Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1913-07-10
DRY LEADER HAS
REPLY TOATTACK

Chicago, July 10.-Former Speaker
William Mckinley was charged with
lodging the real issue in the defeat of
the residence district bill in state
ments made public last night by Rep
resenta- i've George \. Wilson and F.
Scott Mcbride, dry" leaders.
Mr. Mcbride denied that the pledge
which the former speaker signed was
altered afterward so as to include in
it the residence district bill. Repre-
sentative Wilson charged that McKin-
ley failed TO afford him the recogni-
ton which he claims was due him as
chairman of the temperance commit
tee.
"Of his failure in this regard" said
Representative Wilson, "he stands
convicted on his own admissions. Here
lies his greatest perfdy. 1t was vital
! for the life of the residence district
bill that | gain recognition in order
that the senate amendment might be
concurred in by the house. But the
| speaker and his substitute, McLaugh-
! lin, for whom he abdicated steadily
refused to recognize me. As to my
attitude on the public utilities bill,
was not Influenced in the slightest by
| local option Legislation.
ut is evident from McKinley's en-
! tire statement that / was doing every
( thing in my power to have the senate
amendment to the bill concurred in
He admits that Mr.. Mcbride and
went to see him early Friday morning,
/ the last day of the session, and urged
/ an early roll call on the senate amend
ment, although he falsely says that
/ told him that unless | had a roll call
on this bill before 1870 a. m. | did
not want it at all, because some of
my men were going home. 1t is true
that ] did want an early roll call on
/ Friday because Representative Jayne
of Warren county had to leave on the
noon train in order to meet an i'm
portant business engagement at Mon
mouth. He had remained over anoth-
er day at my urgent request, but said
that he could not remain longer than
noon of Friday, the last day of the
/ session
In view of McKinley's subsequent
action | thought afterward that per-
haps | was unwise in letting him know
that We were in danger of losing this
vote through the absence of Mr. Jayne,
but at the time told him | still hoped
that he would treat us squarely in re-
gard to the matter. In this connec-
tion should perhaps be mentioned an
other absurd and false statement of
Mckinley that / wanted him to help
me sneak the amendment through
when no vets were there. Anyone
who is at all familiar with parlia-
mentary procedure under the Hin 0is
constitution knows that it is utterly
impossible for either house TO pass a
bill of concur in an amendment to a
bill adopted by the other house with
out the affirmative vote of a consti.
tutional majority of ali the members
elected to such house. There are 153
members of the house of representa-.
rfves, of which u form a constitutional
majority. It is necessary to get in
the house of representatives II votes
TO pass a bill or concur in a senate
amendment TO a bill such as the
amendment to the residence district
bill in question. If the senate amend
ment to the residence district bill had
gotten 10 affirmative votes and there
had not been a vote against it, still
it would have failed"