Mr. HOWE. The Senator will allow me to say thatI did not at any such question.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I understood you to refer to juries.
Mr. HOWE. I referred to juries, and I referred to them only in this light: the law set thng that the verdict ofajury must receive the unanimous assent of ever member of the jury, I asked the question, if the whole jury should agree to adopt the verdict of a majority, would that make it the verdict of the whole jury?
Mr. TRUMBULL. Now, I will read from. Cushing on parliamentary law, what the law in England was. I suppose that our form of Government was in some measure derived from the British form of government, and that the rules adopted in reference to the election of members to Parliament should have more force than other rules to be borrowed from the common law in reference to the election of members of this body. Now, what is the rule of the common law of England, adopted in this country by the decisions of our courts? I read from Cashing: “At the time of the 1st settlement and colonization of the U.S. the electionof membersof Parliament in England”
Mr. SUMNER. I say members of Parliament.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Cannot the gentleman restrain himself?. “were conducted upon the principle of plurality, which also prevailed in other elections." I will read it now in connection, and perhaps the Senfrom Massachusetts can old his breath until I read the whole sentence: “At the time of the 1st settlement and colonization of the U.S. the elections of members of Parliament in England were conductedu on the principle of pluralit: which also prevaile in all other elections, in which the electors were at liberty to selecttheir candidatesfrom an indefinite number of qualified persons." g I should like to know if members of this legislature were not authorized to select their candidates from an indefinite number of qualified persons. “Such has been and still continues to be the corn monlaw of England; and such is the gresent pradtice in that country in all electrons. ndeed. what is meant there by the term majority embraces what is "denotedwith us by the word plurality. In this country howover, the principle of majority or absolute majority. as it is sometimese alled. was early introduced into the law if elections by the colonists of NewEngland; where it has ever since prevailed veiled to a greater or less extent; in some of the States exclusively. in others only partially."It was changed by constitutions and bylaws. The common law of England today is and always has been that in all elections in which the electors are at liberty to select their candidates from an indefinite number of qualified persons, a plurality elects, and that is precisely the case With regard to a legislative body in the election of a Senator of the U.S.
Mr. YATES. My honorable colleague will Iaeirnhaps say that he has answered the question about to at, when I propound it. But the question which I wish to ask is, whether he knows of an instance in the history of the Senate where a person who had not received a majority of the votes of the Legislature was declared and received as a Senator?
Mr. YATES. I have not got through. The next question is, whether in all time it would be rigut to receive as a Senator into this body a man who had not received a majority of the votes of the Legislature of the State of Illinois? My colleague supposes a case in which there are only 41 members of the Legislature present, and he says very justly, that bein a quorum, 21 would be a majority of the quorum, and 21 could elect a Senator admit it. But extend the question. suppose there were many candidates, and suppose there were only 5 votes for the highest candidate, does my colleague pretend to say that that man by virtue of that plurality vote would be entitled to a seat in the Senate as elected by the Legislature of that State? I ask this nestion in all fairness. I do not pretend to so that we do not derive our laws from Englan. I admit that. But then I do say that this government is a Government of majorities. I say that whenever the Legislature of the State of NewJersey shall send to us a Senator who is elected by a majority of the Legislature, I will receive him into the Senate with open hands, without regard to his party position. But, sir, he must be elected by a majority of the Legislature. These are the questions which I ask my colleague.
Mr. TRUMBULL. My colleague says this is a majority Government. Does not my colleague now that every member of the other House is elected by a plurality vote? Does my colleague mean to deny that if the Legislature in its legislative capacity adopts a plurality rule in regard to Senators, it has a right to do so? Will he disregard it?
Mr. TRUMBULL. Then the question that he asks me has no pertinence to the question I am discussing. I understand him to admit that a man may be elected by a plurality; and if so the question is whether it has been donein this instance, not at a question to know whether if a man gets linttive votes he can be elected. Would not my colleague hold him elected if the State of NewJersey legitimately by law had provided that a plurality should elect and they go into the election in pursuance of the law, acting strictly in conformity to it, and no can didate gets as many as 5 votes but one, and he gets them, will my colleague turn him out? Will e turn him out because he got but 5 votes? Extreme cases prove nothing. Sir, if the convention in the State of Illinois, a majority acting altogether, agree that a minority shall elect in the absence of any law, I say that is a valid election, and neither he nor I sitting as judges with an oath upon us, can turn that man out.
Mr. YATES. Ideny that in this Government anybody can decide thata minority may elect.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Then the Senator denies what is done every day, and what has not been denied on this floor before. That is the law of his own State. Our State provides that a minority may elect a member of the other House. It is the law of Illinois. The man who gets the most votes is elected Representative, not he who gets a majority of all the votes, and I believe it to be the law at this time in l every State of the Union. I am not aware that a majority vote is required in any State.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Certainly. but my colleague is denying that a man can be elected by a minority.
Mr. JOHNSON. It was the law in Massachusetts, but the have changed it.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Yes, and iiowaplurality can elect. I suppose it to be the law every where in reference to the other House.
Mr. YATES. I do not deny that when there are half a dozen candidates for Congress the man who receives the highest number of votes is the member elected. do not deny any such proposition; but the question here is whether a Senator has receive a sufficient number of votes in the Legislature of NewJersey to entitle him to a seat in this body.
Mr. TRUMBULL. That was the point I was discussing when my colleague interrupted me to ask certain questions in which he laid down the proposition, in so many words, that he denied that a minority could elect.
Mr. YATES. Under the circumstances of this case!
Mr. TRUMBULL. “ Under the circumstances of this case, is another thing. My colleague claimed it to be a majority Government, and denied any authority to allow a mine irty or a plurality to elect. ow, let me read alittle clause in the Constitution of the U.S. to my colleague.
Mr. YAI ES. I of course meant in the ab sence of any State law. Of course if there is a law providing that a lurality may elect, as there is in regard to the c ection of Representatives, the case is different; I admit that.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Very well then; there was no necessity to have asked the question or to at the inquiry to me whether, if 5 men had) voted for a man, I would admit him. My colleague, it seems, would admit him, too, if there was a law that authorized a plurality to elect.
Mr. YATES. Does the Senator hold that there was a law authorizing a plurality to elect?
Mr. TRUMBULL. I do hold that there was a valid rule authorizing a lurality to elect. That is the very question I have been trying to discuss.
Mr. YATES. I asked the question whether there was a law by the Legislature authorizing a plurality of the joint bodies to elect. That is the question.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I might turn my colleague over to my friendfrom Maine, wh0 says that a law of the Legislature cannot control it; that it is to be controlled by the concurrent action of the 2 bodies.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Oh, the Senator is never as stupid as he sometimes appears to be.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I beg pardon; I meant to be exact.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I contended for no such thing. I said the action of a previous Legislature could not control the Legislature that was to elect, but that the action of the Legislature was necessary in order to authorize a convention.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I beg pardon. I did not state the Senfrom Maine quite correctly.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Wheng the Senator claims to close, and that no body must say anything after him, I would thank him to keep somewhere within the range of probability.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I assure my friendfrom Maine it was entirely inadvertent in me to leave out the word “existing” before "Legislature. ” What he means is, that that Legislature which elects could by law regulate it. I understand him now that former legislation, the law of a former Legislature, couldbe set aside and disregarded by the concurrent action of the 2 Houses. That is his position. I did not say “present Legislature, but it seems that a law on the statute book passed by a former Legislature could be disregarded by the concurrent action of the 2 bodies in their election of a Senator, and their election still be good. 7
Mr. YATES. My colleague has not answered my 1st question: that is, whether he knows of an instance in the history of the Senate where a person who was elected by less than a majority of a Legislature had ever received a seat in the Senate?
Mr. TRUMBULL. I answered it directly when he 1st asked it, and told him I did not know of any such case.
Mr. TRUMBULL and we did not know of any case of election in the other House by plurality until the rule was changed which had formerly reaired a majority in some States.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It has been changed in NewJerse. They have never had the majority rule half the time since the State existed. It seems, Mr. President, somewhat diilicult to pass through this discussion without speaking in a very incoherent manner when one is so frequently interrupted. I had proceeded to show that the common law of England did not require a majority; Ihad proceeded to show that a majority did not mean a majority of the whole body of electors, but meant a majority of a divided part, a majorityof a quorum, and that there was nothing in the argument or suggestion made to the Senate that a person came here with less than a majority of all the votes. In the absence of any rule or regulation on the subject, the Legislature which met in NewJer sey in joint meeting for the election of Senator had the right to prescribe rules for its government, and having prescribed the plurality rule in this case it is the act of the majority. The rule was prescribed by the majority, and accordingto the principle laid down in Cashing, where a majority adopts this rule for the government of its action, the action of the body in pursuance of the rule is the action of the majorit. It is not a delegation of power, and here I0not quite agree with what my friendfrom Maine said in regard to the delegation of power. I hold that the Levislature cannot elegate its power to elect a Senator.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I hold that the Legislature cannot dele to it to any other body.
Mr. TRUMBULL. We a ree, then. in ref erence to that point but Itink the Senator in his remarks used the word “delegate;” it is so in his published remarks; but we understand it alike; it cannot delegate its powers.
Mr. TRUMBULL. it is only resolvingitse lf into a different body to make the election; but it is the same thing; it is the Legislature. I quite agree that nobody but the Legislature can elect a Senator. The 2 bodies acting separately and concurring may do that, or they may get together and do it; still it is the Legislature, whether the 2 Houses act separately or whether they meet together in joint convention. When they get together in joint convention the adoption by the convention of the plu rality rule is not a delegation of the authority to somebody else. A delegate is one who acts for another; it is not the principal. Here the 81 members are aItogether as principals, and they a co to make the election in a certain way by a opting a plurality rule among themselves. That does not delegate the power to elect a Senator to somebody else than themselves. It is right there in their own control; they agree to make the election in that form; a majority agree to that. Then, whenever it is done in that way, all acting together, not only a majority of the convention, but every member of both Houses acting together, it is the act of the Legislature adopting that mode of express in their will. Therefore I hold that this is a valid election, I am sorry to have detained the Senate so lon. I submit the case so far as I am concerne.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. The Senfrom Massachusetts has given us the law of Rome as to how the cardinals elect the Pope. He has given us the law of England as to the election and displacement of ministers, and then the rule of the House of Commons in the election of their officers. He says these elections are by majorities. He has affirmed much of old antiquity that cannot be verified by the text as it is recorded. But that I will not discuss. He has admitted that opular institutions in England are controlled by pluralities.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. Popular institutions. He has admitted that popular institutions have been controlled by lura ities in this republic. He cannot dispute utthat it is one of the car dinal laws belonging to republican institutions and necessary for harmony. It is not democratic or republican, as on please to use the terms. I hold them to be one and the same, to affirm that a majority has absolute power. minorities haverights, but according to the system of our Government as best organized pluralities control. It is a law not founded upon any abstract principle but necessary in the policy of a reu lican government. It was within the power of the Legislature of NewJersey, they having had conferred on them that power by the Constitution of the U.S., to make their own rule, majority or plurality. They were commissioned, and by the Constitution of the U.S. that commission cannot be withdrawn. They have exercised it in this instance. It is not consistentmith the duty of any Senator to act in this matter without grave consideration. I gave to it the consideration which the Senfrom Massachusetts demands. I say that the Legislature of NewJersey convened, exercised their franchise. I say that in the lower corporations that the gentleman speaks of, it is not the majority of the entire body but the majority of a quorum present that controls. That is the law that governs through all the books. The Senfrom Massachusetts should know it. The 2 Houses together convened were the Legislature of the State according to their system of organization, and they elected a gentleman who took his place in this body; and when a law is violated by partisan calculations wrongis done the nation. I want to correct my friendfrom Massachusetts in his reference to Hoyle. Hoyle does not say that which he attributes to him. He says, “When you are in doubt play trumps." [Laughter.
The President protampon. The nestion is on the amendment of the Senfrom NewHampshire, [Mr. CLARK] to insert the word “ not before the word “duly, ” and also before the word. entitled, ” in the resolution reported by the ComJudiciary; and on this question the yeas&nays have been ordered.
Skip Skip Mr. STEWART. I desire to state that Mr. DOOLITTLE and Mr. WILLIAMS have paired 05 on thisquestion, they being on opposite sides. Mr. VANWINKLE. I desire to state that I have aired off with the Senfrom Michigan, [Mr. Howsnn] who is absent, who would, suppose, vote for this amendment if he were present. I should vote in the negative if I were at liberty to do so. the question being taken by ycas&nays, resiilte yeas 19, nays 21; ABSENT 10. So the amendment was rejected; and the question recurred on the following resolution: Resolved.That John P. Stockton wasduly elected and is e titled to his seat asa Senfrom the State of New crseyfor the term of 6 years from the 4th day of March, 1865. Mr. FESSENDEN called for the yeas&nays; and they were ordered. Upon the conclusion of the calling of the roll the vote stood, as follows: YEAS 21. NAYS
Mr. MORRILL, (to the Secretary.) Call my name. The SECRETARY. Mr. Momma“ Mr. MORRILL. I vote nay. Mr. STOCKTON. Mr. President, I have a colleague, and my colleague has telegraphed me that he has aired off with the Senfrom Maine, [Mr. onnii.i. ] I telegraphed to him yesterday morning that the Senfrom Maine did not wish any Ionger to be bound by his or rangement for airing off. I received an an swer this morning by telegraph from my colleague stating that e could not regard the arrangement as at an end. I think it my duty on Mr. Wmours account to state this fact to the Senate, because when he was last in this Chamber he told me as he left the Hall tha the would not O home if it were not for the fact that, he bat I paireded with the Senfrom Maine. Mr. President, I ask that my name be called. The President protem ore. The See retary will call the name of the Senfrom NewJersey., The Secretary called Mr. Sroeitrous name, and he voted in the allirniative.
Mr. MORRILL. Perhaps the statement of the honorable Senator requires that I should say that the fact is substantially as he states. The fact changes no result, however. Some 7 weeks ago, erha s, when thisquestion was expected to e peopled u, Mr. RIGHT being here in his seat, I a cc to pair of with him. This week, when the question was expected to come up, I felt embarrassed by the arrangement, and I advised Mr. Sro exros on Wednesday evening of that embarrassment and desired him to notify his colleague. This is Friday. A snflicient time, a reasonable time having elapsed, I think, within which the senators colleague might have retnmed, and after the great lapse of time since the original arrangement was made, and in view of the changes that have taken place in the Senate, I felt constrained upon the whole to vote upon the question.
Mr. NYE. It is proper for me, being a new member here, to inquire whether upon a question of this kind the person claiming the seat is entitled to a vote according to the rules of this body.
The President protempore. There is no rule of the Senate upon the question, and the Chair has not the prerogative of settling any question of the kind except to hold that the name of ever Senator on the list may be called, and it is the privilege of every person whose name is on the list to have his vote recorded. The result was announced yeas 22, nays 21; ABSENT 7. So the resolution was agreed to. MESSAGE snort THE news.
Skip Skip A message from the HoRep, by Mr. McIiiriason, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed the JtResolution of the Senate (S.No.60) in relation to the publication of the laws of the U.S. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the following bills and JtResolutions in which it renested the concurrence of the Senate: bill (H.R.No. 360) to reimburse the State of Pennsylvania for moneys advanced Government for war ur oses; A bill (H. i o. 363) supplementary to the several acts relating to pensions; A biMr. No. 894) for the relief of the estate of. W. Eddy; A bill (H.R.No. 420) to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territory; A bill (H.R.No. 421) for the reliefof Iames G. Holland, late acting asst paymaster U.S. Navy; A bill (H.R.No. 422) for the relief of Mrs. Ann Smoot, widow of Capt. Joseph Smoot; Arioint resolution (H.R.No. 101) for the relic of certain officers of the Army; and Ageint resolution (H.R.No. 102) for the relic of Alexander Thompson, late U.S. consul at Maraiiham. ADJOURNMENT to MONDAY On motion of Mr CRESWELL, it was Ordered, That when th S t. be to meeton Monday neat?!“ a amour“ in day It
Mr. JOHNSON. I move that the Senate adjourn. he motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Fawn, March 23, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Bovxrox. The Journul of yesterday was read and approved. LIEUTENANT CBOUSE, and OTHERS. MrISHELLABARGER, by unanimous consent, introduced a JtResolution orderin the names of 1st Lieutenant Edward Cronse, irst Lieutenant Jesse W. Dungan, and 2nd Lieu tenant Joseph Parker to be placed and borne upon the musterrolls of the Army of the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComMilAtfairs, and, with the accompanying evidence, ordered to be printed. KANSAS and NEOSHO VALLEY RAILROAD.
Mr. PRICE, by unanimous consent, from the ComPacificRR, reported back House bill No. 378, to aid in the construction of the Kansas and N eosho Valley railroad connecting the great lakes, Iowa, Missouri, and Kansas, With Texas and the Gulfof Mexico, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes; which was recommitted to the same committee, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. WAS URNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill was recommitted; upon the table. Agreed to. MAUMEE BAY and RIVER.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio, by unanimous consent, introduced the followingresolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the SecyWar he requested to furnish this House with such information as may be in his osse ssionasto the amount of mon necessary for the improvement of the harbor of tlddaumoe bay and Manmec river at the city of Toledo, Ohio.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. TAYLOR asked and obtained leave of absence for his colleague, Mr. Canvass, for 2 weeks. Mr. THAYER asked and obtained leave of absence for his colleague, Mr. Buoouat.1., after today until Thursday next. EASTERN DISTRICT or NEWYORK.
Mr. ANCONA. I call for the regular order of business.
Mr. MORRIS. I ask the gentleman to allow me to put on its passage a bill relating to aju dicial district of cw Tork. It will only take a few moments. It is House bill No. 184, to regulate the term of the U.S. courts in the eastern district of NewYork, and for other purposes.
Mr. ANCONA. I will allow it to be reported.
Skip Skip The bill was reported. It provides or the holdin of 6 terms of the district court and 4 of the circuit court, amends the act of February 25, 1865, by substituting for the word “Suffolk” the wor “Richmond, ” and regulates the compensation of officers of the court.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, (interrupting the reading.) I shall object to this bill. NAVYYARD 0N HUDSON RIVER.
Mr. GRISWOLD, by unanimous consent, introduced the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Remlved, That the ComNavAffrs be instructed to inquire into the propriety of locating a navffqurd on the Hudson “"01", opposite the village of astings, and to report by bill or otherwise. E. W. EDDY. The House then resumed the consideration of the bill reported on Friday last from the ComMilAffrs (H.R.No. 394) for the relief of the estate of E. W. Eddy. The bill provides for the payiuent of$200,000, bein the amount of public funds in the hands of. W. Eddy, as puymnster, on board the steamer Brother Jonathan, lost by the wreck of the said steamer on the 30th of June, 1865, off the coast of California. The accompanying report was read.
Mr. ANCONA. I demand the previous question on the bill.
Mr.WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I hope the previous question will not be called until we can amend this bill.
Mr. ANCONA. I will hear what amendment the gentleman has to suggest.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I offer the following proviso, which is the same substan tially as was adopted in the bill which the gentlemans colleague introduced at the last congress:. Provided, That the final orderforthe allowanceof the said credit shall not bemadeuntil the wholesubject connectedwith the said iilleged loss shall be investigatedby the PnvMGen; and he shall ccrtif to the proper dept of the Government that the lossof the moneyhas beenfully proved.
Mr. ANCONA. I see no objection to that amendment.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. the question being taken on the amendment of Mr. ASHBURNE, of Illinois, it was agreed to. The bill, as amended, was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. ANCONA. mtRtv the bill was passed, on the table. Agreed to. INDIAN EXPENDITURES.
Mr. STEVENS, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolvrd, That the SecyInterior be requestedto report to this Housetho nce ount of the expenditures made u nderhis direction in conformity with the 5th section of the Indian appropriation bill. approved March3, 1865.s ccifying the amount of cacha uproprintion expende, and for what Indians and forw at obJoctsdisbursed. ARMS FOR DAKOTA.
Mr. SMITH, from the Committee on the Militia, reported a bill to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territory; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill authorizes and directs the SecyTreasuy to issue, upon the requisition of the Governor of Dakota IErritory, such amount of ordnance and ordnance stores as may be necessary to arm the inhabitants of said Territory who may organize for defense against hostile Indians, not exceedinr7 1000 standof small arms and 100,000 rounds of ammunition, to be charged against the quota. due or to become due to the said Territory under the law for arming and equipping the militia.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. SMITH mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. JAMES C. HOLLAND.
Mr. DARLING, from the ComNavAffrs, reported a bill for the relief of James G. Holland; which was reada 1st and 2nd time. The bill authorizes the SecyTreasury to credit James G. Holland, late actin asst paymaster of the Navy of the UniStates, With the sum of $500 in the settlement of the accounts of said Holland with the 4th Auditor of the Treasury, such credit to be given to the said Holland tor the sum of $500 in Treasury notes of the U.S. lost and destroyed without any fault or neglect on the part of said Holland.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I think the House should demand a pretty full investigation of this matter. We are adopt in a very unsafe principle in paying for notes an bonds of the IgU.S. alleged to have been lost. I recollect that during the last session of Cengress we passed abillIierc, against my most strenuous remonstrance, to reissue some bonds that were alleged to have been lost on board the Golden Gate. It was proved most conclusively that the bonds were burnt up when that steamship was lost. The bill passed the House and it afterward passed the Senate. My friendfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvsxs] advocated the passage of the bill here. It was not long aftert e bill had been passed that my friend brought in here a letter from the SecyTreasury stating that those very bonds, which had been proved so conclusively to have been lost, had been presented for redemption at the Treasury Dept; and we passed a bill here, on the strength of the statement of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, to repeal that law; but I believe that bill never passed the Senate, and it is very likely that the 2 sets of bonds are out.
Mr. DARLING. The Gentfrom Iili nois does not understand this case exactly.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I hardly know how this bill got to the ComNavAffrs. It is one of those cases which should certainly have gone to the ComClaims, who have jurisdiction of this subject, and I am told are considering this veryquestion. Now, I suggest to the Gentfrom NewYork that Iie permit his bill to be referred to the ComClaims, and let them examine the whole subject. We must have some general rule on which we are to act in all such cases.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Certainl; I only spoke of the bill as it was read from the Clerks desk. There may be something different behind it.
Mr. DARLING. This case is entirely different from the one referred to by the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. wASHBURNE.] This paymaster was compelled to go from a vessel to which he was attached to the flagship to receive money from the fleet aymaster to ay off the men of his vessel. VIiile in the is charge of that duty his boat was swamped, a number of the crew were drowned, and he and the captain rese ued in a drowning condition. The mone which he had in his coat pocket was lost, toget or with the coat. But he is charged on the books of the Deptwith the amount lost, and this bill is Intended merely to relieve him from that charge, and to credit his account with the money thus lost while in the discharge of his duty without fault on his part. It is simply a proposition to wipe out the charge against him of $500 in money, which was lost by reason of this calamity.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Where is the roof of the loss?
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I desire to ask the attention of some committee, whatever one may have the matter in charge, to a subject kindred to this, (perhaps identical with it. A case has occurre in my own State in which a man presents at the Treasury of the U.S. parts of mutilated bonds; those parts showing the numbers of the bonds, so as to exclude all possibility of duplicating them, or of fraud in regard to the matter.
Mr. DARLING. The Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SHELLABARGER] is discussing a matter which is foreign to the subject now before the House. If the gentleman as any explanation to make in regard to this particular case, I have no objection to hearing him.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I desire to add but one sentenceto what I have already said. Now in the case I have described, where parts of bonds are presented to the Treasury, showing that they have been mutilated and destroyed, the law is now such that they cannot be reissued, and the loss falls upon the citizen and I hope that the committee having charge of the resolution upon that subject which [submitted a few (la 5 since will report a bill to meet that different. h
Mr. DARLING. I do not see that the case referred to by the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Summons] has anything to do with the one now under consideration. This is a case which can be met only by passing a private bill. In regard to the evidence of the loss, there is the testimony of officers of the fleet who saw the boat capsized, saw the men strug gling in the water, and assisted in saving those who were rese ued. There is the certificate of the fleet paymaster that he paid Mr. Hol land the sum of $2, 500. It appears that $2,000 of the money he handed over to the captain, and that amount was fortunately saved; but the rest of the money, 8500, he put into the pocket of his own coat, and the coat and money were both lost.
Mr. BLAINE. The papers which accompanies the claim set forth that fact.
Mr. DAWES. I desire to say that in passing these private bills for relief, if there is no general hi I proposed, each one should be accompanied by a statement of facts in the form of a Mr.repVoArtS. HBURN, of Massachusetts. Ide sire to state that the ComClaims have half a dozen cases of this kind before them, in relation to bonds of all descriptions destroyed under different circumstances. The committee have been endeavoring to provide some means by which some general law could be passed to meet these cases. I regret that any individual case should be broughtforward in this manner, without a written report accompanying it, thus establishing what may be considered a precedent
Mr. BLAINE. I think the private cases to which the gentleman.from Massachusetts [Mr. wASHBURN] has referred are cases where parties have lost bonds and applied to the Government for the reissue of bonds to make good their losses. This case is entirely aditferent matter; the case of a paymaster who lost money of the Government in his possession by an accident over which he had no control. It is not proposed to take money out of the Treasury, but simply to relieve him from this amount now charged against him on the books of the Departinent.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. I do not wish to say anything against this particular case. But the cases to which I have referred are those of collectors, aymaspers, quartermasters, and Officers of alI sorts who have met with these losses.
Mr. DARLING. I now call for the previous question.
Mr. WASHBURNE. of Illinois. I hope the previous question will not be 2nded, but that this case will go to the ComClaims.
Mr. PIKE. Will the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. DARLING] withdraw his call for the previous question for a moment?
Mr. PIKE. This bill provides simply that the properaccounting officer of the Treasury shnlI credit this officer with this amount when satisfactory roofof the loss shall be presented; so that the Government is amply protected.
Mr. PAINE. Will the Gentfrom NewYork yield to me for a moment?
Mr. PAINE. Mr. Speaker, I am not opposed to this bill; on the contrary, if the facts are as stated, I think the allowance should be made. But it seems to me that the case should be subjected to the scrutiny of the ComClaims. I wish that the Gentfrom NewYork would yield to me to move the reference of the bill to that committee.
Mr. PIKE. The Gentfrom NewYork will permit me to say to the Gentfrom Wisconsin [Mr. Pawn] that this is simply a question as to the settlement of the accounts of this officer with the Government. The accounting officer will not make the allowance except it on satisfactory proof.
Mr. PAINE. I understand that; butnevertheless it is a case in which the Government may possibly lose a large sum of money: and I think it on ht to go to the Committee ofClaims.
Mr. PIKE. Thisissimilartomanybillswhich have heretofore been passed, and which have in no instance been referred to the ComClaims.
Mr. PAINE. Itrust that the case will be referred to the Comiiiiitee of Claims, and that we shall have a full rert from that committee.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. [see no propriety in referring this caseto the ComClaims. I suppose that the ComNavAffrs is entirely competent to investigate a case of this kind, pertaining to the settlement of the accounts of a naval officer. I know thntit has been the custom of the ComMilAffrs to examine and report upon similar cases in reference to the settlement of the accounts of military officers. I remeinber distinctly that while a member of that committee I reported severalbills authorizing the accounting officers, in settling accounts of military affnirs, to make allowance for losses of this kind.
Mr. BLAINE. The House this morning passed, with the approval of the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. WASHBLRNE] a bill providing for a precisely similar case, except that in that case the amount was $200,000, and in this it is $500.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. That bill had a very stringentproviso.
Mr. BLAINE. No more stringent than the proviso in this bill.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. In that case there was a written report, and there was clear proof that the money had been lost. There is noting here but a more certificate; the claim is not even supported by an oath.
Mr. BLAIN. The proof isjustas ample in this case as in the other.
Mr. DARLING. Gentlemen seem to misapprehend this case entirely. The bill simply authorizes the proper accounting officerto credit this officerwith a balanceof sSUU, which amount was unavoidably lost while he was in the discharge of his duty. I renew the demand for the previous question.
Skip Skip On 2nding the demand for the previous question there were ayes 50, noes 33; no quorum voting. The SPEAKER, under the rule, ordered tellers; and appointed Mr. DARLING, and Mr. wASHDIRXE of Illinois. The House divided; and the tellers reportedayes 50, noes 42. So the previous question was 2nded. The main question was ordered: Which was on ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a 3rd time.
Mr. PIKE. I find. Mr. Speaker. that I was mistaken. The bill does not contain the proviso which I thought it did.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The House voted under a misapprehension.
Mr. PIKE. I move to reconsider the vote by which the main question was ordered. The mtR agreed to; and the question recurred on 2nding the demand for the previous question.
Mr. DARLING. I now withdraw the de mand for the previous question. in order that the Gentfrom Maine [Mr. PIKE] may offer an amendment.
Mr. PIKE. I move to amend by adding the following proviso: Provided, That satisfactory proof of: the lossof the samebe presentedto the 4th Auditor.Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. the following amendment: Provided, That the final order for the allowanceof the said credit shall not be made until the whole subjectconnectedwith said ulle edloss shall be fully investigated by the 4th Au itor and fully certified to.
Skip Skip Mr. PIKE. I accept that, and demand the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. PIKE mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. MRS. ANN E. SMOOT.
Mr. PHELPS, from the ComNavAffrs, reported abill for the relief of Mrs. Ann E. Sine ot, widow ofCaptain Joseph Smoot, of the U.S. Navy; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill provides that the benefit of the 6th section of an act to amend the act to remote the efficiency of the Naw, approved auuary 16, 1859, be extended to Mrs.Ann E. Smoot, widow of the late Captain Joseph Smoot, of the U.S. Navy, and that the proper accounting officers of the Treasury be irected to pay her the amount her said husband was receivingat the time he was placed on the reserved list on furlough pay to the date of his death, deducting whatever amount he may have received in the mean time on account of pay.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. PHELPS mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. INVENTION IN NAVAL WARFARE. On motion of
Mr. GRISWOLD, the ComNavAffrs were discharged from the further consideration of House bill No. 136, to provide for testing an invention in naval warfare; and the same was referred to the Navy Dept. PAY OF CERTAIN ARMY OFFICERS.
Mr. BINGHAM, from the ComMilAffrs, reported a JtResolution for the relief ofcertain officers of the Army; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The JtResolution provides that in all cases in which a commissioned officer actually entered on duty as such commissioned officer, and was entitled by law to be mustered in as such, but by reason of capture by the enemy, or other cause beyond his control, and without fault or neglect of his own, was not mustered according to the regulations within a period of not less than 30 days, the pay Dept shall allow said otheer full pay and emoluments from the date on which such officer actually entered on said duty, as aforesaid, deducting the pay actual] received by such Officer for such perio.
Mr. HALE. I beg to inquire of the Gentfrom Ohio whether this will cover the case of officers who served in their promoted rank and died before being mustered in?
Mr. BINGHAM. It does under the words “or other cause, ” if such cases Are not already provided for.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I move to insert the words “ killed in battle.”
Skip Skip Mr. BINGHAM. I have no objection. The amendment was agreed to. The JtResolution as amended was or dered to be engrossed and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. BINGUAM mtRtv the JtResolution was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. PAY wrruunnn BY COURTS MARTIAL. On motion of
Mr. BINGHAM, the ComMilAffr was discharged from the further consideration of aJtResolution to pay officers and soldiers money withheld by judgments of courts martial; and the same was laid upon the table. ALEXANDER THOMPSON.
Mr. BANKS, from the ComForAffrs. reported aJtResolution for the reief of Alexander Thom son, late U.S. consul at Maranham, razil; which was read a 1st and 2nd time.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I objected to that resolution when up once before, because it then appeared that this man was appointed after the passage of the law providing that none but citizens should be a pointed. That was a mistake, and my frien from Ohio acknowledges “the corn.” [Luughten] It seems this man continued to perform the duties of consul at the request of the Dept in a satisfactory manner after the passage of the act of Au just 18, 1856. I think the claim is just and s iould be paSsed. As it stood on the report it was nota good claim.
Mr. BANKS. I do not think the report is us was stated by the Gentfrom Il ine is,
Mr. wASHBURNE.] If so it was a mistake. lie consul was not a citizen of the U.S. at the time of the passage of the act, but he continued in service at the request of the SecyState. He was not entitled to pay under the law, but having performed his duty, it is just that he should receive compensation. I move the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered, and under the operation thereof the billwas orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed.it wasaccordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. BANhS. mtRtv the JtResolution was passed, on the table. Agreed to. CLERKS OF COMMITTEES.
Mr. BANKS, from the ComForAffrs, in answer to a resolution of the House, submitted the followmg report; which was read, laid on the table, and ordered to be printed: The ComForAffrs, to whom was referred the House resoluuon relating to the employment of clerks of comm1ttccs, reportasfoljows: Thatm order to keepa correct Jourpul of the proceedingsandaprogerrccordof the businessreferredto the committee.a n for the thorough examination into matters pertaining to the conduct of its business a clerk is indispensable. Much of the businessof the committee is connected With the Depts, requiring such personal attendanceusindividunl membersof the committeecannot give to it; and from they State Dept alone important documentsare to be referredto the ComForAffrs concerning the claims against the British Government for losses sustained by American citizens which will require the constant services of a clerk to classify, in ck, and reserve. The clerk of the ComForAffrs is on duty the usual numberof hours preseribed by law and customfor clerical attendance and performs such service only for the membersof the committeeas legitimately belongs to the oficial businessof the committee. For the committee: N. P. BANKS. L irman. THOMAS HUNT. On motion of Mr. ORTH, the ComForAffrs was discharged from the consideration of the petition and accompanying papers of Thomas Hunt, and the same were referred to the ComClaims. PENSIONS.
Mr. PERHAM. Mr. Speaker, how much time is there left of the morning hour?
Mr. PERHAM. I was instructed by the ComInvalidPens to report, and ask its consideration at the present time, a general bill on the subject of pensions.
The SPEAKER. The committee will be entitled to the remainder of this morning hour and to the next morning hour.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. That is rather unfortunate. This is a very important committee, and I hope that the remaining 5 minutes of this morning hour will not be charged to it as a whole morning hour. I move, therefore, that the committee be entitled to 2 morning hours hereafter. No objection bein made, it was so ordered.
