Democratic Sentinel, Volume 22, Number 5, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 February 1898 — KILLED IN THE HOUSE [ARTICLE]

KILLED IN THE HOUSE

TELLER RESOLUTION MEETS WITH DEFEAT. After a Lively Debate, Every Republican, with One Exception, Votes Against Measure-Result is 192 to 132. Vote Avatnst Sliver. The National House of Representatives Monday buried the Teller resolution, declaring the bonds of the United States payable in silver, under an adverse majority of fifty votes. The Republicans were solidly arrayed in opposition, with two exceptions, Mr. Liuney (N. C.), who voted with the Democrats and Populists, and Mr. White (N. C.), the only colored member of the House, who answered “present” when his name was called. The desertions from the 1 iemoerntie side were Mr. McAleer (Pn.) and Mr. Elliott (S. C.). Both voted with the Republicans against the proposition. Speaker Reed, although it is not customary for him to vote, had his name called, and went ou record in opposition to the resolution. The vote was reached after five hours of debnte, under a special order adopted at the opening of the session. The limited time allowed for debate and the pressure of memlters for an opportunity to be heard was so great that the leaders on both sides were compelled to fnrin out the time by minutes. This detracted much from the continuity of the discussion, but it also in a measure intensified the interest in the galleries, which were crowded all day, and the combatants on the floor were cheered by their respective sympathizers. Many of the Senators from the other end of the capitol were also present to listen to the arguments. The majority, under the leadership of Mr. Dingley, who made a carefully prepared speech sounding the keynote of the opposition, assumed the position that the last clause of the resolution was in reality a disguised declaration for the free coinage of silver, while the assaulting Democrats, under the direction of Mr. Bailey, maintained tlint the defeat of the resolution was another step in the direction of the estnblishmeut of the gold standard, to which they allege both the President and Secretary Gage had irrevocably committed the Republican party. The debate was nt times fast and heated. After the close of Mr. Dingley's speech Mr. Bailey was recognized for an hour. He first yielded twenty minutes to Mr. Wheeler (Dem„ Ala.), a member of the Ways and Means Committee, who submitted an argument in support of the resolution. Before dosing Mr. Wheeler yielded a minute each to half a dozen members on the Democratic side. Mr. Bland, to whom Mr. Bailey yielded ten minutes, said the course of the President and Secretary Gage in pressing the gold standard upon the country had driven the bimetallists to Congress to introduce and insist upon the passage of this resolution. Yet, said he, Mr. Dingley charged the minority with playing polities. Every Republican who voted against the resolution violated the St. Louis pintform and voted against the coinnge of silver in any form, free or unlimited. No one disputed the law, he Raid. No one denied it. Silver was a full legal tender. But every Republican vote against the resolution would declare that silver wus not fit to pay the public debt with. Mr. Hopkins (Rep., Ill.) said this resolution had clearly shown that the Senate was not a Republican body, but wna controlled by the free silver element. Mr. Clayton (Dem., Ala.) asserted that the defeat of this resolution was dictated by the masters of the Republican party, who gathered at a New York banquet tnble the other night at SIOO a plate, which meant, at Alahuma standards, that every man ate a bale of cotton and a couple of mules. From Different l’oints of View. Mr. Grosvenor (Rep., O.), in opposition to the resolution, said that throughout all the changes and mutations of the money question in this country the Republican party had maintained its unvarying devotion to what was denominated “honest money.” Mr. Dolliver (Itep., Iowa) made a tenminute speech. Mr. Maguire (Dem., Cal.) said he agreed with Mr. Dingley. Mr. Cannon (Rep., Ill.), whose record had been attacked during the debate, said, in speaking of his former votes for free coinage and for the Matthews resolution, that the difference between silver and gold then was but a few cents; it was now 50 cents. Mr. Hepburn (Rep., Iowa) in opposing the resolution, which he said was equivalent to a free coinage declaration, referred to ex-Gov. Boies’ refusal to longer follow the standard of free silver. Mr. Bailey closed for the Democrats in .a, speech which stirred his followers to a high pitch of enthusiasm. Mr. Bailey, owing to the great pressure for time, had only four minutes in which to close the debate for his side. The resolution under consideration, he said, contained two propositions, one moral and the other legal. One asserts as a matter of law that the bonds of the United States are redeemable at the option of the Government In silver, and the other us a matter of morals that to restore to its coinage sucL silver coins as a legal tender in payment of the bonds, principal and interest, is not in violation of the public faith nor in derogation of the rights of the public creditors. He would not dwell, he said, on the legal aspect of the question. There was not a lawyer in the United States, nor in any other country, who would venture on his professional reputation to dbny that the bonds could be paid in silver. That went without saying. The Republicans in this mntter must justify themselves, if at ail. upon the proposition that in their consciences they believed that gold was the money of the contracts. Mr. Henderson (Rep., Iowa), the onelegged veteran, and Mr. Dalzell (Rep., Pa.) closed the debate with five-minute speeches in opposition to the resolution. Mr. Henderson recalled the President’s declaration in his New York speech. “His declaration,” said Henderson, “means that the best money in the world shall be paid to the bondholder, the piowholder, the hodholder, the penholder, the pensionholder and all who toil and all who sweat.”

Result of the Vote.

At 5 o’clock came the vote, which was followed with great interest, notwithstanding the defeat of the resolution was a foregone conclusion. The Speaker announced that the vote would be directly on the resolution, not on the adverse report. It was soon evident that party ranks were being held intact. After the roll call was completed the Speaker asked that his name be called, and on the call responded with a vigorous’ “No.” He then announced the result—yeas, 132; nays, 182.

The prospective president of Brazil will visit the United States some time between March 1 and November next. The election occurs in March, and the prevailing impression is that Seuor Campos Salles, the candidate of the Republican party, and an eminent member of that element, will be elected. He has signified the purpose in ease of his election of visiting Argentina and other southern republics, and of then coming to the United States for an extended trip. He has traveled widely in Europe and this will be his first visit to the United States.