Rensselaer Republican, Volume 26, Number 48, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 26 July 1894 — FIFTY-THIRD CONGRESS. [ARTICLE]

FIFTY-THIRD CONGRESS.

In the House, Thursday, after the read: fig of th_e journal, Mr. -Oathwaite offered .he following resolution: Resolved, That after the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order when the House conferees on 11. R. 4864 (the tSri ff Pill) make a report of disagreement to move that the House insist upon its disagreement to the Senate amendments to said bill in gross, and ask a further conference with tho Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two houses thereon; that two noun, of debate shall be allowed upon said notion, and then without other motton the vote shall be taken thereon. Should such motion prevail the Speaker shall ( at >nce appoint the House conferees, and the natter shall then, for the time beiug, pass ’rom the consideration of the House. An extended debate ensued, the principal speakers being Chairman Wilson and ix-Speakerßeed, after which tho resolu;ion was adopted by a party vote. The Speakerthen reappointed the former conferees on the part of the House and the •egular order was taken up. The excitenent in the House quickly subsided and ;he routine business was proceeded with. The conference report on the naval appropriation bill was agreed to—lso to 47. The conference report on the military appropriation bill was also agreed to—lsß to 18. The conference report on the diplomatic vnd consular appropriation bill was agreed ;o without division. A special order was ;hen adopted setting aside the remainder )f the day and Friday for the consideration of the joint resolution for the election jf Senators by the people, and Saturday for consideration of a bill for the reinstatement of clerks dismissed from the railway mail service between March 15 ind May 1, 1389. Mr. Dearmond opened vhe debate in favor of the resolution. At i o’clock the House adjourned. In the Senate, Thursday, Mr, Voorhees, •ising to a privileged question, asked that she House bill message en the tariff bill do laid before the Senate. Mr. Voorhees stated that he was commissioned to say shat the bill had been under full and free Conference and the conferees had not agreed to the amendments adopted in the senate and that the Senate conferees insisted on their amendments. “Having consulted with gentlemen on both sides, he said he would ask to have the bill to lay >ll tho table, Friday, to be taken up for reconsideration immediately after the reading of the journal. Mr. Hill thereupon gave notice that at that time he should move to instruct the conferees to put coal and iron on the free list and that he would at the same time submit some remarks on the question. The Indian appropriations bill was further considered until 5:45 p. in., when the Senate went into executive session and shortly after adjourned. In the Senate. Friday, the galleries were packed. Senator Voorhees called up the conference report on the tariff bill and yielded the floor to Senator Smith who iriticised the President for his interference and prophecied failure of all tariff legislation, and stated that tho Houso need not expect any further concessions from the Senate. The Senate bill,, he said, was not perfoct, but it was as perfect as it could be made at this session. At the conclusion of Mr. Smith’s speech Senator Ilill was recognized and spoke as -follows: - j ■■■:-

A theory as well as a condition now confronts us. The theory of the Democratic party is that in the enactment of tariff legislation free raw materials should always be an esspjptial and conspicuous element. It is our creed that the materials which enter into our manufactures should be freed from tho burden of taxation". The best interests of the manufacturers, as well as the consumers, of the land demand the recognition of this wise discrimination. We are committed to this side of the question; we can not retreat, and we can not retract. Let rne read from that remarkable letter of the President’s which was yesterday submitted to the House of Representatives. It expresses better than I can hope to do the true, sound and logical position of the Democratic party upon this questionAfter reading extracts from the letter Mr. Hill went on as follows: “Mr. President, I approve every word of that I have quoted. It is an honest and manly statement of the true attitude which the party should assume in this crisis. lam not required to defend the propriety or wisdom of the promulgation of this letter at this particular time. It may have been indiscreet, it may operate as a firebrand to spread the names of discord already kindled among party friends, honestly differing. as I am disposed to concede, upon jpuestions-of public and party policy. It may widen the breach already existing in the Senate, and in that view it may be regarded as unfortunate, and ill-advised. It was a time for diplomacy and statesmanship and conciliation rather than recrimination, denunciation and arraignment. But, aside from the question of its mere expediency, I am here to defend the President’s letter in so far as it demands that the party shall net bo led astray in the violation of Democratic pledges and principles. Upon the question of free raw materials the President is right and you know it. You can not answer his arguments. You cannot successfully dispute his proposition's. You can not doubt his sincerity or patriotism. You must yield in thnend to his views. You can not stand up against tho sentiment of the great Democratic masses of the country which will rally around the President in his contest with you upon this particular branch of the subject. The time to yield is now, before there is further humiliation. embarrassment and discord. Shall we retreat or advance? Shall we surrender to the House while we cau do so honorably, or shall we wait until we are driven to it? In the light of the letter of the President the House cannot honorably retreat. It has no pther alternative, except to insist upon its bill, wherein it provides for free raw materials. The President cannot approve the Senate bill after what he has said in this remarkabip letter. He arraigns the Senate and intimates that the enactment of the Senate bill means ‘party perfidy and party dishonor.’ These are strong words which the President of the United States would not use ton i rds a measure which lie ever expected afterwards to approve. This letter, unusual and unprecedented in its character and method of promulgation thoueh it may be. nevertheless clearly foreshadow? a veto of the Senate bill even if the House should finally concur in our amendments.

Mr. Hill called attention to the fact ffiat the President opuosed the inconu tax and hoped it would be eliminated so that he could vote for the bill which he could linger do while that clause remained. Senator Vest followed Mr. Hill in a bitter speech in which he said: The defense which the Senator from New York has made of the President, reminds me of a desperate murder case Which I tried once. The only defense I was able to make was that the accused was suffering from such utter moral depravity tliat lie was absolutely incapable of crimp- He was acquitted. Afterward lie came to me to thank rac f6r the verdict. In doing so he said, -however, that lie would rather go to the penitentiary for life than again listen to the defense J made for him. (Laughter.) The debate became general and very animated until 5:30 when the Senate kljourncJ imtii Monday.