Mr. PERHAM. T thank the House for this favor. The House accordingly proceeded to the consideration of House bill o. 363, supplement ary to the several acts relating to pensions. The bill provides apension o 25 dollars a mouth to those who have lost both eyes, or both hands, or been permanently disa led in the same, in the military or naval service of the U.S.; and 20 dollars a month to those who have lost both feet or one hand and one foot, or been totally disabled in the same; and 15 dollars a month to all who have lost one hand or one foot or been totally disabled in the same. During the reading of the bill the morning hour expired.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I call up for consideration JtResolution No. 43, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the U.S., upon which I entered the motion to reconsider the other day.
Mr. PERHAM. I ho c the gentleman will, allow the reading of the bill to 42completed.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I will do so. The reading of the bill was here completed.
Mr. KASSON. I ask the gentleman to allow me to offer this amendment to the bill, to come in at the end: Provided, That the jiayment of no pensionshall be suspendedor Withhel by reason of the accc tance by the pensionerof any public office, unlesst e an nual pay of such office.added to the pension, shall be cone to or greatertbau the amountofincoine exlcaugfprotm the incometax under theinternalrevenue In listening to the reading of the bill I did not observe any such proviSion, and therefore Ioffer this proviso, in order to meet a difficulty under the existing law.
Mr. PERHAM. In answer to the question suggested I wish to say that by the law of March, 1865, peifions who accepted office in the civil service of the Government who were entitled to pensions forfeited their pensions, and the ruling of the office is such that it excludes all classes ofOfficers, so thatapostmaster, for instance , who may be receiving from 50 to 100 dollars a year is excluded from the right to draw his pension under the law. The 4th section of this bill repeals entirelyLthe law to which the Gentfrom Iowa refers and allows every person who is entitled to a pension to draw it, notwithstandin the fact of his being in the civil service of the irovernment.
Mr. KASSON. Then, if the 4th section has that effect, I withdraw my amendment.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. PERHAM mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio, resumed the floor.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Ihope that Yny friendfrom Ohio will postpone this matter and let us go on with the pubiic business. It is more important that we should proceed with the appropriation bills than bring up this matter now.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. This is public business as much as any business which can be brought before the House. It is business of as much importance as any that can be brought before the House, and it is important that it shall be brought before the House now, so that the resolution may not only go over to the senate for its final action, but that it may go to the country. I would be glad to accommodate the Gentfrom Illinois.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. It is not for my accommodation. I merely made the suggestion to the gentleman iu the public interest.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I will now yield the floor to the chairman of the ComPrintg, [Mr. LAFLIN] who desires to report a bill for action. PUBLICATION OF THE LAWS.
Mr. LAFLIN, from the ComPrintg, reported back, with the recommendation that it do pass, JtResolution of the Senate No. 50. in relation to the publication of the laws of the U.S. The JtResolution authorizes and directs the SecyState to renew the contract of October 31, 1850, between the Dept of State and Little, Brown 4!: Co., of Boston. Massachusetts, for the annual publication of the Statutes at large of the U.S. until otherwise ordered iy Congress, provided that the time within which the annual edition of the Laws is to be delivered to the Dept of State be extended to 70 days after the adjournment of each session of Congress; and provided further, that the price shall not exceed the actual expenditure of Little, Brown & Co., for composition, press work, billdin, editing, and transportation, all of which sh I be done at the lowest market prices, the paperto be furnished at as low a price as is paid by the Government for paperof the same quality, and 5%. commission thereon.
Mr. LAFLIN. This is a JtResolution that requires very little explanation. In 1850 the SecyState made a contract with Little, Brown tit Co., for the publication of the Statutes at Large. At thattinle those Statutes made a book about 1/3rd the size they now do, and material and labor were much cheaperthan they are at present. They are unable to perform their contract now at the old prices, and they have consented to renew the contract in the manner specified in this resolution. The JtResolution has already passed the Senate and has been thoroughly considered by the House committee, and inasmuch as there is a clause in the resolution which puts it in the power of Congress to change the contract at any time, I think there can be no possible obicction to the passage of the JtResolution.
Skip Skip The JtResolution was or cred to a 3rd reading; and it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. LAFLIN mtRtv the JtResolution was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. FOREST CULTURE.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I will yield the floor now for a moment to my friendfrom NewYork, Mr. Mourns]
Mr. ORRIS, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill donating lands to the American Forest Tree Propagation and Land Company, for conducting excriments respecting forest tree culture, calcu ated to prevent the destruction and encourage the production of forests in America; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComAg.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Former its Secretary, announced that the Senate he insisted upon its amendments, disagreed to by the House, to the bill (H.R.No. 184) entitled “An act to authorize the sale of marine hospitals and revenue cutters, ” and had appointed essrs. CHANDLER, SHERMAN, and NESMITH a committee of conference on the part of the Senate. The message further stated that the Senate Ifad insisted upon its amendments, disagreed to by the House, to the bill (H.R.No. 84) entitled “An not making additional appropriations, and to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1866, and for other purposes;” had disagreed to the amendments of the House to the other amendments of the Senate; and had a pointed Messrs. Fas sssnss, CONNESS, and cusses a committee of conference on the part of the Senate. SERGEANT AT ARBIS.
Mr. ROLLINS. I ask leave to report back, from the Committee of Accounts, the following resolution as a substitute for one referred to that committee: Recolved, That the Ser eant at Arms be allowed to employ an additional O erk in his officeduring the Dmipt session of Congress, at a salary of $125permon.
Mr. ROLIJNS. Will the rntleman allow me to explain a moments
Mr. ROSS. I do not think we need any more explanation. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the SecyWar, transmitting the remainder of the information called for by a resolution of the HoRep of the 8th instant; and the same was referred to the select committee on freedmen and ordered to be printed. PAYMENT FOR SLAVES.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I now call up the mtRtv the House 0n the 13th instant recommitted to the ComJudiciary the JtResolution (H.R.No. 43) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the U.S. The Jomt resolution proposes the followin amendment to the Constitution of the U.S.A. SEC. 1. authorizeN, peritohveidr eCfoonr, gorresmsankoer paanyymSetanttetoshaanlyl epveerr son or personson account of the emancipation of any slave or slavesin the U.S., or as compensation therefor. SEC. 2. Abife: That Congress shall have power to enforcethis article by appropriate legisllitlon and the judicial powerof the U.S shall extend to all casesarising underthis article and the laws made in pursuancethereof.
Skip Skip The question was upon the motion to reconSi or Tellers were ordered; and Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky, and Mr. Lswnsxcs, of Ohio, were appohienteHdo.use divided; and the tellers reported n ves 44, noes 48. So the motion to reconsiderwas not agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Fonxnv, its Secretary, announced that the Senate had passed bills of the following titles, in which the concurrence of the House was requested: A bill (S.No.107) entitled “An act to provide for a term of the district court for the district of Minnesota to be held at the city of Wine na, in said district;” A bill S.No. 210) entitled “An act.for the relief ofl ellington & Dorsey;” and A bill (S.No.145) entitled “ An act for the grant of lands to the State of Kansas to aid in the construction of the Northern Kansas railroad and telegraph.” PENNSYLVANIA WAR CLAIM.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that the rules be suspended, and that the House now resolve itself into ComWhole for the purpose of considering the special order. The motion was agree to; and the House accordingly resdlved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union, (Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois, in the chair) and resumed the consideration of House bill No. 860, to reimburse the State of Pennsylvania for moneys advanced Government for war purposes. The pending question was upon the following amendment moved by Mr. HALE: Strike out the words “advanced at the request of the Government for the payment of troops in the service of the U.S. under an express romiso of payment, " and insert the words “ex lender for the paymentoftroopsin these rvlcc of the U.S. "
Mr. STEVENS. Ihope the Gentfrom Maine [Mr. BLMNE] will withdraw that amendment.
Mr. BLAINE. My colleague upon the committee having in charge the war debts of the loyal States, as well as man other gentlemen on this floor who feel friendiy to the bill which I moved as an amendment to the pending proposition, have expressed a desire that the one shall not be embarrassed by connecting it with the other. 1 therefore Withdraw my amendment.
Mr. STEVENS. I now move that the committee rise and reportthis bill, with the amendment to it, to the House. The motion was agreed to. So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. w.i51intrn.Vi:, of Illinois, reported that the ComWhole on this state of the Union, having had under consideration the bill (H. It. No. 860) to reimburse the State of Pennsylvania for moneys advanced Government for war purposes, had directed him to report the same to the House with an amendment, and recommend its passage.,
Mr. STEVENS. I now call the previous question on the bill and amendment.
Mr. SPALDING. Will the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvsxs] Withdraw his call for the previous question for a moment?
Mr. STEVENS. I will give the gentleman an opportunity to say what he desires to say out of my time after the main question shall be ordered.
Mr. HALE. Will the Gentfrom Pennsylvania permit me to make a single suggestion.
Mr. lIALE. I understoodythe gentleman to promise as the other day that he would furnish the House with certain documentary evidence. I desire to inquire whether the gentleman proposes to furnish that evidence. It seems to me that it ought to be furnished.
Mr. STEVENS. I have it in my hand, and will present it.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not propose, Mr. Speaker, to discuss the bill to any extent. my self, but. will yield to several other gentlemen. I simply wish to make a remark in reference to a point which was drawn into the discussion the other day. the question was then raised whether the New.Yor c and NewJerse troops. called out at the same time as these Pennsylvania troops, had been paid. I have made inquiry at the office of the Adjutant General, who addressed the following note to the Asst Adjutant General: General Vixensr: Have the troops of NewYork and NewJersey which werecalledpoutduring the invasion bierbpuidl March 22.1866. T To this the Asst Arbutant. General made the following reply: They have. long since. Respectfully
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Will the Gentfrom Pennsylvania yield to me for a moment?
Mr. FAltiSWORTH. l have understood frOm what has been stated by the friends of this bill, the Gentfrom Pennsylvania and others, and from my recollection of the discussion upon the question last year, that these troops were mustered into the service of the U.S.
Mr. STEVENS. They were sworn in, as it is called, under the telegram of the SecyWar. which was read the other day. Tech nically speaking. they were not mustered in, although they were sworn in. They took part in the battle of Gettysbur, and were also engaged at Hagerstown an Falling Waters. here was no time for mustering in.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Were musterrolls made out?
Mr. SplEVENS. Company payrolls, which the SecyWar stated were all that were necessary. were made out.
Mr. TAYLOR. lfthe Gentfrom Penns lvaiiia will allow me, I desire to ask him wh those Pennsylvania troops were not mustere into the U.S. service.
Mr. STEVENS. They were called out at the moment of the invasion. There was no time to muster them in.
Mr. TAYLOR. I desire to inquire whether those Pennsylvania troops did not positively refuse to be mustered into the U.S. service.
Mr. TAYLOR. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him how long these troops were in service?
Mr. TAYLOR. I have been told by some persons who ought to know that these troops absolutely refused to be mustered in after the emergency.assed away.
Mr. STEVENS. There is no truth in that. My colleague here [Mr. BnoouALL] was one of the catains of those troops; and my collcague from the 1st district [Mr. RANDALL] was a so in service at the same time. Both these Gentlemen can speak further in reference to the point which the gentleman suggests.
Mr. TAYLOR. I have been informed that these troops refused to be mustered in, claiming that they were State troops. They refused, I understand, because they did not wish to be subject to the disposal of the Federal Government, lest they might be taken beyond the limits of their State. Is there any truth in that 7
Mr. STEVENS. My 2 colleagues can state the facts, because they were in that army. I yield to m colleague from the 7th district, [Mr. ROOMAI.L.]
Mr. BROOMALL. Mr. Speaker, I happen to know all about that matter, and can state all about the charge that some of these troops refused to be mustered into the service of the U.S. The fact is that troops were wanted bad] at that time; the danger was very imminent. t was understood that more troops could be had by permitting them to be mustered into the service of the U.S., or of the State, as they might elect. It was distinctly put to each one of the companies whether it would be mustered into the service of the U.S or the service of the State; the statement being made at the same time that they would all be put under the command of the same otheers, rationed in the some way, equip ied in the same way, paid in the same way, an in all respects treated in the same wn. The result showed that more men could be obtained by giving them their election. Some companies were mustered into the State service, and some were mustered into the U.S. service. The company I had the honor to command was sworn into the U.S. service. No one supposed there would be any difference in the payment or the treatment of the troups. It was supposed they would be all under the same officers and treated alike. The object was to get the most men in the emergency.
Mr. TAYLOR. You say you were sworn into the “U.S. service. Were you mustered into the U.S. service?
Mr. BROOMALL. My company was mus tered into the U.S. service.
Mr. BROOMALL. My company was paid. The difference between the State service and the U.S. service did not show itself until the time to pay came.
Mr. TAYLOR. This is for those who would not. be mustered into the U.S. service.
Mr. BROOMALL. I do not know there were an who refused to be mustered into the U.S.totes service. They had their choice.
Mr. TAYLOR. Were all those who were mustered into the U.S. service paid?
Mr. TAYLOR. I will state that I learn at the War Dept all who were mustered into the U.S. service have been paid.
Mr. MYERS. If I am allowed I will have read the form of the oath that was taken.
The Clerk read, as follows: HAaaisauno, April 26.1861. Hon. Lsoiuno Mvsas. HoRep: The following is the form of oath of master of Pennsylvania troops in J " nue, 1863: You and each of you do solemnly swear that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the U.S.A., and to thestate of Pennsylvania; that you will serve them honestly and fail fully ngainst all their enemies or oppose rswhatsoever and o serveand obeytheordersof the Governor of Pennsylvania and the orders of theolficers appointed over you according to law. So help you God." SAMUEL B. THOMAS, Lieutenant Colonel, dad A. D. U. to Governor(.Mrtill.
Mr. BltOOMALL. That is the form of the oath which was administered to those men. I will say another word. These who were sworn into the State service were under the same commanders as those mustered into the U.S. service; they marched together to Get tysburg, marched out of the State into Maryland together, and were treated in all respects alike. The arrangement was made for the convenience of the War Dept, and it was never supposed that that Dept would not in good faith pay those whom it had under taken to pay. The year before I was also called to command a coman in the State service, yet the officers of the U.S. paid us just no they did the soldiers sworn into the service of the U.S. Hence Pennsylvania and these soldiers had the right to understand the Government would pay them if sworn into either service, when they paid them when sworn into neither.
Mr. MORRILL. This claim is an old acquaintance. It was 1st introduced from the ommittee of Ways&Means last year, and the point of order was made that it was not in accordance with existing law. It was brought before the House again and defeated. I do not know but I am in favor of the bill but I would prefer it should be 1st committed to the ComMilAffrs. It seems to me bills of this character flioald undergo the scrutiny of that committee. I have no fault to find with the Gentfrom Pennsylvania for fitting his bill in this way, Of course he prerred to have the child nursed by its friends. We have claimsof other States of alike character, and Whatever example we may set in relation to this bill the House will be disposed to follow. Now, while we are all ready and willing to relieve the ]people of some part of their. taxation, I do think that such large appropriations ought to be subjected to careful scrutiny, and I hope the House will come to the conclusion to recommit this bill to the ComMilAffrs. Let us havea bill based on some general principles upon which we can stand, by which other States may have their claims adjusted.
Mr. STEVENS. I now yield the floor to my colleague, [Mr. RANDALL]
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I have but a word to say in reference to the objection raised by the Gentfrom Vermont, [Mr. Momma] I should an pose after he had characterized this as an 01 acquaintance, that he had given to it a thorough examination. But for oneI am in favor of any examination or scrutiny that can be made of the bill. I do not know what my colleague [Mr. SrsVENS] desires, but for myself I am perfectly willing that it should pass through the severest scrutiny, knowing that it is a gust claim. It is in fact an obligation which is due to Pennsylvania by the U.S. Government. The governor of the State of Pennsylvania (the Legislature not being in session) found himself compelled to take some resonsibility withouta law authorizing an expenditure necessary to pay and equip the soldiers called outat this perio, the State being invaded. The Governor accordingly went to Philadelphia and borrowed this entire sum of money from patriotic men of that city. They advanced their money without any written obligation, merely a on the word of the SecyWar transmitted to them by telegraph an the word in person of the governor of the State, but for this it is not the less sacred in morals or cquit. It has not lost any of its force by examination or by delay, and I think that for the House to refuse to pay this obligation would be substantiall repudiation. I think it is right that a ful examination should be made, and such has been made fully, fairly, and completely. If, however, the Gentleman who has charge of the bill desires that it should go to the ComMilAffr for further examination, and such is the pleasure of the House, I am perfectly willing. tmust come out of any investigation uniin paired in merit. [Cries of“ No!” “Nol”]
Mr. STEVENS. The House knows all about it. I yield now to my colleague, [Mr. Bennu]
Mr. ROGERS. I know that the troops from N cw Jersey have not been paid.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not make the assertion myself; but I saw the evidence in the War Dept positively asserting that they were in. p
Mr. ROGERS. A certain amount has been paid; but some 108,000 dollars is still due.
Mr. ROGERS. I do not know;I know that $108,000 is still due.
Mr. BOYER. At all events, by paying a portion of the amount, the principle has been established that the troops are to be paid; and whenever the State of NewJersey shall bring in here her claim for the balance due by the General Government for the services of her troops, I shall support it with the greatest cheerfulness.
Mr. It GERS. Then why not refer the bill to a committee until we can have an opportunity to get the claims of NewJersey and other States? I am told that the State of NewYork has also a claim.
Mr. BUYER. It is because I think each claim should stand by itself upon its merits.
Mr. ROGERS. I understand that the State of Missourihas a claim. ;
Mr. BOYER. I can see no good reason for aggregating all these claims in a sort of omnibus bill, any more than for consolidating different suits between different parties to he tried at the same time before the same con" and jury. Let each case stand upon its own merits. This case of Pennsylvania rests upon the plighted faith and honor of the General Government; it rests upon the word of the POTUS, which during the war was held competent for the accomplishment offargreater things than this. It was held to be sufficient, without an act of Congress, to suspend the writ of habeas corus.
Mr. STEV “NS. I do not like to interfere with my colleagues remarks, but as my time is fiist passin I must resume the floor. Mr.SPA DING. The Gentfrom Pennsylvanin [Mr. Srsvnxs] promised to yield to me for a few moments.
Mr. STEVENS. I know that I did, but I cannot fulfill the promise now. When this measure was u during the last Congress, Mr. Wood made the assertion that the State of NewYork had not been paid, and he moved an amendment. The bill then passed over to the next week. When it again came u, Mr. Wood got u in his place and stated that he had receive a letter from the Governor of the State of NewYork informing him that the NewYork troops had been aid in full. There was no pretense that the YewJersey troops had not been paid. Now, I have seen a cer tificate that NewJersey was paid in full.
Mr. ROGERS. It was pretended distinctly that NewJersey was not aid, and I made an argument against the bil on the ground that NewJersey had not been paid. I obtained the items of the account.
Mr. STEVENS. Why did not the gentleman present those ems?
Mr. ROGERS. because I could get no opportunity to do so, the bill is rushed through so fast.
Mr. STEVENS. I wish to say one word in reply to the Gentfrom Vermont, [Mr. MonRiLL] who is mistaken in regard to this bill. It was considered during the last congress by the only appropriate committee, the ommittee of Ways&Means and this session it has been considered by the only appropriate committee, the ComAppropriat. This bill has already passe the House once, and I now ask for a vote.
Mr. HALE. I rise to a privileged motion. I move to reconsider the vote by which the main question was ordered. If the reconsideration should prevail, I desire to move the reference of the bill to the ComMilAffrs.
Skip Skip On agreeing to the motion to reconsider, there were a es 41, noes 57. Mr. ROGE S called for tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Romans and Bnooimm. were appointed. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 32, nays 65. So the motion to reconsider was not agreed to. The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. The question being on the passage of the bill. Mr. STEVENS demanded the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. SPALDING. I call for the yeas&nays on the passage of the bill. On ordering the yeas&nays, there were ayes 16. Mr. SPALDING. I call for tellers on or derin the yeas&nays. the ers were ordered; and Messrs. SPALD nm and Berna were appointed. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 26 noes not counted. So the yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative yeas 85, nays 35, not voting 68; So the bill was passed. During the call of the roll, Mr. ANCONA stated that Mr. DENISON, if present, would have voted in the affirmative. Mr. ANCONA also announced that Mr. Joan sox was confined to his bed by sickness. Mr. ELDRIDGE stated that on this question he had paired with Mr. DENISON. Mr. SMITH announced that Mr. RANDALL, of Kentucky, was absent on account of sickness. Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania, stated that Mr. COFFROTH was unavoidably detained from the House. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv just taken; on the table. Agreed to. LOAN BI LL.
Mr. MORRILL, from the ComWays&Means, reported back, with amendments, a bill (H.R.No. 207) entitled “An act to amend an not entitled An act to provide Ways&Means to support the Government, aproved March 3, 1865.”
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I must object to the consideration of this bill in the House at the present time.
Mr. MORRILL. I think that after the Gentleman shall have heard my explanation he will withdraw his objection. This is the report of the majority of the ComWays&Means. this the understandin that the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. oorsa] s iall be permitted to otfer his ill as a substitute, and also that one other member of the committee shall, if he chooses, offer an amendment. I shall then ask the House to 2nd the demand for the previous question. I do not propose to occupy, myself, any more time than may be necessar to explain the report of the ComWays&Means.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I do not withdraw my objection.
Mr. STEVENS. I would like to know how far this bill differs from the bill of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. HOOPEBJon which I thought all seemed to agree the other day.
Mr. THAYER. We should like at least to hear the title of the bill. The bill was read.
The SPEAKER. This is neither a tax bill nor an appropriation bill, and therefore the language of the bill does not require it to have, under the rules, its 1st consideration in the ComWhole on the state of the Union; but the rule giving the ComWays&Means the right to report at any 1 time provides it shall be for commitment. The bill t ierefore goes to the ComWhole on the state of the Union.
Mr. MORRILL moved that the rules be suspended, and the House resolve itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union; and pending that motion moved that general debate in the ComWhole on the state of the Union be closed inten minutes after the committee resumed the consideration of the bill just referred to it.
Mr. STEVENS. I hope the bill will be post poned so that it may be ordered to be printed. The House divided on the motion to close debate; and there were ayes 65, noes 30. So the motion was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. Is it in ordertomove that the bill be postponed till it can be printed?
The SPEAKER. Not pending the motion to go into committee. lie question recurred on the motion of
Mr. Monmu. to go into committee. The House divided; and there were ayes 65, noes 83. So the motion was agreed to. The Honse accordingly resolved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union (Mr. Rounss in the chair) and proceeded to the consideration of House bill Tio. 207, to amend an act to provide Ways&Means to support the Government, approved March 3, 1865.
The CHAIRMAN stated that general debate was ordered to be closed inten minutes.
Mr. MORRILL. Mr. Chairman, it is not necessary for me to trouble the committee with any extended remarks. The bill was recommitted with sundry amendments to the ComWays&Means without instructions, but the committee did regard the fact of recommitment as instructions to some extent, and in harmony with that idea have reported the bill back with an amendment which provides that the "SecyTreasury shall not retire more than ten millions in the 1st 6 months after the passage of this act, and not more than 4 millions per month there after. It will be seen. then, if this law be passed, that it will not limit the SecyTreas sury to a period of less than 9 years in which to retire the amount of legal tenders now in circulation. That certainly will not be a very rapid reduction of the currency. So much for that. The Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. Hoorss] I suppose, will offer his proposed amendment as a substitute. All I have to say is that we have, in the bill now offered to the House, limited the Secretary as much as we believe alarge majority of the House would be in favor of doing. If the views of the Secretary are of any consequence to the House, and I think the should be, I ask to have read a communication from him today on the subject, which I send to the Clerks desk.
Mr. MORRILL. The amendments have been wrest] uson and reported by the Committee of ". ays an Means inaspirit of compromise; not to allow, us was reported in the original bill, unlimited power on the part of the SecyTreasury, and on the other hand not trammeling him so that he could not retire a single dol ar of legal tenders, nor even look toward a time, however remote, of ultimate specie payments. Ihope and believe it will prove acceptable to this side of the House, and also hope it will not be a reproach to the bill nor to gentlemen on the other side of the House if they fore O party and give it their support. 1 think it will be a compliment to the American Congress if we can consider financial“ questions reardlcss of art.
Mr. BINGHAM. Does this authorize the Secretary to negotiate these bonds abroad I
Mr. MORRILL. It leaves the bill as it was in that respect. The amendments reported by the ComWays&Means were read, as follows: On page 2 of the bill.after the word “debt” in line 2, insert thesewords: Provided, That of U.S. notes not more than 810.000.“)0may be retired and canceledwithin lix months from the passage of this not and there after not more than 0.000.000in anyone month. At the end of the bill add the following as an additional section: " SEC. Abife: That the SecyTreasury shall report to Congressat the commencement of the next session the amount of exchange made, or money borrowed under this act, and of whom and on what terms, and also the amount and character of indebtednessretired under this act and the act to which this is an amendment, with a detailed statement of the expenseof making such loans and exchanges.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the 1st amendment reported by the Committee of Wu 5 and Means. by Mr. ELDRIDGE. I desire to ask the chair man of the ComWays&Means a question in regard to this matter. I desire to know how many dollars this bill authorizes the Secretary to retire, and whether, in the retirement of money, be is limited to greenbacks or legal tenders alone, or whether it includes all the currency of the U.S.
Mr. MORRILL. It is limited to the legal tenders, commonly called “greenbacks.”
Mr. ELDRlDGE. Will it not have the effect to limit him in the retirement of interest bearing notes, as now authorized?.
Mr. EGGLESTON. He has a right to do that by law.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I understand this to be a limitation upon the Secretary.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I do not know whether I understand the effect of this bill or not, and I rise more for the purpose of making an inquiry than of saying anything on the subJecItf. I understand this prosition now, it is that the SecyTreasury shall be authorizedto fun $180,000,000 of the compound interest notes within the coming year, and that in addition to that he shall have authority to fund $34,000,000 of U.S. notes, legal tenders, making in all a reduction of $214,000,000 in the currency of this country within one year, all of which is a legal tender in the payment of debts. Now, sir, I hold in my hand an extract from the NewYork Tribune of March 19, from an article which was devoted to the discussion of this subject, and in favor of the bill; and here is the effect which the advocates of this measure claim will follow from it. This, mark you, is the effect of this bill as stated by its friends.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. These are the effects which I suppose are to follow if we adopt the proposition now before the House. It is said that the laborer must accept less wages, but that the amount which he will receive will buy him as many products. That article, it seems to me, overlooks the fact that if the laborer shall receive less wages for his labor and the farmer less pay for his products, the amount which shall be so received will not pay as much taxes as if the laborer received the same compensation for his labor and the farmer the same pay for his products as now and yet I suppose we are to pay within the next year some 500 million dollars in taxes in various forms, and the wages of the laborers of the country and the price of the products of the great West are to e reduced, when there is to be no reduction in the amount of the national indebtedness or in the amount of the national taxes. New, I hope that this measure will not be agreed to by the House. I hold that the reasons which are presented by the friends of the measure themselves are such as must convince every gentleman here that we ought not to pass it. I hold in my hand a letter which I have received from a distinguished gentleman in NewYork, and I will ask the Clerk to read an extract from it.
The Clerk read, as follows: “ We needno artificial meanstobreak down prices. they will comedown this summer fast enough. If you will keep an accurate account of the gold received lllollihlyllOIl] California and the gold sent to Europe. you Will find that for several months past there has beenlesssent to Europe than we have received from California. Home, the supply being greater than the demand, gold is accumulating here, and is consequently slowly falling here. If there shall continue the someincreasehere until September or October, the par of gold will be reached. "Gold has nothing whatever to do with the currency."
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I am not in favor of an indefinite suspension of specie payments, but areduction oipthe legal tender U.S. notes is not necessar to resumption. The question we have to decide is, what is the true policy of the countr, not what is the policy of any officer or individual. It is time we should ask only whether we are supporting the olic of the people and their interests.
The CHAIRMAN. Debate is exhausted on the endin amendment.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I would inquire if it is now in order for me to move a substitute for the bill?
The CHAIRMAN. There are 2 amendments reported from the ComWays&Means now ending.
Mr. STEVENS. Is it in order to move a substitute for the entire bill?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. original bill is perfected.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. Then I will give notice that at the propertime I will move a substitute for the whole bill.
Mr. LYNCH. I propose to amend the amendment reported by the ComWays&Means by adding the words: and no U.S. notes shall be retired and canceled until all the interest bearing Treasury notesnow outstanding are funded.
The CHAIRMAN. To what portion of the amendment of the committee does the gentleman propose to add that?
Mr. LYNCH. I will move to insert it at the end of the amendment reported by the committee. Mr. Chairman, I understand the SecyTreasury does not propose, ifwc confer upon him the authority, to retire any of the U.S. legal tendernotes until allthe compound iuterest notes are funded; and that lie propose s to retire of those not over 100 million a year. At this rate it would take nearly 2 years to fund all the compound interest notes. Now, I ask gentlemen, why anticipate beyond that time 1 Why not waitand see the result of retiring 180 million of the currency? and then, if we think it desirable, to continue the experiment, if we find the country can stand up under it, grant additional power upon the SecyTreasury. The people have a right to know what the finan eial policy of the country is to be, that they may conform their business to it, and govern themselves accordingly. I am as anxious to see the country once more on a specie basis as the SecyTreasury or the ComWays&Means or any member of the House can be; but I do not believe it necessary to contract the currency beyond the amount of the compound interest notes in order to reach this result. Why, su, since the meeting of this Congress, and Will! out contracting the currency a dollar, the premium on gold has fallen 1/3rd. At this After the rate we shall reach specie payment in about 6 months. Why not let Well enough alone?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Indiana. I would ask the gentlemariwhether, if I hold $20,000 in compound interest notes, and am disposed to hold on to them for ten years, I can be compelled to fund them.
Mr. LYNCH. I presume the gentleman would not hold those comound interest notes for ten years when they have ceased to be a 142 l tender and to bear interest.
Mr. PRICE. Will the Gentfrom Maine let me answer that question I
Mr. LYNCH. I yield to the gentleman for a moment.
Mr. “ASHBURN] asks the Gentfrom aine whether, if he has $20,000 in comound interest notes, and is disposed to hol them for ten ears, he can be compelled to fund them. I wish to answer that question in this way: that he may hold them as long as he pleases, but when they mature they Wlll draw no interest after that time.
Mr. WASHBURN, oflndiana. The amendment of the Gentfrom Maine HMr. LYNCH] is that no legal tender notes shal be funde until all the other notes are taken in.
Mr. LYNCH. That none of the notes not bearing interest, known as legal tender notes, shall be retired until all the interest bearing notes are funded.
Mr. WASHBBURN, of Indiana. Suppose that I should hold $20,000 of these compound interest notes for ten years, the legal tender notes cannot be retired while I continue to hold those notes.
Mr. LYNCH. I do not suppose these compound interest notes will be held after they mature and cease to draw interest. The Gentleman knows very well that those notes are not legal tender except for their face. After they mature they will no doubtbe promptly presented for payment.
Mr. KELLEY. I renew it, as follows: But no U.S. notes shall beretired and can celed until all the interest bearing Treasury notes now outstanding are funded.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. Will the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY yield to me to ask my colleague [Mr. ALLEY aquestion?
The CHAIRMAN. It will come out of the gentlemans time, except by unanimous consent.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I desire to ask my colleague [Mr. ALLEY] ifhis resolution was anything more, or purported to be anything more, than an expression of opinion on the part of this House, that at the earliest suitable opportunity, when the country was in a proper condition for it, specie payments should be resumed? Was it. anything more than that?
Mr. ALLEY. I will state all that it contained. The Gentfrom Maine [Mr. LYNCH] otfered an amendment the practical effect of which I have stated to be to prevent an contraction of the currency at all.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. My colleague will pardon me for interrupting him. My inquiry was in reference to the resolution he introduced in the early part of this session.
Mr. ALLEY. I was going on to say that that resolution merely contemplated the pledging the Congress of the U.S. to coop erative action with the SecyTreasury in the views he had expressed in his annual report to Congress. That I think was the language of the resolution: that so far as it could be one without disaster to the business interestsof the country, the policy of Congress should be in favor of an early resumption of specie payments.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. Itreferred to a resumtion of specie payment?
Mr. HOOPER. of Massachusetts. At the earliest period practicable I
Mr. ALLE. Yes, sir, without doing violence to the business interests of the country.
Mr. GARFIFLD and suggested a contraction of the currency as a means.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I wish to ask my colleague if he intends to convey the impression to this House and to the country that an member who is opposed to withdrawvingall the greenback circulation, which cost the country nothing for interest, and substituting for it bonds bearin interest payable in gold, is therefore oppose to the resumption of specie payments at the earliest period possible without derangement of the industry and business of the country; and if he wishes the contraction of the currency to be conducted so rapidly as to break down all industrial pursuits, and thus benefit large capitalists at the expense of the great body of the people?
Mr. ALLEY. I do not intend to conve any such impression, that any gentleman w is opposed to withdrawing all the greenback cir cuation and substituting interest paying gold bonds is therefore opposed to a resumption of specie payments at the earliest practicable moment consistent with the business interests of the country. Neither am I aware that anyone, on the contrary, has advocated or favored any such policy as the question would seem to imply. I certainl have not. In reply to teother part of the question I have to say that the very reason I advocate the policy of the SecyTreasury is to avert such a calamity, and the only way to avoid such disaster was to avow the policy of contraction so far as maybe necessary to bring about resumtion of specie payments at the earliest practicable moment consistent with the least derangement to the business interests of the country. The very avownl of such a policy, and clothing the SecyT Treasury with necessary power to carry it out, will produce such a feeling of caution and such a check to speculation and excessive importa tiohsastomakeitunnecessa, in my opinion, to contract very much. Ithin I see very clearly how a resumption of specie payments can be etiected with very little contraction of the currency; but there must. be some, and it is impossible to effect it without giving the Secretary the pewer to control our securities to considerable extent, and the very pesse ssion of that power is what will conduce very mate rially to prevent the necessity of its exercise. Therefore I cannot consent to cripple the Secretary desiring, as I most sincerely do, for the best interest of all, to brin about resumption within a reasonable period of time.
