The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-02-24
DEBATE ON PORTO RICAN BILL
SPEECH BY ORATOR LITTLEFIELD
AGAINST THE MEASURE.
Vote to BE Taken Next Tuesday and
1t VIII Be Close-COnference of
Republicans This Evening.

WASHINGTON, Feb. 23.-To-day's ses-
sion of the Senate was unusually interest
ing from the very beginning. In spite OF
vigorous and influential opposition, Mr..
Penrose, Of Pennsylvania, succeeded in
getting the Quay case before the Senate.
There was a sharp parliamentary squabble
and then Mr.. Penrose moved that the reso-
luton involving the seating of Mr.. Quay
be taken up for consideration. On yea
and nay vote the motion prevailed, "a to 2S,
as follows:
Yeas-Allison, Bate. Beveridge. Carlyle,
Chandler, Clark of Montana, Culberson,
Daniel, Davis. Depew. Fairbanks. Foster.
Gear, Hansbrough. Hawley, Hoar, Jones
of Nevada, Kenny, McComas, McEnery,
McLanrin. Martin, Morgan: Nelson: Pen
rose, Perkins, Pettigrew, Pritchard, Shoup,
Stewart, Taliaferro, Vest, Warren. VOL
cott-Y4
Nays-Aldrich, Burrows, Butler, Caffery,
Chiffon, Clark of Wyoming, Cockrell, Gull
lom, Foraker, Gallinger, Hale, Hanna,
Harris, Jones of Arkansas, Kean, Lindsay,
McCumber, Mcmillan, Pettus Platt Of Con-
necticut, Proctor, Quarles, Rawlings, Ross,
Simon, Teller. Tillman, Turner'S.
The following pairs were announced:
Clay with Lodge lodge in favor of seat
ing Quay. but against taking up case now),
Deboe with Mallory (no statement Of posi-
tion), Frye with Berry (no statement of po-
sition), Mcbride with Money CMcBride
against, Money for), Taliaferro with Scott
(both in favor Of Quay: Taliaferro voteD,
Thurston and Allen (no statement), Wet
more with Bacon (no statement. Sewell
with Wellington (Sewell for). Platt Of New
York and Heitfeld Platt for.)
The majority was SO decisive as to cause
some surprise. 1t is known that some SEN
ators who will vote. If the opportunity be
offered, to seat Mr.. Quay, to-day voted
against consideration of the case, while. on
the contrary, others who voted for consid-
Grafton probably will vote against seating
him. The vote, therefore. cannot be re-
garded as quite test Of Mr.. Quay's abso-
lutte strength in the Senate.
Following the taking up Of the resolution
Mr.. Daniel Dem., Va.) delivered speech
in which he vigorously supported Mr..
Quay's right to a seat. In concluding he
said: 1.-THE Senate is at once a legislative
body. an executive body and a judicial
body. When hear senators say that we
should lay aside this matter so that a Ha-
waiian bill or Porto Rican bill or any
other bill shall be considered, 1t seems to
me that the senator has not risen to his
proper dignity and that he is not treating
his brother senator as he ought to be treat
ed when he is knocKlng at the gates of the
body with as perfect credentials as his
own. I shall never vote-unless. indeed. in
some great public emergency, when every
thing else must give way-to postpone the
credentials of a senator to any other con-
sideration of public policy. The first step
,f1 4 Of I,.,Ixr
tain who are its members According to
the Constitution it has been ascertained
that we are members of this body. But
there is one who has as much right in this
Senate, according to my judgment, as any
one who has placidly voted to postpone his
case and let him cool his heels, waiting to
be heard / shall vote In this case as I
voted in all other similar cases."
At the conclusion Of Mr.. Daniels speech
the Hawaiian government bill was taken
up and Mr.. Morgan resumed his speech.
Mr.. Morgan. not having concluded. yielded
the floor at 3:25 p. m. to Mr.. Aldrich, who
presented the report Of the conference on
the financial bill. wnen the reading of the
report had been concluded and an order
made for it's printing an arrangement was
effected whereby some member of the con-
ference committee on next Wednesday
would make a statement concerning the
changes made by the conferees, and that
the next day the report would be taken up
for consideration.
Mr.. Vest Dem.. MOI and Mr.. Foraker
(Rep., o. then delivered notable speeches
anent the Hawaiian government bill Both
were constitutional arguments, Mr.. For
aker's being reply to that Of Mr.. Vest.