Arizona republican., 1905-02-14
A Day for Washing Dirty
Linen in the House
HEARST AND SULLIVAN
One Is Described by the Other as a
Degenerate and the Former Hints
That His Colleague, SalOOnKeeper,
Has Been Indicted for nansIaushter

Washington, Feb. 13-ImmediateIy
after the house convened today Mr..
Sullivan of Massachusetts, in pursu-
ance of notice given by him last Friday
addressed the house in reply to certain
statements regarding himself alleged to
have been printed in the New York
American. Mr.. Sullivan's remarks
were the outcome o. last weeks debate
on the railroad rates question, in the
course of which he inquired of Mr. La
mar of Florida why Mr. w. r. Hearst
of New York, was not present to ex-
plain his own bill
Mr.. Sullivan at the outset stated that
he had given his notice early in order
that Mr.. Hearst might be present to-
day. He had interrupted Mr.. Lamar,
he said because he thought Mr.. Lamar
was criticising too harshly his demo-
cratic colleagues for their failure to
support the so called Hearst bill, and
he felt that Mr.. Hearst himself might
produce the desired effect. Ordinarily
he said, public men expect fair criti-
cism of their official acts, but where
the proprietor of a paper is a member
of congress he owes a double duty to
his colleagues to be fair and impartial
in his criticism OF them. He read an
article in the New York American of
Feb. 9. in criticism OF himself which
he said had been called forth by u
criticism of Mr.. Hearst and he
thereby had been consigned to
political assassination by Mr..
Hearsts paper. Thi; article in ques-
tion Mr.. Sullivan said. touched his rep
resentative capacity, land is a deliber-
ate insult to one member by another"
He was interrupted by Mr.. Robinson
of Indiana who raised the point that
Mr.. Sullivan was not in order. I'm
Iaediately there went up a howl OF
'no. no, no." The speaker ruled that
AIr. Sullivan was proceeding by uu-
animous consent.
Continuing Mr.. Sullivan said: "The
writer raises q query whether my
ignorance OF the pending measures was
due to congenital incapacity to under
stand the peoples rights. Congenital
incapacity is a serious charge, yet ob-
viously one which the person accused
would not care to discuss. If the
charge is true, he is not guilty, but un-
fortunate and it is surely a grievous
misfortune not to be able to sppreci-
ate the value of the legislative ser
vices of the gentleman from New York.
But conSenitaI incapability to under
stand is a term that covers a wide
range of mental and moral deficiency.
1t covers the case of a moral degener-
ate. an unclean, an unproductive, and
shiftless member of society, and it in
cludes the man who is totally bereft Of
the sense of proportion. raises his pro-
flaming eyes toward the splendid tenn
pie of the peoples highest gift, the
presidency of the United States, bliss
fully unconscious of the woeful con-
trast between the qualifications re-
quisite for that high office and his own
contemplate and moral equipment"
Mr.. Sullivan again was interrupted
by Mr.. Sullivan but the speaker ruled
that Mr.. Sullivan was in order. Mr..
Sullivan was then permitted to pro-
ceed, commenting on the non attend
ance and lack of record on the roll call
exhibited by some members
Mr.. Sullivan referred to Mr.. Hearst
as the unknown man or political no
vice whose only recommendation is his
inherited wealth"
A scheme of political assassination,
he said, had been mapped out evident
ly with the idea of destroying the re-
spectacle elements OF the democratic