The CHAIRMAN. the time of the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Hooves] has expired.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. Has all my timebeen consumed by the gentlemansansweri
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I desire to get the views of the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] in relation to this fact, whether the laws of trade are not now carrying us a lit tle faster toward the resumption of specie payment than is satisfactory to the Secretary imself; whether he is not of opinion that gold is falling too fast; and whether he would not be glad if it would go up?
Mr. ALLEY. I am not here to shield an body. I express my honest convictions. O man will be more glad than Iwill be to receive information from any quarter, and I will an swer the question The C AIRMAN. Debate is exhausted on the ending amendment.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. Can I have the floor to move an amendment? All my time was taken up by my colleague.
The CHAIRMAN. Amendment is not now in order.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved that the committee rise, to dispense with the night session. The motion was disagreed to. The question recurred on Mr. KELLEYB amendment, and it was disagreed to.
Mr. GRISWOLD. I rise to oppose the amendment. I concur with the gentleman in the object he seeks to attain, but I differ with him entirely as to the mode of doing it. In my judgment we are legislatin at the wrong end of this question. It the HoRep would take measures with reference to protecting us from the overwhelming, inev itable, and destructive avalanche of foreign" importations into this country, we would be legislating to some purpose.
Mr. WENIWVORHH. I ask ifthere are not importers in this House now acting for this bill?
Mr. GRISWOLD. I snyifwe shouldlegislate to prohibit these enormous importations we won d be doing a much wiser thing than we are doin now.
Mr. HIGBY. I rise to a question of order. itself when gentlemen are on the floor. It is utterly impossible to hear them, there is so much talking in the vicinity of members who are speaking. I have got tired of this.
The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen will resume their seats and preserve order. All business will be suspended until gentlemen resume theirseats.
Mr. WENTWORTH. Is it in order for me to say a few words againstthe amendment?
The CHAIRMA. It is not. Debate is exhausted upon it.
Skip Skip The question being taken on the amendment to the amendment it was disagreed to.
Mr. MOORHEAD. Mr. Chairman, I am not at all surprised that there should be a great deal of excitement on this question, for it is a very important one, and the House appears to be somewhat closely divided upon it. I regret to say I believe I can refer to the fact without impropriety, as it is already well understood by the House that the ComWays&Means were divided upon this question. I do not wonder that such should be the fact. I must say, however, that I differ entirely from the remarks of the gentlemaii from Illinois [Mr. Wssrwoiziii] upon the subject of the resumtion of specie payments. think, sir, that all) the members of this House are in I favor of resumption. I know that I am in favor of as early a resumption of specie payments as can be attained without doin violence to the business of the country. The fference is with regard to the mode of reaching resumption. I0not believe that it is to be reached by making a stringent currency. I donot believe that the resumption of specie payments can wisely be attained by creating a scarcity of money throughout the country and thereby causing general distress. Therefore, when this bill in another form was before the House a few days agoI voted against it.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I desire to ask the gentleman a question: under the provisions of the bill as now reported by the committee, how many years wou d it be before the currency would be reduced in the manner in which the gentleman desires to have it reduced?
Mr. MOORHEAD. I have but 5 minutes, and I cannot permit myself to be drawn aside from the line of my remarks to answer questions. I was saying that when this bill in a different form was before the House the other day, I voted against it. I am opposed to reducing the currency to any considerable extent at the present time. But I believe it to be important, and I may say necessary, that we should agree upon a bill, by the passage of which we shall manifest our confidence in the SecyTreasury, and, so far as may be done, withoutviolating our own convictionsof policy and duty, stand by him and support him. With the view of reconciling so far as possiblethe differences of opinion on this subject, the ComWays&Means have presented the amendment now before us; and I trust that gentlemen on both sides of the House can give it their support. I hope that the bill will be passed. Its elfectwill be to reduce the currency in a very moderate measure, and n by any means at a rapid rate. It will not, as I believe, affect injuriously the interests of the country. My reason for voting as I did the other day to prevent the reduction of the currency was that I believed, with the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. GRISWOLD] that we were beginning at the wrong end. As I have already remarked, I did not believe that we can safely advance toward a resumption of specie pay I renew the amendments by making the currency of the country stringent. I believe that to insure the pros perity of the country, the money of the country should be abundant. I believe that if we would adopt some measure to restrain the excessive mports with which our count is being flooded, entailing upon us an intolerable burden of debt, which, unless some remedy be found, must soon involve us in distress and ruin, we should soon have money enough here to float all our present currency and even more. I withdraw my amendment.
Mr. MORRILL. In order to terminate de bate on the pending amendments, I move that the committee rise. The motion was agreed to. So the committee rose; and the Speakerhaving resumed the chair, Mr. ltonuxs reported that the ComWhole on the state of the Union, having had under consideration the Union generally, and particularly the hill (H.R.No. 207) entitled “ An act to amend an act entitled An act to provide Ways&Means to support the Government, approved March 8, 1865, ” had come to no resolution thereon. EVENING SESSION DISPENSED WITH.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move that The motion was agreed to. ORDER or BUSItvEss proMoanow.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move that, by unanimous consent, the session of tomor row be devoted exclusively to debate as in ComWhole upon the Presidents mes sage. There was no objection, and it was so ordered. LOAN BILL Again.
Mr. MORRILL. I move that when the House shall again resolve itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union on House bill No. 207, all debate upon the bill and pending amendments terminate in one minute. I desire, however, to give the Gentfrom Massachusetts
Mr. oornn] an opportunity to offer hisamendment.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I move to amend the motion so as to provide that debate upon the bill and all amendments thereto shall terminate inten minutes. The amendment was agreed to aycs 66, noes 56. The motion of Mr. MonitiLL, as amended, was adopted. o
Mr. STEVENS (at 4 oclock and 5 minutes p.m.) I move that the House adjourn. The fnotion was not agreed to; there being a es GO, noes 65.
Mr. MORRILL. I move thatthe House again resolve itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union. The motion was agreed to; and the House accordingly resolved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union, (Mr. ROLLINS in the chair) and resumed the cons“ideration of the bill (H.R.No. 207) entitled An act to amend an act entitled An act to provide Ways&Means to support the government, approved March 8, 1865.”
Mr. H00 R, of Massachusetts. I rise, Mr. Chairman, for the purpose of offering, if in order, a substitute for the bill.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I wish 1st to record my protest against the idea which has been urged in the House, that any person who votes against withdrawing “greenbacks” from circulation, before the interest bearing notes are withdrawn, is an opponent to the resumptionof specie iriyment. I claim to be as strongly in favor of the resumtion of specie payment at the earliest possible time as any man in this House. I will state, sir, in regard to the substitute which Ipropose to offer, that it differs from the bill of the committee mainly in 2 points. By the act to which this bill is an amendment the SecyTreasury cannot issue bonds the session of this evening be dispensed with. l at less than par. The bill of the committee places no limit to the rate at which he may issue bonds. I propose that the original limit shall be retained: so that the Secretary cannot issue bonds at less than par. I think it is due to the holders of the bonds who have taken them at par that they should have this security. The Secretary expresses fears that if the limitation of par is inserted in the bill, combinations may be made to reduce the price below par and thus prevent their being ne gotinted. The danger seems to be that if the power is given to sell below par such combi nations may be made to compel him to sell at constantly decreasing rates, and the present holders may become sellers with the view of replacing their bonds afterward at still lower rates an thus produce a panic in regard to the value of the Government securities. I have as much confidence in the present SecyTreasury as anyone, but it does not seem to me desirable to withdraw the secilrity of a limitation of the rate at which the bonds maybe sold, and to give the power to issue bon s at any rate he c ooses. We cannot tell who may be his successor; and, even if we were willing to give the present Secretary the power, we may not be wiing to give it to his successor.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Has there been an. such limitation in former bills?
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. In the early bills there was a limitation of the market price, but in which it is proposed to amend, as it now stands, the limitation at par exists. The 2nd difference is in regard to the withdrawal of the U.S. notes, or legal tender currency not hearing interest. This bill provides that the Secretary shall only with draw interest bearing obligations. The See retn has power now under existing laws to with raw nonjinterest bearing obligations also to issue Treasury notes or interest bearing legal tenders in place of them. It was thought unwise to exchange bonds bearing interest for U.S. notes which cost nothing for interest, and therefore this substitute limits him, so far as he acts under this law, without imairing the power he has under another existing aw. If he sees fit to withdraw non-interest bearing notes he has that power now. Those are the only 2 essential oints of difference between the proposition of the committee and the substitute which I offer. I have added one other provision, to limit the rate of interest on the temporary loans to 5%.; the limit now being 6%. I think the temporary loans would not be reduced by thus limiting the rate of interest; that they would be continued at 5 as well as at 6. Even if it did lessen the amount of the loan, no harm could be done, as the greater the amount the more uncertain it becomes, and therefore less advantageous. I prepared this substitute after hearing the discussion in the House, believing itconformed to the sentiment of the House on the 2 points to which I have referred. namely, that bonds should not be issued atle ss than par, and should not be issued in place of the U.S. notes, which constitute a loan to the Government without interest.
The Clerk read the substitute, as follows: That the act entitled “An act to provide Ways&Means to support the Government, ” approved Inreli 8 865 shall be extendedand construedto empower the SecyTreasury to sell any description of bonds aut orized bysaid act.at such rates not less than paras hemaythink advisable.lorlawful money i of the U.S., or to receive in payment any Treasurynotes, compound interestnotes. ccrtiticutes of indebtedness or of deposit, With the interest accrncil thereon, which have been or which may be issued under any act of Conn ess; it shall be the duty of the SecyTreasury to retire and cancel an amount of Treasury notes, certificates or other obligations bearing interest, equal in amount to the bonds disposedof: and the public debt shall not hereafterbeincreasedby authority of this or ot any previous acts of Congress: and from and utter the let day of July next the interest on certificates of deposit for temporary loans shall not exceed the annual rate of 5%.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I wish to say that in the early part of the session
Mr. MORRILL. Have not the gentlemans 5 minutes expired?
Mr. THAYER. The gentleman has ten minutes, and I hope he will not be interrupted.
Mr. FARISWORTH. I make the point that we are under the 5 minutes” discussion and that the gentleman cannot speak for a longer time.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair overrules the point of order, and decides that the gentleman is entitled to ten minutes.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I wish to an that early in the session the Committee of ays and Means addressed a letter to the SecyTreasury asking him whether he had not, under existing laws, sufficient pOwer to meet all requirements of the Treasury and contraction of currency suggested in his report. His reply I will send to the Clerk to be read; and it will be seen that m substitute contains all the power stated therein to be requisite. The Elerk read, as follows: TREASURY Dariiizrimsr,Iammnfl 1866. DR?! Sin: Your favor of the 19th instant is receive(. The proviso in the act of the 3dof March. 1865t.o which you call in attentionhsimply authorizes the SecyTreasury, with the consent of the olders. to convert Treasury notes or other obligations bearing interest into any description of bonds authorized by that not. have been and still am of the opinion thatthe word "converted" is usedsynonymquslyWith “ex changed.” and that it was the intention of Congress to limit the Secretary to a mere exchange of bonds authorized by that act for other interest bearing obligations of the U.S. I have not felt and shoiildnot feel at liberty to sell bondsunder that act for U.S and pational currency notes, and psethe proceedsin retiring interest bearingobligations. It is, in myjudsrment.of verygreatimportancethat the powers of the SecyTreasury should be clearly defined and that c should avoi the exercise of anauthority novexpresslvgiven to him I am. very truly, yours, H. MoCULLOCbfil.aw. Secretary. Hon. J. S. MoaniLL, Chairman ComWays&Means. HoRep.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I wish only to add that my substitute exactly covers the points asked for in that letter.
The CHAIRMAN. The time allowed for debate is exhausted.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I would like to ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [ries of “ Order!”] he CHAIRMAN. Debate on this bill is exhausted.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Congress [Loud and continued shouts of “Orderl” “Orderl"]
Mr. MORRILL. I desire to ask the Chair, what is the 1st question before the House?
The CHAIRMAN. The question before the committee is upon the 1st amendment reported by the ComWays&Means.
Skip Skip The question was taken on the 1st amendment reported by the ComWays&Means, and it was agreed to. The 2nd amendment reported by the ComWays&Means was also agreed to.
Mr. ALLISON. I move to insert after the word “advisable, ” in line 14 of the original bill the words “at not less than par, ” so that it will read: As he maythink advisablekatnot lessthan par. for lawful moneyof the U.S. Are.
SKIP SKIP Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I call for tellers on that amendment. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Monniu and ALLISON were appointed. The committee divided; and the tellers reported ayes 53, noes 73. So the amendment was not agreed to. No further amendments being offered to the original bill, the question recurred on the substitute offered by Mr. HOOPER, of Massachu letts. Mr. STEVENS. I demand tellers. Tellers were ordered.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I wish to ask if by common consent the question may not so taken on this substitute by yeas&naysin I understand that the House. [Cries of“Nol” “No! ”] Why not let the substitute be reported to the House, and let us have a vote upon it by yeas&nays? [Shouts of “Object! ” and “Nol ” (I l 11 Messrs. MORRILL, and Hoorna of Massachusetts, were appointed tellers. The committee divided; and the tellers reported ayes 60, noes 74. So Mr. Hoorrziv.s substitute was not agreed to.
Mr. MORRILL. I move that the committee rise, and report the bill to the House, With the recommenation that it pass. The motion was agreed to. So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. Romans reported that the ComWhole on the state of the Union, having had under consideration as a special order bill of the House No. 207, to amend an act entitled “An act to provide Ways&Means to support the Government, ” approved March 3, 1865, had instructed him to report the same to the House With sundry amendments, and recommend its passage.
Mr. MORltILL. I move the previous question on the engrossment of the ill.
Mr. ALLISON. I appeal to the gentleman to yield to me for a moment. [Cries of “No! ” “No!”] I desire to put a simple [Shouts of “Order!” and “No!” “(NlloGSl”lI]OH.
Mr. MORRILL. I must really decline to yield.
SKIP SKIP Mr. STEVENS. I move that the House do now adjourn, and on that motion I demand the yeas&nays. Mr. FARNSWORTH. I call for tellers on the yeas&nays. Tellers were not ordered. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the negative yeas 61, nays 72, not voting 60; So the House refused to adjourn. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered, being upon the 1st amendment reported from the Committee of {he Whole ont e state of the Union, as follows: On page 2, line 2. after the word "debt" insert the following: Provided, That of U.S. notes.not more than $10,000.00m)ay be retired and canceled within 6 monthslrom the passage of this act and there after not more than $4,000, 00ino anyonemonth. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. BINGHAM. I move to lay the bill upon the table; and upon that motion I demand the yeas&nays, and I call for tellers on the yeas&nays. Tellers were not ordered. The yeas and nay: were not ordered. The question was taken; and the House refused to lay the bill upon the table. The question recurre on the 2nd amendment reported from the ComWliole on the state of the Union, to add at the cud of the bill the following: SEC. Abife:.That the SecyTreasury shall report to Congressat the commencement of the next session the amount of exchangesmade or moneyborrowed under this act and of whom and when and on what terms and also the amount and character of indebtednessre tired under this actand the act to which this is an amendment. With a detailed statement of the expensesof making such loansand exchanges.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The bill was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. Mr. MORRILL. I demand the previous question on the passage of the bill. The previous question was 2nded and the main iiestion ordered. Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I demand the yeas&nays on the passage of the bill. The yeas and iiays were ordered. The question was taken; and was decided in the affirmative yeas 83, nays 53, not voting 47; So the bill was passed. Mr. MORRILL mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. POSTAL LAWS.
Mr. ALLEY. I now call up the mtRtv the House recommitted to the comPostOffice House bill NO. 281, to alter and amend the postal laws. I entered the motion to reconsider at the time this bill was recommitted, which was about the 17th of February. As it is now late, and I suppose the House has no desire to proceed to the consideration of that bill, I will now more to adjourn.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. SATURDAY, March 24, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borsrox. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
The SPEAKER. By order of the House, the only business in order today is debate, as in ComWhole, upon the Presidents annual messa e; upon which the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. MOULTON] is entitled to the floor. PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
Mr. BROOKS. I risk consent of the House to make a correction of the semi official report of our proceedings.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. MOULTON] is entitled to the floor, and no other person can occupy the time of the House without his permisston during the hour to which he is entitled.
Mr. MOULTON. I will yield the floor, if it is not to come out of my time. No objection was made.
Mr. BROOKS. If I recollect aright, never before in my life have I arisen to a matter of personal explanation, or to correct anything which has appeared officially or semi officially in relation to the debates and proceedings of the House. But in the Globe of yesterday there is a report in some respects so erroneous that I feel it my duty to call attention to it bricfl. I (I0 not refer to my own remarks, where there is a slight error in astronomy, in regard to Orion among the Pleiiides, a matter w iieh is of little importance; though the reporters are supposed to know astronomy, astrology, and almost everything else. But I rise more particularly to state that the remarks of the honorable gentleman who followed nie, [Mr. GARFIELD] which are reported there as having been made to this House were not heard by me; and as I understood them they have been very incorrectly reported. It is not. for me to state how or where this report is in error. It is a matter of comparatively little importance to me, except to stand right. on the record. Before I go further, I wish to state that in the debate of the other day I stated that the report of the majority of the select committee made by Hon. Mr. Garfield, is signed only by himself. In justice to the honorable member I will state that by reference to the record I find that “Mr. Garfield, from the select committee to investigate charges against the Treesury Dept, made the following report.” The report was not signed; but it seems that he had authority from the select committee to make it. The report of the minority was signed by James Brooks, John T. Stuart, W. G. Steele, and John L. Dawson. But the particular object. for which I have arisen, is to ask that the paperwhich I send to the Clerk to be read he entered upon the Globe, as a part of the record connected with this debate.
The Clerk read, as follows: Tnmsunv Darn rill", Sonictrons Orrier. April 19.1864. Sin: Ihuve the honor herewith to transmitareport made to me by Colonel L. C. Baker, togetherwith a number of adent: uffecting the conduct and character of S. M. Clark and G. A. In Henderson. accordance with your instructions 1 exhibited these allidavits to Mr. Clurk.stuting to him that I did so by your dire ction, and in order that he might have an opportunity to make such explanation or reply ashe should deem proper. Hisrepl to mewas, that as to anything alleged against him impeaching his conduct or character as an ethos:of the Dept he denied it utter: matter, and that as to any other he scorned to may to any answer. I have further, in obedience to your order. called before me most of the personswhose athdiivits are haesrietwhitahs transmitted and made such other inquiriel been in my power to make touching the matter stated in the aflidui it, and the result is an entire conviction that the most material of the lo sthtaeteamfliednutvsi tsaroetfruLlola.paJarctikcsuolanr, lyJetnhnoiseeGcoonrmtaoinne, danind Laura Duvall. What action. it any, ought to be taken in view of thesefacts, is of course not a question for me to consider. I have the honor tube, with high res Pet. EDWARD.IDRDAN, Solicitor of the Trealunl. Hon. S. P. CHASE SecyTrcasury.
Mr. GARFIELD. Will the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. MOULTON] yield to me fora moment?
Mr. MOULTON. I will, with the understanding that it is not to come out of my time.
Mr. GARFIELD. I have nothing further to say in regard to this matter beyond what I have already said. I am obliged to the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Baooxs] for the correction he has made in his remarks of Thurs day last. On that point I will only state that. my report was in the usual form of reports of committees to this House. leports are not. signed; but some member of the committee iil authorizedio make the report as from the committee. So far as I know, it is the almost Universal custom to head a report thus: “Mr. submitted a report fom such a committee;" and that is understood to be the authorized report of the committee. such was the fact in this case; I was authorized by the may fority fI of the committee to make the report. had not been so authorized, certainly some one of the 4 members associated with me, Mr. Henry Winter Davis, Mr. Wilson, of Iowa, Mr. Jenckes, of RhdIsland, and Governor Fentou, of NewYork, would have made the correction at the time. No such correction was made; the report was made, as the record of the committee will show, by their authority. One word only in regard to the paperwhich has just been read. That paperconstituted the chief element of the charges on which the committee proceeded to make the investigation. As the result of their examination ot those charges, and of other charges brought. before them, the committee made the report which I submitted. Iwill ask the Clerk to read the conclusion of that report.
The Clerk read, as follows: “ Resolved.That the policy of printing public money in the Treasury has resulted in a great saving of expenseto the Government.andsecurity against fraud and the llfl llilS.of the Printing Bureau have been administered with marked abilit and integrity. "All of which is respectfullysu uiitted.”
Mr. GARFIELD. Then in addition there is a report from Governor Fenton, in which he states that he concurs in the report of the committee in every respect, except the reflection on the NewYork Bank Note Company; so that I made the report from a majorit of the committee; and there was not, so ur as I have overheard, until the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Baooxs] so stated, any dissent whatever except by the minority whose report is on the record. I am entirely satisfied to leave the record as it. now stands.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. With the permission of the Gentfrom Illinois, I wish to put myself right in relation to this report, inas much as it seems that it was not. signed by any person. I did not concur in the conclusion of the committee. I was not present at the session of the committee when the report was read. That report contains a great deal in which, as I stated at the time to members of the committee, I did not. concur. If the report had been presented to me for my signature I should not have signed it. I do not concur in a portion of the conclusion of the committee as set forth in the resolution up nded to the report. As the case has been biought up in this manner I make this statement, in order that I may be placed in a properposition upon the record.
Mr. GARFIELD. I am very glad to hear the statement of the gentleman. I now learn for the 1st time that he dissented from the conclusions of that report. I know that a majority of the committee present at its last meeting authorized me to make the report, as the records of the meeting will show. Of course what the gentleman now states in regard to his own opinion is correct.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. Before the report was submitted to the House, I was asked )3;a member of the committee the late Henry Winter Davis, whether] would be willing to sign the report. I told him that I would not be; thatI did not agree with the conclusions of the committee as set forth in the report, and the resolution accompanying it.
Skip Skip LEAVE or ABSENCE. Mr. GRIDER asked leave of absence for himself for 2 weeks from next Wednesday. Leave was granted. The SPEAKER asked leave of absence for Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. Leave was granted. RECONSTRUCTION.
The Clerk read, as follows: ResolvedI: the Senate and HoRep of the U.S.A. in Congress asesembled That whereas the peopleof Tennesseedid on the 22d day of February, 865, by a large popular vote adopt and ratify a constitution of government.republican in form, and not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the U.S., and a State government has been organized under the provisions thercof; and which said provisions and laws passedin pursuancethereof exclude those who have been engaged in rebellion against the U.S. from the exercise of the elective frnncliise for the respectiveperiods of timethercin provided for, and foreverprohibitthe state of Tennessee from assuming or saying anydebt or obligation contracted or incurre in aid of the late rebellion, which said constitutional provisions and laws passed in pursiiance thereof, proclaim and denote loyalty to the Union; and whereas the people of Teniicsseehave made known to the Congress of the U.S. their desire that the constitutional relations heretofore existing between them and the U.S. may be fully established and said people are found to he in a condition to exercise the functions of a State within this Union: Therefore. The State of Tennesse cis hereby declared entitled to represenlatiop in the congressof the U.S. in accordance With the Constitution and laws thereof.
Mr. HOGAN. I desire to make some remarks, but I prefer not to go on this after noon. I have agreed to yield to the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. Lawn $02] with the understandin that I shall be recognized as entitled to the nor when the House again meets for general debate.
The SPEAKER protempore, (Mr. Tnnna.) That will be the understanding, if there be no objection. here was no objection. PAYMENT FORSLAVES.
Skip Skip LEAVE or ABSENCE. The SPEAKER protempura (Mr. THAYER) asked leave of absence for next week for Mr. GARFIELD. Leave was granted.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I move that the House adjourn.
Mr. WENTWORTH. Will the Gentfrom Ohio withdraw that motion for one moment?
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. Yes, sir. FALL or GOLD.
Mr. WENTWORTH. I desire to in uiie whether any reparations have been run e to drii c this all in mourninijn consequence of the fall of gold to 125? [ aughter.]
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I have not. heard from an gentlemen on the other side.
Mr. WENTWORTH. Well, I will simply say that although I am in favor of. the fall of gold, yet ifthe o ponents of it wish to do an lllljlllg of that kind I do not know that I would O ect.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire at tiic same time whether anything has occurred that is likely to bring about a full of taxes. Taxes have not fallen any, ifgold has. The price of the means whereby taxes are to be paid is fallin, and will continue to fall; yet taxes are not 1i ely to decrease.
Mr. WENTWORTH. I will simply say, Mr. Speaker, in answer to the gentleman, that there is every probability that the few remaining soldiers of the Revolution and their widows, the soldiers of the war of 1812, and the brave boys who foughtso nobly to put down the late rebellion. wil, with members of Congress and the employees of this House, rejoice in a few days in the fact that the credit of this great Government of ours has been restored, and that the money of the nation is at par. God bless the soldiers!
Mr. GRIDER asked and obtained leave to print a speech. [See Appendix]
Mr. ASHLEY, ofOhio. I renew my motion that the House adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and thereupon (at 4 oclock and 25 minutes p.m.) the House adjourned.
Skip Skip PETITIONS, ETC. The following petitions. $10.w. cre presented under the rule and referred to the applroimate committees: By Mr. KASSON: The petition of Campbell 8: Thaycr and moors. for increase of duty on foreign linseed oil imported. By Mr. LAFLIN: The petition of citizens of Clay ton. JeHerson county. New ! ork, in favor of univer sal suffrage. By Mr. MORRILL: The ietition of asst as sessorsof 2nd district of ermout for increase of pa. byMr. NICHOLSON: The petition of John H. Price 5 Co and others.for theremovalof the tax on barrels and casks. By Mr. PERHAM: the petition of J. H. ilorcestci and 11 others.for the amendment of the tent! law so as to irotcct American labor. By Mr. UPSON: The plOllIllblBand resolutioris of the Common Council a the city oi Lansing. Michi gun. in favor of the extensionof the land grantimjde to the State of Michigan {orthe purpose of building a railroad from Amboy. iiii Lansuig. toTraverse llay, and requesting the Sens&Reps from that State the useall honorable means to procure such extension.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. MONDAY, March 26, 1866. Prayer by Rev. Jossru CUMMINGS, President of Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connec ticut. The Journal of Friday last was read.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep by Mr. McPHl ZRSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed a bill (H.R.No. 207) to amend an act entitled “An act to provide Ways&Means for the support of the Government, ” approved March 3, 1865. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED. The message further announced that the Speaker of the HoRep had signed an enrolled Jtresolution (S. It. No. 50) in relation to the publication of the laws of the U.S.; and it was thereupon signed by The President protempore. Senfrom NEWJERSEY.
Mr. SUMNER. I rise to a question of privilege. I move to amend the Journal by striking out the vote of Mr. Stockton on the question of his seat. As the motion is of some importance I have reduced it to writing, and I send it to the Chair.
The PRESIDENT protempme. The following motion to ament the JournalofFridays proceedings is offered by the Senfrom Massachusetts. It will be read.
Mr. SAULSBURY. I rise to another question of order. The Journal is correct, the vote having been taken, and cannot be amended, I apprehend, by a resolution contrar to the fact. The vote was given by Mr. Stoc ton. The Journal is correct. No one denies that the Journal states the truth, and therefore to under take to correct it now in this way would be to make it speak that which is false. The vote of Mr. Stockton was given. My point of order is that this motion cannot be entertained in the Senate, being out of order.
The President protempore. The motion must 1st be read. The proposed amendment to the Journal offered by the Senfrom Massachusetts will be read.
The Secretary read it, as follows: That the Journal of Friday. March 23. 1866.be amendedby striking out the vote of Mr. Stockton on the question of his seat in the Senate.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Was that at the same or a subsequent session?
Mr. SUMNER. I will remind the Senator that members of the House of Commons receive no compensation, and yet no member of the House oi? Commons is allowed to sit as a judge in his own case.
Mr. JOHNSON. Afier a while, if the learned member goes on, he will try to persuade us that the Government of GreatBritain is a eat deal better than our own; that a monarchy is to be preferred to a republic; and that instead of the present mode of electing Presidents, wev should adopt the mode resorts to in the Vati can of electing Popes. Now, they have made a rule in the HoRep on this subject, he says. What is the rule? In the 1st place, why make a rule? The honorable member says it is a part of the law of nature. Isupposethat the members of the House are so ject to the laws of nature. Then he says it is a part of the law of Parliament. I imagine the HoRep are supposed to know what the law of Parliament is; but notwithstandingthat, they adopted the rule to which the honorable member refers. We have adopted no such rule; and if the rule referred to as adopted by the House was a rule which would cover a case of this description, the adoption of it by the House is conclusive evidence that without it the law would be otherwise than it was made to be by the rule. But the rule is altogether mise on ceived. But it is said the rights of the American aegiple are involved, the reutation of the vernment is at stake. I the rights of the American people and the reputation of the Government are to depend on the manner in which this case is disposed of, they are neither rights nor reputation worth contending for. The whole of the Judiciar Committee except m friend the member from NewHampshire
Mr. CLARK] were satisfied that Stockton was dul elected. What would have been the result if Mr. Stockton had not voted 1 Would he have lost his seat? The member from Massachusetts, 1 snppose, is under that impression, Would a tie vote and that would have been the state of the vote if he had not voted have lost him his seat? Certainly the member knows that it would not. He is to remain here until he is excluded; and as far as the result, therefore, is concerned, it is quite immaterial whether be cast that vote or did not cast it. Why did he vote? He gave his reasons on Friday. I shall not repeat them. Even if there had been any want of delicacy in such a vote in ordinary circumstances, there was in the judgment of many, perhaps of all, thought to be no want of delicac under the particular circumstances in which be cast his vote. His colleague was away and had tele graphed that he would be here early this week. e had no notice that his vote would be required at all until Thursday morning. He telegraphedin reply, afterstating matters which I shall notmention, “I am now confined to my room, and I cannot come immediately, but Iwill be there early in the next weck;” and yet the vote was taken on the very day the telegram arrived.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Nothing was said about postponing the vote on the part of Mr. Stockton no reuest was made to postpone.
Mr. JOHNSON. There was no proposition on this side. There was no proposition suggested by my friend, who, I have no doubt, acted as he thought was right, to make a ost oucment. under the circumstances, t cre ore, I think the sense of the public was and will be that even supposing there was the slightest want of delicacy in castingavote upon such aquestion by the member whose seat is contested, it was in the particular instance more than justified by the circumstances existing at the time the vote was cast. I have said all I proposato say. The whole matter is in the keeing of the Senate. No matter what may bet e judgment of those who differ from me personally, whether they direct the name to be stricken from the Journal or not, I shall rest perfectly conse ious that my honor is untarnished by my approval of the act of the member from NewJersey.
Mr. NYE. Will the Senfrom Illinois allow me to ask aquestion?
Mr. NYE. If I understand the resolution reported from the ComJudiciary the conclusion of it was that the Senfrom NewJersey was entitled to his seat. I wish to ask whether, in order to pass that resolution, it is not necessary to have a majority vote.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Certainly it is; but the Senator is here without that.
Mr. NYE. That is what we will discuss hereafter.
Mr. TRUMBULL. You would have to get him out by a vote, would you not? and if you proposed such a resolution and the vote was 20 for it and 20 against it the resolution would fail.
Mr. NYE. If the Senfrom Illinois will show me how he can pass a resolution without a rpajority vote of this body, I will be obliged to im.
Mr. TRUMBULL. That is not a matter involved here at all. It is not necessar to pass a resolution to declare the Senfrom cw Jersey entitled to his seat any more than it is necessary to pass a resolution to declare the Senfrom evnda entitled to his seat. They are both here as Senators, and until you have some aflirmative vote of the Senate denying them the right to their seats they have a right to remain here as Senators. It will require, as I said an affirmative vote.
Mr. CONNESS. It is simply an undeter minedquestion. He would not have a right.
Mr. RUMBULL. the question with me is as to the propermode of arriving at this matter; and it seems to me that the proposed proposition would not accomplish the o ect; at any rate without another proposition, i this carries to strike the Senators name from the roll. Then you would have to bring up the resolution, it seems to me, upon which we acted, for although this motion carried, that would stand just as it is. It seems to me that the properand the only propermode of reaching this matter would be to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was carried, and then, when the question arises upon the passage of that resolution, the Senate can decide as to whether the Senfrom NewJersey shall vote or not. If his name is stricken out the resolution stands unpassed; but it seems to me we have to get that resolution before us in some shape in order to place our action properly upon the Journals. I do not see howyou can expunge the Journal to change the result of what has happened. I am inclined to think that the proper course to pursue is that which I have suggested; and I shall be prepared, if that is the proper course I leave that to other senators to move a reconsideration of the vote by which that resolution carried, if that is necessary to accom plISh the object.
Mr. Do I understand my friendfrom Illinois to say that he is ready to move a reconsideration?
Mr. TRUMBULL. I said if it was necessary to accomplish this object. If that is the best mode to get at it, I all make that motion ifno other Senator does. I did notsee how it could well be accomplished by the Senators motion, and I ask him now whether in any of the cases to which he has referred the result was determined by the vote of the interested party.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Then they are not anal ogous to the proposition which he has made.
Mr. SUMNEIE. I did not understand the Senatorsquestion. I have 2 cases before me towhic I will call attention. The Senator, us I understand him, now proposes to move a reconsideration. I am la of it.
Mr. CONNESS, [to Mr. Suntan] You withdrawin your motion.
Mr. SUMIER. I am glad of iIt, say. When Ibrought forward this motion, and, indeed, when I undertook to consider the propriety of bringing it forward, I had no reason to suppose that any Senator would move a reconsideration. Voting as I did, Iwas not in a condition to make such a motion; I could not make it; and with me the practical question was how to bring the Senate to a vote on the important question whether
Mr. Stockton is to be deprived of his right to vote on the present question, it must. be by some rule or by some law. Will the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts point out any rule or any law that contravenes, much less that overrules the positive provision of the Constitution, that can Senator shall be entitled to one vote? That is the law of the Constitution in the organization of the Senate. If the Senate has prescribed a rule for its own proceedings, that a Senator should net vote on a question in which he was concerned or interested, the question might come u, then, between the validity of such a rule agd the provision of the Constitution; but this case, as it is now before the Senate, admits of no such question. There is no conflict of rule or law to govern the principle of the case; but here is a simple rule of the Constitution, that says in plain and explicit language that the Senate shall consist ot 2 members from each State, and that every Senator shall be entitled to one vote, generally, without qualification, without reservation, and that, I maintain, entitles Mr. Stockton here to vote. If the Senate ever intended a different rule they would have prescribed asecial rule to govern the particular case; an in the absence of any special rule or any rule upon the subject, his right to vote, in my judgment and I have always been of this opinion is just as undeniable and as valid as that of any Senator of the body. Whether he will vote or not in his own case is a question addressed to his own delicacy and his own sense of honorand I concur with the judgment passed by the honorable Senfrom Maryland, that the circumstance of this case fully authorized and required him to cast his vote; and he would have been derelict to his duty to the State of NewJersey and to his duties as a Senator in this body not to have given that vote.
