The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-06-13
Heated Reply by the Indianian, Who
Said His Plan Was Perfectly
Reasonable and Proper.
SPEECH BY THE ALBANIAN
WHO CONDEMNED THE PROPOSED
PURCHASE OF PANAMA CANAL,
Saying 1t Was "Fou1 and Dirty
Scheme"-Specin1 House Rule for
the Irrigation Bill.

WASHINGTON, June 12-After consid-
ering the London dock charges bill for
hour and half to-day without completing
it, the Senate resumed consideration of the
isthmian canal question. Mr.. Morgan, of
Alabama, occupied the floor for three
hours and half, discussing particularly
the diplomatic phases Of the question.
From this point he was diverted by
amendment introduced by Mr.. Fairbanks,
of Indiana, providing for the issue of bonds
for the construction of the canal. Mr.
Morgan vigorously attacked the amend
ment. maintaining the expense of the
canals taxation should be paid from the
treasury's current receipts. Incidentally
Mr.. Morgan again opposed the Panama
route and assaied the right of the new
Panama Company to dispose of the conces-
sions it held from the old company
When the land bill was taken up Mr..
Hoar formally offered his amendment, of
which be gave notice some time ago, in the
form of a substitute. 1t provides that it
shall be the duty of the President to cause
isthmian canal to be built by such route
as he may select; that he shall obtain all
advice necessary and that 100000 be ap-
propriated to begin the work.
Mr.. Morgan, in the course of his speech,
said the Liberal party in Colombia never
would extend the concessions of the new
Panama Canal Company and if the United
States should pay $40. ZOO 900 for those con-
cessions and the property, it might well
| throw the money into the sea. He repudi-
ated the idea that any American could be
deceived by any such foul and dirty
scheme" He declared that there never
was more mistaken piece of legislation"
than the Spooner amendment and referred
to it as having been Offered in the name
~ ha for in
RESENTED BY SPOONER.
Mr.. Spooner warmly resented the inti-
nation that he was not the author of the
amendment and declared that he not only
was its author, but that he had devised it
in every part. With certain amendments,
he proposed to insist upon its adoption. AS
yet he had not had time to prepare the
amendments because, he suggested, in
! cisively, he had other work to do than to
| look after the canal bill.
Mr.. Fairbanks at this point, offered his
| amendment to the Spooner amendment,
! authorizing the secretary of the treasury tc
| borrow from time TO time slSO,0o0,00o for the
construction OF the canal, bonds TO be
/ issued for the amount borrowed to bear in
terest at per cent, payable in gold; the
/ bonds 10 be disposed of at not less than
par
| Mr. Morgan Immediately criticised Mr.
| Fairbanks's proposition, declaring that il
| was simply another feature of the methods
|
/ Struction.
With some heat, Mr.. Fairbanks insisted
that his amendment was perfectly reason
| able and proper. He believed it to be In
| accord with the wiSeSt craftsmanship to
distribute the cost of the canal over
period of years, instead of putting the bur
! den of the entire cost on the people of the
| present time. He said that if the bill
! providing for a canal by the Nicaragua
route were enacted he would offer the same
/ amendment TO that. One of his principal
objections to the Nicaragua canal bill
was that it proposed to pay the expenses
of construction from the current receipts
! Later Mr.. Morgan suggested that he was
/ holding the craftsmanship of the oceanic
! canals committee as a placebo thrown 10
! him that he did not hold the position as
! a placebo, but because the Republican
side had regarded him ''one of the great
| est living senators, one of the greatest
| of living authorities on one of the greatest
questions"
MORGAN FACETIOUS.
az shall soon be one of the greatest dead
ones" suggested Mr.. Morgan, facetiously
unless the Republican side shall take up
the question in the view of William Nc
| Kinley, who was more responsible for it
than l am, or in that of General Grant
who was more responsible still"
After Mr.. Morgan had proceeded until
$40, refusing curtly to yield the floor for
| any other business, Mr. Hanna gave notice
that as he obliged TO leave the city
| this week TO be absent until next Wednes-
! day morning, he would address the Senate
on the bill that day at o'clock.
| ''Will the senator occupy the floor until
| o'clOck2' inquired Mr.. Morgan.
Mr.. Hanna replied that he did not know
| but he might emulate the senator from
! Ala bama in that respect
| ''Well," replied Mr.. Morgan, "if the SEN
ator occupies the floor until o'clock
| shall take il then and speak until mid
! night. l am responsible for this bill and
| have the right TO close the debate"
Mr.. Hanna said he had no desire to pre-
vent Mr. Morgan from speaking and
thought there would be no difficulty in af-
! fording him time to reply.
| prohibit the passage of local laws in the
| Territories and TO limit the territorial in
debtedness.
a resolution introduced by Mr. Carmack
directing the committee on civil service
! and retrenchment TO investigate the dis
charge from the War Department of Miss
! Rebecca ]. Taylor, a clerk in that depart
| ment, was called up. On motion of Mr.
Platt, of Connecticut, the resolution was
/ referred 10 the committee on civil service
The resolution introduced yesterday bv
! Mr. Culberson, directing the secretary of
| war 10 send TO the Senate an itemized
statement OF the expenditures made from
I the Cuban funds from the time of the
/ American occupation to May l of this year
was taken up. Mr.. Platt of Connecticut
| explained that the information was being
compiled in the War Department. and the
resolution was sent 10 the calendar
IRRIGATION BILL IN HOUSE