242 



CONGRESS. (SPECIAL SESSION THE SHERMAN ACT.) 



home in Terre Haute forever than to yield the 

 principle that th majority has the right to gov- 

 ern. I stand here for the highest principle of 

 free government known to men or known to his- 

 tory. We started in here some weeks ago to dis- 

 cuss the repeal of a bad measure of financial 

 legislation. I have nothing to say on that ques- 

 tion now, but we have reached a higher question 

 than that. We have reached the principal ques- 

 tion of free government. We have reached the 

 greatest problem of free constitutional govern- 

 ment. We have reached the question whether 

 we have a Government that can administer itself 

 by a lawful majority. 



" Idle, vapid talk has taken place in the papers 

 in regard to abolishing the Senate of the United 

 States. The Senate of the United States can no 

 more be abolished than the Constitution, for it 

 is a 'great part thereof ; but it can be governed 

 by rules of its own making so as to make it a 

 self-acting, a proper and a reasonable body of 

 deliberation and legislation. 



" I confess, sir, that when I confronted this 

 question, when it fell to my fortune to manage 

 tlie pending bill and I found how powerless I 

 was, it almost paralyzed my energies of action. 

 I found myself clothed with a mighty responsi- 

 bility, a keen, eager, hungry expectation on the 

 part of the public for speedy action, without 

 any power at all to respond to it. Never, sir, do 

 I desire to be placed in such an attitude again. 

 Never do I desire any other man to be so placed, 

 and he never shall be if by my agency a reform 

 can take place in the rules of this body whereby 

 a gentleman standing in the attitude I am here 

 to-night shall be clothed with power, power un- 

 der the rules, power under the Constitution, 

 power under the laws, not lawless power but 

 power regulated by law, to bring about a vote. 



" Mr. President, I am tender of minorities ; I 

 would not injure the minority here, but shall 

 the minority govern ? Answer me, Shall the 

 minority govern f Somebody has to rule. Some- 

 body has to control this body. Shall it be the 

 minority, or the majority ? 



" The Senator from Idaho signified that possi- 

 bly they had a majority, and then I said, Let us 

 ascertain that by a vote and we will submit to 

 it gladly, willingly, if we are the minority ; will 

 you? No. Then the question comes whether 

 or not we have a government at all. The ques- 

 tion comes whether the Senate can be governed 

 by a majority, or whether that vicious principle 

 in government, the most vicious known in hu- 

 man history, that the few shall govern the many, 

 shall obtain. Throughout my life, which in 

 some of its parts has been a stormy one and is 

 not now short, I have stood for the rule of the 

 majority, and whatever the majority pronounces 

 under the forms of law ought to be gracefully 

 submitted to. I stand for that simply to-night. 



" I stand here not talking of compromise, 

 either. A great deal has been talked of com- 

 promise in the last week. I have not shared in 

 it. There is a mighty principle involved in this 

 question, and I am going to the end with it, so 

 far as I am concerned. If I go down I will go 

 down with my flag nailed to the masthead. If 

 compromise is to take place, compromising on 

 the principle that the minority has the right to 

 dictate, it will be done by others, and not by me. 



" Mr. President, one or two other things 1 

 might say ; in fact, I will. I see myself criticised 

 every day for the failure of the passage of the 

 pending bill at an earlier period. If there is a 

 Senator on either side of the Chamber, friend or 

 foe of the measure, who knows how that could 

 have been done, and he will arise and convince 

 me of that, I will remain silent forever hereafter. 



" I have been criticised for my bearing toward 

 the opponents of the bill. I saw in one paper 

 from Boston, I think that I should have de- 

 nounced the Senators opposed to repeal as ferce 

 naiurm, wild animals. Sir, I am proud of the 

 fact that I have treated each representative of 

 an American State as a Senator should be treated, 

 so that when it is all over it will not be said that 

 I have narrowed my mind by any unworthy pas- 

 sions, that I have not belittled the place I hold 

 here by casting aspersions upon Senators who 

 are sent here by States and are necessarily the 

 peers of every other Senator. So far as I am 

 concerned in this discussion and the struggle on 

 which we now are entering, proceeding into the 

 night, and to-morrow and to-morrow night, it 

 will be conducted to the end upon the same 

 principles of decorum, dignity, honor, and fair- 

 ness which have thus far characterized it. 



' I have no criticism to make of the bearing of 

 Senators in opposition to the bill. The Senator 

 from Idaho, in his well-turned sentences, said 

 a while ago that when the roll was called at times 

 here during the last two weeks there were more 

 of them in attendance than on our side. That is 

 true ; but the reason why there was not more 

 vigilance on this side was my knowledge of the 

 fact that an agreement entered into with the 

 Senator from Colorado, who sits here near me, 

 was as binding as the laws of the Medes and 

 Persians, and would not be broken. I knew that 

 perfectly well. 



" Now, a word in regard to criticism upon 

 what is styled leadership. Sir, I assume no 

 leadership. Providence and the kindness of my 

 people at home have placed me where I am. and 

 I have to do my duty ; but in doing so, and in 

 assuming the management of the bill, how is it 

 to be done except under the rules of the Senate ? 

 The rules of the Senate are the emanations of 

 the Constitution of the United States ; they are 

 provided for in the Constitution ; and when each 

 Senator takes an oath upon his admission here, 

 he swears to support the Constitution, and con- 

 sequently the rules and laws which govern this 

 body. I have had it suggested to me frequently 

 by letter and in the press to go outside of the 

 rules, to appeal to the presiding officer of this 

 body to sustain me in a motion not provided for 

 in the list of motions, not provided for in the 

 rules, to proceed to a vote. I would as soon 

 think of committing open high treason, or pri- 

 vate murder, as to commit such a crime. Per- 

 jury is an ugly thing to rest upon the human 

 soul. 



" And now, while on this point, allow me to 

 say another thing. This debate seems very long 

 to a certain class of people. It, indeed, seems 

 long to us here because we have all been in it, 

 and are tired. But you and I are aware, Mr. 

 President, that there are instances in American 

 history where debates have taken place in this 

 body four times as long as this. When I am 