The President protempore. Is the Senate read for the question on the motion to amend teJournal?
Mr. TRUMBULL had given notice of his intention to call it up. I ask that the Clerk read the letter.
Mr. STOCKTON. I think it was Tuesday night, but this fact any gentleman can ascertain; it was the evening before the day when the case was called up.
Mr. STOCKTON. My impression is that it was Tuesday.
The President protempore. The letter will be read, if there be no objection.
Mr. STOCKTON. I recollect now that the Senfrom Maine [Mr. MORRIM] stated himself on the floor that it was on Wednesday evening that he, notified me, and I have no doubt, therefore, that it was on Wednesday evenin that this letter was written. The hief Clerk proceeded to read the letter, but was unable to decipher it.
The President protempo re. The Clerk suggests his lllflbllltglto read the writing.
Mr. JOHNSON advanced to the deskto assist the Clerk in deciphering the manuse rit.
Mr. DSOLITTLE. While the letteris being deciphered, 1 ask unanimous consent to introduce a.bill for the purpose of reference. Several SENATORS. N ot now.
Mr. STOCKTON. I will go on with my statement.
The President prote mpore. The Chair will state that the Senateis hardly yet open for business. This is a question of privilege, one of amending the Journal. The Chair does not feel authorized to receive any business until the correction of the Journal has been determined.
Mr. hESSEi DEN. Mr. President, I do not know whether the Senator referred to me or not in his closing remarks.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I think it very likely that I told Mr. Monsiu. to vote, or rather advised him to vote.
Mr. STOCKTON. I referred to the Senfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. SUMNER. I advised him to vote, of course.
Mr. SUMNER. If I had not been directly alluded to by the Senfrom NewJersey I should not say a word againbut I desire to join with the Senfrom Maine [Mr. FES sssnsx] in taking my full share of the responsi bility of the counsel that I gave to
Mr. Moa BILL. I do not shrink from it at all, and I take my share of that responsibility With certain y a greater knowled e of the rules of this body than the Senfrom NewJersey can now have. When I 1st came to the Senate airs were of very rare occurrence very rare Indeed. The habit has grown up of late years. The rules which regulate them are still uncer tain, unsettled; they are left to the mutual understanding of the parties rather than to any general considerations. Of course there must e always the essential element of good faith. No one can doubt that. But I take it no senator with any experience in this body supposes that a pair, as it is called, can be, like a cov enant, running with the whole session. We hear of covenants running with the land; but a pair running with the whole session I have never heard of until it seemed to be suggested by the Senfrom NewJersey. I think Mr. MonRInL I call him by his name as he is not present acted fairly and honorably with Mr. WRIGHT, kindly, too, and gently, as became the mild and gentle nature which we all know Mr. MonnIu. has. By pairing with him, as he did, he allowed Mr. W worn for a long time to absent himself from his duties in this Chamber; and then, when at last the important question seemed to be hurrying to a close, and Mr. Monnlm. thought that he ought to vote, he was anxious; the Senfrom NewJersey bears testimony himself to the anxiety that be displayed. There are many of us here who can bear testimony to it. The Senfrom Maine near me [Mr. hssssNDsN] has already done it. I must O it. More than once he spoke to e on the subject, and confessed his unatfecte solicitude. Iadvised him that after giving a reasonable notice to
Mr. WRIGHT he might then consider the pair as at an end and vote. The question then was what, under the circumstances, was a reasonable notice. As has lready been remarked, Mr. WaIGHT was eight hours from Washington. He might have come through had he been able to come, the very night on which he received the telegraphic dispatch; he could have been here early the next morning, and could have been here late the next morning, at 11 oclock; I believe there is a 2nd arrival at that time.
Mr. MORRILL, full of that deli cacy which belongs to him, forbore on that day to vote, iving the absent gentleman an opportunity of g arriving. Again, he had not one opportunity, but 2 or 3, for there were as many arrivals from his home, and he did not a pear, and then Mr. Momma. properly consi cred his pair at an end, and proceeded to exercise his privilege as a Senator. I think the Senfrom NewJersey has been hasty in his judgment of the act. I thank him for his courtesy to Mr. Momma. person ally, and for his appreciation of his character. He would have been more unjust than he has been if he had not rendered that horn e; but I think had the Senator been more amiliar with the question, he would not even have undertaken to characterize the act as he has.
Mr. STOCKTON. There is one fiict about which I presume I know as much as these Gentlemen at least, and that is in regard to how the railroad lines run between here and Newark, in my own State. From the time my colleague received the telegram which allowed him a reasonable time to get here until the vote was actually taken, there were not more than 12 or 14 hours of da light. There was a part of one day, and unti the vote was reached the next day. The object of the pair, as the Senfrom Maine himself states, was the kindness of Mr. Monnrm. to let a sick man go home. What is a reasonable time to a man so situated? A person lying on his bed sick is telegraphed to, and he is expected to take the owl line, the midnight line, as it passes his house, and then whether he gets here in time or not may depend very much on the accidents of railroad travelin. I say that the mistake these gentlemen mic is that they did notgive
Mr.WnIGHT time, although I agree with them entirel in reference to the Senfrom Maine and I have felt bound so to state; because i have seen that he has been spoken of in the papers as if he intended to do wrong. I say that he did not intend to do wron, bnt he suffered like a 1great many other people, from hav in very ba advisers. Mr. CLARK. I know a little more about this transaction than has been expressed in the Senate. This pair was made some 5 or 6 weeks ago with Mr. WuIonr, of NewJersey, who then desired to return home. I think the Senfrom NewJersey, sitting here, will hear me witness that he is satisfied that Mr. MonnILL did not understand it to go on forany length of time; certainly not for such an in definite len h of time, because on Suturday, when Mr. oanru. was sitting by me in my seat, the Senfrom NewJersey, now reent, came to him and inquired if he by not paired with his colleague, Mr. WnIenr. The Senfrom NewJersey will, I am sure remember the astonishment with which Mr. on nH.I. looked n and in nired if that was so, and then said that he did not know but that he had done it. That took place on Saturday.
Mr. STOCKTON. That is the occasion to which his letter refers when he appeared undeceived.
Mr. CLARK. A week ago last Saturday. That was the time when the Senfrom NewJersey here himself called the attention of Mr. MORRXLL to that pair which had run on so long that Mr. Monnlu. had entirely forgotten that he was paired with Mr. WRIGHT, or that anybody so understood it.
Mr. STOCKTON. At the time that conver sation occurred notice had been given, if I am not mistaken, that the case wouhT be called up on the following Monday. On Saturday, at the suggestion of a Senator on this floor, who said that there might be some doubt about it, I came up to the Senate Chamber and spoke to Mr. Moaniu. in his seat. The Senate was not in session, but he was here in his seat.
Mr. CLARK. That is entirely true. The matter was expected to come up on Monday and Mr. Monmu. made no objection at that time further than to say that he did not know but that Mr. WnIonT might not so understand it. It so happened that the case did not come up on Monday on account of my illness. I was confined to my room and I senta messenger to request the Senfrom Illinois not to call it up because I could not be in the Senate.
Mr. JOHNSON. You asked him in the J ndiciar Committee room not to call it up.
Mr. JOHNSON and I united in the application.
Mr. CLARK. It was intended to be 2 days, and he took every precaution that it should be. When the Senfrom NewJ as sey said that he would write by the tardy mail
Mr. MoanILL said “No, that will not do; senby telegraph.” and yet now he is accused of using “ artifice.” The Senfrom NewJersey does him the honor to state that he does not suppose that
Mr. Moamu. intended to do anything wrong. I am happy he does say so.
Mr. STOCKTON. Allow me to correct the Senator. There is a misunderstanding on the part of these gentlemen. I used the word “arti ce” in the course of my remarks, but lex ressly said that I accused the Senfrom aine [Mr. MoanILn] of nothing that he did not think right, that I took pride in saying so. I do not think it is “ fair to impute the word artifice” to him. It was perhaps not the most properword to use on the occasion; I meant simply to pronounce that the act, under the circumstances connected with it. was such, and so entirely wrong in myjndginent, that it justified me in giving my vote at that time and over coming on question of delicacy. Butat the same time I wish to bear testimony, because I think it is right, to the fact that Senator Monmm. himself was very uneasy, and ye doubtful, and very anxious to do right, an it was the pressure of his party friends that forced him to give that vote.
Mr. CLARK. I have nota word to say further upon the epithet applied to the Senfrom nine, or to the act of his, because the Senfrom NewJersey, as I now understand him, says it was not a properterm to use, and of course he would desire to withdraw it. But now the charge is that he acted not under duress, but under the advice of this “new school of manners, ” as Major Wright says. I think that is the term he uses. I am ready to take my share of that advice, and if he means to characterize this portion of the Senate as the “ new school of manners, " I belong to the new schoolof manners. It may not be very accept, able to the other side, but I say here that I think the Senfrom Maine was entirely right in casting his vote, and if the Senfrom NewJersey feels the load that he has taken upon his shoulders, he should not shift it upon the Senfrom Maine.
The President protempore. With the permission of the Senfrom Indiana, as a note from the Senfrom Maine was sent to the desk and its reading asked for, and it could not be read by the Clerk, the Chair will now, with the permission of the Senate, read It: MY DEAR Sm: I was not quite decided. when you spoke to me a day or 2 since about arrangement to pair with your colleague. The sumo“ WM Hoi It was only one days exccted to run on at that time so long and upon recction I think it not unreasonableso to recur it. To avoid embarrassment.I give you this suggestion that you may adviseyour Very truly, yours, OOllelti.lMlO. MORBILL. Hon. J. P. Sro exron. U.S.nSenate.
Mr. HENDRICKS. 1Mr. President, I am not satisfied that the Senfrom NewJersey had not theright to vote on the occasion. It is said that he had a personal interest in the question. I do not know that it is proper to say that a Senator has a personal interest in his office. It is a position which is sought for because of its honorable character or for the gratification ofour personal ambition. We are elected as Senators upon the supposition that it is for the good of the country, and it is an office that we old for the public good. Therefore, in respect to that office, I think it is hardly proper to say that a Senator has a personal interest in it. If reference is bad to the emoluments of the office, then we have a very strong precedent upon that subject, and I resume it is very likely that the Senfrom assachusetts who has led in this debate parti cipated in the establishment of that precedent. A few years ago the compensation of Senators was increased from 8 dollars a day during the session to $3,000 a year n very decided increase of compensation and I believe that increased compensation was made to take effect at the very session of the passage of the law. It could not have become a law except by senators voting for it, and every Senator who voted for that law voted to put money in his own pocket at that very session. You might say that a Senator had a personal interest in the result of that vote because it put money in his pocket, and yet it was not so regarded then.
Mr. SUMNER. May I interrupt the senator there?
Mr. SUMNER. I do not happen to have the book near me now; but the book which the Senator cited the other do and whichI have cited today, Cushing on arliament ary Law, expressl notices that case and treats it as exceptions. He says that a member of a arliamentary body cannot vote where he is interested; and he then goes on to say that in voting the compensation of legislative bodies there is an exception to this rule. Imention that as a reply at once to the instance adduced by the Senator.
Mr. CONNESS. Mr. President, the argument of the honorable Senfrom Indiana is as I understand him to state it, that if Mr. LTORRILL, the Senfrom Maine, had not voted, then he, the Senfrom Indiana, is not sure that Mr. Stockton had a right to vote in his own case; he has some doubt about it.
Mr. HENDRICKS. No, sir, I did not say that. There was one question that I did not discuss, and that was tequestion of delicacy in voting upon such a case. I should hesitate to vote upon any guestion involving my right to my own seat. this a question of delicacy, and not of legal or constitutional right, in my uilgment, but when the Senfrom NewJersey was placed in such a condition that he would lose the vote of his colleague, to which he was entitled, and which could have been procured but for this pair, I think the question of delicacy was overcome by the fact that Mr. Monmu. voted under the circumstances.
Mr. conNESS. I thought I understood the honorable Senator correctly, and I find that I did, and I shall try to state him exactly. If Mr. Mons ruin vote had not been in question in the premises, the Senfrom Indiana would then regard the question of Mr. Stock tons right to vote in his own case as one of extreme delicacy, so much so that he would not like to vote in the case himself, and does not desire to exress now an opinion on the subject; but ifflr
Mr. Momma. did vote in violation, as he thinks, of the pair, he then believes positively that Mr. Stockton had a rightto vote. do not think that" that logic holds good. I think that Mr. Stockton either had or had not the right to vote in his own case; and upon that proposition I have, and have had, no doubt as to in opinion. I confess that l was surprised when the honorable Senfrom NewJersey rose and asked that his name be called, and I uttered an exclamation from my seat against the propriety of the vote. I shall not undertake to characterize that vote as the honorable Senfrom NewJersey has under taken to discuss and characterize the conduct of Mr. MORIULL, although with some compliments to
Mr. Momma. at the same time, and ending his analysis of the case by puttin the responsibility upon other Senators, an finally concluding by characterizingit as charge able to modern morals prevailing particularly on this side of the Senate. 1 shall not go into that branch of the case; but in this discussion the question pending before the Senate appears to me to have been entirely lost sight of by running into an incidental discussion whether
Mr. TRUMBULL. Mr. President, it is not very material to me how this question is arrived at; I do not think there is any importance in that. It occurred to me at 1st that perhaps the better way would be to move a reconsideration of the vote taken on Friday; but I think on reflection the motion of the Senfrom Massachusetts will settle the question. His motion is that the Journal of Friday the 23d of March, 1866, be amended by striking out the voteof mr. Stockton on the question ofliis right to a seat in the Senate. lfthat resolution should ass, the consequence would follow which he we stated, and for which he has cited a precedent that the resolution would remain not passed.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Let me go on: “To these high and add u. opiniog of the Tgsiilihhiiihffililik inmrii Commonwealthes.Woe percl 0L, 8Serg.& Rawle. 43, which it is a mistake to suppose was overruled or contradicted by the other membersof the court.” The Senator s he a little too soon; the supreme court of Pennsylvania says it is not overruled.
Mr. JOHNSON. The Senator does not understand me. I say the decision is overruled in all the States.
Mr. JOHNSON. Read the opinion of Judge Iredell in the case cited.
Mr. TRUMBULL. What case does the Senfrom Maryland mean to say is overruled?
Mr. JOHNSON. I mean the general doctrine that legislation contrary to the principles of justiee and equity in the opinion of the court before whom e question is decided is not binding. The honorable Senator will find, if he will turn to the original ease of Calder vs. Bull, in which Judge Chases opinion was pronounced, that Judge Iredell, who stood even higher than Judge Chase, took directly the opposite view, and in almost all the States of the nion where the same question has arisen it has been decided that the doctrine laid down by.Chase was untenable.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I am readin from the case of The Commonwealth vs. cCloskey. Does the Senfrom Maryland mean to say that it is overruled? I
Mr. JOHNSON. I do not mean to say that. sayxthat the opinion of Justice Chase in Calder vs. all has been overruled. Li
Mr. TRUMBULL. I imagine that myfriend telling me that some other case has been over ruled Will have very little to do with this. I
Mr. JOHNSON. The honorable member, am sure, does not mean to misre present me.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Not at all. he Senfrom Maryland shall be correctly stated if he will have patience.
Mr. JOHNSON. I have as much patience as most men.
Mr. TRUMBULL. In 1830. The judge goes on to say: “ The nearesttheyhaveever goneto it in Congress was where returned membersvoted on a principle on which their own election depended: a case on tirely dilierontfrom this, and the propriety of which might be well qfistioned: at any rate, I feel but little respect for a decision which comesin such a questionable shape." I shall not take up the time of the Senate by reading father from this decision; but I ven ture to say that what is stated by the judge in that case will be found on examination to be strictly correct. It is not unnatural that the Senfrom NewJersey should have fallen into what I think was a mistake on his part, that because a voter sometimes voted for himself at an election where his right to vote was. ot in question, or because a member in a legislative body voted for himself as presiding officer, therefore he could vote on the question of his own right to vote. It is a very different thing. It is a matter addressed to the discretion and propriety of the voter, whether he will vote for himself or not; but it is not a question addressed to the sense of proriety and delicacy of a person, when his rightto vote is questione, whether he shall decide that he has got a right to vote; and that is precisely this case. ow, sir, I desire this to be corrected.I am ready to vote upon it now, and I think perhaps that is the better way, and let us sett e at this time that a.member has no right to vote upon the question. I am willing to do that either by moving, as I said before, if it cannot be got at in any other way, to reconsider; but the Senfrom Ohio has satisfied me that I shall not accomplish my object by moving a reconsideration, because the question would come up again when the vote came, and we could not determine it while the yeas&nays were being called. I think, upon consideration, that perhaps the best way to arrive at it is by the adoption of the resolution offered by the Senfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. SAULSBURY. I wish to say to the honorable Senfrom Connecticut that in any remarks I made I did not wish to reflect, or mean to be understood as reflecting, on the President of the Senate. He is the last man I know in this body or anywhere else that I would reflect upon by any remarks of mine. I certainly did not wish to be understood as making any reflection on the President of the Senate.
Mr. FOSTER. I did not, by any means, understand the Senator as reflecting on anyone, but as stating a fact, which was of course as he believed the fact to be, but not the fact as it appears on the record. I did not by any means mean to be understood as that considered it a reflection.
Mr. STOCKTON. Mr. President, I rise to withdraw my vote, with the permission of the Senate, and I am exceeding y anxious that I shall make my position in doing so perfectly clear. At the moment that I voted on the res olution of the ComJudiciary no man had questioned my right to vote in this body when my name was on led, from the moment I entered the Chamber, upon any subject whatever. I had been, on the contrary, told by Republican as well as Democratic Senators, by gentlemen of different politics, that in their opinion I was entitled to vote. None of them With whom I spoke on the subject had examined that matter particularly. lhequestion of the validity of that vote never crosse my mind. I believe today, I believe this moment, that that vote was a valid vote under the Constitution of the U.S. Now, Mr. President, the vote bein valid according to my judment, that being beyond question, it was my duty, as I explained this morning, to overcome all scruples of delicacy in order that NewJersey should be represented properly, whatever gentlemen might think of my delicacy on the subject. But the discussion to da has exhibited to me the fact that there are in the minds of the ablest lawyers in the Senate, in the mind of the chairman of the ComJudiciary of the Senate, grave doubts asto the constitutionality of the vote. I do not propose to keep my seat in this body by an unconstitutional vote or by an illegal vote. That was not the proposition upon which I voted. I desire that question to e examined carefully. I should like the ComJudiciary, of which the distinguished Senfrom Illinois is chairman, to examine it. I therefore withdraw my vote, and request some Gentleman to offer a resolution that the ComJudiciary be instructed to examine into the question before I am again called upon to vote in this case.
Mr. SUMNER. Can the Senator at this da withdraw his vote?
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. CLARK.) The Chair is of opinion that he cannot, unless by the unanimous consent of the Senate he wishes to correct the Journal.
Mr. JOHNSON. If the Senate refuse to consent to let him withdraw his vote then his vote stands and he is a Senator. I submit to the Senate whether. if they think the vote is illegal and the resolution be passed in consequence of that vote, they ought to suffer him to withdraw it; but certainly if they refuse to allow him to withdraw it there it stands, and it stands to have the same effect as my vote; and if it stands, that vote, with the other votes, de cides that he is a Senator of the U.S. now.
Mr. FESSENDEN. It is entirely contrary to the rule. The Senator cannot withdraw his vote at all, as I understand, after the vote has been declared, even by the unanimous consent of the Senate.
Mr. COWAN. He can consent to your strik i it off, which is the same thing.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair does not mean to be understood as saying that the Senator may withdraw the vote in such a manner as to strike it out, but the Journal might be corrected as he desires.
Mr. FESSENDEN. That amounts to precisely the same thing. My own judgment is, that the propermode to reach this matter would be by some gentleman moving a reconsideration of the resolution adopted on Friday, and then we could settle that question free from any embarrassment, if we desire to settle it forever in the Senate hereafter by making a precedent. Several gentlemen who voted for the resolution have expressed the opinion that that vote ought not to have been given and consequently the resolution ought not to have been (declared adopted. If they are of that opinion, anyone of those gentlemen can with perfect propriety move a reconsideration and vote for a reconsideration in order that the question may stand before the Senate as it did before the vote was taken, and then the question can be properl settled. I hope that course will be taken. I do not propose to argue it. I think that will relieve the question of a great deal of difficult, because if the vote of the Senfrom ewJersey was withdrawn, it would then stand 20 to 20, and it would be hard to tell who voted in the majority in such a case, or who should move a reconsideration, if anyone was disposed to move a reconsideration. Theresolution staudingadopted on the records, if the Senate proceed to order the Journal to be corrected, it would raise questions whether they were not acting rather unfairly or without deference to the rights of the Senator; but if the vote adopting the resolution is reconsidered, it settles all that, because the majority have a right to reconsider it if they see fit. I hope that course will be taken instead of the other.
Mr. POLAND. I was one of those who voted in favor of the resolution reported by the ComJudiciaryar and in favor of the right of the Senfrom ewJersey to hold his seat, having been one of the committee who reported that resolution; and I now think, as I t oughtiu giving that vote on Friday, that the Senfrom NewJersey was legally elected; but, sir, I am equally clear that he himself had no right to vote on that question. The law regards the right to an office as a species of property. A man is entitled to maintain an action at law, if he is de rived of the properinduction into office, for the purpose of securing himself the place. He is entitled to maintainan action against a man, if he deprives him of an office whereby he loses the profits of it. A man may be entitled to maintain an action for a slander or libel in consequence of which he is deprived of obtainin an office. In every way almost the law regar s an office as a species of property, so that it is regarded as a legal pecuniary interest that a man is entitled to in the office. I feel perfectly clear, therefore, that upon the decision of this question the Senfrom NewJerse y himself had no right to vote; that he was legally interested in the question; and as this resolution was passed by his vote it required his vote to make the majority by which it was passed I am ready if this proposition be withdrawn, or in any state of the question where it may be necessary to have a reconsideration moved for the purpose of bringing the subject again before the Senate and having it properly debated, to move that reconsideration.
Mr. SUMNER. I understand the Senfrom Vermont declares his willingness to move a reconsideration. Of course thatmotion must be made today according to our rules. I have already stated that the motion that I brought forward was partly conceived with the idea of accomplishing what the Senator, by his motion to reconsider, proposes to accomplish, but which I was not in acoudition to attain. I could not make a motion to reconsider, but at the same time I have already said that I did conceive that it would be better if the Senate by a simi lar vote rectified their Journal. But Senators about me, I see are disposed to meet the question in another orm. he Senfrom i aine prefers the form that is proposedby the Senfrom Vermont, another Senators with whom I have conferred prefer that form, and I certainly shall not stand in the way of their desires.
Mr. SHERMAN. I should like to ask my friendfrom Massachusetts a question. He desires to have a vote on this question. I think we ought to have a vote. Suppose the motion to reconsider should prevail and the question should again come up on the adoption of the resolution and Mr. Stockton should not vote, is the question settled I Not at all. suppose he should vote, can you raise the point then , pending the vote? Not at all. His name is called. At the conclusion of the roll call, when the vote is announced by the Chair, you may insist that the Chair is in error in announcing the vote in that way and you might possibly raise the question in that way. But you have the question raised now just as well. If you desire the judgment of the Senate on the right of the Senator to vote in his own case you have the question in as good a form now as you can ever have it.
Mr. SUMNER. I would ask my friend if we should not meet it.
Mr. SHERMAN. I think we onghtto meet it.
Mr. SUMNER. I ask him if we might not meet it in this way: previous to the call of the roll let a Senator move that the name of Mr. Stockton on that occasion be omitted. That would meet the question.
Mr. SHERMAN. In a very indirect way. It would be presuming that he would undertake to vote when according to your claim he has no right to vote.
Mr. SUMNER. He certainly has no right to vote.
Mr. SHERMAN. Then you presume that he would claim to exercise a rightwhich you In be has not.
Mr. SUMNER. Simply because he has undertaken to exercise it once.
Mr. SHERMAN. We come back after all to the same difficulty. If he exercises the right to vote, it is in the power of the Senate to exress an opinion as to whether that vote is egally recorded. You have thatquestion now before you. You have the recor for the 1st time of this vote brought before you, and you say that record is not true, that a person has voted on a particular vote that had not the right to vote. You certainly have a right so to dec are. The question is now presented, and if you desire to settle it it can edone now as well as at any other time.
Mr. FESSENDEN. ask Senators, is there any diHiculty when Mr. Stocktous name is called in another Senator moving that Mr. Stocktous vote be not received? Ihere would be no trouble about that.
Mr. SUMNER. Before the call it can he done. Senators say to me, “ Withdraw the motion.” I withdraw it with the understanding that the Senfrom Vermont makes the motion for a reconsideration, that we may at once enter upon the consideration of the question in another form.
Mr. JOHNSON. I object to the withdrawal.
Mr. POLAND. I move a reconsideration of the vote by which the resolution reported by the ComJudiciary that the Senfrom NewJersey was entitled to his seat was adopted.
Mr. JOHNSON. Has the Senfrom Massachusetts a right to withdraw his motion without the unanimous consent of the Senate?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. ilhe Chair is of opinion that he may.
Mr. SHERMAN. The yeas&nays were not ordered upon it.
Mr. JOHNSON. Iobjeeted, and the objection was made very Ositivel quite loud enough, I thought, to e hear al over the Chamber.
Mr. FESSENDEN. He maywithdrawitat any time, on his own motion, the yeas&nays not having been ordered.
Mr. JOHNSON. I only want to know what the rule is.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair is of opinion that the Senfrom Massachusetts may withdraw the motion. That motion being withdrawn, the Senfrom Vermont moves to reconsider the vote by which the senate on Friday last adopted the resolution reported from the ComJudiciary.
Mr. JOHNSON. How does a motion to reconsider settle the case? When is it to be acted u on?
Mr. JOHNSON. So I supposed. The colleague of the Senfrom NewJersey is not here and cannot be at here “right off." The Senfrom NewYork [Mr. Moacm] is confined to his room by sickness, and cannot be got here, but he is in the city, and is exceedingly anxious to vote on this question. I put it to Senators who think Mr. Stockton isnot entitled to his seat in this body, whether it is not due to their colleagues in the body, and especially the Senfrom NewYork, that no vote should be had until they have had a reasonable op ortuniti of being present.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Of course, I apprehend nobody expects to take the vote instantly to decide the wholequestion.
Mr. JOHNSON. What I said was in consequence of the remark of the Senfrom Massachusetts that the matter was to be acted upon “right off.”
Mr. TRUMBULL. I was not aware that that was the design of the Senfrom Massachusetts, but I resume there is no such design on the part of I. e Senate. I am willing that the resolution should be reconsidered; that does not alter it at all; and then the question in relation to the Senators right to vote may be considered afterward or before. I have retty much come to the conclusion that the Senfrom Ohio was right about it, and that it would be best to do it tlgie other we. however, I do not think it is very materin. I shall vote for the reconsideration, and then, it strikes me, we had better settle the question as to the right of the Senfrom NewJersey to vote by adopting the resolution already offered or some other one
The PRESIDING OFFICER. rt. queltion before the Senate is, Will the Senate reconsider its vote agreeing to the resolution declaring the Senfrom NewJersey eutitled to his seat? The motion was a eed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The resolution is before the Senate.
Mr. JOHNSON. I now move that the further consideration of the question be postponed until Thursday next.
Mr. FESSENDEN. It is hardly worthwhile to do that. I should like to have some reason given for it.
Mr. CONNESS. I thought the Senate was about to vote 1st on the question of expunging the vote of the Senfrom NewJersey mm the record.
Mr. CONNESS. I understand that, sir. Nevertheless, the vote on the resolution is reconsidered now, and it stands as before the Senate. Do I not understand that the record of that vote is made?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The record is made.
Mr. CONNESS. Then I should like to see that record corrected. As to when the final vote shall be taken, that is another matter. That may be postponed, if it is the sense of the Senate. I think we had better settle that question now.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I would like the Senate to give its unanimous consent that the Journal be corrected, and the Senfrom NewJersey be permitted to withdraw his name. I make that motion, that the Journal be corrected by striking his name from the vote.
The President protempore. At present there is another motion before the body.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I propose that it be done by unanimous consent. Fthiuk it but just to the Senfrom NewJersey. He admits that he gave a hasty vote. We have spoken in favor of the proposition that it was a hasty vote It seems to me but just to one who is a new member of this bod that he have permission to correct that vote y unanimous consent.
Mr. CONNESS. What is the question pend in?
The President protempore. The motion made by the Senfrom Kansas is that the Senfrom NewJersey be permitted to withdraw his vote, and thus correct the Jour nal. In the opinion of the Chair, that motion cannot now be entertained. The Senate having voted to reconsider the vote on the resolution reported from the committee, the question before the Senate is, Shall the resolution pass? and a motion of this sort cannot now be entertained.
Mr. CONNESS. Then as I understand, the question is now settled except as to the record, so far as the vote of the Senfrom NewJersey is concerned.
The President protempo re. The vote has been reconsidered by a vote of the Senate.
Mr. CONNESS. But yet there is a record of the Senators vote on the Journal.
The President protemporc. The record of Friday remains yet unaltered.
Mr. CONNESS. Then I hopeamotion will be made to correct the recor, and then the subject can be postponed, if that is the wish of the Senate.
Mr. CLARK. I was oing to suggest that the alteration had altered nothing except the vote on the resolution. The record stands.
Mr. CONNESS. I move that the record be corrected by excluding the vote of the Senfrom NewJersey. Then, if that is done, the subject may be postponed to any time agreed upon by the Senate.
Mr. SHERMAN. I will ask the Senator whether, if his motion should he agreed to, the motion to reconsider does not fall. If the Senator wants to get at this point, let him introduce a simple order stating that on the vote That motion was with on this resolution the name of the Senfrom NewJersey shall not be called on the ground that he is interested.
Mr. CONNESS. I am speaking with reference to the record that is made on the Journal of the Senate. It is there recorded that the Senfrom NewJersey did vote.
Mr. SHERMAN. But if the Senator accomplishes that purpose, a motion to reconsider the vote on the resolution cannot be entered, because neither party had a majority; and it is doubtful whether a party on either side can move to reconsider. of the Senator had better let it stand as it is.
Mr. SUMNER. I will propose still another form to meet this difficulty. I offer the following resolution: Remlved, That the vote of Mr. Stockton be not received in determining the question of his seat in the Senate. That meets it directly without undertaking to interfere with the existing Journal.
Mr. JOHNSON. Does the honorable member desire to take a vote upon that proposition now?
Mr. SUMNER. I should like to have a vote upon it now. I think we can all agree upon it.
Mr. JOHNSON. But we cannot all agree. It seems to me that it ought to go over until Thursday next, when the final vote is to be taken. It is a question that will arise then. We can dispose of it then. We are not prepared to do it now for the reason that thqe are 2 or 3 Senators absent whose opinion may be against the proposition contained in that resolution. Nothing would be made by it, because we could change it afterward. I move that the whole subject bepostponed until Thurs day next.
Mr. CLARK. I hope the matter will not be postponed. but I desire to suggest to the Senfrom Massachusetts that it is hardly worth while to introduce an order or resolution of that kind, hecauseI understand the Senfrom NewJersey to express regret that be cast the vote on Friday, and I have no idea that he will attempt to do it again.
Mr. STOCKTO. I hope I may be permitted to say a word at this point. The Senfrom Kansas [Mr. LANE] said a moment ago thatI acknowledged I voted on Friday last in a hasty moment. I at once determined at the 1st opportunity on taking the floor to state that he misunderstood me artially. I used no such word as that. The Senfrom NewHampshire now says that I said I regretted it. I ask every Senator on the floor whether I uttered one single word of the kind. I state now that I had the constitutional right to vote, in my own judgment, and I did not know that any human bein could or would dispute it. Believing that had that right, I overcame all delicacy for the purpose of accomplishing what I believed to be a solemn duty. I cannot regret that. I did what Ibe lieved to be right. But I find that other Gentlemen, abler awyers than myself and some of my own party friends are of opinion that there is extreme doubt on the subject of the constitutionality of that vote. Under those circumstances, I asked permission to withdraw the vote; and of course no gentleman on the floor could dream that I would vote until the question was settled. What is the object of my withdrawin it? If there is a doubt in the minds of the ComJudiciary as to whether it is unconstitutional, I do not wish to hold my place here by an unconstitutional vote. In my judgment, that question on ht to be settled by the ComJudiciary be ore this resolution again comes to a vote. I think it is butjustto require that. If they say I am not entitled to vote, I certain] should never dream of offering avote; antivif the vote is forced upon me before that question is decided I shall not vote.
Mr. agree with the Senfrom Ohio in taking the Senfrom NewJersey at his word. I have no personalquestion with the Senator; I have for him noting but kindness and respect. I deal with this guestion simply asaquestion of principle. The Senator tells us that e will not vote when the case comes up again. I believe him; he will not vote. But, sir, he has taken the Constitution in his hand and holding it up he tells us that he finds int at instrument authority for it in his case. That being so, I do think that we ought not to be content merely with his statement that he will not vote. The Senate owes it to itselfto fix the precedent for all time, that a Senator in his position cannot vote. He says, reading the Constitution, “ The Senate of the U.S shall be composed of 2 Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for 6 years, and each Senator shall have one vote.” A, sir, each Senator shall have one vote when he is recognized as a Senator on this floor full and completely.
Mr. FESSENDEN. that has reference to their votin by States.
