The Washington times. (Washington [D.C.]) 1901-1902, 1902-06-14
Attempt Fails to Talk the
Measure to Death I'm
der the Rules.
OBSTRUCTION BEATEN DOWN
Democrats and Western Republicans
Unite in Favor of Measure-Substi-
tute Bill Proposed by Mr. Grosvenor
Voted Down.

The Western Republicans Joined hands
with majority of the Democrats in the
House yesterday, overthrow the lead
ers, and by vote of 1i6 TO so passed
the Newlands irrigation bill.
An unsuccessful effort was made TO
talk the measure to death by Offering a
number of amendments, and discussing
them at length.
Mr.. Underwood, however. sounded
warning, calling the attention of the
irrigationists that under the rule adopt
ed by the House for the consideration OF
the bill vote must be reached before
the adjournment or the bill would die.
II. he said, when o'clock came there
was not a quorum present, the bill could
not be acted upon.
After that the irrigation men took
control of things and proceeded to carry
motions limiting debate on the amend
ments. Toward the close discussion
was limited TO thirty seconds.
Obstruction Unsuccessful.
Mr.. Ray, member of the Committee
on Irrigation. and who led the attack
upon the bill, made several unsuccess-
full efforts to obstruct by raising various
points of order, but to no effect. ma
jority of the House was determined to
pass the bill as 1t was reported from
the committee. and they succeeded in
doing so.
The fight in behalf of irrigation was
carried on chiefly by MIR. Newlands, the
father OF the plan; Representative Mon
dell of wyoming and Representative
Shafroth OF Colorado. Messrs. Dalzell,
Payne. Hepburn and Grosvenor Joined
Mr.. Ray in attempting to defeat the
measure, but for once their words had
little effect. Even the mild protest of
Mr.. Cannon fell upon deaf ears.
The bill does not call for an appro-
priation from the public treasury, but
directs that the proceeds OF the sale of
public lands shall be devoted toward
erecting dams and main canals for stor-
ing and conducting waste water
The bill was taken up under the five
minute rule and read shortly after the
reading CT the journal yesterday. The
first section contained proyiso that If
the receipts from the sale OF other pub
lie lands than those in the arid region and
covered by the bill were not sufficient to
meet the appropriations for agricultural
colleges, under the present law, the de-
felt should be made up from the Treas
uTy.
Mr.. Grosvenor's Substitute.
Mr.. Grosveror rep. Ohio offered a
substitute providing that none of the
receipts from the sale of public lands
necessary to meet the appropriations
for the agricultural colleges should be
diverted for that use. The bill, he said.
proposed a national crime against these
institutions, and it was to prevent that
that he offered the amendment.
The benefits Of the measure, he de-
clared, would be largely reaped by the
transcontinental railroad companies, to
which the people had originally given !
the lands, and it was no wonder that
they were out in force for the passage |
CT the bill.
Mr.. Robinson Dem., Ind) argued (
along the same line. contending that the |
railroad companies of the West were the /
chief advocates of the bill, and would |
receive the greatest benefit.
Mr.. Shafroth asked. granting thats
statement was true how an indOrtse- 7
ment OF irrigation came to be contain
ed in both the Democratic and Repub
lican national platforms.
Opposing the amendment, Mr.. Bur-
kett (Rep., Neb) advocated the bill as
a step in the development Of the general
plan OF Improvement that the Republic !
had pursued for a century and quar-
ter. and no one now objected or criti-
cises.
He denied that the operation ds the
bill would be to the detriment of the
farmers of the East, but. admitting
that it would, he asked when it was that
Congress had constituted itself the pro-
tector of those who had, rather than OF
those who had not.
The demand for this legislation did not
come wholly from nor originally from
the West. It came from the laboring
men and trades unions, first.
Mr.. Robinson's attack drew spirited
reply from Representative NewlanGs
dem. New, who vigorously denied the
statements of Nr. Robinson. Mr. New
lands opposed the amendment the pur-
pose of which he said was to defeat the
plan of irrigation.
Congress. To- said. had gone on year
after year and appropriated for the ag- :
ricultural colleges; as a matter Of fact
those colleges are fastened upon the
public treasury.
Agricultural Colleges Views.
The Committee on Irrigation, he said
had been in conference with represent
atives of the agricultural colleges. who
net only approved Of it but were
heartily in favor OF irrigation.
The measure he said, stilI left to the
colleges all the public lands outside of
the arid and semi-arid States These
arid lands he declared are now value
less and the only way TO give them
value was to irrigate them.
The opponents of the bill, he said. II
had expressed themselves as willing TO
have the Government cede the arid }
lands TO the various States in which o
they are situated. That would take a
the public lands Away from the agri- c
cultural colleges I
In reply 10 question Mr.. Newlands
said there were about 100000. coo acres a
Of arid lands, and that about 10 per q