Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1908-04-08

members of the committee moved that
the bin as read be ordered favorably
reported and on that motion demanded
the previous question. The chairman
suggested that the gentlemen who are
not members of the committee had
been invited to attend the committee
meeting to discuss the provisions of
the bill and asked if it was the purpose
to report it without hearing those gen.
tlemen. The answer was that as the
committee had very short time in
which to act and as Congress was fast
approaching the close of the present
session. and as these gentlemen and
others had previously been heard on
similar bills, the motion would be in
sisted upon.
about this time the chairman en-
gagged in whispered conversation with
lhekema and Burke, the two Republi-
can members present, after which they
Immediately left the room. The Chair
then announced to the Democratic
members, all of whom were present,
That no quorum was present and that
ne would not put the motion to report
the bill One of the Democratic men,
bers asked the chairman if, upon roll
call within five minutes, a quorum had
not answered present to which he re-
| sponded Yes Then he was asked if
the two Republican members who had
| just retired from the room did not alb
sent themselves at his suggestion and
he replied to this inquiry The Chair
| does not like to have to answer that
question: s;.. ,. T..
The chairman expressed himself as
| being opposed to the Mccall bill re-
ferred to, however, and said he did not
| feel like maintaining a quorum to re-
posed. The five Democratic members
of the committee were in favor of re-
| porting the Mccall bill and it would
have been favorably reported but for
the filibustering tactics of the Repub-
licans in breaking the quorum. This
is concise statement of the proceed
ings of the committee, submitted with
out comment"
Chairman Gaines of the majority is
sued the following statement in reply:
| without criticizing the position of
any other member of the House, I
myself do not care to rush into a
| printed or other public statement OF
what occurred in any committee. The
Mccall bill, and the date Of it's intro
duction, are, however, matters Of pub
| lie record outside of the committee.
1t was introduced on the 31st day of
March. 1t will be seen therefore that
the anxiety for its passage has been
postponed, so far as all the gentlemen
who signed the statement just shown
to me are concerned, until late day
| in the session-and until the Demo-
cratic filibuster.
!. IT the proposition were new this fact
truth is that substantially the Mccall
| bill was before the committee during
the last Congress and was the subject
Of great number of hearings and of
thorough consideration. Messrs. Rucker
Hardwick and Gillespie were members
| of the committee at that time. The
defects of the present Mccall bill were
sufficient at that time to induce them to
| condemn a similar BILL
'The Mccall bill is in reality the Rcr-
| nv Belmont bill. Those persons who de-
mand that members of Congress should
support without effort to consider it's
real merits, anything which even pre-
| tends to be in the nature or reform,
may condemn the Republican majority of
the committee for being unwilling to re-
| port this bill without any attempt to
perfect it. Thoughtful persons however.
respectfully submit, who will examine
| the bill, will agree with the majority.
| This bill undertakes to compel publicity
| of campaign contributions made to a po-
| litical committee which shall in two or
| more states influence the result or at
| tempt to influence the result Of an cleo
| ton at which representatives in Congress
| are to be elected. The slightest possible
| consideration will show that the result
of this will be not to prevent and not to
make public any campaign contributions,
| but simply to divert such contributions
from national committees to smaller COM
| mittees-from those having the greatest
publicity to those having the least pub
licity. Sounding in publicity and purity.
it would, as a matter of fact, mitigate
against both objects. 1t would make pub
lie no contributions except as some rich
other for the purpose of giving himself
standing in that party.
PERSONALLY do not object to a federal
election law. Personally, also, I am will
ing to pass any federal election law I'M
less it he conceded by all the parties that
the federal government may exercise suf-
ficient authority actually to preserve the
purity of the nomination and election of
members of Congress and Presidential
| electors. That we ought to pass just
| such bill, and no other, as the Southern
Democratic members of Congress consent
| we shall pass does not now, and is not
| likely to in the future, meet with my ap-
proyal either as chairman of the commit