Mr. SUMNER. It has reference, as the Senfrom Maine reminds me, to their voting by States; but then I am willing to accept the interpretation even that the Senfrom NewJersey gives it, subject, however, to this limitation, that he cannot vote in his own case. The Constitution of the U.S. itself is to be interpreted in subordination to that great principle ofuniversal law. But since the senator makes that claim it is important that we should meet it, and in some way or other, as I proposed, by correcting the Journal, or, as I now propose, by a resolution declaring that the Senator shall not vote. fix the precedent forever, so that hereafter we shall not be left to the uncertainty of the will or opinion of a Senator whose seat may be in question. We must not rely upon his honor. We have got to rely upon the Constitution as interpreted by this body and fixed by precedent beyond recall. It is, therefore, that I pthiuk still it would be better if the Senate had corrected its Journal and annulled the vote. Being a vote that in itself was null and void, it was to be treated as not having been given. That brings me to another question. The Senator asks to withdraw his vote. to with draw what? Something which I think has never been done; that is, legally done. There is no legal vote of the Senator. His name is recorde there as having voted. but it is a vote that at the time was null and void. There is nothing, therefore, for him to withdraw, but something for the Senate to annul. Now, sir, as to the question of postpone ment, if the Senate desire to postpone the subject, they will postpone it. I 51111 regret it. Already this case has occupied too much time. Why not proceed with it at once? Who hesi States? I ho doubts whether Mr. Stockton should be allowed to vote or not? Let us be gin, therefore, by declaring that he should not vote, and then let us proceed with the main question and settle it before we adjourn. Why not?.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It strikes me that the easier and better way to dispose of this matter in the sha e in which it now is, as we have reconsidere the vote, would be to correct the Journal. The Senfrom Massachusetts says the vote is void. No matter whether it is void or not void, it is cast. The Senfrom NewJersey, from considerations of his own which he has stated to the Senate, has asked the unanimous permission of the Senate to have the Journal in that respect corrected. If there is no objection, that may be done. I think that would be the better way; and then let the other question of his right he referred, as suggested by the Senfrom Ohio, to the ComJudiciary. As he and some other Senators desire it, I have no objection ti) that. The committee can examine it and make a report on the subject. I trust that there will be unanimous consent to correct the Journal as suggested by the Senfrom NewJersey. That would make the correction upon the Jour nal; and then we will settle the question of his right to vote on the motion that is made by the Senfrom Ohio. That would dispose of the case, as the motion to reconsider is already adopted.
The President protempore. The question is on the motion to refer to the ComJudiciary, with instructions, the following resolution: Resolved, That the vote of Mr. Stockton ho npt received in determining the question of his seat in the Senate.
Mr. GRIMES. I understand the Chair to say that the motion is to refer that resolution to the ComJudiciary, with instructions. I should like to know what those instructions are.
The President protempore. To report by Thursda morning.
Mr. GRIES. I move to amend that by instructing them to report a standing rule for the Senate and then we shall have the question settled not only in this, but in all other cases.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I suppose it would be competent under this resolution, and probably that would be the result, for the committee to, report a standing rule on the subject. It strikes me so at this time; but that would certainly be competent. We should not be compelled to report back the precise words of the resolution referred.
Mr. CLARK. What is the necessity of a reference to the Judiciary Cemmittee of that question at all?
Mr. CLARK. The Senfrom Iowa says to frame a rule. I have drawn and hold in my hand what I think would be a good rule, which I offer to the Senate, and it can lie on the table until tomorrow and then be adopted.
The President protempera. The question before the Senate now is on the reference of the resolution of the Senfrom Massachusetts to the ComJudiciary with instructions.
The PRESIDE T protempers. Is the Senate ready for the question?
The President protem are. the question is, Shall the resolution of the Senfrom Massachusetts be referred to the ComJudiciary with instructions to report by Thursday mornin?
Mr. JOHN SO. for the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted yeas 18, nays, 22, ABSENT 10. So the motion was not agreed to.
The President protempore. The question now is on the resolution offered by the Senfrom Massachusetts. The resolution was agreed to.
Mr. SUMNER. The question now iIs, believe, on the report of the committee.
Mr. JOHNSON. I suppose the question now is on the motion to postpone until Thursday next, the motion which I made some time ago.
The President protempore. That is the pending question.
Mr. WADE. I hope this subjectwill not be gostponed. We have had it here long enough. verybody understands all that they ever will understand about it. Those that have said nothing about it are not anxious to postpone it any further. I believe every member here disposed to take any part in the discussion on the subject has said aIthat he can think of on it. Those of us who have not taken part in the debate are ready, and always have been, to vote upon it. It has taken time enough. There is no reason why there should be any extraordinary magnanimity on this subject. I hope we Wi11 take the vote and end the question now.
Mr. HENDRICKS. The propositiontopost pone until Thursday next is not an unreasonable one. TheSenfrom NewJersey desires an opportunity to have his colleague here, and another of his friends is not able to be in the body. Although perhaps one gentleman de sires to discuss the question further, still it is desirable that all the Senators who wish to vote on the subject shall be here, and they can probably be here by that time. I do not see any special neccssity to hurry a vote on it, unless it be to have that vote when some senators cannot be here. It has been impossible for Mr. Wmenr, of NewJersey, to be here at this time, for the reason that it was not an posed this question would come up again. Tt was supposed to have been settled. In this body it 1.8not customary to drive questions through. A proposition to postpone or a few On that question I call days is generally received with favor. Iappeal to the magnanimity, if not to the sense of right, of Senators to allow an opportunity to hawe a full vote upon the question. If the Senate be full and the vote of the majority be that Mr. Stockton is not entitled to is seat, of course we will acquiesee in it; but to take the vote now, when it was not expected that the question would come up, when but 3 (in s postponement is asked, would indicate a es1re to have a vote when the Senate is not full, and I am sure the majority of this body cannot desire that. The proposition is a reasonable one, and I think it ought to be agreed to.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I have said what I have to say in regard to this case. I have exressed my views in reference to it. I think that the attempt to force a vote on the question now, with a view of getting a vote upon the right of Mr. Stockton to his seat, is pot properunder the circumstances. We have discussed here today the question of his right to vote, and have disposed of that question properl, I think. He was mistaken in voting. but think it would be an unusual thing on the part of the Senate under the circumstances to attempt to force action here to night. I trust there will be a general understaning not to do so, and to take the vote at some suitable time when senators can be here. Several Sussroas. Move to adjourn.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I move that the Senate adjourn. I think that we had better not attempt to take a vote tonight, and I make that motion, if all will no uiese e in it.
Mr. SUMNER. With the understandingthat this question will come up tomorrow.
Mr. CLARK. It will come up tomorrow as the unfinished business.
The President pro{empomtion is on the motion to adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. MONDAY, March 26, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of Saturday last was read and approved. The ques Prayer OBDEB op BUS!NESS
The SPEAKER. This being Monday, the 1st business in order is the calling of committees for reports, to go upon the Calendar and not to be brought back by a motion to reconsider, commencing with the ComElections. No reports were presented. ASSUMPTION OP REBEL DEBT, ETC.
The SPEAKER. The next business in order during the morning hour is the call of States for resolutions. Under this call the 1stquestion is on a series of resolutions, presente last Monday by the Gentfrom NewJersey, [Mr. Roonas] on which the House refused to 2nd the demand for the previous question just as the morning hour expired. The question is on agreeing to these resolutions; and the Gentfrom NewJersey is entitled to the oor. I The resolutions were read, as follows: Resolved.That the Federal Government bas noconstitutional right to assumeor pay the debt of the socalled confoderute government of theinsurgentStates or the rebel debt of any of said States and that it yould be an outrage even to nttemptto do so. Resolved.That the honor of the F oderal Government and over principle of justice demand that the Federal debt 5 onld be paid to the utmost farming: that repudiation should be discountenanced and the plighted faith of the country sacredly preserved. esolvezl.Thatequaltaxntion is jnst and right, and that every person in thise ountry should hearhis equal share of the Federal and State taxes; and that there should be no privileged class.
Mr. DAVIS. I move to amend by adding the ten commandments. [Laughter.]
Mr. ROGERS. I want to be heard on the resolutions.
Mr. BLAINE. I rise to a point of order. When the resolutions were up on last Monday, and the House refused to 2nd the call for the previous question, the Gentfrom Illinois
Mr. WABHBURNE] rose for the purpose of slanting them, and they went over under the ru e.
The SPEAKER. The morning hour expired while the tellers were countin the House; and as the morning hour expire before the House was counted, no other business could be transacted, and the Gentfrom Illinois could not rise to debate the resolutions.
Mr. BLAINE. My recollection is distinct that the Gentfrom Illinois rose to debate the resolutions. The Gentfrom NewJersey is as gra ciously heard as almost any man on this door; we always listen to him With delight, but it is rather going too strong for him to take up the entire mornin hour.
Mr. HALE. Will the Gentfrom NewJersey permit me to ask a question?
Mr. HALE. I would ask if it is the purport and meaning of the 3rd resolution of this series, that the Federal securities should be taxed; and if so, whether it would not be better that the resolution should say so in express terms, and not leave it in language which may be deemed ambiguous.
Mr. CONKLING. Will the Gentfrom NewJersey [Mr. Rocsns] allow me to ask a question?
Mr. CONKLING. Will the Gentfrom NewJersey inform the House whether Federal securities are exempt from taxation by force of acts of Congress, or by force of the Constitution of the U.S.?
Mr. ROGERS. Federal bonds are exempt from taxation by reason of the Constitution of the U.S.; not that there is an express provision iu the Constitution forbi ding a State from taxing the bonds, but the courts have decided that it was against the spirit and intent of the Constitution to allow a State to interfere with the necessary functions of the Federal Government in carrying its properpowers into effect.
Mr. CONKLING. Are we to understand, then, that if we repeal all acts which in terms exempt these securities, they will thereby become subject to State taxation?
Mr. ROGERS. No, sir; if we simply repeal the law which now exempts Government secu rities from State taxation, the States can no more tax them under the Constitution of the U.S. than if this law had never been passed. There was no necessity for framing this act of Congress exempting those bonds from State taxation, for the simple reason that the spirit and intent of the Constitution forbids any State from taxing the machinery of the Federal Government without its consent, because it might by that means prevent the government from exercising fuly its necessary powers.
Mr. CONKLING. In the light of the very lucid explanation which the gentleman gives, how could we subject the securities of the government to State and municipal taxation?
Mr. ROGERS. I was just about to explain that when the gentleman interrupted me. If he had listene to my argument attentively he would have seen the ground which, I take. Although the Constitution of the U.S., in its intent and spirit though not by direct provision, prevents the States from taxing these securities, yet Congress, as the guardian of that power, could delegate to the States this right of taxation. This was expressly settled in the eat case lately before the court of appeals of the State of NewYork, and now before the SCOTUS for final decision and the Maryland Bunkcase also decides that the State of Maryland had the right to tax the income derived from the bank to tax the propertyu on which the bank stoo, and to tax the stock iolders who owned the stock in the bank to the amount of their stock. The State could not tax the bank itself because the bank was one of the means used by the Federal Government to carry its own functions into effect and therefore the spirit and intent of the Constitution of the U.S. would not permit the State in any manner to clog the wheels of the Government, or in an way prevent it from carrying on its lawfu Operations.
Mr. CONKLING. If I may avail m self further of the views of the gentleman, ask him whether we are to understand that this power of Congress to dele to to the States the right to tax may propery be exercised in reference to bonds which were issued hereto fore under the legislation of Congress as it stands and which are now held by those who took them under the existing exemptions from taxation by the States.
Mr. ROGERS. Most certainly, sir; and the 1st part of my argument, if the gentleman had listened to it, was designed to meet the point which the gentleman now raises. I maintain that there is no contract or a reement with the bond holders thatif the bondolders would accept the bonds, the Federal Government would not tax them. It is a recognized principle of the common law with which the learne Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. COXKIJNG] is as familiar as I amjhat no legislative body, by a mere legislative act, can tie the hands or diminish the power of n subsequent Legislature. This principle is expressly laid down by Blackstone; and it is well settled in this country that a mere law either of the Congress of the U.S., or of the Legislature of any State, cannot prevent a subsequent Congress or a subsequent Legislature from reealin that law.
Mr. CONKLIN.Idiffer with the gentleman; he affirms that a State Legislature is not bound in any case by the action of its prede cessor. In that position the gentleman runs counter to the oustitution of the U.S.
Mr. ROGERS. I say thatpne Legislature cannot by a simple law prevent a subsequent Legislature from reealing it.
Mr. CONKLIN. Let us pass that omt; it is foreign to my question. he point submit to the gentleman is whether, not asaquestion of power, (I waive that consideration for the moment) but as a question of good faith in the exercise of power, Congress may rop erl subject to State taxation bonds issued ere to ore, and taken, paid for, and held under an express guarantee beforehand of exemption from taxation?.
Mr. ROGERS. Now, if I understand the gentleman, he has changed the position he took in the 1st place. Do I understand the gentls man to say now that he does not deny that congress has the constitutional power to subject these bonds totaxstion and to authorize the 1650 States to tax them, although the law upon the statute book at the time the bonds were issued and went into the hands of the bond holders declared that these bonds should not be taxed? Let us have the question of power settled 1st.
Mr. CONKLI G. Does egentleman wish me to answer?
Mr. CONKLING. Without having heard the wholequestion I will say
Mr. ROGERS. I will repeat the question, if the gentleman so desires.
Mr. CONKLING. It is not necessary. I understand it far enough to answer it. As an original question I have no doubt, confining the question to bonds to be issued and sold herea er, that congress may tax the bonds of the U.S. Ighave no doubt, either, that Congress may leave to the States all subjects of taxation which, as subjects of taxation, lie within the domain and jurisdiction of the States, whatever those subjects may be. Iwus asking the gentleman, and I wish now to go back to the inquiry, exclusively with regard to those Federal securities, those instrumental it ies for raising money and carring on the federal Government which have heretofore been created and invested with immunity from all State taxation. Speaking only of these, I ask whether he means to say that without reudiation, without a violation of the public aith, we can now, either by delegating to the States the power or by exercising it directly ourselves, withdraw from those securities the immunities which now attach to them, and which did from their inception attach to them, and subject them to the very taxation against which we guar untied the holders when they took them and advanced their money.
Mr. ROGERS. As to the power to do it I presume it is unquestioned. I presume the gentleman does not question it. As to the polic, I am equally as clearly of the Opinion, and think the majority of the American people are so, that the $3,000,000,000 which are invested in these Government securities ought to bear the necessar burdens of State and federal taxation accoring to the protection those bonds and those men receive from the different sovereign States of this Union.
Mr. COI KLING. I see that I am unable to make myself clear. I will try once more. I am not asking about the question of power.
Mr. ROGERS. I am talking about the policy, too.
Mr. conKLING. I assume, for the sake of the argument, all that the gentleman pleases as to the mere question of power. I ask him whether, without repudiatio and violating the public faith, any power may be exercised by Congress which shall withdraw from these securities the immunity enhancing their value which holders relied upon when they took them and paid their money for them.
Mr. ROGERS. I understand the gentleman, and I understood him before. Yes, sir; I say it would not be in violation of plighted or public faith, and would not have the 1st resem blance of repudiation to compel these bond holders these rich, aristocratic bond holders, who have $8,000,000,000 invested in Govern ment securities, to pay taxes to the State and Federal Government, according to the amount of protection they receive from both, because there is no guarantee to the contrary. It is not a violation of public faith, because, when the law was passed, it was well understood that Congress afterward might exercise its constitutional power of taxation. It is awell settled principle that congress or a Legislature may exempt certain kinds of property from taxation one year, and the next year may compel every one of those articles to pay tax, and yet not repudiate or Violate public faith. It has been done in my own State of NewJersey. It is done in almost every State of the Union. You cannot find a single year passing without the Legislatureof sonio State changing the taxation of that State. Sometimes schools, colleges, coiporations, or banks are exempted from taxation by virtue of mere law, but no one ever pretended it was iolating the public faith or derogatory to the State afterward to compel the things before exempted from taxation to pay taxes.
Mr. STRUUSE. Idesire to ask the gentleman a question. Does the gentleman mean to say that all these $3,000.000,000 invested in Federal securities are entirely exempt from taxation?
Mr. ROGERS. No, sir, not exactly; but it amounts to that. There is no other tax but a more tax on income.
Mr. STROUSE. Suppose, then, that the owners of this money invested in these bonds had kc t it, what tax would be upon them?
Mr. STROUSE. What law have you for that?
Mr. ROGERS. The law which taxes every kind of property in the States.
Mr. SpROUSE. Do we not pay 5 or 10%. income tax?
Mr. ROGERS. I understand that. Do you not pay income tax upon all incomes, whether from t new bonds or not? Do you not in addition pay income tax on all kinds of property? Do you not pay school tax, township tax, county tax, State tax, and Government tax, from which the Government securities are exempt?
Mr. STROUSE. Very well; one word more. This is not a contract between the citizens of a State; it is directly with the General Government, with which the States, in my judgment, have nothing to do.
Mr. ROGERS. I agree with the gentleman that the law has relation only to the Federal Government and to the citizens of the States, and that the States have nothing to do with it. But I propose that Congress shall legislate so as to give authorityto the States to have something to do with it.
Mr. WARD. Mr. Speaker, I wish to inquire if this comes out of the morning hour.
The SPEAKER. It does. This is the morning hour.
Mr. BLAINE. Has not the morning hour exired? Fhe SPEAKER. No, sir.
Mr. BLAINE. I was going to ask, then, that the gentleman repress his remarks until some Saturday and let the States be called.
Mr. ROGERS. Ipropose to go on, and claim my right, and if gentlemen on the other side or on any side do not agree with me, all I have to say is, that this is the doctrine that the Democratic conventions have enunciated in almost every State of this Union, and which was enun ciated by our revolutionary fathers when parliament taxed the colonies different from what it taxed the English. It has just been enun ciated by the State convention of Indiana, and was enunciated by both Democratic and republican conventions of NewYork, and I am ere to sustain it without regard to who may agree or disagree with me. this well known in this House that I speak whatI consider right regardless of consequences to me. Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I have no objection to the Gentfrom NewJersey speaking) for himself as he proposed when he ot up. but when he assumes to s ak for the eniocratic party of Indiana or i NewYork I would like to have the resolutions read.
Mr. conklliG. When the gentleman says that he wants to know, does he really mean it? If so, I will answer him.
Mr. ROGERS. Iiinderstand the gentlemans ground. It is that this taxation is against the policy of the country.
Mr. CONKLING. Oh, no, that is not my ground. I want no privilege that can be honest] avoided. it
Mr. ROGERS. Then the gentleman holds that taxation of these bonds would be a violation of lighted faith?
Mr. CONKLING. Yes, sir, as to those which the nations faith is solemnly pledged not to surrender to taxation only those.
Mr. ROGERS. The gentleman does not deny that we have the constitutional right to exert ise this power of taxation, hilt maintains that it would be a violation of the faith of the country to do so.
Mr. STEVENS. Will the Gentfrom NewJersey allow me to interpose a word, in answer to a question which he has afied?
Mr. SllfiVlflNS. The gentleman asks why we should not tax these bonds. Mv only an swer is, because we promised upon the faith of the Government of the U.S. that we would not tax them.
Mr. ROGERS. Isay that there has been no such promise. Congress simplydeclared by a simple law that the bonds or the time being should be exempt from taxation. Without any such law they would have been exempt from State taxation; and because congress saw fit to sanction it by a law it makes the obligation no more sacred: and we are just as much authorized now, in the face of that act of congress, and without a violation of pli lited faith, to authorize the States to tax the [iiederal securities as we would have been if that act of Congress had never been passed.
Mr. CONKLING. Will the gentleman an swer one morequestion?
Mr. CONKLING. Will the gentleman explain the difference between his proposition to allow the States to tax bonds which were taken and aid for by bonafide holders, under a promise that they should be exempt from State and municipal taxation, and a proposition to reduce, say 1%., the interest to be paid? In other words. would it not be just as fairnnd equitable for us to say now that, upon a 6%. bond we will pay only 5%. interest, as to say that, though we continue to pay 6%. nominally, we will withhold 1%. by permitting State or municipal taxation to that or a greater extent?
Mr. ROGERS. [o, sir; the cases are not at all annlo ous. The rate ofinteresl is of the essence of the contract. If a man givesapromissory note payable 3 months alter date with interest at a certain rate, that interest is a part of the contract, and when he refuses to pay the interest he refuses to perform the contract. But, sir, if a State gives its obligation to an individual, payable ifyou please in 6 months after date. with interest at 5%., does that prove that it is repudiation if the State, before the time for the payment of that obligation arrives, should, in the exercise of its sovereign power, declare that that obligation shall bear its share of the necessary bur dens of taxation imposed by the State in pursuance of a fundamental right of its government? If the Federal Government, plightini: its faith, had entered into a contract with the bond hold ers, saying, “ If you will take the bonds, they shall never be taxed, ” I am the last man who would stand here to advocate that Congress should either delegate or exercise the power of taxation in violation of the contract. But, sir, the declaration in the law of Congress passed 2 or 3 years ago, that these bonds at that time should not. be liable to taxation, constituted no agreement, contract, or comact, express or implied on the part of the federal Government with the bondholders that the bonds should be exempt from taxation for all time to come.
Mr. GRINN ELL. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. GRINNELL. [desire to inquire whether the gentleman subscribes to that Democratic letter written a short time since, declaring: “If we should now in the 1st place succeedin taxinn the bonds, then we shall be ready to demand that those holding the bonds shall receive for their bondswhat they paid for them, taking a cold stand ard: and then, if they Will do that, shall we not be preparedto put the rebel indebtednesson a parwith this, and so so upon the market?" That is the pesition which has been taken by certain Democrats in this country.
Mr. ROGERS. I do not subscribe to an such doctrine as that. To comel these bon holders to surrender their boin s before those bonds are surrenderable upon their face, would be a violation of plighted faith, and a reudiu,tion of an express contract entered into by the ll Federal Government with the bond holders. I am opposed to repudiation in every shape. The time in which the shall be paid and the rate of interest are in the bonds themselves, and are an express contract which should not be violated. What I am now asking is that taxes shall be levied in this country ii on the equitable principles of justice, and that all men shall pay taxes according to the value of their property, regardless of what that property may consist. What reason is there that a man with wealth amounting to a million dollars invested in secu rities of the Federal Government, should reside in the State of NewYork, or any other State, and pay no taxes to the State, and but a disproportionately small amount to the Federal Government, while he enjoys the protection of both governments and is allowed to participate in all the privileges of citizenship, while the toiling millions of the country have their meager means subjected to a heavy taxation the rich aristocrats are living in luxury and paving compuritively no taxes?
Mr. lI IAYER. The gentleman has been very good natured in yielding to others; will. he permit me to ask him a question?
Mr. THAYER. I happen to have in my family a lady of Celtic extraction, an artist who attends to matters relating to the chambers in my household. By “ aristocrats ” she is ordinarily called a chamber maid. [A laugh. Within the last year she called upon me an placed in my hands a small sum of money, which by frugality she had accumulated from her small earnings, and requested me to invest it in U.S. securities, which I did. Now, I want to ask the gentleman if thatperson is included in the designation “aristocrats, ” against whom he has inveighed here for an hour?
The SPEAKER. The morning hour for today has expired, and this resolution goes over to next Monda, during the mornin hour.
Mr. BLAIN i. I would inquire oi the Chair what will be the position of the resolution on Monday next.
The SPEAKER. It will be again open to debate.
Mr. BLAINE. Is a motion now in order in reference to this resolution?
The SPEAKER. Not at present; the morning hour having expired, teresolution goes over under the rule.
Mr. BLAINE. Well, air, the Gentfrom NewJersey, [Mr. Rootns] with all his blatant argument upon this subject, was afraid to bring the resolution to a vote because the members on that side of the House have too much sense of honor and justice to sustain any such principles as he there lays down. He has gone on and talked during the whole morning our and prevented us from attending to any morning business at all. Now, after he has abused and outraged the patience of the House to this extent I want to guard against any simi lar outrage next Monday.
Mr. ROGERS. Ihad no intention of occupyin so much time. As to the vote of the members on this side, I do not care how they vote; each man will vote for himself.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state the manner in which this resolution came up this morning. It is one of those cases which happen very rarely indeed. The morning hour of, ast Monday exired just as the House had refused to 2nd the demand for the previous question on the passage of the resolution submitted by the Gentfrom NewJersey, [Mr. BOG I uns] therefore, by the operation of the rule the resolution went over until today. The rule is, that resolutions shall not be debated on the very day of their being presented; nor on any day assigned by the House for the receipt of resolutions, unless where the House shall direct otherwise, but shall lie on the table, to be taken 11 in the order in which they were presented. his resolution, before the question of its disposition had been decided, by the expiration of the morning hour, came over until today, and was open for (debate and by the expiration of the morning hour today, it goes over until next Monday, and will be again open to debate.
Mr. BLAINE. Will I be then entitled to the floor upon this resolution?
The SPEAKER. Certainly. RAILROAD TO PITTSBURG.
Mr. STEVENS, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to authorize the building of a military and a iostal railroad from Cumberland, on the river otomac, in the State of Maryland, to the city of Pittsburg, in the State of Pennsylvania; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the select committee on an air line railroad to NewYork.
Mr. STEVENS moved that 2 members he added to the select committee on an air line railroad to NewYork.
Skip Skip The motion was agreed to. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv just taken; upon the table. Agreed to. STATISTICAL DIVISION, TREASURY DEPT.
Mr. GRINNELL, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to establish a Manufacturing and Statistical Division in the Treasury Dept; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComManufactures. POSTAL LAWS.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. What is the regular order of business?
The SPEAKER. The consideration of the mtRtv the House recommitted to the comPostOffice House bill No. 281, to alter and amend the postal laws. BOYD VERSUS KELSO.
The SPEAKER laid before the House evidence in the contested election case of Boyd against Kelso, 4th congressional district of Missouri; which was referred to the Committee of Electigns. COAST SURVEY REPORT.
The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the SecyTreasury, transmitting the annual report of the U.S. Coast Survey for the year 1865; which was laid upon the table and ordered to be printed.
Mr. ELIOT moved that there be printed 3000 extra copies of the report of the Superintendent of the U.S. Coast Survey for 1865, 2000 copies for distribution by the Superintendent of the Coast survey, and 1000 for the use of members of the House. The motion was referred, under the law, to the ComPrintg. NAVAL STATION AT CANTON, MARYLAND.
The SPEAKER also laid before the House a communication from the SecyNavy in reply to a resolution of the House in reference to the cost at which the Government can locate a coal and naval station at Canton, near Baltimore.
Mr. PHELPS moved that it be laid upon the table and ordered to be The motion was agreepritnot.ed. TAX 0N PETROLEUM.
Mr. MOORHEAD, by unanimous consent, presented pJtResolution of the Legislature of Penneyvania instructing her Senators and requesting her Representatives to procure a repeal of the tax on crudeoil or petroleum; which was referred to the ComWays&Means, and ordered to be printed. TRADE WITH BRITISH NORTH AMERICA. Mr. KELLEY. I ask unanimous consent to submit the following resolution: Resolved, That the SecyTreasury be requestedto communicapsto this House a statement oi the trade of the Provinces of British North Amerien, especially Canada, in 1854 and 1865 66 respect ivoly, the values being estimated in gold and specifying what proportion of said trade was with the L U.S., and what articles. if any.were exclusively exported to the U.S.; also.the tarifl law now in forcein Canada. With a statement of the nature and extent of the changes made therein since “34; also, the returns of Canadian canals for 1865. illustrating their value and tboimportimco of the free navigation of the river StLawrence to American commerce, togetherWith such general information, b proposusegshstion down to the present time. asmay be in his and may assist incorrectly estimatinir the trade. resources, 0., of said PIOVIHULS and their grilnttionto the trade and production of the U.S.r. a es.
The SPEAKER. Being acall for executive information, it requires unanimous consent.
Mr. PIKE. I object. RAILROAD to PITTSBURG Again.
Mr. FTHOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of making an explanation. I an derstaud, during my absence for a short while this morning, 1; e Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. SrnVENS] chairman of the ComAppropriat, moved that 2 more members he added to what is called the select committee on an air line railroad between this city and NewYork. I ask whether I am rightly informed in that respect.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania is not now in his seat.
Mr. FTHOMAS. The Chair will have the kindness to sa.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania is now resent.
Mr. F. the AS. Very well, then, I will repeat: I understand during my absence a few moments since the Gentfrom Pennsylvania moved that 2 members he added to the select committee to inquire into the expe diency of making a new railroad connection between this city and NewYork.
Mr. STEVENS. What I did was this: I presented a bill authorizin the construction of aroad from Cumberland, alaryland, to Pitts burg, Pennsylvania, and then asked that 2 members he added to the committee to which it was referred.
Mr. FTHOMAS. I hope some gentleman who was then present will move to reconsider.
The SPEAKER. The motion to reconsider was made and laid upon the table.
Mr. FTHOMAS. Cannot the vote to lay upon the table be reconsidered?
Mr. FTHOMAS. Will the House indulge me in a moments exlanation?.
The SPEAKER. he Chair hears no objection.
Mr. FTHOMAS. The House will recollect that early in the session the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srnvsus] submitted a bill proposing to construct a new line of rail roa between this city and the city of NewYork, and that upon his motion the bill was referred to a select committee of 7 members appointed by the Speaker. That subject has been under full consideration in that committee in some 6, 8, or ten meetin s. Delegates from Maryland and officers of the various railroad companies between this city and NewYork have been heard. We have one into a full, thorough, and minute examination of agreat deal of documentary evidence which has been submitted to the committee, and the committee have formed an opinion as the Gentfrom Pennsylvania well knows, temajority having decided against the propriety and expediency of the mode of communication proposed between the 2 cities. Now, what is proposed to be done? That the House shall interpose and place 2 more members on that committee, and require at its hands that it shall revise all the proceedings that have been taken. Why, sir, if such a practice prevails there will he no termination to any subject matter of inquiry in a committee, because the minority can come into the House at any time and ask that 2 or more members he added so as to make a majority. Now, all I ask of the House is that by some mode the consent of the House be obtained to a reconsideration of the action heretofore taken. If in no other way, perhaps it can be done by a motion to suspend the rules.
The SPEAKER. That motion would he in order, the morning hour having expired, were it not that a motion to reconsider is pending.
Mr. FTHOMAS. I could move to postpone further proceedings.
Mr. STEVENS. The gentleman will have an opportunity hereafter.
Mr. FTHOMAS. We may as well dispose of it now, for I may be absent again.
Mr. STEVENS. I bet; leave to ay 0.word in answer to the Gentfrom Maryland Mr. FTHOMAS.] Early in the session I had e honor to offer a bill, as well as the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. GARFIELDJon this subject, and we asked for the appointment of a select committee to which it should be referred. That was granted. Now, I need not say to this House that by parliamentary rule the Speaker was bound to place upon that committee, which consisted of 7, a majority favorable to the project. such is the absolute and undoubted parliamentary rule. The Speaker did apoint 4 whom I have no douiit he suppose were favorable to the project, for one of them was the chairman of the same committee last year. Now, sir, I do not like exactly to say what took place in the committee, but the remarks of the gentleman render it important that I should say something. Contrary to all parliamentary law, one of the majority of the com. mittee to which it was referred, has by argument, and by ar iment alone, changed his views and refused to fit the bill be reported favorably to the House. I have, therefore, deemed it not only perfectly proper, but my duty, to ask the House to reconsider the matter, in order that, according to parliamentary law, the friends of the bill might have a majority on the committee and be able to report favorably.
The SPEAKER. The motion to suspend the rules is not in order without postponing the pending motion of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, Mr. ALLEY.]
Mr. ALLEY. I yield to allow the gentleman to move to.ost one.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire to say one word in answer to the Gentfrom Maryland, [Mr. F. Tamas] He has hardly stated the rule fairly; I mean no reflection upon him at all. Whenever a select committee is appointed and a bill or proposition is referred to it, all parliamentary law requires that a majority of the members of that committee shall be favor able to the proposition; not favorable to the particular bill, at favorable to the general subject matter; and any departure from that rule on the part of the Speaker would be either a mistake or an overruling of parliamentary law. I have never known it done except by mistake.
Mr. FTHOMAS. I would ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVENS] to suspend his remarks until my proposed motion comes a for consideration.
Mr. STEVENS. No, sir; I prefer to say what I have to say now. N ow, the member of the committee who has been referred to I will not reTer to him by name was not in favor of the proposition at all. He did not propow to amend the bill, he did not propose any other bill for the same object, but absolutely refused to allow any bill to be introduced into this House for the action of the House.
Mr. DAWES. it is true the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvsss] as not named any particular member of the select committe. but he has been just as specific as if he had named him. Now, I wish he would call the attention of the House to the fact that that member is not present here. If there is any significance in teremarks of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, it must be as a reflection upon the integrity of that member, which I hardly think the Gentfrom Pennsylvania desires to make in his absence. I am aware of the peculiar language with which the Gentfrom Pennsylvania has clothed what he has said. But it strikes me that there can be no significance in his remarks if they do not reflect upon the gentleman now absent to whom he reers. If he were here it would be a matter of his concern, and that of no one else.
Mr. STEVENS. I have no objection to having this matter postponed until all the members of the committee are present. I do not intend to reflect upon the integrity of any member of the committee. I mean to say that there has been a vastdeal of argument in this case by the railroad company interested, and it has prevailed upon some member of the committee to act in an unparliarnentary manner. If he had said, “I do not like this bill"
Mr. RAYMOND. If I understand the na ture of this debate, the case is this: abill providing for a railroad from this cit to the city of NewYork was introduced an referred to a select committee, that committee having charge of no other subject. The committee have made no report.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not hesitate to say that the majority of the select committee were opposed to any new road and this morning I introduced another bill to make a road in another quarter, and asked that it be referred to this same select committee; and I also moved that the committee be increased by the addition of 2 members. In the 1st place, I say I had the right, without the introduction of any new bill, to ask that the committee be increased, so asto put it upon the footing which parliamentary law puts it. In the 2nd place, after Ihad introduced another bill, and adit referred to the same committee, I had a further right to ask for that increase of the committee. After finding that the committee did not agree with the original proposition, I should have felt myself acting perfectly in order in making this request. I am willing. however, that the vote shall be postponed until all the members of the committee are present; or, if the Gentfrom Maryland [Mr. F. Taoms] prefers, let it be taken now.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I was out of my seat when this discussion arose. would like to know what is the pending question.
