The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-02-13
WILL Do NO GOOD.
De Armond, of Missouri, At
tacks Elkins Bill.
Accuses Republicans of a Lack
of Sincerity.
TO BUNCO THE PEOPLE
He Says Is the Object Of Anti
Trust Legislation.
Declares There Are No New
Features in 1t.
ClOture Rule Adopted by Strict
Party Vote.
no BUNCO THE PEOPLE

Washington. Feb. 1s.-The Elkins bill
has passed the house by a vote of PAL to
s. Those voting in the negative were
Ofessrs. Cochran and DeArmond Of Mis-
souri,; F'lass (Dem- Va.), Hooker CDem-
NIiss.), Klutz (Dem- N. c. and Neville
CDem. Neb.).
Washington. Feb. BIN the house
today Mr.. Dalzeu Pa-) from the COM
mittee on rules presented a special order.
for the consideration of the Elkins re-
bate bill
The rule provides for an hours debate
and a vote on the bill and committee
amendments at the end of that time
without intervening motion. The pre-
vous question being ordered on the
adoption of the rule of minutes debate
on each side were allowed under the
rules. Mr.. Dalzeu contented himself
with a very brief explanation. He said
the provisions of the measure were IA
miliar to all, that it was one phase OF
antitrust legislation which should re-
ceive consideration
MI. Richardson, the Democratic lead
er, protested that there was no emerg-
ency which required such q drastic
course as the special order proposed. It
permitted no opportunity to amend or
recommit the bill.
Mr.. Underwood (Ala-) said he favored
the passage of the BILL but he protested
that 1t did not go far enough.
Mr.. Hull Ga.4 said no one contended
that the bill was perfect, but it was a
step in the direction of the regulation
of trusts. Mr.. Cannon called attention
to the fact thatless than three weeks of
the session remained and to the back
ward state of appropriation bills and
+ other imperative measures. In the
/ house. he said, it was possible to put
( through legislation. In the senate bust
ness at this stage was practically by
unanimous consent Public sentiment
( demanded trust regulation. The pend
ing bill he declared. would do more to
solve some of the troubles than any
other. Tt would prevent favored rates
to favored shippers and place all on an
/ equal footing. He urged the house TO
take what it could now and try for
more later on.
Mr.. LittlefeId attempted to get in
with an inquiry but Mr. DalzeH de-
| clined to yield him time. He however,
got a minute from Mr.. Richardson. In
! that minute. he called attention to the
word 'Wilful" before failure In the pro-
vision imposing penalties for the will
! fur failure of carriers to publish and
observe rates. He said the word ought
to come out and that Senator Elkins,
the author of the bill, agreed with him.
Mr. Cannon replied that if that were
the case Senator Elkins could air his
views in the senate. He is a very con-
! siderable senator, said ne. but
never heard that he was a great law
/ yer"
Mr.. DeAr1nond t59o) denied emphati-
caIly that the country was demanding
the enactment of the Elkins bill. 1T
will do no good, said he, and the peO-
pie foremost in urging it know If. that
is the reason they urge it," Demo
cratic applause). There is nothing IN
the bill. he said, that was not on this
statute books except the clauses re-
/ pealing existing penalty provisions ot
/ law. To repeal these penalties, he said,
was the real purpose The bill, ne de-
clared, was an ATTEMPT to "bunco' tns
people and to prevent the offer1ng OF
/ amendments, the majority dare not
I vote against" It was q mere Dem
! agosic play to stif1e legislation
THE gentleman from Illinois tMr.
/ Cannon). he said, says the author Of
the bill is not d great lawyer. He may
not be- but he is great in other things
"a master in the art of this sort on
legislat ton
Mr. Overstreet Gnd.) in support of tta
rule, pointed out the three features o.
the antitrust legislation the majority
had set out to place upon the statute
books-tO expedite cases, to secure pub
licity of the corporations methods OF
doing business. and to prevent discrimi-
nations and rebates by railroads.
Propositions covering all three SUBJ
jects had passed the house and two had
I passed the senate
The rebate bill. for the consideration
Of which the rule provided. he said. was
practically identical with the bill tlla
house had passed Saturday. If that bill
could not become a law it was a part OF
practical wisdom to pass this.
Mr.. Dalzell said the reasons given on
the other side against the rule were th..
best that could be offered for its adoD-
tion. They had all said they were for
the bill, good or bad. Two-thirds of the
| antitrust legislation was now passed
With this measure the present legisla.
tive programme for the regulation OF
| trusts would be complete.
Mr.. Richardson concluded the debate
on his side and urged the house to vote
down the rule and compel the Droduc.
tion Of another that would open the bill
to amendment
j Mr.. Grosvenor concluded the debate
for the majority, deprscating the cor
stant attempt OF the othe- side to play
for party advantage in connection with
the trust question. The question, ne
said, should be above party
The roll was called and the rule was
adopted 140 to 10, d strict party vote.
/ Mr. Littlefield fReu Me did not vote