The Washington times., 1901-12-21
UNDER THE CAPITOL'S DOME,

Regrets have been expressed by friends
of the Nicaragua Canal project that the
Morgan and Hepburn bills. reported to
| the Senate and House, respectively, are
not literal or. at least. substantial copies
of eash other. These regrets are based
upon the fear that even though the Nor
gan bill should pass the Senate and that
of Mr.. Hepburn be carried through the
House, there may be a disagreement in
conference that will lead to delay and
possibly jeopardize the construction of
the waterway.
To allay this fear those actively inter
ested in the enactment of q suitable law
PORT out that there are no vital differ
ences between the Morgan and Hepburn
bills. Both have precisely the same OBJ
ject in view. both contemplate the same
route, and the ultimate expenditure of
the same amount of money-$l0O G0O. 600.
The views of Senator Morgan are EN-
bodied in two bills. The first is a mere
! skeleton and simply provides for the ac-
QUESTION OF the territory necessary for
the construction of the canal appro-
priating whatever money may be neces-
sary for that purpose. The second goes
more into the details, creating a canal
fund in the Treasury of $3.50. 200 600. a
| canal division for the separate manage
ment of the accounts of the fund. and a
canal board to have full charge of the
work of construction. The Chief Justice
of the United States, the Secretary OF
! State. and the Secretary Of War are con-
stituted a board to prepare regulations,
to be approved by the President, for the
police government of the canal belt and
| for the preparation of a measure, TO be
submitted to Congress, for the establish
ment II courts therein. Other details OF
minor character are also provided Tor
Ir. Hepburn's bill is much fuller than
Mr.. Morgan's first one. but less elaborate
in It's details han the Senator's second
one There is however. no real conflict
between them and both gentlemen are
extremely anxious for the building of the
canal il is not thought likely that either
will be overexacting in matters OF mere
detail. Should both measures pass and
conference committees be appointed. the
Senate committee WILL Of course, be head
ed by Mr. Morgan, while Mr.. Hepburn will
be chairman of the House committee
Under such circumstances IL seems very
improbable that they would allow differ
ences of opinion touching mere matters OF
administration TO stand in the way OF the
main object which each has In view II is
quite possible that the measures may be
brought into complete harmony by amend
ment in the Senate or the House, thus
rendering a conference unnecessary.
In and sbout the Capitol there is con-
siderable interest manifested in the move
by Admiral Schley's friends for the re-
vival of the grade of vice admiral and the
advancement of that officer. as well as Ad-
miral Sampson and Captain Clark. to the
grade named
Some Of the extreme Schley men are
disposed to criticise the action because it
means the promotion Of Sampson. On the
other hand. il is explained that neither
Admiral schley nor any of those nearest
to him has ever attacked Admiral Samp-
son or expressed any unwillinguess that
he should be duly honored. Their purpose
has been merely to secure for Schley the
credit which they believe to be his due
and now, since the decision of the Court
of Enquiry, they are mainly desirous of
removing the cloud which that decision
casts upon his name and fame. and this,
they argue can be fully accomplished by
advancing him to the rank of vice admi-
raj, even though others receive the same
honor.
IT IS urged that this can be done with
out .ierious disparagment of the course
OF the majority of the naval court, the
decision Of which it is claimed. SO far
as It is adverse 10 Schley. is merely upon
minor points, in no way affecting the
final outcome Of the compaign. Admiral
Dewey having held that Schley was in full
command at the battle OF Santiago. and
entitled TO the credit for the victory
while the other members In no way dis
pute the fact. but admit that Schley's
conduct in the battle was excellent. il is
argued by the friends of the latter that
there is ample ground for his. promotion
regardless OF questions Of coaling and the
speed Of the squadron between certain
points in the earlier stages Of the cam
paign.
In brief, it is the view of many OF
Schley's friends that he can with perfect
propriety be made a vice admiral as a re-
ward for his services in the battle. while
Sampson may receive a like honor for his
general conduct OF the West Indian cam
paign. exclusive of that battle. the splen-
id services OF Captain Clark being also
httingly recognized at the same time.
The strictly nonpartisan character OF
the sampson Schley controversy is well
eNennlified by the circumstance that SEN
sentative Pearre of Maryland, both strong
Republicans, simultaneously introduced
the vice admiral bill In the houses of
which they respectively are members
Opinions differ as to whether il VIII he
possible to secure action on the measure
but as TO that it is too soon to speak
with any degree of assurance.
Another matter which has attracted
much attention and given rise TO a great
deal of comment in Congressional circles
is the rather peculiar political status OF
Senators Wellington Of Maryland and Nc
Laurin of South Carolina. The former is
nominally a Republican and the latter
nominally Democrat. but for some time
past me part! standing Of both has been
very dubious
Recently In making committee assign
ments the Republican majority took care
OF both these Senator'S Some have be.p
inclined to regard this action as indi
eating purpose on the part Of the Re
publican Senators fully TO restore Sen
ator Wellington 10 favor and at the same
time receive Senator McLauriu into COM
plete Republican fellowship.
As against this view il is suggested by
those familiar with the course of the
Senate in such matters that the action re
ferred 10 really proves nothing at all in
a political way. In general the dominant
party controls the committees. merely al
lowing the minority certain number Of
representatives on each. The minority.
however. names its own representatives.
and as IL was unwilling to stand sponsor
for the Democracy OF either Of the two
Senators named. and perhaps neither
desired such course, they were left
tyfghouf cpuruitfap .gSipnruaufc ta