The SPEAKER. The pending question is upon the motion of the Gentfrom Maryland [Mr. F. Tnonss] to postpone the reconsideration of the recommitment of the bill No. 281, the postal bill, moved by the Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. Amman] lhe Chau understands the motion of the Gentfrom Maryland [Mr. FTHOMAS] to have been made with the intention of moving to suspend the rules for the purpose of reconsidering the proposition made by the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srnvsns] to add 2 members to the select committee on the air line railroad between this city and the city of NewYork. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania mtRtv his proposition was agreed to, upon the table, which latter motion was agreed to, and the only manner in which the subject can be reached is by suspending the rules.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Then it all comes up in the proposition to reconsider the vote by which 2 members were added to the select committee?
The SPEAKER. That is the gist of the matter.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I should like to understand the reason for reconsidering that vote.
Mr. FTHOMAS. I will reiterate what I have said upon that subject. I consider that it is nothing more than right that I should do so, and also to respond to something that has fallen from the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, Mr. STEVENS.
The SPEAKER. With the permission of the Gentfrom Maryland, [Mr. F. Tuonas] as the composition of this committee has been debated at some length, the Chair will state that it has been his uniform custom, when a select committee has been ordered by the House, to consult with the member who was to be the chairman of the committee as to the personnel of the majority of the committee. The rule requires that temajority of a select committee shall be favorable to the measure for the consideration of which the committee is raised. When this select committee was ordered the Chair consulted with the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srnvsxs, who introduced the original bill, and as the Gentfrom Pennsylvania will say, he was satisfied with the names of the majority suggested by the Speaker.
Mr. STEVENS. I dlt? consent to the names suggested. Mr. Brusnnoss was the chairman of the committee oflast session, and when the Spealtkepmentioned his name I replied, “Certain y.
Mr. FTHOMAS. The House has been so very kind and indulgent that it is with extreme regret thatI intrude thisupon the regular order of business; but I hope the House will find my apology in the peculiar circumstances of the case. Now, if we were to permit a post ponement of this subset, I do not know what motion might be made in my absence. I did think, and I now believe that I was right in so thinking, that the Gentfrom Pennsylvania would not have made such a motion without notifying the majority of that committee that this attack was to be made upon the action of the committee.
Mr. FTHOMAS. I so considered it; I mean an attempt to overthrow the action of the committee. Now, I remonstrate most earnestly against this proposed action. The Speaker has said that where a measure is submitted to a select committee parliamentary law requires that the majority of that committee shall be favorable to the measure. That corroborates all I have said; but you are not obliged to have a committee friendly to the particular instrumentality by which that end is prosed to be attained., Mr. STEVENS. I would inquire of the gentleman whether in the present case the member he has referred to did not oppose all measures of this committee.
Mr. FTHOMAS. No, sir; I do not so understand it. We have a ComReconstruction, and day after day we read to them propositions in regard to the mode or manner in which the States of the Soutn shall be permitted to come back into the Union. ow, does that committee feel themselves forbidden to amend, modify, change, or alter those propornttons, or even to reudiate them altogether? Can they not come ack to this House and recommend that all those propositions be reJected? and if the House is issatisfied with that recommendation of the committee, the House can refer the subject to some other committee for further advisement. There is hardly a day when committees are called that some one or more of them do not report back some matter referred to them, and ask to be I made no attack on the discharged from its further consideration and that it he laid on the table and upon what principle. Because the committees have a perfect right to change their opinions, even if the measure referre to them was one they were originally friendly to. Of what earthly use is a Comrttee if they cannot do that? I do not understand the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVENS] as reroaching
Mr. BLOND. I wish to make this inquiry: if the motion now pending, which is to postpone. should be agreed to, will it arrest the apointment of the 2 additional members otP this committee?
The SPEAKER. After the disposition of the motion to postpone, the question would be upon the motion which, as the Chair understands, the Gentfrom Maryland [Mr. F. Tnonas] proposes to submit for a suspension of the rules to allow a reconsideration. If that motion should be adopted, action would be suspended; otherwise it would not.
Mr. LEBLOND. If the motion to suspend the rulesv should be postponed, can the Chair go on and appoint these 2 additional members, and can the committee thus increased proceed to act 11 on the subject matter under consideration? f this be so, then the House on ht of course to take immediate action.
Mr. SpIEVENS. Let me say that if such a thing takes place, I shall not, nor will the committee ask the Chair to proceed any further until the motion of the Gentfrom Maryland shall be acted upon.
The SPEAKER. By parliamentary law, the pend hey of the motion to suspend the rules would not arrest the appointment of the 2 adduional members. The Chair would be oblige l, after consultation with the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, to make the appointment. But as the Gentfrom Pennsylvania l the committee. states that he would consider the pendency of the motion to suspend the rules as equivalent to a suspension of the action of the House, it might be so understood. If that were the understanding, the Chair would not appoint the additional members till the motion to suspend the rules should be decided.
Mr. CONKLING. If the present motion to postpone should not prevai, the Chair will goon and appoint the 2 additional members.
The SPEAKER. The Chair would be compelled to do so, acting, ofcourse, upon consultation with the Gentfrom Pennsylvania.
Mr. CONKLING. I hope, then, that the motion to postpone will not prevail: and as in the case of this bill this chil has been put out to nurse, and has been strangled, I hope that 2 additional members will be appointed and that we shall have some bill under which we can get such a railroad between here and NewYork as is necessary in time of peace as well as in time of war.
The SPEAKER. If the pending motion to postpone the proposition to reconsiderthe vote reeommitting bil H.R.No. 281 should be rejected. the Chair would understand the House as desiring him to go on and appoint the 2 additional members.
Mr. STEVENS. Idesire to say that Gentlemen aronnd me seem to prefer that a vote should be taken now.
Mr. CONKLING. Let us make this a test question. Those who are in favor of a railroad to NewYork will vote against the motion to postpone.
Mr. CONKLING. I will say that out of respect to the Gentfrom Maryland, I have with held objection to this debate, which has only proceeded by unanimous consent and having said that, I ask his permission to make a sing e suggestion.
Mr. Sneaker, we all understand, in the quaint old language of parliamentary law, that a child is not to be put to nurse with those who will strangle it. he Speaker will know whether I am right or not. In an early part of the session the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvsss] made a motion for the creation of a select committee to which a certain subject should be referred. It was not a new thing. It did not need any investigation of evidence, volumine us or otherwise. The Speaker, with the care and caution which the present incum bent of the Chair gives to everything with which he has to do, took, it seems, particular pains to observe the understanding and requirement of the parliamentary law in the composition of this committee; but, in spite of the unusual care he took, it so happened the committee was not against a particular bill, was not divided as to a particular mode and manner in which the expressed determination of the House should be carried out and embodied, but the majority of that committee was radically against the whole measure which was proposQCI.
Mr. FTHOMAS. I do not think it right and properthat the gentleman should introduce an elaborate argument into in remarks.
The SPEAKER. The regular order of business is the motion to postpone the pending mtRtv the House recommitted the bill in reference to the postal laws. If the strict rule be enforced, this debate is all out of order.
Mr. STEVENS. I will say my friendfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] misunderstood my remarks this morning.
Mr. CONKLING. The Gentfrom Maryland has referred to me and I want to set myself Mr. RADrhigh0tR. D. I want to correct a statement made by the gentleman. I understood the gentleman to say a majority of the committee are radically opposed to a new road between Washington an NewYork. For my self, I wish to deny that charge. I was in favor, and am in favor, of a railroad between New. York and Washington today, provided I could see the right ofCongress to pass a bill of that character.
Mr. CONKLING. I am glad to hear the explanation of my colleague, for I do not wish to misrepresent any gentleman.
Mr. FTHOMAS. I as whetherit is right that the gentleman should exhaust my time in this way?
Mr. CONKLING. I do not wish to interfere with the gentleman, but
Mr. CONKLING: The gentleman referred to me, and I was only stating my position.
Mr. FTHOMAS. It is that we shall, not withstandin the motion to reconsider has been laid upon the table, be brought to the lain proposition whether the majority of the case will allow this thing or not.
Mr. STEVENS. I think the gentleman will execuse me from going that far. I wish to so that the Gentfrom Mas What does the gentleman sachusetts [Mr. Dawns misunderstood my remarks this morning. did not say the arguments addressed to the committee were persrst ent and thathe gentleman referred to could not resist them. When I said the gentleman had changed I did not say from persistent argument but from argument. I meant nothing more. We had argument upon argument on the measure sent to us, and Ionly rose to exonerate the gentleman referred to from any suspicion of having been convinced by persistent argument.
Mr. CONKLING. I wish to be allowed to say that the motion of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania this morning was in effect to correctamistake a mistake into which the Speaker and the House fell, the Speaker having, ll] spite of all the pains he took, constituted a committee which in the end turned out to be adverse to this measure. Now, sir, because the motion is made for that purpose, because it does carry out the original intention of the House, to wit, that the committee should report here a proposition favorable to the construction of a road from here to NewYork, I hope for one the action this morning will not be overturned, but that the Gentfrom Pennsylvania will persist, and that the House will sustain him in persisting, in that action. Then we shall have a proposition which the country, the enterprise of the whole country demands that is, a proposition to construct a road relieving the public from the inconvenience, from the imposition, from the monopoly to which it is subjected. I speak in the interest of no line, no corporation, no proposition peculiar to any set of men: I speak only in the interest of a railroad from the political to the commercial capital of this country to rival that which now exists, and to give to the country, I hop:, that convenience which is denied now and which can be found only in the construction of another railroad betweien the termini I havementioned. I hope the motion to postpone the regular order will be defeated, and that on this question we will have the assistance of all those in the House who are against perpetuating the monopoly under which the traveling public groans and has been groaning for years past. 1 hat is all I wish to say.
Mr. FTHOMAS. Isuppose if the motion to postpone be agreed to the matter to which I have reference will come up.
The SPEAKER. Ifa majority of the House refuse to postpone the pending proposition the Chair will regard that as instruction that additional members should be so named as to make the majorit of this committee in favor of the original bilireferred to them. The Chair will state that in the appointment of select committees he always consults with the friends of the measure as to their personnel, as he did in this case. This is in accordance with the old parliamentary rule referred to by the gentleman, that a child must not be nursed by one who does not care for it. It was decided 2 or 300 years ago that the whole of a select committee should be in favor of the bill referred to them, and it was held to such an extent that ifa member was named who did not intend to go for it it was required of him that he should rise in his place and ask to be excused from serving on the committee. That was as far back as 1606; but in the HoRep the practice has been that a majority should be favorable to the bill.
Mr. FTHOMAS. Does the Speaker maintainthat a majority of the committee are bound to sanction an thing that is sent to them?
The SPEAKER. The Chairdoes not so bold; but that they should be “friends of the measure referred.”
Mr. FTHOMAS. So I understand. But does not the Chair recognize the parliamentary law of which I spoke, that the majority of the committee may report a bill back to the House with a recommenation that it do not pass?
The SPEAKER. If they are convinced on hearing the arguments, they would have to so report it. But the duty of the Presiding Officer is to make a select committee which shall be friendly to the measure referred to it, and therefore the Speaker always consults the chairman of the select committee about the composition of the majority of the committee. the question is on postponing the motion to reconsider.
Mr. STEVENS. By common consent let the motion to reconsider be considered as post poned and then take the vote on the suspension of the rules.
Skip Skip The question being accordingly taken on the motion to suspend the rules for the purpose of reconsidering the vote by which the House added 2 members to the select committee, there were a cs 43, noes 55. The SPEAKER ordered tellers; and appointed Messrs. Srnvnxs and FTHOMAS. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 43, noes 54., So the House refused to suspend the rules.
The SPEAKER appointed as the additional members of the select committee, Mr. Wasn snasn, of Illinois, and Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. ARMY BILL.
Mr. SCHENCK. I rise to a privileged question. I have not asked to make an Iwill proceeding from the ComMilAffrs a special order at this session, but I think it is important that I should do so in reference to the Army bill. I will, therefore, ask that the House permit me to report that bill say on Monday next and make it the special order from day today until disposed of.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Make it the special order after the morning hour.
The SPEAKER. There is one special order and only one remaining in the House, which is the bankrupt bill; but as that was made under a suspension of the rules, a special order by unanimous consent overrides it.
Mr. JENCKES. If the House will allow an evening session for the consideration of the bankrupt bill I think we can dispose of it. It can be disposed of in a few hours.
Mr. COi. KLING. Suppose the ComWays&Means want to report the internalrevenue bill, what will be the effect of this special order on that?
The SPEAKER. The committee could not report while there is a special order ending.
Mr. conKLING. hen I ask the chair man of the ComMilAffrs [Mr. Sonssox] whether it would not be the shortest way of getting at this by postponing his motion until the chairman of the ComWays&Means is resent.
Mr. SCHEL OK. I would willingly do so, but I think the House will concur with me that there is no bill more important or pressing than this, if we may believe what the officers of the Dept communicate to the country in regard to the necessity of having the Army bill disposed of, or if we look at the intense anxiety pervadin" the whole volunteer force of the country, which is, to some extent, to be transferred by examination, and to constitute a part of the regular Army. I think we can dispose of it in 2 days.
The SPEAKER. If there is no objection the Chair will understand that the ComWays&Means will have leave to report an internalrevenue bill, and as soon as it reports it will O to the ComWhole.
Mr. SCHENCK. I have no objection to that understanding.
The SPEAKER. There being no objection, on Monday next, after the morning hour, the ComMilAffrs will have leave to report the Army bill, and make it the special order from day today till disposed of.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. ANCONA asked and obtained leave of absence for his colleague, Mr. Dawson, for ten days from Friday last; and also stated that he had paired with Mr. Lawanxen, of PennsylVania Mr. ALLEY asked and obtained leave of absence for his colleague, Mr. AMES. HOSPITAL 1N THE DISTCOL.
Mr. INGERSOLL, by unanimous consent introduced a bill to incorporate the General Hospital of the DistCol; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComDistCol. TRADE WITH BRITISH AMERICA Again.
Skip Skip Mr. KELLEY. The Gentfrom Maine PMr. PIKE] withdraws his objection to the resolution I submitted this morning. Mr. ANCONA objected, but subsequently Withdraw his objection, and Mr. BERGEN renewed it. EVENING SESSIONS.
Mr. PRICE. I ask unanimous consent to submit the following resolution: Remloed, That. until otherwiseordered, the House will hold so.ions everyTuesday and thursday evenings for the 11 day evening, ofeoinrnittccs, commencingon Tues the 27thinstant.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of, Illinois. I object. The House is ahead of the Senate in legislation. POSTAL LAWS. The House proceeded to consider the motion of Mr. ALLE? to reconsider the vote of the House by which House bill No. 281, to amend the postal laws was recoinrnitted to the committee on the East Office, Mr. ALLEY being entitled to the floor.,
Mr. ALLEY. Mr. Speaker, the postal bill which was reported several weeks ago was pbjected to on account of its great length, and a desire having been exressed at that time to have it printed, I yieldhd to the renest and movedthat the bill be recommitted an printed. I then entered a motion to reconsider for the purpose of bringing it u when it should suit the convenience of the House is now before the House. But before the motion is put I will explain the provisions of the bill. The main objections I believe to that bill were to a supposed provision which members seemed to apprehend was in the bill in relation to the prepayment of postage on newspapers. That provision was not in the bill and is not reported at all by the committee. Another provision which excited a good deal ofo position at that flme, and which is now in the bill, I propose to move to strike out. The remainder of the bill I think will occasion no opposition whatever. his bill passed the committee unanimously. All its provisions were asked for by the Dept. The 1st section is in relation to stamped envelo es.
Mr. CONKLING. Will the gentleman yield to allow me to ask a question?
Mr. CONKLING. The bill, asIapprehended it, contained 2 propositions: one that the Government was to give away envelopes, char ging nothing except the price of the stamps, and the other requiring subscribirs of local ipews aers to ay iostave upon their a crsi ear iield through the mdil. H should Ililih to learn from the Gentfrom Massachusetts whether he proposes to relieve the bill entirely of the provision with regard to giving away envelopes on payment of the price of the stamps upon them, and also the provision relative to imosing postage upon local newspapers. If those provisions be stricken out, I shall be willing, so far as I am at present informed, to vote for the bill.
Mr. Cosnmxc] has manifested very considerable zeal and solicitude with regard to this small matter of stamped envelopes, and also in relation to newspaperpostage, and I will state for his special gratification that I propose to move to strike out the proviso n which the bill now contains on the subjeet of stamped envel O es. pThe other provision to which the gentleman alludes has never been reported from the committee, and it is not their purpose to report any provision of that character. There is nothing in this bill affecting that question. Now, Mr. Speaker, the 1st section of the bill contains a provision with regard to stamped envelopes which I have 1st intimated I shall at the propertime move to strike out. The 2nd section provides, paTihdaltetftreorms sahnadll abfetefrorthwear1dsetdda. aytotfhAeprreilq.ule8s6t 6p, proO th party addressed, from onepostolliceto anotherwithout additional postagecharge; and returned dead letters shall be restored to the writers theroof free of postage. The 3rd section provides that so much of previous laws as requires postage to be charged at the prepaid rate, to be collected on the return delivery of letters indorsed with arcquest for their return to the writers, shall be repealed; and that all letters hearing such indorsement shall hereafler be returned to the writers thereof without additional postage charge. The provisions of these 2 sections have been recommended by the Dept, and the committee were unanimous y of opinion that they should be adopted. I am prepared to give any explanation in regard to them which members may desire.
Mr. ASSON. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts allow me to suggest that the bill be read section by section, so that it may be amended as we go along?
Mr. ALLEY. I thought it best to egplain the contents of the bill before the House voted upon the motion to reconsider.
The SPEAKER. The bill is not yet before the House. The question is on the motion to That motion reconsider the vote by which it was recommitted. If there is no objection, the Chair will regard the motion to reconsider as adopted and the bill as before the House. There was no objection.
The SPEAKER. The bill is now before the House; and the Clerk will read it section by section for amendment. The 1st section was read. It proposes to authorize the PostMGenl in his discretion, to sell postage stamped envelopes for letters or newspapers, at the value of the stamps impressed thereon, without reference to the cost of rocurin and furnishing the same.
Mr. ALE Y. I move to strike out that section. The motion was agreed to. The 2nd section was read. It provides that from and after the 1st day of April, 1866, prepaid letters shall be forwarded, at the request of the party addressed. from one postoffice to anotiher without additional ostage charge; and returned dead letters shafi be restored to the writers thereof free of ostage.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. desire to inquire of the Gentfrom Massachusetts whether he proposes to allow this section to stand intact. I so, I wish to inquire of him why, if these dead letters are returned, post, age should not be paid upon them?
Mr. ALLEY. That provision is recommended by the Dept; and the reasons given by the Dept, which the committee eein sufficient, are thus stated: co"mThpelicactoellsetchteionaoccf opuonsttsaguenodnersutheehlraewtufirnxcindglctstaelral ries of postmaster s.These lettersmustbe entered the mailin and then at the rocuiving office. posta a colect d; and such as cannot edeliverod must O credited to the postmasterwhen sentto the dead letter office. The aim of the Dept is to have no unpaid lettersin the mails and to cplloct all revenues by means of postagestamps, avmdrng the necessityof keepingaccounts. In future , postinnstern are to enter in their accounts only unpaid letters, which are mostly from or to foreign countries and it seemsinconsistentto send1,000sdaily from thil Dept with instructions to enterthem and collect posta o. The amount is comparatively small and yet teattendant labor very considerable" I therefore suggest, as a matter for the consideration of Congress, t opropriet ofrestoringprepgurl letters to the owners free of ostagc.especially in view of the fact that a very large proportwn no to persons of moderatemoansr" There is such a small portion of the letters sent back that are called for and the postage aid that it reall amounts to very little to the Dept. Teexpense is nearly as much as it comes to. Therefore we have proposed this as a great saving of labor to the Dept without any very great loss, as the whole thing amounts to but a small sum.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The labor has to be done anyhow. I suppose the gentleman wants the letters returned and not have an thing chaed for them. {In ALLE. The postage has always to be preaid. LIL KASSON. I will state what I understand the facts to be about this clause. Instead of a question of revenue and inconvenience alone, I approve the action of the committee in recommending this clause for this reason: it is in the direction of simplicity and uniformity. It already prevails at Enfglish st offices under the simplified system of England. The last clause is the only thing about which there can be any difficulty. The 1st clause is certainly a very great convenience and was proposed, I think, 2 or 3 years ago. I think the House then adopted that prosition. It simply authorizes, when a traveller has one from one city to another, his letter shal be forwarded Without a new account. It is to facilitate the work among postmasters. The other clause concerning and letters is a matter of more pecuniary importance. It is in the same direction of simplicity and uniformity and the abolition of unnecessary accounts. It may sacrifice a few 1,000 dollars, but it will be of great convenience, not only to the public, but to the Dept. I believe it harmonizes with the news of the Dept for 4 on 5 years in both of these directions. The section was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: SEC.4. Abife:, That.the PostMGenl be, and he is hereby, authorized to cause the mails to be transported by sailing r cs vlsbetween any port of the U.S and anyforeign port or ports. allowing and paying therefor any sum not exceeding the sea postageon the mails so transported.
Mr. ALLEY. I move that that section be stricken out, as it was contained in an appropriation bill which we passed the other day. The motion was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: SEO.5 and beif Abife: That so much of the 7th section of the not entitled “An net to amend the laws relating to the Post offico Dept, ” approved March 3, 1313, ns provides for the publication of the list of undelivered letters in any postofficein newspapershaving the largest circulation within the 0stofficedelivery, be and the some is hereby, repea ed; and the modeof publishing lists of undelivered letters shall be at the discretionof the PostMGenl.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The Gentleman does not really expect that we will cc to any such section as that.
Mr. ALLEY. Why not? This section was asked for by the Dept, and was adopted by the committee
Mr. FARNSWORunIaHni.mousWh.at reasons are therefor it?
Mr. ALLEY. I will an, in the 1st place, that it entails upon the Dept a large expense; and that something less than 25%. of the advertise letters are called for. The Dept uys for advertisements of letters over 60,000 dollars a year. It seems to the Dept to be to a considerable degree an unnecessary expense. They are required now to advertise in those papers having the largest circulation, and are obliged to pay 2 cents a letter, and but forthat provision they would be able to get most of them advertised for a cent apiece. If the PostMGenl be allowed to advertise in such papers only as be may choose, and to the extent he may deem necessary, it will save much to the Government, and do little or no damage to any bod. hfir. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I think the law is right as it. is. It has existed for a long time. think it is just and properthat the pay or having the largest circulation should have the publication of the list of letters, I do not care to what party it may belong. I do not believe in giving the power to the PostMGenl to transfer the publication of these lists to papers which have very little cir enlation.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to amend by striking out the following words: In any post.ollice.in newspapershaving the largest circulation Within the postofficedelivery. be, and the same. That will leave it. so that undelivered letters may not be published at all unless the postmaster secs proper; but if they are to be published at all they should be published in the papers which have some readers. Mr. KASSON. I think that proposition strikes right at the point; for I remember very well that in many cases it has been deemed expedient for years simply to post up a list of the letters advertised in the ost ofhce, where we can glways [ind a crowd ooking at them, even after they have been published in the newspa icrs. I agree with the Gentfrom Pennsyvania that if the list is published in In papers at all it should be in those of the largest circulation. If posting a list in the postoffice is sufficient, then it will certainly economize expenditures.
Mr. RAYMOND. I think if the list is published at all it ought to be published in the newspapers having the largest circulation. But the chairman of the postoffice Committee
Mr. ALLEY] knows, whether other gentlemen ere know or not, that it is utterly impossible to do this at present rates. The rates provided by law may be very extravagant or they may not; but. it is utterly impossible at those rates to get this list )ublishe in any news aperof any considern le circulation published in any large city. I thinkI but state a fact well known to every one here. at all familiar with this subject, that in the city of NewYork the PostMGenl has endeavored in vain to get this list published, not only in the papers having the largest circulation, but even in these papers standing the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th on the list of cir culation and a list is now published and posted up in the postoffice bail in. If this list is to be published intenewspa pers having the largest circulation, then a rate of payment must be provided adequate to secure that nblication. Unless that can be done perhaps t. a only thing that can be done is to ct the PostMGenl use his discretion in selecting such apers as will publish at the rate now fixed by aw.
Mr. ALLEY. I do not know that I object to the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvauia, [Mr. Srnvnns 5 still I think the section is better as it now stands, because it gives the PostMGenl the authority which he needs. But as it seems to be the desire of the gentleman to limit it. in the way he proposes, I shall not make an strenuous opposition to it.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinms. I do not want to repeal the provision of the law here referred to. I think the most of the news papers, outside of the city of NewYork, advertise the letter list at the prices fixed by law. NewYork may be exceptional, probably is. I think the law is substantially right as it. is. Everybody knows that letters are advertised in the papers, and the people are accustomed to look in certain papers for the list. I therefore move to strike out this whole section. The section was as follows: BIG. 5. Abife: That so much of the 7th section of the not entitled “An act to amend the laws relating to the postoffice Dept, ” approved March 3, 1M3.as provides for the publication of the list of undelivered letters in any postofficein newspapershaving the largest circulation within the ost office delivery. be and the same is hereby, repea ed; and the modeofpublishing lists of undelivered letters shall beat the discretionof the PostMGenl.
Mr. ALLEY. I hope that motionwill not prevail. I see no objection to placing this matter in the hands of the PostMGenl to the extent here proposed. A great many letters are advertised), for which advertising is unnecessary; it subjects the Dept to great expense, and if the PostMGenl is permitted to exercise discretion in the matter the advantage is very great. The annual expense of advertising letters is about 60,000 dollars; while less than 25%, in fact only about 22%, of the whole number of letters advertised are ever called for. I therefore submit to the House whether, under the circumstances, it is not better to take this section with the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania rather than subject the country to this great expense for the comparatively little advantage derived from it. Then the PostMGenl, whenever he shall deem it exedient, will advertise the list of letters, and when he does advertise will do so in the papers having the largest circulation. It seems to me that covers all the ground that can be desired.
Mr. SCOFIELD. The Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] says that only about 22%. of the number ofy letters advertised are called for. I suppose that he might say, in addition to that fact, that proba bly not. 5%. are called for in consequence of their being advertised; that the largest number of advertised letters called for are called for by persons who would have called for them even if the advertisement had not been made.
Mr. ALLEY. The Gentfrom Wisconsin [Mr. Swan] is mistaken in supposing that the ostmnstor General has the power he de scribes. He has not the power of selecting beyond the paperhaving telargest circulation. In consequence ot that he is compelled to pay the rate prescribed by law that is, 2 cents for each letter when in a great many, cases he might be able to get the advertisin done for less, for even one cent perletter. understand from the PostMGenl that he can get nearly all the letter advertising for one cent perletter but for this law, which prac tically fixes the rate at 2 cents each letter.
Mr. SLOAN. Then I would suggest that this section be amended so as to give the PostMGenl the power, if the aperhaving the largest circulation will not pubiish the list, to select the paperhaving the next largest circulation and also give him the power to obtain the publication of the list at a loss rate than that now fixed by law wherever he can do so. I would be willing to support such an amendment as that.
Mr. ALLEY. Mr. Speaker, the Gentfrom Iowa has declared that the postoffice Dept has been administered, not for the benefit of the people, but against the interests of the people. For one, I do not believe that declaration to be correct.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. The gentleman states my position rather too broad y. I say that the tendency of these amendments to the postal laws has been in that direction.
Mr. speakcr, I have looked over this bill, and perhaps it would be well enough to pass 2 or 3 sections; all the balance might be left unpassed with advantage to the Government. Inm tired, sir, of the constant change of the postoffice laws. Every Congress we have something new brought in. One session we make a new law and the next session we change it, so that it is almost impossible for anybody to tell really what the postal laws of the U.S. are.
Mr. ALLEY. My friend will allow me to make a suggestion.
Mr. KASSON. I rise to a point of order. We should go on with this bill section by section.
The SPEAKER. The whole bill is before the House.
Mr. ROLLINS. I suggest that we have 5 minutes debate on amendments, taking up the bill section by section. No objection being made, it was so ordered.
Mr. ALLEY. The Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Wasnnunxn states that he has looked overthis bill and t tthere are 2 or 3 sections perhaps that might be properly adopted, and as for the rest he is entirely o.iposed to them. I will say for the benefit of the House, I think it had better dispense with the comPostOffice and iI elfer the whole matter to the Gentfrom I ine is.
Mr. WASHBURNE. of Illinois. I liOpethat suggestion will be carried out. I will make a good bill a great deal hotter than this.
Mr. ALLEY. My friend feels fully compe tent to discharge the functions of every committee in the House, and I suppose the House will concur with him in that opinion. But, sir, we had no idea when this committee was apoinied that he would give his attention and ook over any bill so thoroughly as he says he has this. If we had, we certainly could have dispensed with the appointment of such a committee, and for one Isould have been relieved of a vast amount of labor, for this committee has met twice a week for several weeks, has considered all the questions presented to it very carefully, has conferred with the Deptand considered its recommendations fully, and has reported this bill unanimously. There is only one section that we were in doubt about, and that is the one on which there was a great deal of division in the House, so far as we could learn. It is the 1st section, which I have proposed, in accordance with the iwish of the Dept, to strilge out. As it is merely a proposition to reduce the ostage we did not think, in the present condition of the Treasury, that it was worth while to grant it at this time. Now, I propose, notwithstanding the statement of the Gentfrom Illinois, [ML WASHBURNE] that he has looked over this bill and oes not think there are more than 2 or 3 sections that should be adopted, to have it considered section by section, and I will endeavor to explain them. [Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. RAYMOND. I move to amend section 5 by striking out the last line. This section provides for the repeal of section 7 of the law of 1863. Several statements have been made concerning the law of 1863, but none of them, I believe, have been quite accurate. By that section the PostMGen has now the discretion of deciding, 1st, how long letters must lie before they are advertised, and then whether he can advertise them by 0sting them in writing or by insertion in n ail or weekly newspaperhaving the largest circuiation. But he is restricted from paying more than one cent per letter. That of course prevents him from publishing in apers having large circulation in any considerable term. This section proposes to strike that out for the purpose of ena linghim to secure the object sought by the original law, namely, the advertising of letters in the newspapers of largest circulation. That is the character of the section to be stricken out by section 5. I shall oppose the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvrzss] and go for the section as it stan s in the bill.
Mr. FINCK. M colleague, the chairman of the committee, think, has inadvertently fallen into a mistake in regard to the unanimity which prevailed in the committee in relation to its action. I was from the beginning opposed to the 5th section. I do not believet ere is any necessity for legislation in relation to this particular question. The law as it now exists is, in in judgment, the best that we can have in relation to the publication of letters. It ought, in fairness, to be always in the paperhaving the largest circulation. I am therelore Opposed to the section as it stands, and also to the proposition to amend it by the gentlemun from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srsvsss. I trust the motion to strike it out will prevail.
Mr. RAYMOND. I withdraw my amendment. The question beingtaken on the motion of
Mr. Srsvsss to strike out of section 5 the words, “in any postoffice, in newspapers having the largest circulation within the postoffice eliv erg, be, and the same, ” it was not agreed to. he question recurred on the motion to strike out the entire section.
Mr. BALDWIN. I move to strike out the last ten words of the section. This would kill it; and I think this section ought to be killed in some way, and for this reason: the attempt to advertise letters in any other way than is now prescribed would certainly cost the government more than it costs now, or the attempt to advertise suitably would fail. Anyjob printer who should be required to furnish printed lists of letters suitable for posting would charge more for his work than it costs to advertise them in the newspapers. anyone familiar with the printing business knows this, or will readily see it by means of a.little calculation. Now, if it is necessary to give public notice of letters remaining in the postoffice uncalled for, it should be done in a way best calculated to bring the notice to the attention of those concerned. The present method is better than any that has been suggested. In one respect the present system might be imroved; the present regulation might be so c lunged as to require letters to remain longer in the post O cc before advertising them than is now required. oppose this section for another reason, which may lie also against some other sections of the bill. These continual chances in the postoffice laws are very injurious. I ear some of the best men connected with the management of the postoffices complain of this. They say, “ Before we can get accustomed to the law in one form, or as soon as we get our machinery fairly at work, in properadaptation to the law, some new change is made in the law, and we have to devise new appliances and a new adaptation of the machinery.” Now, let us allow the law, in some of its revisions at least, to stand long enough for the people to become familiar With it.
Mr. ALLEY. I rise to oppose the mendment. My colleague, as well as the Gentfrom Iowa, [Mr. WILson] seem to suppose that this advertising is to be done in some other mode, or in the most expensive manner. I do not understand that to be the proposition at all. This simply provides that it shall be left in the hands of the PostMGenl, to be done in the manner that shall be most economical and shall best serve the interest of the people and the Government.
Mr. ALLEY. He expects, I presume, to advertise these letters. If you take it for granted that the PostMGenl is to administer the Dept for partisan purposes merely, and not for the good of the country, then you are justified, I think, in taking the position which you do with regard to this provision. But if you expect the Dept to be administered for the benefit of the people, then I say you ought to give him such discretion as is here proposed. Now, with regard to the remark respecting frequent changes, I concur in all that has been said in that particular. I know that a great many changes have been made, and some that are unnecessary. The committee have investigated these matters fully. They have refused to concur in a great many recommendations. Nothing has been recommended or asked for that has not been fully examined and not withstanding my predisposition tooppose anything like changes in the postoffice laws not absolutely necessary, yet everything here proposed meets the aprovnl of in judgment and I do hope that the House will retain this section of the bill. It will be promotive only of good, save considerable money, and do no possible harm, in my judgment.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I will ask my friendfrom Massachusetts whether this bill was not drawn in the postoffice Dept, and sent to him from that Dept?
Mr. ALLEY. Most of the provisions of the bill were recommended by the Dept; and the Dept recommended some other provisions, which did not receive the approval of the committee.
Skip Skip The SPEAKER. Debate is exhausted upon the amendment. r.BALDWIN. I withdraw the amendment. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I demand the previous question on the section. the previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. The motion of Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois, to strike out the 5th section was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the 5th section was stricken out. on the table. Agreed to.
