The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-04-08

, sent themselves at his suggestion and he replied to this query: The chair does not like to have to answer that question: The chairman expressed himself as being opposed to the Mccall bill referred to. however. and said he did not feel like maintaining a desire to report a bill to which he was opposed. The five demo- cratic members of the committee were in favor of reporting the Mccall bill and it would have been favorably reported, but for the ilibustering tactics of the republicans in breaking the quorum. This is a concise statement of the proceedings of the committee, submitted without conn., ment."
 Statement By Gaines.
 Chairman Gaines of the majority is- sued the following statement in reply:
 Without criticising the position of any other member of the House, I, myself, do not care to rush into any print or other public statement of what occurred in any committee. The Mccall bill and the date of it's introduction are, however. matters of public record outside of the committee It was introduced on the thirty-flrst day of March. It will be seen, therefore, that the anxiety for it's pas sage has been postponed, so far as all the gentlemen who signed the statement just shown to me are concerned, until a later day in the session and until after the democratic flibuster.
 "The truth is that substantially the Mccall bill was before the committee during the last Congress and was the subject of a great number of hearings and of thorough consideration. Messrs. Fucker, Hardwick and Gillespie were members of the committee at that time. The defects of the present Mccall bil. were sufficient at that time to induce them to condemn similar bill.
 Objections To Bill.
 "The Mccall bill is in reality the Perry Belmont bill. Those persons who demand that members of Congress should support, without effort to con sider it's real merits, anything whicn even pretends to be in the nature of reform, may condemn the republican majority of the committee for being unwilling to report the bill with out any attempt to perfect it. Thoughtful per sons, however, I respectfully submit who will examine the bill, will agree with the majority. This bill under takes to compel publicity of campaign contributions made to a political con- mittee which shall in two or moro states influence the result or attempt to influence the result of an election al which representatives in Congress are to be elected The slightest possI- b'e consideration will show that the re- suit of this will be not to prevent and not to make public any campaign cor tributions but simply to divert su.h contrfbutions from national committees ro smaller committees-from those hay. ing the greatest publicity to those hay ing the least publicity. Sounding the cry of publicity and purity, It would as a matter of fact initiate against both objects. It would make public no con- tributions except some rich man might contribute to one party or the other for the purpose of giving hims seie standing in that party.
 Hearing To Be Given.
 There are several members of Con- gress who wish to be heard on the subject of publicity in election ex- penses, among them MT. Bourke Cock ran of New York, who have bills pend- ing before Congress. and I have en- deavored to secure for them that cour- oesy. There is to be a meeting of and a hearing before the committee the day after tomorrow.
 Personally, do not object to fed oral election law. Personally also, I am unwilling to pass any federal election law unless it be conceded by all the parties that the federal gov srnment may exercise sufficient au- thority actually to preserve the purity of the nomination and election of mem- oers of Congress and presidential elec- tors.
 That we ought to pass just such bill. and no other as the southern democratic members of Congress con- sent we shall pass, does not now and is not likely to in the future meet with my approval, either as chairman of the committee or as member of the House."