The President: The question before the house is on the amendment of the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Morris) to the original resolution offered by the gentleman from New York. The resolution was read again by the Secretary. Fabius H. Busbee, of North Carolina : The effect of the adoption of that will be to substitute the second resolution for the first, and then the entire subject will be opened up for discussion. George Whitelock, of Maryland: Oh, no, not at all. The effect of adopting this resolution will be to approve the minority report. Fabius H. Busbee: The first motion, as I understand it, was in the nature of a motion to refer by the gentleman from New York. Then a motion was made to adopt a substitute, which is an amendment, and if that amendment is adopted, the question will then be upon the original motion as amended. That is the usual parliamentary procedure. That will throw the question open for discussion. The President: Does not that depend upon the character of the motion made by the gentleman from Indiana? Fabius H. Busbee: His resolution is really in the nature of a substitute for the motion made by the gentleman from New York, and I would ask the Chair whether, under that resolution, if it passes, the entire subject is not opened up for debate. Moorfield Storey, of Massachusetts: A motion has been made to substitute one motion for another, as I understand it, Mr. President. Therefore, the first question will be, Shall it be substituted? If that motion prevails, then the question will arise as to whether or not the substituted motion shall pass. George E. Price, of West Virginia: I think if the Secretary reads that resolution again, and we listen to its language carefully, it will be perceived that if it shall be adopted it will approve of the minority report so far as it relates to the amendment of the Act of Congress. Fabius H. Busbee: That could not be so, because it is an amendment to the pending motion; otherwise it would not be in order. George E. Price: The gentleman from North Carolina is in error in assuming that a substitute is a simple amendment. It is not. When a proposition is adopted as a substitute for another proposition, the substitute so adopted becomes the action of the body. Therefore, if we adopt this resolution offered by the gentleman from Indiana, we approve of the amendment of section 7 of the Sherman Act. The resolution was read again by the Secretary. Moorfield Storey : That is not a resolution that comes before the house for the first time. The motion is that that resolution, which has just been read by the Secretary, shall be substituted for another resolution that is before the house. If there is now a pending resolution, there is no way of bringing it before the house except by amendment or substitution; and the question is, first, whether the house will allow the pending motion that has been received to be replaced by this other one; then, if that motion prevails, the question will be as to whether the substituted motion shall pass. George E. Price: Suppose it is moved as amendment? Moorfield Storey: The same thing would be true then. The question is first, Shall the amendment be substituted? James D. Andrews, of New York: I ask for the reading of the resolution again in order that we may get the language of it correctly and consider the action which it will be necessary to take upon it. The President: The gentleman from New York asks that the original resolution and the amendment, or the substitute therefor, as the case may be, shall be read. The Chair asks that the house attend to the reading of these resolutions. The Secretary: (Reading.) Resolved, That the recommendations of the minority report of the Committee on Commercial Law for 1904, together with the recommendations of the supplement thereto for this year, be referred to the Committee on Commercial Law with instructions to report thereon at the next meeting of the Association. That is the resolution offered by Mr. Logan. Then Mr. Morris, of Indiana, offered the following: Resolved, That the recommendation of the minority report of the Committee on Commercial Law, with reference to the amendment of the Act of Congress entitled "An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies," passed July 2, 1890, be approved. James D. Andrews: The only significance of the little deliberation which we are now having is that we shall not vote mistakenly, but may vote understandingly. I think the explanation offered by Mr. Storey is obviously the true one. If it is not, we ought to agree that our vote shall not be considered as an approval of the minority report when we understand that we are simply voting merely upon the question of substituting one resolution for another. Lynde Harrison, of Connecticut: It seems to me that we can settle very easily the discussion as to whether this is an amendment or a substitute. What is called a substitute is equivalent, in any deliberative mind, to amending by striking out all after the word "resolved" in the resolution offered by the gentleman from New York and substituting the wording of the other resolution. Now all the members of the Association, it seems to me, who believe that in addition to the language in section 7 of the act, which confers upon Congress the power to give judgments at law under such circumstances, authority shall also be given to any person to bring a suit in equity for an injunction to restrain any corporation or person from doing anything that is declared to be unlawful, and are in favor of having the so-called Sherman Act of 1890 amended by adding those words can vote "yes" upon this substitute or amendment, whichever you choose to call it, and if the majority vote yes, then they will immediately vote yes to pass the resolution as amended. That is all there is to it. Robert S. Taylor, of Indiana: It seems to me that some confusion has arisen from the fact that the gentleman from Indiana did not put his whole motion. in writing. We have had it read repeatedly, but not yet has there been read his real motion, as I apprehend, which is that the pending resolution be amended by a substitute. George E. Price: That is it precisely. The carrying of that motion simply puts one resolution in place of the other. Then the amended resolution will be up for the consideration of the house. George Whitelock, of Maryland: If the Chair will so rule, that will settle it. Then we will know where we stand on the discussion of the merits of the question. The President: The Chair is ready to rule on the question. As the Chair understands it, the motion of the gentleman from Indiana was a motion to substitute the resolution which he offered for the pending resolution offered by the gentleman from New York. In the opinion of the Chair, if that motion prevails, it will result simply in having the resolution of the gentleman from Indiana before the house instead of the resolution of the gentleman from New York. The question is upon the substitution of the resolution offered by the gentleman from Indiana in place of the resolution offered by the gentleman from New York. Lucien H. Alexander, of Pennsylvania: If the gentleman from Indiana will temporarily withdraw his substitute, I will move to lay on the table the so-called protocol. Ernest T. Florance, of Louisiana: I do not think the members here desire to go through the idle form of adopting a substitute and then immediately revoking the substance of that substitute, as suggested by the gentleman from Indiana. The whole matter can be easily solved by striking out of the original resolution everything after the word "resolved," and adopting the wording of the substitute. The President: The Chair will put the question. The question was put, and was determined in the affirmative. The President: The substitute of the gentleman from Indiana is now before the house. Walter S. Logan, of New York: Mr. President William A. Ketcham, of Indiana: I would rather talk myself on this question than listen to a man who has run away from the question. Walter S. Logan : I yield the floor to the gentleman from Indiana. William A. Ketcham : We heard this morning, as we hear every time when a lot of lawyers come together, what a magnificent lot of men we |