The Clerk read The 6th section was read. It provides that the balance of the appropriation of $100,000, under the 13th section of the act approved May 17, 1864, which may remain unexpended at the close of the current fiscal year, may be used as far as necessary to supply deficiencies in the proceeds of the money or er system during the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1866.
Mr. KASSON. I desire to ask my friendfrom Massachusetts whether he will not consent that this section be stricken out, and let the matter come up for the consideration of the Senate in connection with the regular postoffice appropriation bill. I think the gentleman himself must concede that such a provision is out of place coming from the postoffice Committee. It is in fact an appropriation of $100,000, or some considerable portion of that What other modement. This I House has already passed the regular postoffice appropriation bill. If the Gentleman desires that this item shall be included in a deficiency bill, he can doubtless procure the consent of the ComAppropriat for its insertion; or if the matter requires earlier action, the gentleman can doubtless induce the Senate to insert the item in the reular postoffice appropriation bill. I submit sum, for the support of the postoffice Departthe gentleman that this section should not be embraced in a bill like this, which has nothing to do with a )EVIUPHILHODS of money.
Mr. ALL “. I will not object to the sec2tion being stricken out. Mr. I( ASSON. I move, then, to strike out this section. The motion was agreed to. The 7th section was read. It provides that the 3rd section of the act entited "An act to establish a postal money order system, ” approved May 17, 1864, be amended so as to authorize the issuin of a money order for any sum not to excee 50 dollars, and that the charge or fee for an order for a less sum than 30 dollars shall be ten cents; for an order for more than 30 and not exceeding 40 dollars, 25 cents; and for an order exceedin 40 dollars a fee of 30 cents shall be c arged.
Mr. STROUSE. Mr. Speaker, I move to amend by striking out before the word “dollars, ” in line 6, the word “50, ” and inserting in lieu thereof the words “ 100;" and dby adding at the end of the section these wor s: and for an order exceeding 50 dollars, 50 cents shall be charged. Mr. Speaker, if this money order system is to be of any practical benefit to the people of the country, especially the store keepers and the small dealers, there is no good reason why 50 dollars should be fixed as the maximum amount of the orders. By authorizin orders of a larger amount, the revenue of the dept will certainly be increased, and the public will be accommodated. If we wish to suit the convenience of the small traders through out the northern, the eastern, and the western States, there is no reason why $100 should not be the maximum rather than filly dollars. It is a great advantage to the people to be able to purchase money orders, instead of being obliged to buy drafts or send their money by express. The Governmentguarunlics the payment of these orders; and in case of iheir loss duplicates are issued. To extend the benefits of this system, I have offered my amendment.
Mr. ALLEY. I was really in hopes this section would pass without any motion to amend, as the Gentfrom Illinois said when it was read that it was all right, and that he was content to have it go through. As to the gentlemans motion to amend by inserting “ 100 ” instead of “50, ” I will remark, when the bill was 1st introduced and considered there seemed to be serious objections to making it as high as 50 dollars. The object of the mone order sys tem is to enable persons of small means to. make remittances of small amounts. It was not desi ned or intended as a medium of exchange or brokers and persons of large means. It seemed to the committee, and I believe the House will come to the same conclusion. that 50 dollars should be the maximum amount we should adopt for the monoorder system. I hope, therefore, the amendment will not prevail. The amendment was rejected.
Mr. RADFOR D. I move to strike out all after the word “dollars” in the 7th line, and to insert in lieu thereof: 1/2 of 1%. for all sums for more than 30 dollars and not exceeding 50 dollars. Asit is now a man may call for 2 30 dollar orders and only pay 20 cents. scarcely one will call for an order beyond that, for as it now reads they are required to pay 25 cents for an order for more than 30 dollars and not exceeding 40 dollars.
Mr. McRUER. I move to strike out after the word “order, ” in the 6th line, the following: For a less sum than 30 dollars shall be ten cents: for an order for more than 30 and not exceeding fort dollars, 25 cents: and for an order exceeing 40 dollars a fee of thirt! cent! shall be charced and in lieu thereof to insert the follow ing; Shall be 1/2 of one or cont: Provided, No order shall be sold for less on ten cents.
The SPEAKER. Does the Gentfrom NewYork accept that as a modification of his amendment?
Mr. RADFORD. I do not accept it as a modification of my amendment.
Mr. KASSON. I wish to say that it is impracticable for gentlemen to regulate this b%age. The law limits the minimum dra to one dollar. The charge on that would be 1/2 of one cent hal a cent to pay for an order for adollar for a subscription to a country newspaper.
Mr. McRUER. My amendment is that no Order shall be sold for less than ten cents.
Mr. KASSON. I do not believe we can act to suit every mans convenience. It will be impracticable to carry out the amendment. The difficulty of computation is very troublesome. I think there should be 2 charges for money orders, as we have now but 2 charges for letter ostage, a charge of 3 cents whether the etter is to go to Baltimore or to Boston, and a charge of 2 cents for a drop letter, whether it is to o to the next door or a mile or two. So I thin we ought only to have 2 rates for money orders. I suggest that it should be, for a less sum than 30 dollars, ten cents, as it is in the report of the committee, and for all orders exceeding 53 dollars 25 cents, so that a man may now exactly what a draft is to cost. If we adopt this plan of%age, a calculation will have to be made before a man would know what his draft. would cost. You must recollect, too, that the blank draft costs something. In this money order system there are 2 items of expense to the Dept, one for the blank draft itself, and the other for the clerical labor. We must also remember that the Dept does not, like the brokers, transport money from one section to the other to meet these drafts. I hope the amendments will not revail.
Mr. RADFORD. uppose a man asks for 2 orders of 30 dollars. Now, as I understand it, he gets 2 money orders, amounting to 60 dollars, for 20 cents.
Mr. ASSON. I refer these matters to the chairman of the committee.
Mr. McRUens amendment, and it was disagreed to. The question then recurred on Mr. RaniOims amendment. The House divided; and there were ayes 80 noes 32: no quorum voting.
The SPEAKLR ordered ers; and appointed Messrs. RADFORD and tar. The House a sin divided; and the tellers reigned ayes t irty, noes not counted.
Mr. RADFORD. I do not press my amendment any further.
The SPEAKER. The amendment will then be considered as rejected.
Mr. KASSON. In order to meet the oint to which attention has been called, and ask the attention of the chairman of the committee to it, will it be satisfactory to say, for a less sum than 20 dollars it shall be ten cents, and for an order exceeding 20 dollars, 25 cents? I will state my amendment again. I move to modify the section so that it Will read: Site. 7. Abife:, That the 3rd loction of the not entitled “An act to establish a postal money ordersystem." approved May 17.1864. o and the sameis hereby, amendedso as to author ise the lSBlllllR of a.mono order for any sum not to exceed 50 dollars, and that the chargeor fee for an order for a sum not exceeding 20 dollars shall be ten cents; and for an order exceeding 20 dollars it shall be25 cents.
Skip Skip The question was taken, and the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HILL. I desire to move to strike out the word f 50” in line 6 of section 7, and insert in its stead the words “ 75. ” As the section now stands it provides that money orders may be issued for sums not exceeding 50 dollars each. I believe a proposition to strike out “50” and insert “ 100 ” has been already made and voted vm. My own observation and exerience has been that this money order system has been received with great favor by the people at lar e. The only complaint in regard to it which iIhave heard is, that the amount for which the order may be issued is not large enough. For that reason I make the motion to amend whichI have indicated.
Mr. ALLEY. I think that the sum of 50 dollars is sufficiently large, for the reasons which I have already stated. If anyone desires a larger sum than 50 dollars, then the person can take 2 or more orders, and thus accomplish his object. the amendmentof
Mr. HILL was notagreed to. The next section was then read, as follows: SEC. 8. Abife:.That a money order shall be valid and payable when presented to the deputy postmasteron whom it is drawn Within one year after its date. but for no longerperiod: and in case of the loss of a money order a duplicate thereof shall be issuedwithout charge, on the application of the remitter or payee, who shall make the required proofs: and postmastersat all money order pfflccsare hereby authorized and required to administer to the up licant or applicants in such cases the required out or affirmation free of charge.
Mr. ALLEY. I desire to inquire of the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Wasnnunxn] The has examined this section, and if he has any objection to it. Laughter.
Mr. WASHB RNlt, of Illinois. I think I have no particular objection to it. The next section was read, as follows: 51 10. 9. Abife: That all railroad companies carrying the madeof the U.S shall convey. without extrii charge, by any train which they ma run over their roads.all such printed matteras the PostMGen shall from time to time. direct to be transported thereon, in charge of persons designated by the postoffice Dept for that purpose.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I agree to that. Laughter.]
Mr. KASSON. There is, I think, a little alteration needed in that section. I move to amend the last clause so that it will read, “with the persons in charge of the same, designated by the postoffice Dept for that purpose. The amendment was agreed to. The next section was read, as follows: SEC.10. Abife:, That if any person or persons shall willfully and maliciously Iizunre, deface or destroyany mailable matter deposited in any letter box. pillar. box or other receiviii boxes established by authority of the PostMGenl of the U.S. for the safedeposit of matterfor tahsesismtianils or for dolivery or shall Inlllully aid and injuringI such mailable mntter so deposited as aforesaid, cit or by pouring into such boxes oil, water, or other fluids, or by another means.every such offender being thereof uly convicted shall for every such offense. be fined not less than 100 nor more than 1000 dollars or be imprisoned not less than one year. nor more than 3 years, at the discretion of the court. Noamendment being offered, The next section was read, as folloWs:. SEC.11. Abife: That the POTUS may, and he is hereby authorized, on the uppll08i10u of the PostMGenl and not otherWiso.to direct. if in IllSOpluion neccssaryfor the publicservice. that n. portion of the moneys appropriated for a particular ranch of expenditure in the postoffice Dept be appliedto another branch of expenditure in the sum apartment; in which case asecial account of the moneysthus transferred and oft eir application shall be laid beforeCongressduring the 1stweck of their next ensuing session: Provided That nothing herein contained shall be construed to modify or repeal the 2ndsectionof the act of March 3.1843, aut orizin the transfer of any surplus of the contingent fun, under the direction of the properDept.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to strike out this section. If passed at all it should be passed in an appropriation bill.
Mr. ALLEY: lp this section, that the PostMGenl has always exercised the power to transfer money from one particular appropriation to another where it may be nee ed. That has been the invariable custom in the postoffice Dept as well as in other Depts and I am told at the Dept that it is impossible to get ulon without the exercise of such a power. The PostMGenl says that being indisensably necessary, even he does not like to o it without authority of law; and therefore he asks for this authority from conWil remark, in regard to. gress, notwithstanding it has always been the custom to do it. This section provides that this power shall not be exercised without the consent of the POTUS, and upon a report to him by the PostMGenl that it is necessary and I do not see how any gentleman can object to this section if he is in avor of restricting the PostMGenl to the provisions of the law. It has heretofore been customary for them to do it, but in violation of the law. They say they cannot get along without it, that the cannot run the machine without it. The PostMGenl who gentlemen all know is a very strict an conse ientious man in these articu are, said to me that if this was absolute y essential for the administration of the Dept, he desired to do it in accordance with law; and therefore he asks that this provision be passed, guarded in this manner.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not think there would be the least difficulty if the House or the senate were asked to make up any deficiency that might be needed. But this is a very loose way of doing business, entirely unknown to any regular legislation, and in my judgment ought never to e practiced. The gentleman can have put in the deficiency bill any appropriation that maybe necessary.
Mr. HILL. I move to amend the section by striking out the following: Provided, That nothing herein containedshall be construed to modify or repeal the 2nd sectionof the act of March 3, 1813, authorizing the transfer of any surplus of the contingent fund, under the direction of the proper Dept and n on that I desire to say a few words.
Mr. ALLEY. Will the gentleman allow me to say a few words now?
Mr. ALLEY. I was going to remark that the s each of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Tmrsa reflects almost precisely the views I presente to the Dept upon this subject, and the reply was that it would be impossible for them to get along in the Dept without some such provision as this. I appreciate fully the remarks and objections of e Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srn VENB, and acting upon his suggestion, with the viewt at he presents, that it would be more appropriate in the appropriation bill, and that the ComAppropriat will report the provision if uecessar, fully convinced asI am of the necessity of is provision in some form, I cheerfully consent to having this section stricken out.
Mr. HILL. I am very glad the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] agrees to that.
Mr. KASSON. In the proviso of the 1st section of the act of March3, 1809, which is still in force, as I understand, is the following: “Provided, merfllcleu. That during the recessof Congress.the POTUS may and cis herebyauthorized.on the application of thoSe o retary of the properDept, and not otherwise, to direct, if in his opinion necessaryfor the public service, that a portion of the moneys a proriated fora particular ranchofexpenditnreint at court ment.may beyapgliedto another branch of expenditure in the same Dept; in which caseas coiul account of all moneys thus transferred and of their application shall be laid before Congressduring the 1st week of their next ensuingsession." That is all the power any Secretary ought to have, and all I presume that the PostMGenl wants. For if a deficiency occurs during the session of Congress, he cans e with to Congress and they will take action. fa deficiency occurs during the vacation of congress, then this old law confers all the power that is necessary.
Mr. HILL. All I desire to say now, since the Gentfrom Massachusetts Mr.Ai.LnY] consents to have this section stricken out, is. that I am very happy to find that the speech which the gentleman says he made to the PostMGenl has ha a much happier effect when made here than it had upon the PostMGenl.
Mr. ALLEY. I was not aware of the existence of the law just noted by the Gentfrom Iowa, which tellers this section of course unnecessary and therefore it should be stricken out. The motion of Mr. Wiisnnunun, of Illinois, to strike out section 11 was then agreed to.
The clerk read Section 12 was then read, as follows: SEC. 12. Abife:, That newspaper, ououlars, pamphlcts. andother kinds of printed matter depositediniiny postoificcforlocal deliver, shall besubject to the lollowmgratesofpostngc, to c prepaid in all casesby stamps namely, the drop ostacc on newspapers, Glfifllllllt, and pamphlets shall be uniform at one cent each: PTOUHH., hairrver, That drop newspapers, in packagesto one address shall be cabinetto postageat the rate of onecent for each four ouncesor fraction thereof: Aml provided alw, That drop printed matter not enumerated in this section Ihall esubjectto a estugcof once ent for eachpiedo, except books, which shall be subjectto postage at {he ratp of 4 centsfor eacheightouncesor fraction creo.
Mr. RAYMOND. I move to strike out the words “to be repaid in all casesb stamps."
Mr. MIMR. I move to strike out the whole section.
Mr. MILLER. I think this section ought clearly to be stricken out.
Mr. ALLEY. I understood that this section was got up in the newspaperinterest. Certainly no objection has heretofore been made to it from that quarter. It has been considered, I believe, by a great many newspapereditors, and I have not yet heard any opposition to it on their art. But if it is objectionable to that interest I are no objection to its being stricken out. The motion was agreed to. The 13th section was read, as follows: SEC.13. Abife:. Thatsomuch of the 15th section of the act entitled “An act to amend the laws relatin to the postoffice Dept.” approved March 3, 1863, as authorizes postmasterstocontract with the publishers of newspapprs. periodicals, and circulars. for deliver bycarriers within their postal districts of any pn lication not coming through the mails, at rates and upon terms to be agreed upon with such publishers. be, and the same is hereby.repealed.
Mr. ALLEY. I suppose it will be necessary to strike out that section, now the others have been stricken out. I make the motion that it be stricken out. The motion was agreed to. The 14thsection was read, as follows: SEC.14. Abife: That whenever it shall becomeexpedient.in the opinion of the PostMGenl.to substitute a (lificrcutkind of post ago stampsfor those now in use.he shullbe, and is hereby, authorizedto modify the existing contractfor the manufacture of postiigestamps, so asto allow to.the contractors a sumsufficient to cover the increased ozrpensdes, ii any. of manufacturingthestampssosub si uto.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I so pose the Gentfrom Massachusetts also move to strike that out.
Mr. ALLEY. In regard to that section I will say he will not object to its being retained. It is deemed of great importance by the Dept.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Why should I not object to it when it provides for increased and unnecessary exease? I do not like this authority given to the PostMGenl to change these stamps at an time when a new design may be proposed. think it is unsafe. Everybody knows what the stamps are now, and ever body is satisfied with them.
Mr. ASSON. Will the Gentfrom Illinois, with whom at the 1st blush I agreed, listen to a single statement I I remember now there is another kind of postage stamp with a peculiar kind of ink which is in part a patent and in part a secret. It is in use in some of the English and inisome of the continental postoffices. It has been desired by the Dept hero. The mark which it puts in canceling a stamp cannot be removed without effacin the entirciin ression of the stamp. If the c air man of tlxie committee thinks it relates to the substitution of some stamp like that, and not for some new design, I think the section should be retained.
Mr. ALLEY. When this matter was presented to the committee, the same objection occurred to my mind that the Gentfrom Illinois has urged against it, but the Dept satisfied the committee that it was important and necessary. Iwill not detain the House by stating all the arguments that were advance, but I recollect very well they were conclusive to my mind. I hope the clause will be retained.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Will not the gentleman agree to amend so as to strike out the words “so as to allow to the contract ors a sum sufficient to cover the increased ox penses, if silly, of manufacturing the stamps so substitute 2”
Mr. ALLEY. I think the section is properas it is. It is a simple matter, and it is necessary for the Dept.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move the amendment. The amendment was disagmed to.
Mr. GRINNELL. I move to add the following as an additional section: Thatsectlon two of cliapter 137 of the laws of Congress, approved July 1l. 4, beamendedby adding the followmg: Provided, That when the quarterly returns of any lipstmaster.of the 3rd 4th, or ii h class shows that the salary allowed is 10%. less than it would be on the basisof commissions under the act of 1854fi, xing compensation.then the PostMGenl shallroview and reudiust under the provisions of said section. Mr. Speaker, I wish to so a word on that amendment. I was on the ComPostOffice when this provision was under consideration, and proposed an amendment proven inadequate. It does not seem to me that the hardships experienced under the system of commissions by postmasters in new towns in towns built up in the newest portions of the country, and on the lines of railroads, have been fully appreciated. It has been found, sir, that the postmasters in these new towns under the system of salaries are called upon to do work for little or nothing. I know of postmasters who receive only 35 or 40 dollars a quarter who should receive $100 if commissions were allowed according to business. Now, it is not just; it does not appertain to the dignity of the postoffice Dept to callupon those public servants living in Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, California, and the new States and Territories to do this work for next to nothing. Lot is law be plain that there may be an early recognition of responsible and faithful service. Once in 3 months is not too frequent an adjustment for men too oorly paid.
Mr. HUB ARD, of Iowa. I would asluny colleague whether fre nent applications have not been made for relieri, and whether they have not been refused by the PostMGenl.
Mr. GRINNEL. I have received between 40 and 50 applications for redress, and gentlemen all around me have received similar applications they inform me. This is only a question of justice to those who receive comparativel little comiensntion.
Mr. ALLEY. I do not like to object to a provision of this kind. As I said before, if the gentleman would make it 20%. in stead often I would agree to it, although it will involve immense additional labor to the Dept. The review of the whole matter of compensation to postmasters will have to take place in July. I was in hopes they would consent to let it be deferred till that time, when this revision will take place. If this is passed it goes over to the Senate, where it will proba bly be delayed and before this will be passed to do much good July will probably be upon us. I think on the whole that the amendment had better be referred to the committee f r them to mature it and put it in the next hi 1 which they report.
Mr. GRINNELL. I dislike this reference to the committee. This is the favored hour. Near 3 months ago I presented a bill to remedy this grievance of our half paid postmasters in our new towns, and it has slept with the committee. I will trust the Senate to concur with us in what is so palpably proper. Next July is too far off". It was my fortune to serve for 2 sessions under the chairman of the ComPostOffice, Mr. ALLEY] and I take pleasure in saying hat I was honored by the association, and found him discreet and wise, as our chairman, ever faithful to the postal service; but I cannot resist the conviction, that a little more liberality to the new States on his part and that of the able PostMGenl, would tend to secure a faithful class of servants and add to the dignity of the Dept, as well as its efliciency.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I sng eat to my friendfrom Iowa [Mr. Gaisnnmf to change the language of his amendmenthso that we may know what act he means. Let it be to amend a certain act. The language as it is now is entirely exceptional. I never saw it in any bill.
Mr. ALLEY. Will it be in order to move to amend the amendment?
Mr. ALLEY. Then I move to strike out “ 10%.” and insert “ 20%.”
Mr. GRINNELL. I will modify the amendment as suggested by the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. Wiisnaunnsfl as it is not material. I hope the amendment of the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] will not be adopted. It is no, fair to the new States. The penalty for rowth by a loss of 10%. on what is justIy due is quite enough.
Mr. HALE. Is there any district in the Gen tlemans section of the country that increases at a less rate than 20%. a quarter?
Mr. GRINNELL. I do not know how that is. Yet if it enjoyed the presence of the learned gentleman the country would present such at traciions that its growth could not easily be computed.
Mr. ALLEY. I hope my amendment will prevail, for I do think that 20% is ttle enou h. I move the previous question on the bill and amendments.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. The question being taken on the amendment proposed by Mr. ALLEY, there were ayes 23, noes 69. Mr. ALLEY. I demand tellers. Tellers were not ordered. So the amendment was not agreed to. The question then recurred on the amendment of Mr. GRINNELL; and it was agreed to a cs 70. noes 22. he bill was then orderengross and read a3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. ALLEY. mtRtv the bill was passed, on the table. Agreed to. EVENING SESSIONS.
Mr. WASHBURNE. of Illinois. I move to dis ense with the session of this evening. he motion was agreed to. Mr. STEVENS, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Remlved.Thatin everyevenin sessionof the House the 1st hourshall be considere as amorning hour. in addition to the usual morning hour. CONTESTED ELECTION.
Mr. DAWES. The ComElections, to whom was referred the memorial of William E. Dodge, contesting the right of James Brooks to a seat as Representative from the 8th district of the State of NewYork, have instructed me to submit a report, accompanied by 2 resolutions. [ask that the resolutions be read, and the report laid on the table, and printed and I desire to state that it is my intention at an early day after the printing of the report to call it up. I will say on Thursday next, if it should be printed by that time. The resolutions were read. as follows: Resolved, That Hon. James Brooks is not entitled to aseatin this HouseasReprese iitative in the 39th Congress from the 8th district inNewYork. reaoloecf.That William E. Dodge is entitled to a seat in this House as a Representativeiu the 39th Congressfrom the 8th district in NewYork.
Mr. MARSHALL. I wish to otfer, from the same committee, a minority report, and to have it printed. 0th reports were laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. FINC. I ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] not to designate so early at day as Thursday next. This is a case involving a gieat deal of testimony, and ample time ought to be given to both sides for examination. I suggest next Thursday 2 weeks. The evidence cannot be printed by Thursda next. as I understand.
Mr. DAWES. The testimony has been printed more than 2 months.
Mr. FINCK. It could hardly be examined until the reart.is presented from the committee.
Mr. DAWES. I hardly think it could be expected to postpone it as long as that. It is now more than 4 weeks since the parties concluded their arguments. They were for 3 weeks in daily session submitting their views. More than 2 months have elapsed since the testimony was printed and now to ask 3 weeks longer before we act on the question seems to me reallytobe rathera modest request. If the Gentle muu from Ohio [Mr. FINUIL] has not yet. read the documents that have been printed Ictitainly cannot ask the House to wait. for him to read them.
Mr. WRIGHT. 1have not read these documents, nor have I been supplied with them. KANSAS RAILROAD and TELEGRAPH. On motion of
Mr. LOAN, Senate bill No. 145, for a grant of land to the State of Kansas to aid in the construction of the Northern Kansas railroad and telegraph, was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the comPostOffice. DEPT OF MISSOURI.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the House a communication from the SecyWar, transmitting, in reply to a resolution of the House of March 9, 1866, the report of Major General Pope on the condition of the de artinent of Missouri; which was laid on the ta le, and ordered to be printed. CATTLE PLAGUE.
The SPEAKER also, by unanimous consent, laid before the House a communication from the ComrAg, transmittin correspondence of European consuls received. through the State Dept relative to the cattle plague, its nature, remedy, and means of prevention, and a copy of the recent law enacted by the British Parliament on that subject; which was referred to the ComAg, and the question of printing the document was referre to the ComPrintg.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. VANHORN, of NewYork, asked and obtained leave of absence for his colleague, Mr. Moaiiis, for ten days and then, on motion of Mr. FARNSWORTH, (at 4 oclock and 35 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. TUESDAY, March 27, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. COAST suavav REPOHT.
The President protempore laid before the Senate a communication from the SecyTreasury. transmitting in obedience to law the annual report of the Superintendent of the U.S. Coast Survey, showing the progress of that work during the year ending November 1, 1865, and an engraved sketch, showing the progress made in the survey of the Atlantic Gulf, and Pacific coasts.
Mr. SHERMAN. I believe that is the regular coast survey report. There is a great deal of matter of the coast survey publised that I think ought to be omitted in printing the report. It is a very expensive volume and much of it is useless. I move that it be referred to the ComPrintg with a view to see how much of it should be printed.
The PRESIDENT protemporr. That ordel will be made if there e no objection. HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. The following bills from the HoRep were severally read twice by their titles and referred as indicated below: A bill (H.R.No. 207) to amend an act entitled “An act to provide Ways&Means for the support of the Government, ” approved March 3, 1866 to the ComFinance. A bill (H.R.No. 360) to reimburse the State of Pennsylvania for moneys advanced Government for war purposes to the ComMilAffrs . Abill (H.R.No. 363) supplementary to the several acts relating to pensions to the ComPensions. A bill (H.R.No. 394) for the relief of the estate of E. W. Eddy to the ComMilAffrs . A bill (H.R.No. 420) to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territory to the ComMilAffrs . A bill (H.R.No. 421) for the relief of James G. Holland, late acting asst paymaster U.S. Navy to the ComNavAffrs. A bill (H.R.No. 422) for the relief of Mrs. Ann E. Smoot. widow of Captain Joseph Snioot to the ComClaims. A JtResolution (H.R.No. 101) for the relief of certain officers of the Army to the ComMilAffrs . A JtResolution (H.R.No. 102) for the relie of Alexander Thompson, late U.S. consul at Maranham to the ComForRel.
Mr. TRUMBULL. A communication was received when I was not in my seat, a day or 2 since, from the SecyWar, and referred to the ComMilAffrs, in reference to some imrovements at RockIsland, Illinois, where the Government has established an arsenal. I desire to have that communication printed for the use of the senate. It is now in the hands of the ComMilAffrs.
The President protempers. The order to print will be made if there be no objection. PRINTING OF A BILL.
Mr. RIDDLE. A few days since a hill (S.No.190) was introduced by the Senfrom Illinois, to incorporate the DistCol Canal and Sewerage Compan. It was not ordered to be printed. It is an important bill. It was referre to the ComDistCol, the chairman of which is absent, and I merely ask that it may be ordered to be printed.
The President protempore. The order to print will be made if there be no objection. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.
Mr. FESSENDEN, from the ComFinance, to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 127) making appropriations for the support of the Army for the year ending the 80th of June, 1867, reported it with amendments. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred abill (H.R.No. 280) making appropriations for the service of the postoffice Dept during the fiscal year ending the 30t of June, 1867, and for other purposes, reported it with amendments. Mr. SUMNER, from the ComForRel, to whom the subject was referred, reported a bill (S.No.229) to authorize the POTUS to transfer a gunboat to the Government of the republic of Liberia, accompanied by a correspondence of the Dept of State in relation to the subject. he bill was read and passed to a 2nd reading, and the correspondence was ordered to be printed.
Mr. SUMNER, from the Commitee on Foreign Relations, to whom the subject was referred, reported a JtResolution (S.R.No. 63) authorizing Rear Admiral H. Paulding to acee t a decoration from the King of Italy; which was read a 1st time by its title, and passed to a 2nd readin.
Mr. SUMNER. As this is similar to a resolution which was passed last week with reference to another officer of the Navy, I ask the Senate to proceed with its consideration now.
Mr. GRIMES. Let the morning business be 1st disposed of.
Mr. SUMNER. This will not take a minute.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I hope the resolution will not be taken up until we get through with the mornin business.
Mr. TRUMBULL. When we get through with the morning business you can call it up. I object to it now.
The President protempers. Objection bein made, the JtResolution cannot be considered on the da it is reported.
Mr. NESMITH, tom the ComMilAffrs , to whom were referred resolutions of the Legislature of WestVirginia, in favor of an appropriation for the payment of military claims created by that State during the late war, submitted a report, accompanied by a bill (S.No.230) to reim burse the State of WestVirginia for moneys expended for the U.S. in enrolling, equipping, and paying military forces to aid in suppressin the rebellion. The bill was read, and passe to a 2nd reading, and the report was ordered to be printed.
Mr. NORTON, from the ComClaims to whom was referred the petition of Mrs. Mary E. Twiford, praying for indemnification for the loss of her house and other property, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. ANTHONY, from the ComPrintg, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.172) authorizing certain public documents to be distributed to the district and territorial judges of the U.S., reported it with amendments. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a petition of citizens of the U.S., praying that each commoh school in the Union may be furnished with the Presidents annual message and accompanying doc uments, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, on account of the large sum of money it would cost. The report was agreed to.
Mr. ANTHONY, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the memorial of William Pierce, of SanFrancise o, California, praying for an issue to him of du licate bonds in place of 4 Oregon war bon s, lost by the burningof the steamer Golden Gate on the 27th of July, 1862, submitted a report, accompanied by abill (S.No.231) for the reliefof William Pierce. The bill was read, and passed to a 2nd reading, and the report was ordered to be printe.
Mr. CHANDLER, from the ComCommerce, to whom was referred a memorial of the Wine na and StPeter Railroad company of Minnesota, praying that certain additiona duties paid on railroad iron imported in the fall of 1863, maybe refunded, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, and that it e referred to the ComFinance; which was agreed to.
Mr. WILSON. I am directed by the ComMilAffr and the Militia, to whom was referred the JtResolution (H.R.No. 96) in relation to the public lands appertaining to the armory at Springfield, to report it back without amendment, and as it is a small matter, if there be no objection, I should like to at it on its passage now.
The PRESIDENT protempore. Is there any objection to the present consideration of the JtResolution I
Mr. GRIMES. Yes, sir, there is objection. I think we had better proceed with the morning business until we dispose of that, and then we can take u the Senators hill.
The presENT protempera. Objection being made, the bill cannot be considered today. I CONDITIONS OF RESTORATION.
Mr. STEWART. I ask leave to introduce an amendmentin the nature of a substitute for the JtResolution (S.R.No. 48) setting forth certain conditions upon which the States, the people of which have been lately in rebellion against the U.S., shall be restored to their representation in Congress; and I move that it be printed and referred to the ComReconstruction. The motion was agreed to. BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. DOOLITTLE asked, and byunanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.232) to provide appropriate legislation to enforce artic e 13 of the amendments to the Constitution abolishing slavery iu the U.S.; which was read twice by its title.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I move that the bill be referred to the ComJudiciary, and as it is, in my judgment, a very important bill, and perhaps could be easier examined by the committee if it were printed [ask the unanimous consent of the Senate to have it printed.
The President Protem e. The order to print will be entered and the bill referred to the ComJudiciary if there be no Objection.
Mr. GRIMES asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.233) in relation to appointment ofenlisted persons at the Naval Academy and for other purposes; which was read twwe by its title.
Mr. GRIMES. This bill was prepared at the Navy Dept and is accompanied by a letter from the SecyNavy adressed to the chairman of the ComNavAffrs, explaining and urging the provisions of the bill. I move that the letter be printed in connection with the bill, and that they be referred to the ComNavAffrs. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas, asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.234) to authorize the SecyWar to sell a portion of the Fort Leavenworth military reservation to the city of Leavenworth, in the State of Kansas, for a public park; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComMilAffrs .
Mr. NYE asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.235) grantin lands to aid in the construction of a milroa and telegraph line from Virginia City to the Truckee river, in the State of Nevada; which was read twice by its title, referred to the comPubLands, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. TRUMBULL asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.236) to authorize and establish certain post roads; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComPostOffices.
Mr. TRUMBULL. As that bill contains a provision for the establishment of a bridge across the Mississippi river, I move that it be printed. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. DOOLITTLE asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a JtResolution (S. R. L o. 54) to provide for a survey of a route for steam naviration through the Wisconsin river, from the ississippi river to Green Bay, on Lake Michigan; which l was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComCommerce. SEIZURE OI STEAMSHIP HIE OB.
Mr. GRIMES submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved.That the POTUS he requested(if notdecmedby him to be incompat ible With the public interests)to transmit.to theSon a the copiesof all correspondencethat has passed between the Government of the U.S and the representatives of the Government ot Ship, in relation to the seizure and detrntion of the steamship Meteor; as well ase opiesofull instructions issuedon the same subject to the U.S. district attor ney and marshals for the southern district of the State of N NewYork. COAST SURVEY REPORT.
Mr. WILSON submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the ComPrintg: Rrmlverl, That there be printed of the report of the Superintendent of the U.S.Coastt urvey for the year 1865, 1200 copies extra for the use of the Senate and 3000 copies for distribution by the Superintendent of the CoastSurvey.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. McPHEltSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed the following bills and JtResolutions, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: A bill (H.R.No. 281) to amend the postal ws; A bill (H.R.No. 416) for the benefit of certain half breeds and mixed bloods of the Winnebago tribe of Indians; and A JtResolution (H.R.No. 103) to refer the canon of Benjamin Holliday to the Court of claims. SPRINGFIELD ARMORY LANDS.
Mr. WILSON. I now call up the JtResolution that I reported a few moments ago, in relation to the public lands at.the Springfield armory.
The President protempore. That JtResolution having been reported today, and objection having been made to its consideration, it lies over under the rule unless the senator making the objection Withdraws it.
Mr. WILSON. The Senator only objected to it until the morning business could be disposed of. There bein no objection, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the JtResolution (.R. No. 96) in relation to the public lands appertaining to the armory at Springfield, which proposes to revive, reenact, and continue in force the 1st section of a JtResolution approved June 17, 1844, entitled “A resolution relating to the public lands appertainin to the armories at Springfield and HarpersTerry."
