The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-05-13

to defend the Monroe doctrine. The senator
almost said that we were In danger from
Germany on account Of that doctrine. That
doctrine is dearly cherished by the Amer
loan people. II is regarded as a vital
principle and II will never be surrendered
at the challenge of any government, even
though We have TO employ the almost IL
limitable resource of the country In its de-
Tense. L believe that there has not been
time In fifty years when there was less
danger than there is to-day OF the chal-
lenge of the Monroe doctrine by any gov
eminent under the sky. i was surprised
at the suggestion contained in the speech
OF the senator from Massachusetts, yester-
DAY as an argument in favor of speedy
completion Of the ships or of increasing our
navy that 1t might be necessary that we
should be ready to meet the challenge of
that doctrine by Germany. / don't believe
It, 1 have on the highest authority warrant
for asserting that there has not been a time
when there existed more cordial relation
between the United States and Germany
than exists to-day.
NO WAR WITH GERMANY.
'I look for war, no trouble. with the
empire of Germany. i think there is no
foundation for any such suggestion. But
we must have large navy. do not say
that We have become a first-class nation in
the sense that we have not been one, but
We are a developing and an aggressive
nation Our commerce is constantly ex-
banding and will be content with no limit
or boundary. We must have a larger navy
We will have commercial interests in every
country and we must be ready TO safe
guard our interests in all parts of the
world" In conclusion, Mr.. Spooner argued
that inasmuch as the country is defence
less and at the mercy Of two armor COM
panies" the United States ought 20 erect
present situation, he declared was intoler-
able.
In closing the debate. Mr.. Hale. in charge
of the bill said: II don't believe that a
great need or necessity for an increase of
the navy stalks before us because of any
apprehension of hostilities, either now or in
the future with the empire Of Germany.
That great country is tied to by indis-
soluble bonds in the name Of ten million
people of German extraction, who to-day
make some of our best citizens. 1 have no
fear that any danger awaits us from Ger
man Intervention. But We do need re-
spectacle navy Of the best ships In the
world. And with the vale of waters be-
tween us and Europe nobody need fear that
any nation is likely to trouble u.s."
The amendment offered by Mr. Penrose
to pay s545 for the armor for the Maine,
Ohio and Missouri was defeated.
Mr.. Pettus offered an amendment MAX
ing 1t mandatory upon the secretary OF the
navy to erect an armor plate plant at once
at a cost not to exceed A,000,00O The
amendment was defeated % to "a, as fol-
lows:
Ter, Cockrell, Daniel, Davis, Harris, Jones
of Arkansas, Jones of Nevada, Mallory,
Money, Morgan, Nelson, Pettus, Spooner,
Stewart, Teller, Thurston, Tillman, Vest
o.
Nays-Allison, Baker, Clark of Wyoming,
Depew, Elkins, Fairbanks. Foraker. Fos-
ter, Frye, Hale, Hansbrough, Hoar, Lodge,
Mcbride, McComas, McCumber, McEnery,
Penrose. Perkins, Proctor, Quarles, Ross.
Sawyer, Shoup-N.
Mr.. Tillman's amendment striking out
the committees proposition to pay S445 per
ton for armor, fixing the maximum price at
$500 per ton, except for armor for the bat
tleships Maine. Missouri and Ohio, for
which $545 was to be paid, and making it
mandatory upon the secretary of the navy
TO construct an armor plate plant, was de-
feated-22 to A-the vote in no respect diff
fering from the vote on Mr.. Pettus's
amendment
Mr.. Tillman then offered his amendment
three times, each time raising slightly the
limit of cost of the armor. Each time the
amendment was defeated. An effort was
made by those opposed to the committee to
prevent its proposition from coming TO a
vote. Mr.. Hale made an appeal to the Sem
ate that 1t should stand by the unanimous
agreement to vote finally upon the armor-
plate question at to-day's session.
Mr.. Chandler offered an amendment pre-
cisely similar to those proposed by Mr..
Tillman. The vote on the amendment indi-
Gated the absence of a quorum, the vote
being IL yeas TO % nays.
call of the Senate was demanded and
a quorum was developed A vote on Mr..
Chambers amendment was taken again,
resulting: Yeas, IL; nays, PINOT quorum.
"It is evident" said Mr.. Hale that we
cannot dispose of this question to-day. We
are at the mercy of the minority
On his motion the Senate then, at Ais p.
m, adjourned.