore re-
| ferred to in this correspondence. mas
| been favorably reported in the senate.
| The senate committee is in favor of the
| proposed legislation, but says that
while ii is pending an opportunity is
presented to prevent complications
which may arise under existing laws
by the diversion of water for reservoir
or other purposes from its natural
channels, Ii is understood tnat claims
are made that laws which have been
enacted upon this subject give author
ity to use the waters of streams and
rivers without regard to the rights OF
those living below even to the extent
of changing or removing natural boun>
daries, state and international. and of
destroying the avenues of trade and
commerce or impairing their value 1t
is the policy of law to recognize and
protect these rights. and If any basis
for such claim exists or is claimed Ii
should be removed; and the senate
committee recommend that the bill be
amended so that the rights of those who
live along water courses or who carry
on their trade and commerce by their
use may not be endangered.
Not on Party Lines.
The Gorbett case, which has oecu-
pied SO much time in the senate, was
not determined upon party lines. 1t
raised much the same question as that
in the Mantle case in 1893. Senator
Mantle himself still believes that he
should have been seated at that time.
lie therefore supported Corbett's claim
for a seat, although fully aware that
if successful this meant the loss Of the
senate TO the friends of silver. He
made a speech on the subject dealing
largely with the Montana precedent,
which he sought to have set aside He
said: 1T happened that about five
years ago | came to the senate of
the United States bearing a commits
sion from the governor of the state of
Montana, who had appointed me under
practically the same circumstances
which surround this case now before
the senate. The result of the three or four
months debate upon the case at that
time was vote which declared that
the governor could not legally appoint
in such IA case and that | was not en-
titled to a seat in this body. The vote
was a very close one. and had all the
senators who were favorable to seat
ing been present upon the occasion of
the taking Of the vote, the decision
might have been different, | am in
clined to think al least that it would
have beer a tie vote. Looking at the
matter in this light, not great deal
of Importance attaches To the decision
then rendered as establishing a prece
dent for the future action of this body.
And | hold that any precedent estab-
lished here relating TO membership in
this body or to the right of one claim
ing "a seat in this body In eases such
as the one now being considered cannot
have any binding effect whatever upon
those who may come here afterwards,
and cannot be set up al rule of action
for the future conduct of the senate of
the United States Every member
comes here sworn To uphold the consti-
tuition and to be guided solely by his
conscience in the determination of
matters OF this character; no predeces-
sor of mine can bind my action and
neither can any action of mine bind
my successor in respect to such ques-
tions.
Il am inclined 70 believe that ii was
not the constitutional consideration of
the subject solely which determined
the votes of number of the members
of this body In my case. | am inclined
TO the opinion expressed by Senator
Foraker upon this point and | find
some warrant for making this asser-
tion in observations made by Senator
Hoar upon the occasion of the vote be-
ing taken on the Mantle case in 1893.
That distinguished member of this
body intimated very plainly that sena-
tors were being governed, not by their
views upon the constitution, but rather
by their views upon the opinion which
might be held by the appointee respect
ing vital questions which were then up
for consideration.
At the time | first presented my
self before this body With the appoint
ment from the governor of the state
Of Montana, the sentiment in this body
was overwhelmingly in favor of seat
ing. The matter went over, because
a quorum was not present, until the
extra session called by President Cieve-
land in August 1898. That extra ses-
sion was called for the purpose of re-
peaiing what was known as the Sher-
man silver purchasing law. Every one
here remembers how strong the tide
of sentiment rose both for and against
upon that occasion. how very bitter
the feeling became. what a prolonged
and determined contest ensued in this
body over the repeal of that law. and
] do not hesitate to say that it was be-
cause of the views which | held upon
the financial question that some sen
ators al least. in this body changed
their opinions and voted against my
being seated.
Il shall not stop TO inquire into the
circumstances and conditions which
led up to this appointment. | do not
consider that they have any bearing
upon the determination of this matter.
II | were To do SO. ii would perhaps
change my intention and lead me to
vote in another direction to that | i'm
tend. Neither shall | stop To inquire
into the relations which the appointee
now claiming seat in this body has
borne toward those circumstances and
conditions. They are matters, | know,
which are talked Of privately here and