The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-03-04

MUST REPORT SOON.
Committee Is Given 36 Hours to
Fix 1t.
Hot Words Pass in Discussing
the Measure.

The house reversed itself on the Hale
congressional apportonment bill this
morning. Tuesday by a vote of 80 to Il
it voted to adopt the minority report of
the congressional apportionnaent bill in
favor of the Hale bill. Today by a vote
of 43 to 70 it sent the bill back to the
congressional apportionment committee
It afterwards instructed the committee
to bring in a report within &c hours.
The supposition that the house ran
away with Cyrus Leland Tuesday seems
to have been mistake. Mr.. Leland was
just giving the house little liberty to
enjoy itself. When the proper time came
he called it to time and it obeyed his
wishes.
AS a matter of fact, all Tuesday after
noon, last night and this morning, the
opponents of the Hale bill were lining
up members against it and when the
house met they knew they had a clear
majority against it.
The bill appeared on today's calendar
as a saeciaI order. The plan of its OPP
ponents was to send it back to the APP
portionment committee, and Hayden OF
Nemaha was chosen to open the fight.
He did it as soon as the preliminary
business of the house had been dispos-
ed of by making the motion TO re-refer
1t is useless at this late hour to try
to force this bill through he said. The
counties which are put into this new
district are all opposed to it
Representative Barnd moved as a sub.
stitute that the bill be placed on final
passage Immediately, and he made
lard fight for his motion. He said:
Yesterday this house voted to report
favOrably on this bill Since that time
medicine has been made-not by n1en-
bers OF this body, but by persons who
have no voice on the floor of this house.
The only purpose of the motion OF the
gentleman from Nemaha is to smother
this bill It Is cowardly. If you want
to kill it, do it openly on a roll call and
everything Of importance that has come
up in this house. The legislature two
years ago appointed a commission to
prepare a tax bill. a the belfast o.
the managers OF the campaign no one
dared to defend that bill on the stump
except on his Individual responsibility.
We now owe it to the people of this
state to try to do something on some
of the questions We have been sent here
10 pass on
Brandon seconded Barnd's motion and
then the debate opened in earnest.
Nation Of Neosho said: II voted yes
terday to consider this bill, hoping It
would be satisfactory. [ have since dis
covered that it is opposed by every
county in the proposed new district and
therefore am against this bill 1t IS
1fII0aIeI4ai TO me now IL AS Killed. JUST
so it is killed"
Robbins of Hamilton: "It is material
to me how this bill is killed. If it IS to
be killed ] want it done in an honorable
way. My county wants this bill The
west wants it. It is claimed that q
drouth might depopulate the western
part of the state and SO reduce the pop
ulation, but no such thing will hap
pen"
from Nemaha IS simply trying to side
track this bill. Yesterday II members
voted to consider it to 81 against. The
gentleman from Ness says somebody has
been making medicine around here. If
the vote today shows any material
change it viii be evidence that some
body has been taking some doses Of
medicine I want it understood that
no politician is responsible to the people
of my county for my vote. [ am not
particularly anxious for this bill. but l
want to go on record as trying to dc
+ something that the people sent us here
to accomplish. Michael Angelo never
used to criticise a picture. Instead ne
would simply hang up beside it another
picture far superior. This congressional
/ apportionment committee instead CT
criticising a bill ought to hang up an
other superior to it. Instead Of that il
has not reported a single bill for US
to act on.
who voted for the considera ton of this
bill yesterday, but I viii not vote for it
today I am in favor OF ao9ortiOning
the state of Kansas. but this bill only
apportions the Seventh district. There
fore I am against this particular bill
and am in favor of sending it back to
the committee.
Chairman Jenks Of the apDortionmenr
committed: y do not wish to say any
thing either for or against this bill, but
I wish to reply to the intimation Of the
gentleman from Mitchell that the con-
gressionaI apportionment committee has
M hpa47 doing 2nNf1jnp The commit
tee has always tried to be fair Some
/ time ago a bill came to the committee
which seemed to be hostile to Charles
/ Curtis, and the committee turned 1t
down Next came a bill which was
direct slap at the governor of this state
and that was turned down Next this
bill came from Democratic member
of the house. perhaps in behalf of DEM
ocratic interests. It was opposed by
every member from the Third congress
siOnal district. which was affected DS
this bill / do not feel justified in open
ing old sores by introducing bill here
in the interest of any particular fac
ton
Dunn of Pottawatornie announced that
he was one of the Il yesterday, but had
/ changed since then.
Hutcheson of Pratt: My county is in
f the Seventh district and is affected by
/ this proposed bill. I am for u reappor-
+ tionment but not along this line. It
/ takes away Harper and klngnan eOun-
/ ties. thereby dividing our judicial and
4 senatorial districts, to which we are OPP
posed. The state at large is not inter-
/ ested in this bill but we who are af-
fected by it are vitality interested in it,
O'Donnen Of Ellsworth: Il am against
4 this bill and I want to go on record
4 against it. I resent the inputation that
/ this bill is TO be killed simply becaus
there are those with a pull who are op-
! posed TO it. There is a far deeper po-
litical plot behind those who are for this
bill than there IS on the other side
Bevington of Jewell: TT occurs to me