table not being
debatable, this enables the Senate to dispose promptly of
a good many propositions, which otherwise would consume a
good deal of time in debate. There had been such a provision
as to appropriation bills before. When I first suggested
this change, Mr. Edmunds exclaimed in a loud whisper, "we
won't do that." But I believe he approved it finally.
The other was an amendment relating to order in debate, made
necessary by a very disagreeable occurrence, which ended in
the exchange of blows in the Senate, by two Senators from
the same State. I had long in mind to propose, when the occasion
came, the last clause of this amendment. If Senators are
to be considered to any degree as ambassadors of their States,
it would seem proper that they should not be compelled to
hear any reproachful language about the State they represent.
Such attacks have given rise to a great deal of angry debate
in both Houses of Congress.
The following is the amendment:
No Senator in debate shall directly or indirectly by any
form of words impute to any Senator or to other Senators
any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.
No Senator in debate shall refer offensively to any State
of the Union.
I was also for several years a member of the Committee on
Woman Suffrage. That Committee used to hear the advocates
of Woman Suffrage who liked to have their arguments reported
and sent through the mails as public documents under the franking
privilege.
Although a very decided advocate of the extension of the
right of suffrage to women, I have not thought that it was
likely that that would be accomplished by an amendment to
the National Constitution, or indeed that it was wise to
attempt to do it in that way. The Constitution cannot be
amended without the consent of three-fourths of the States.
If a majority can be got in three-fourths of the States for
such an amendment, their people would be undoubtedly ready
to amend their State Constitutions by which, so far as each
State is concerned, the object would be accomplished. So
it seems hardly worth while to take the trouble of plying
Congress with petitions or arguments.
But my longest service upon Committees has been upon the two
great Law Committees of the Senate,--the Committee on Privileges
and Elections, and the Committee on the Judiciary.
I have been a member of the Committee on Privileges and Elections
since March 9, 1877. I was Chairman for mor
|