The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-01-25
FOR EXPANSION
Continued from Page Two.)

the bill not later than clock Tuesday
next The minority gave notice they
would offer a complete substitute bill.
Hull addressed the house in advocacy Of
the bill as necessary under our larger re-
sponsibilities, and was replied to by
Representative Cox, DEM, Tenn, and
Mr.. Mcclellan, dem. N. Y, who spoke
for the measure, and Mr.. Hay, DEM,
Va, against it.
At Mr.. Suffers suggestion, it was
agreed that the vote should be taken
mot later than O'clock" on Tuesday
next
Mr.. Hay, from the minority of the
committee, gave notice that the min
GRITTY had united upon substitute bill
which will be offered at the proper
time.
The house then went into a commit
tee and took up the bill under the
agreement for fifteen hours for general
discussion, with night session tonight,
Wednesday and Thursday. Mr.. Hull
opened the debate in advocacy of the
bill, in a brief speech. The bill fixed
no maximum strength for the entire
army, but under the organization
would permit a strength of 100000 men.
The bill could be amended if desirable,
SO as to provide minimum. in the dis
cretion of the president $4,000.
situation was a dangerous one. We
were confronted with grave RESPONSE
bilities, even though we held the Phil
ippines temporarily. No one could tell
what would happen in 30 days We
could not afford to sacrifice efficiency
to economy He declared that
the proposal to continue the
present strength of the regular
army (62, OO0) until 1900 was a miserable
olyoe ,,I nf
Mr.. Cox, dem. Tenn, a member CT
the committee, replied to Mr.. Hull. He
directed his argument against the
main proposition to increase the army
to 1000. If we needed such a stand
ing army in time of peace, something
must have some radically wrong With
our institutions. No power on earth
wanted war with us. There could be
no motives unless we invited it.
Mr.. Mcclellan, DEM. N. Y, followed
in support of the bill. He did not speak
in spirit of partisanship, he said. but
he considered the crying need of the
hour the reorganization of the army
He had no desire to reflect on any Off
cial in the war establishment. but we
ought to take to heart the lessons of
the late war. If the congressional cleo
tons had resulted differently it might
have been possible to have honestly
the goats from the sheep and have pun
ished the guilty. But no good could
come now of washing our dirty linen
in public. Congress would not permit
us to investigate, much less prove the
facts. Mcclellan paid beautiful trib
ute to the regular soldier.
Mr.. Hay, DEM, Va, member of the
committee then took the floor in oppo-
siton to the bill. He said this country
had depended in ever crisis upon the
volunteers and he considered such an
army the peer Of raw recruits with the
advantage that when their services
were not needed they could be mus
tered out and millions in taxes saved
the people by making it unnecessary to
maintain a large standing army. He
did not believe such a large army or
such a vast expenditure of money JUS
titled.
In conclusion he said: "Our stua-
ton is such with reference to other
countries that a large standing army
never has been nor is now necessary.
Our battles of the future, if there are
TO be any, which God forbid, must be
fought upon the high seas; we must
look to our navy to bring US victories.
| would not disparage for one moment
the brilliant achievements of our SOL
diers in the late war with Spain-th ay
are monuments to American manhood
and endurance: but impartial history
must record that those achievements
pale into insignificance in comparison
with those great triumphs of our navy.
which have marked an epoch in naval
warfare. The victories of Dewey at
Manila, and Schley at Santiago, crush
ed the Spanish power Let us then
build a strong navy, and avoid the dam
gerous experiment of a great standing
army. The liberty of the citizen VIII
not be suppressed, the ballot box can
not be desecrated, the people of the
country will not be unduly taxed. our
commerce will flourish, and our mer-
chant marine will grow continually; the
produce of our farmers will find a mar
ket; our workmen will be employed,
and our beloved flag, the emblem of lib
erty and fraternity, will float triumph
antly over every sea-
Mr.. Parker, rep, N. j., advocated the
passage OF the bill
Mr. Bell, pop, Col, opposed the bill
in toto as a measure designed to pre-
pare the way for imperialism.
Mr.. Brown, rep, Ohio, supported the
bill. In the course of his remarks, he
quoted from the presidents message
and utterances to show that there
was not an official or unofficial word
which stood in the way of the ultimate
freedom and independence of The
Philippines. AS the military comman-
der, the president had taken temporary
possession of the islands.
Mr.. Lanham, DEM, Tex, who closed
the debate at the afternoon session, de.
voted his argument against Imperialism
At $50 p m. the house recessed until
s o'clock, the evening session to be de-
voted to debate on the army bill.