Mr. GRIMES. What is the section that it is proposed to reennct?
Mr. WILSON. I will simply say that this resolution revives an old resolution which empowered the SecyWar to lay out streets adjoining the Government lands at Springfield, and to dispose of a portion of the Government lands in exchange for other lands. This resolution is introduced for the purpose of enabling the armory at Springfield to obtain certain lands that theydesirc, and to lay out certain streets; in other words, to authorize the SecyWar to make such arrangements with the military authorities at Springfield and other persons as will accommodate the Government with the lands it needs in exchange for others that it possesses. It puts the whole power in his han s to make such dispositionas he may deem necessary for the public interest. It is a very small matter any way, but it is deemed necessary to pass this resolution. The JtResolution was reported to the Senate without amendment; ordered to a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. TRANSFER OF SMITHSONIAN LIBRARY.
The President protempore. If there be no further mornin business, the Chair will call up the unfinished usiness of yesterday.
Mr. HOWE. Is that now regularly before the Senate?
The President protempore. It is not regularly before the Senate until one oclock. but if there be no other business the Chair will call it u.
Mr. HOWE. I move to amend the bill in section 2, line 6, by inserting the words “in the recess of conrcss” after the word “year, ”v so that it will rea: That when such library shall have beensoremoved and deposited, the Smithsonian Institution shall have the usethereof in like manner as it is now used, and the public shall have access thereto for purpose l of consultation on every ordinary Week tay. except during onemonth of eachyearin the recessof congress.when it mu be closedfor renovation. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish to ask the Senfrom Wisconsin whether this bill contemplates the permanent transfer of these books to the congressional Library? These books belon to teSmithsonian trust fund, which I thin ought not tobe diverted.
Mr. HOWE. The Senator will see, if he looks over the bill, that it does not transfer the title of the books. It is the custody of the books that is transferred to the Congressional Library for safe keeping, as well as for the better accommodation of the public.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I will state to the Senfrom Indiana that this is a mutual arrangement entered into between the regents of the Smithsonian Institution and the ComLibrary, satisfactory to both parties. It is thought to be safer to have them deposited there. There is danger of them at present, as the building in which they are is not tire proof.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment concurred in.
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to he engrossed for a 3rd reading, was read the 3rd time, and passed. MINNESOTA LAND GRANTS.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. Senfrom NEWJERSEY.
The President protempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday, which is the following resolution, reported from the ComJudiciary: Resolved, That John P. Stockton was duly elected, and is entitled to his seatas a Senfrom theState of NewJersey. for the term of 6 years from the 4th day of March. 1865. The pending question is on the motion of the Senfrom Maryland [Mr. Jonssox] to postpone further consideration of this resolution until Thursda next.
Mr. STOCKTOL. I desire to make a correction in the remarks that I made yesterday when this matter was before the body. I stated that the present presiding officer of the Senate of New crsey was elected by his own vote. I find upon inquiry that that is not strictly correct. He exchanged votes with a Democrat. I have received a telegram from my colleague, [Mr. WRIGHT] in these words: "Is your caseadjourned to Thursday? If not, beg tIhe Senateforms to deferyourcase to that day, when will be presentor ask no further delay."
Mr. HENDRICKS. I presume upon that statement there will be no objection to a post ponement until Thursday. T lepublic interest will not suffer byit.
Mr. WRIGHT expected to be here to day, as I understand from dispatches from him, but his physician informed him this morning that he must not leave today, that he could probably leave tomorrow. He thinks he can, and if he cannot be here by Thursday, no further delay of the question will be asked on that account. It seems to me to appeal so forcibly to the sense of justice of the Senate that there should be no objection to a postponement of it until that time. There is no desire to have any advantage by a postponement except to get the vote of allthe Senators that can attend upon this question, and especially to get the vote of the Senfrom the State of NewJersey. These resolutions and bills are generally under the charge of the senators who report them. I have not known of an case in which any Senator has reported a w bill and desired its postponement where it has been denied. When the Senfrom Maine [Mr. FESSENDEN] reported a bill to the body and suggested its consideration at a particular time, I never knew an earlier consideration to he demanded. The Senfrom Illinois [Mr. Tntmsunn] reports this resolution, and 1 understood him to suggest yesterday before the reconsideration, “Let the reconsideration take place, and then let the resolution stand over until Thursday, " and I thought there was no objection to it. I thought it was understood when the vote for the reconsideration wastaken, that it was to stand over until Thursday. It seemed to me at the time that that was the understanding. There was no opposition to it. I therefore understood that it was to stand over until Thursday. Under all the circumstances of the case I think that by unanimous consent the resolution should stand over until Illhulrsday. There can be no objection to it, I t in.
Mr. CLARK. I hope the postponement will not take place. This matter came before the Senate last Thursday. It was discussed on that day. It was discussed all day Friday. It then came up before the Senate yesterday, (lilonda.) fo day it is before the Senate again 5 days after it 1st came before the Senate and now we are asked to postpone it that a man who has been sick 6 or 7 weeks may by possibility get here after 2 or 3 days, when his physician says he cannot leave today to be here.
Mr. JOHNSON. Will the Senator permit me to interru t him?
Mr. JOHNSON. I have a dispatch from him, directed, I suppose. to his colleague, which has just been p seed in my hand: Is our case adiourned to Thursday? If not, beg the enuto for me to defer your case to that day. when I will be present, or ask no further ill lay. WILLIAM WRIGHT. Now, I submit to the Senate whether, under the circumstances, the postponement should not be had? The fact itself speaks as persuasively to the Senate as any language I could use.
Mr. CLARK. I have only to reiterate that I hope no postionement will take place. There is the dispatch from the Senfrom NewJersey that he can be here on Thursday, but not a shadow of a reason given why he could not be here today.
Mr. JOHNSON. I can tell the Senator if he will permit me again to interrupt him, that. adispatch received before this dispatch was received stated that his physician told him it would peril his life if he started last night or this mornin; that he might come to niorrow.
Mr. POM ROY. I was called upon by a neighbor of Mr. WRIGHTS last night who says he not only does not expect to come back within a week, but he never expects to come back. He says he lives almost the next door neighbor to him; he knows him well; and he not only could not be here, but did not expect to be here.
Mr. CLARK. I have only to add that after this long and lingering delay I do not think this question should be postponed any longer.
Mr. HENDRlCKS. PIhere is but one purpose on the part of those who believe Mr. tockton is entitled to his seat in asking this postponement, and that is, to get a full vote of the Senate. If there is anyquestion upon which Senator do not desire
Mr. Stocktons vote before T ursday next. if that should be communicated to me I should not ask the consideration of any such question. The delay is not for the purpose of having his vote upon any matter in the mean time, but simply to secure the vote of Mr. Waienr upon this question. I am surprised that the Senfrom NewHampshire should object to this postponement. It is the only postponement, I believe, that has been asked by the friends of Mr. Stockton. The resolution was reported by the Senfrom Illinois rather earlyin the session. Its consideration was not pressed by the Senfrom NewHampshirepr any other Senator, although it lay upon the Secretarys table week after week. 1 here was no concern expressed nboutit, no haste. Finally the Senfrom Illinois in formed the Senate a few days in advance that he should call it up on yesterday week, and then the Senator was informed that the Senfrom NewHampshire, [Mr. CLARK] who was opposed to the resolution and the doctrines of the report of the ComJudiciary, was not able to be in his seat on that day, and he asked a postponement. I never dreamed of objecting to that postponement; I did not think of such athing. When it was asked by a Senator upon the ground that his health did not allow iim Senator thought of such a thing. By pressing it at that time, if we could have pressed it, our side, perhaps, would have the advantage of excluding his vote. But, sir, I would count my self very unworthy if I should ask the imme diate consideration of aquestion because at the hour it was asked I won d have the advantage of the sickness of a Senator who did not concur with me in opinion upon the merits of the question. Only upon his request has there been a pgstponement at all. It waswpostponed then, believe, from Monday until ednesday, upon the request of the Senator, or some one requesting it in his behalf.
Mr. JOHNSON. He asked another post ponement until Thursday.
Mr. HENDRICKS and then it was post poned again until Thursday, I understand. The exact particulars of that postponement I do not recollect.
Mr. JOHNSON. The Senfrom NewHampshire will, I am sure, remember that at his request it was postponed until Thursday, from ll ednesday, he being unwell and not bein able to take part in the debate as he intende to do, so that 2 postponements of the subject have been made on account of the Senfrom NewHampshire.
Mr. HEL DltICKS. I have but one more remark to make. I cannot conceive of any reason why this subject should be pressed now except the fact that the vote of a Senator cannot be had upon the resolution today. He tel egra pllEd to his colleague yesterday evening that e would be here today. That was his 1st dispatch, that he would be here to day if allowed, and then afterward he telegraphs that his physician will not allow him to start to reach here today, but hopes to be here tomorrow. We can get a full vote on Thursday, and we cannot today. Is not that a sntheient reason in the Senate of the U.S. on a question of this sort to let it stand over for 2 days, when there is no public interest jeopardized by it?
Mr. CLARK. The Senfrom Indiana endeavors to press upon me and the Senate the fact that the discussion of this question was once postponed by my reuest. The Senfrom California has state partially what was the occasion of that postponement, and as far as he went stated it tru. I was the only member of the ComJudiciary dissenting from the majority report. When that report was made, I was urged by the friends of the remonstrants to put my views before the Senate in writing and have them printed. I said there could be no necessity for doing that, for the objections had been stated pretty fully in the publications that had been laid on our desks on one side and the other, and that when the case should come up, I would be in my place in the Senate to state them to the Senate, and that was the reason I gave them for not making what is called a minority report. Having as sured the remonstrants that I would do that, I felt that I should have an opportunity of it, and hence I asked that the Senate shdoouinlg postpone the case until I could be in the senate; and that, it seems to me, is a very different case from that of the Senfrom NewJersey who is not here, who has taken no part in this discussion, who was not upon the committee, who has been absent from his seat 4 or 5 weeks, who does not return after 4 or 5 days notice, but asks it to be still further postponed that he may be here. I do not wish to do anything discourteous to any bod, but it does certain y seem to me that we on it now to come to avote.
Mr. SUMNER. The Senfrom Indiana says that next Thursday we shall have a full Senate. How does he know that?
Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not think I said that.
Mr. SUMNER. I understood that was the Ian
Mr. HENDRICKS. I did not intend to say that. I intended to say that we wanted it post pttnlied so as to have as fall a Senate as possi e.
Mr. CONNESS. The other expression was the one the Senator used.
Mr. SUMNER. I believe I did not misquote the Senfrom Indiana. However, he now says that he wishes as full a Senate as possible. Does the Senator expect that next hursday there will be a fuller Senate than there is now? I need not remind him that we are all subject to the contingency of sickness, and there is a Reaperwhose name is Death; he, too, may come among us. There is no one who is sure that he will be here next Thursday, and the very Senator whose presence is expected on that day is at this moment so ill that no person can promise surely that he will be here and yet the Senate is asked to postpone this grave question, which has already occupied so many days of our delib erations, merel for that contingency. IVe too, sir, have an absent colleague, who if he were in this Chamber we have every reason to believe would record his name with us. He cannot be hEre. Disease has made the pair between the absent Senfrom NewJersey and the absent Senfrom Vermont, [Mr. Foor.] Let that pair continue. Meanwhile, let the business of the Senate proceed. If this were the 1st day of the discussion, perhaps the Senfrom Indiana might urge his suggestion with better reason. at the absent Senfrom NewJersey has already had ample notice. On Wednesday night he was informed by telegraphic dispatch that this matter already occupied the attention of the Senate and that his presence was needed. He has not yet appeared. 6 days have passed. During anyone of those 6 days 2 or 3 times a day he might have come to Washington. He has not come; and now the Senate is asked to post pone the final decision of this important question merely for the contingency that the sick man may rise from his bed and do what during the last 6 days he has either declined to do or been unable to do. I hope, sir, that the Senate will today proceed with this question and cart it to its close. It has occupied enough of the attention of this body, enough of the attention of the public.
Mr. SAULSBURY. In reply to one remark which has fallen from the Senfrom Massachusetts, vIwish simply to make a statement. I do not know what may have come over the mind of the Senfrom V Vermont, who is sick, [Mr. Foor] but I myself heard him up reach the Senfrom NewJersey, while the Senfrom NewJersey and I were sitting on that sofa, and he told the Senfrom NewJersey that there was no objection in his judgment to his right to a seat upon this floor. So, unless there has been a change since, disease has made no pfair in that case, because the Senfrom Vermont told the Senfrom NewJersey in my presence we did not approach him, he came to us that in his judgment there was no question as to his right to a seat on this floor.
Mr. HENDRICKS. There is just one point in the argument of the Senfrom Massachusetts that I wish to answer, and that is the statement that so many days have elapsed, and still the Senfrom NewJerse is not here. What are the facts? On Thur ay mornin he was telegra bed. The resolution came up that day. He could not come that day. He supposed that it would be disposed of that day, an of course made no further effort to come. Then on Friday the vote was taken, and from that time until yesterday it was supposed of course that his presence was not necessary here. He was tele graphed yesterday afternoon to be here, that probably the question would be reached today. e answered by telegraph that he would be here today. Then this morning he tele raphs again that he cannot come today uudger the a vice of his physician, but he hopes to come tomorrow. He has hopes that tomorrow.
Mr. HENDRICKS. es, sir. Justwhat the word is, I cannot say, but that is the idea. It is not positively certain that he can be here, nor is It. certain that he cannot be here. He hopes himself to be here. Now, will the senate allow the question in relation to the representation of his State to be forced on simply to exclude his vote, or under circumstances that will exclude him, when there is a probability of getting that vote on Thursday? If any Senator had suggested any public consideration for this immediate action of the Sea ate, I could understand it, butthere is no reason given why it ought to be disposed of today. he public interests are not suffering by reason of this question being undetermined. Isuggest that should any question arise in the senate upon which Senators would object to the vote of Mr. Stockton, I would say that that vote will be withheld until Thursday, or the question might stand over, so far as I was concerned, and I believe so far as this side of the Senate is concerned. All that we want is that we shall have an opportunity to vote when the Senate is as full as it can be had. We desire a full Senate to say whether Mr. Stock ton is entitled to his seat or not. Surely senators do not want to press a vote simply because they have the advantage of one member being absent. That cannot be. What public consrderation requires it? Ihear none stated, and I appeal to Senators as a matter of court esy, of justice, and of propriety, to let the question stand over until hursday.
Mr. conNESS. The repeated suggestion of the hot". rable member from Indiana, which is implied in the offer volunteered by him that the Senfrom NewJersey will not vote upon qpestions to ensue before the Senate, is, as I t ink, entirely out of place and gratuitous. It carries with it the imputation that Senators are influenced by the fear of the vote of the Senfrom NewJersey upon questions not yet presented to the Senate. I think the su "estion is hardly legitimate in its character ere, e can come but that the honorable Senator should, as he must feel, concede to each member of the senate the same independence and intellience in regard to his vote that he claims for unself. If the Senator had not repeated his suggestion I should nothave noticed it; but I do not feel thatit is a legitimate argument in this case.
Mr. DAVIS. Mr. President, I wish to state a point in the practice of the courtesy of the Senate. I am aware that it will avail nothing; still I will make the statement. Since I have been in the Senate I have frequently known propositions to be made to postpone the taking of a question upon a particular subject pending before the Senate or afew days on account of the absence of Senators, or their want of readiness to complete the debate before the time indicated, and I do not recollect a solitary instance in which such a request has been made in relation to important ordinary topics of legislation that the Senate has refused the courtesy of gostponing the question to the time de sire. Now, sir, it is a very reasonable request that this question shall not be taken before Thurs day. There ise certainly enough connected with the arrangement made between the absent Senfrom NewJerse and the Senfrom Maine [Mr. Monaiu. to induce the friends of the latter, I think, who are properly regardful of his honor and of fair play, to accede at least to this reasonable request. I believe that the honorable Senfrom Maine, of whose honor and integrity I have high appreciation, would feel himself dissatisfied with the conduct of his friends on this occasion if they were to refuse that moderate and reasonable request. I do trust that in conformity to the uniform court esy and usage of the Senate, so far as I have recollection of its practice in that respect since I have been amember of the body know of no instance in which such a reasonable request as this has ever before been denied this will not be denied now. If it is yielded on ordinary questions of legislation, much more is it due to the importance of this occasion and the serious interest of my friendfrom NewJersey in the issue of the question. I therefore hope no, I will not sa I hope, but I desire that the question upon the pending proposition shall be post oued until Thursday next.
Mr. IOHNSON. Upon the question of postponement I ask for the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll. MLWILLIAMS (when his name was called.) I observe that the Senfrom Wisconsin [Mr. DOOLITTLE] is temporarily absent from his seat and as I agreed to pair with him in this case I shall not vote.
Mr. STOCKTON (after the call of the roll was concluded.) [desire to say, in order that there may be no misunderstanding on the subject, that the reason I did not vote when my name was called was on account of the rule adopted by the Senate yesterday. the result of the vote was announced yeas l8, nays 23; ABSENT 9. So the motion to postpone was not agreed to.
Mr. CLARK. I now move to amend the resolution by strikin out all in it alter the word “Stockton” an inserting “not having received a majority of the voices of the Legislature of the State of NewJersey present and voting is not entitled to a seat as Senfrom that State for the term of 6 years from the 4th day of March, 1865.”
Mr. SAULSBURY. I ask whether that is in orderThe other day the Senate by a solemn vote refused to declare that Mr. Stockton was not entitled to his seat. There has been no appeal taken from that decision. Now, the proposition is to amend the resolution so as to say that he is not entitled to his seat and to assign a reason for thatdecliiration. I hold I maybe mistaken, butI submit the question that the amendment is not in order, because the Senate on Friday last refused to vote that Mr. Stockton was not entitled to a seat on the yeas&nays, upon a vote on which Mr. Stockton himself did not vote. The proposition was then distinctly made to the Senate that he was not entitled to his seat; a vote was had upon it; the vote was against the proposition; it was rejected; there has been no appeal from that decision; and now the attempt is made to amend the resolution so as to say that Mr. Stockton is not entitled to a seat. I apprehend that it is the same question, and the fact that a reason is assigned in the amendment for so voting now makes no difference.
The President protempore. In the opinion of the Chair, the proposed amendment is in order. An amendment in the precise terms of the former amendment might be obnoxious to the objection made by the Senfrom Delaware; but this proposed amendment is different entirely in its terms; and though it may come to the same result, it is not obnox ious on the ground that it is out of order.
Mr. CLARK. Some Senators having suggested tome that it is betternot to state in the resolution the reason why Mr. Stockton was not elected, I will modify my amendment. I now propose to strike out the same words which I cfore moved to strike out, but to insert: “ is not entitled to a seat as Senfrom the Stzfle of NewJersey for the term of 6 years from the 4th day of March, 1865, ” so that the resolution, if thus amended, would read: Resolved.That John P. Stockton is not entitled to a seatas Senfrom the State of NewJersey for the termof six yearsfrom the 4th day of MarchJStfi.
Mr. SAULSBURY. Now I renew my oh jection to the amendment. What was the question decided on Friday last? It was that the Senate would not say, and itrefused to say, that Mr. Stockton was not entitled to his sent. If he was entitled to his seat, he was entitled to it from the 1th of March, 186 3. The amendment as now modified is certainly directly within the objection which I make, that it is precisely the same vuestion that the Senate decided before, and a ding the words “from the 4th day of March, 1865, " cannot alter it, because the senate, on Friday last, said by a solemn vote that theywould notdeclarethat ewas not entitled to his seat, and his credentials, under which he was then acting, said thahhe was entitled to that seat, if entitled at all, from the 4th of March, 1865. It is precisely the very same question, in my judgment, which the Senate decided on Friday last. I again submit my point of order, that the amendment is not in order.
The President protempore. The Chair thinks the amendment is in order, again repeating that upon a question of order it is not uniform, and, indeed, perhaps never the case, that though the same result may be arrived at an amendmentis out of order because the Senate has before acted on it. The amendment must be in the same words as the previous one which has been decided in order, in the opinion of the Chair, to be obnoxious to the objection that it is not in order. That it comes to the something in substance is a matter of I: reasoning, not a question of order.
Mr. CLARK. I think the yeas&nays have not been ordered on this amendment.
The President protempore. They have not been.
Mr. CLARK. I ask for them. The ycas and nnys were ordered.
Mr. DAVIS. I move to amend the amendment of the Senfrom NewHampshire by striking out all after the word “ is” in the 1st line of the proposed amendment, and in lieu thereofinserting That th legislature of NewJerse having cin vonod in joint meeting to choose a actor to the Congressof the U.S. for 6 years from the 4thof March. 186.) and said Legislature in said joint. moctinghaving passed an order that such election shouldhemadeby a plurality voteof that joint meeting: and on the 1st bn llottukon by said meeting John P. Stockton hnving received 40 out of the 81 votesof the membersof both Houses of the Legislature COINUillillllZ such Legislature in said joint meet me and evetjyotherpersonvoted for, a lessnumber and the presiding officerof said joint mocting having then announcedto it that the said John P. Stockton was elected senator to Congress and there being no ODJQOHOIoI r dissent expressedto said enunciation. the said John P. Stockton wasduly electeda Senfrom said State and is entitled to hold his seatassuch from the 4thof March. 1865.
Mr. CLARK. On that question I ask “for the yeas&nays. The yeas and no s were ordered.
Mr. ANTHON. I have already indicated by my vote my concurrence with the report of the ComJudiciary in this case, but I can see no possible use of pilin amendment on amendment in this way, an I shall vote against it. the question being taken by ess&nays resulted yous 15, nays 27; ABSENT 8. So the amendment to the amendment was rejected.
The President protempore. The question now is on the amendment of the Senfrom NewHampshire, upon which the yous and nay: have been ordered. With the permission of the Senate. before the roll is called, the Chair will state that upon this question he is paired with the Senfrom Maine, Mosnlu] who is absent. The Senfrom Maine, if present. would vote for the amendment; the Chair would vote against it. M
Mr. MCDOUGALL. I move that the further consideration of the subject before the Senate be pest woued until tomorrow, Wednesday, at one do ock p. m.
Skip Skip Mr. MCDOUGALL. On that question Iask the eas&nays., the yeas and no s were ordered. Mr. ANTHON. I desire to state again that I regard this as a mere dilatory motion on a subject upon which the sense of the Senate has already been taken, and without meaning it to be an indication of my vote on the main question, I shall vote against the postponement. The question being taken by yeas&nays resulte yeas 15. nays 28; ABSENT 7. So the motion was not agreed to.
The President protem on. The question now is upon the propose amendment.
Mr. JOHNSON. hat is the amendment before the Senate?
The President protom re. posed amendment will be rea.
The Secretary read the amendment of Mr. CLARK, which was to strike out of the resolution of the committee the words “was duly elected, and is entitled to his seat, as a Senfrom the State of NewJersey for the term of 6 years from the 4th day of March, 1865, ” and in lieu thereof to insert, “is not entitled to a seat as Senfrom the State of NewJersey for the term of 6 years from the 4th of March, 1865.” The Secretary proceeded to call the roll on the amendment.
Mr. STOCKTON. I dosireto state, in order The prothat it may be a part of the record, that I do not vote on this question, on account of the resolution passed by the Senate yesterday. The result was then announced yeas 22, nays 21; ABSENT. 7. So the amendment was agreed to.
The President protempore. The question now is on the resolution as amended: Ruolned. That John P. Stockton is not entitled to a seat as Senfrom the State of NewJersey for the term of 6 years from the 4th of March. 1865.
Skip Skip Mr. SAULSBURY called for the ycas&nays, and they were ordered. The Secretary proceeded to call the roll. At the conclusion of the call of the roll, Mr. RIDDLE, (who had at 1st voted in the negative.) I ask to change my vote from the negative to the affirmative. I vote “yea.” Mr. STOCKTON. I desire to announce that I did not vote on this ballot, because I was deprived of my vote by the resolution of the Senate ssed yesterday. The PR SIDEN1 protemporc. Before announcing the vote, with the permission of the Senate, the Chair will state that upon thisquestion he has paired with the Senfrom iIaine who is absent. The Senfrom Maine, if present, would vote for this resolution; the Chair would vote against it. The result was then announced yous 28, nays 20; ABSENT 7. So the resolution as amended was agreed to.
Mr. CLARK. The Senfrom Delaware having voted in the adirmative undoubtedly for the purpose of moving a reconsideration, I move now a reconsideration of the vote, and hope that every Senator who voted for the resolution will vote against the reconsideration, and I ask the tria now. [“Question l” Question l”] "
The President protempore. it is moved that the Senate reconsider their vote passing this resolution.
Mr. CLARK. On that I ask for the yeas&nays. The yeas and no s were ordered.
Mr. SHERMAI. The question occurs to me whether amotion to reconsider can be twice entered.
The President protempore. This resolution, in the opinion of the Chair, is a difibr cut one from the other. There was a motion made to amend the other. It passed without amendment. The motion now has been to strike out and insert other matter. which makes this. in the judgment of the Chair, 11new resolution and subject to a motion to reconsider.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I move to postpone the further consideration of the motion to reconsider until tomorrow at one oclock, and on that motion I ask for the yeas&nays. The yous&nays were ordered.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. If the honorable Senator will give way, I will state a fact which perhaps I am in duty bound to state to the Senate. It is this: this morning, after the session commenced, I received a message from Senator Dixox, ofConnectient, who is ill, expressing to me the hope that this question could be post posed until he should be able to be in the senate and to vote upon it. That Senator, as Iam informed, is much better than he has been. Whether he would be able to come into the Senate tomorrow I am not able to state, but the fact of this message having been sent to me is perhaps a fact that I ought not to omit to state to the Senate.
Mr. JOHNSON. I was not about to advert to the condition of the Senfrom Connecticut, for I did not know whether it was at all probable that he would be here. But what do we know in relation to the Senfrom NewJersey, Mr. Wamnr? In his seat he stated to the Senfrom nine, [Mr. MonniLL] “I will stay until the vote is cast unless some one will pair 08 with me, ” and with the frankness which distinguishes the member and with the perfectly honest purpose of carrying out his agreement e consents to air off, to enable the sick man to return to is home; and he returned, and not until last Wednesday had he or his friends any notice that that agreement would not be adhered to, and then the vote was to be taken on the next morning. It was not taken then, butit was taken on Friday; and the honorable member from Maine, my friend personally and upon many matters politically, whom I am perfectly satisfied had no idea of doing wrong, acting under the advice of friends with whom he had acted, who told him that it was his duty to vote, voted. Now the man who is sick in Newark, in answer to a telegram, says that he would have been here today but that his doctors told him he could not start with safety until tomorrow, but that tomorrow he will be here.
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; that is what he says. He says that if not here tomorrow he will not ask for further delay; but he will be here tomorrow. I know not how Senators may feel upon this subject, but speaking for myself individually I should feel that I had been harshly dealt with.
Mr. NYE. Will the gentleman allow me to read a telegram that has just been received?
Mr. JOHNSON. Certainly, you may read it from our seat.
Mr. YE. I read it for the Senators information: Mr. Wyuonrwashers today, but heNgave up to iVnshington this morning. H. CONGgoBi.ng This disatch has just been received from Newark, ewJersey.
Mr. JOHNSON. That I understand; the honorable member need not have read that to me for the purpose of correcting me. I had said nothing that required that correction. He intended to start this morning, but was advised not to start, but he says he will be here tomor row. Now, in the name of all that is reason able, when the only Senfrom the State of NewJersey appeals to you from his sick chamber to give him one day to be here to represent what he supposes to be the rights of his State, and there is no public ground upon which he should be excluded, no public necessity for his exclusion, why should not the little privilege be granted to give him that one day? We are in the habit, Mr. President, of giving days, ay and weeks. If as the honorable member from Nevada suggested yesterday, the Legislature of NewJersey is continuing from dayto da in session having, as I understood, no other u lic business except that which might be brought before them upon the contingency of the rejection of Mr. Stockton, why should they remain? The Governor can appoint. Why should that Legislature remain?
Mr. NYE. Because they want to send a Senator in his place.
Mr. SAULSBURT. Mr. President, I rise, not to discuss the question, but to make a single remark. I have voted on this resolution, believing as honestly as I believe in my personal existence, that Mr. Stockton is entitled to his seat as a Senator on this floor, but I rise to say to him and to say to the country that if he is excluded under these circumstances he can return home to his native State feeling that "More trucjoy Marcellus exiled feels Than Caesarwith a senateat his heels."
Mr. MCDOUGALL. Mr. President, in making a few minutes since the same motion which has now been made by my friendfrom Indiana, I did it with no purpose to delay a conclusion for delays sake. I will say to my friendfrom Ohio in connection with what has been said by the Senfrom Maryland, that this morning a messenger arrived from Newark and came to my room before I came to the Senate Chamber and informed me that full arrangements had been made for the Senfrom NewJersey to arrive here in the cit tomorrow. It was with that information an in view of the results we have seen that I made the motion I did, for no object of delay, but simply that NewJersey might at least be represented by one Senator in a case where she was so deeply concerned.
Skip Skip The President protempore. The motion is to postpone the further consideration of this subject until tomorrow at one oclock, and upon that question the yeas&nays have been ordered. the question being taken by yeas&nays resulte yeas 21, nays 22; ABSENT 6. So the motion to postpone was not agreed to. The President protemporc. The question now is on the motion to reconSider the vote of the Senate passing this resolution. the question being taken by yeas&nays, resulte yeas 20, nays 23; ABSENT So the motion to reconsider was rejected. crvn. RIGHTS VETO MESSAGE. During the discussion of the case of Mr. Stockton the following message was received from the POTUS by Mr. W. G. Moons, his Secretary: Mr. President, I am directed by the POTUS to return to the senate, in which House it originated, the bill (S.No.61 entitled “An act toprotect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rights, and furnish the means of their vindication, ” with his objections thereto in writing.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I hope not. There is a message on the table that ought to he read.
The PItESlDENTpro tempers. The motion is not debatable.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I hope the Senator will withdraw the motion, and yet the message he printed.
Mr. WADE. If it is the general desire to have that message read to nig t, I withdraw my motion.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I move, then, that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the message from the President returning the civil rights bill, with his objections.
Mr. HOWARD. I move that the Senate do now adjourn. The motion was not agreed to.
The President protamporc. The question is on the motion of the Senfrom Illinois. The motion was agreed to.
The President protempore. The subject is before the Senate, and the message will be read.
Mr. COWAN. I move that the Senate adjourn.
Several SENATORS. Let. us have the message rmted.
Mr. COWAN. Iwithdraw the motion to adjourn; and I move that the message be printed for the use of the Senate. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. COWAN. I now renew the motion to adjourn.
Mr. SAULSBURY“NcOalVleA for the yeas&nays, and they were ordered, and being taken. resulted yeas 14, nays 28; ABSENT 7. So the Senate refused to adjourn.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I move that the consideration of this subject he postponed until tomorrow at one oclock. i) do not know but that it will come up at that hour at any rate without a motion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. CLARK in the chair.) It would, in the opinion of the Chair. if the Senate adjourned without any Order being made. It is before the Senate at the present time.
Mr. SHERMAN. Is it now in order to renew the motion to adjourn? Has any business intervened?
Mr. TRUMBULL. I design to make some remarks upon this veto, and will either make them to mght or tomorrow. as may suit the convenience of the Senate. I have only list ened to the reading of the message. We shall have it before us in print tomorrow. I am willing to consult the convenience of the senate and either submit the observations I design to make tosnight or tomorrow, as shall seem best to them.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I move that the Senate adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned. 4. O
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tussnsv, March 27, 1866. The House met at 12 o clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borsros. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. COMMITTEE ON AIR LINE RAILROAD.
Mr. GRINNELL. I rise to a privile question. I ask to be excused from further service on the select committee on the railroad from Washington to NewYork city.
Mr. ANCONA. Is it in order to ask on which side of the question the gentleman is?
The SPEAKER. The gentleman has a right to ask to be excused. The renest was accordingly granted.
The SPEAKER subsequently appointed Mr. Smut to fill the vacancy. STEAM AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS.
Mr. WENTWORTH. I have had a bill in my charge for some 4 weeks past which I have been instructed by the ComWays&Means, unanimously, to reiort to the House, and ask that it be considered at the present time. Now, I ask leave. in order not to infringe upon the morning hour, to report the bill at this time. No objection was made, and the bill was recoived. It was a bill fer the admission, free of duty, of steam agricultural implements and machinery for the manufacture of flax and beet SD or for the period of one year.
Skip Skip The bill was read a 1st and 2nd time. The question was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and reafa 3rd time. Mr. wENTWORTH. I call the previous. question on the passage of the bill. Mr. STEVENS. I move that the bill be laid on the table. Mr. WENTWORTH. I call for the yeas&nays on that motion; and upon the yeas and as s I call for tellers. ellers were refused. The yeas&nays were refused.
Mr. WENTWORTH. Let the bill be read; it will speak for itself.
Mr. JENCKES. It has been read, and it has spoken for itself.
Mr. WENTWORTH. Will the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Ma Srsvnxs] allow this bill to be recommmitted to the ComWays&Means?
Mr. STEVENS. Inasmuch as it helps the tariff to let everything come in free, I do not object to its being recommitted.
Skip Skip The motion to lay the hill on the table was agreed to. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv the bill was laid or use table; on the table. Agreed to. AMERICAN SUBMAIHINE TELEGRAPH.
Mr. SPALDING, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to grant certain privileges to the American Submarine Telegraph. Company which was read a 1st and 2nd time, an referred to the ComCommerce. ORDER OF BUSINESS.
The SPEAKER. The 1st business in or der is the consideration of reports from the ComIndAffrs. SHIP CANAL MICINGAN.
Mr. BEAMAN, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill grantinir certain lands to the State of Michigan, to aid in the construction of a ship canal to connect the waters of Lake superior with the lake known as Lac LaBelle in said State; which was read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComPubLands. O RIVER RAISIN SHIP CANAL.
Mr. BEAMAN, by unanimous consent, submitted the folloiving resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the ComCommerce be instructedtoinquire into a the expediency of constructing ship canal lrom thomouthof theriver Raism to the StJoseph river, in the State of Michiga and that the said eoinmittce alsovconsiderthe propriet of an appropriation for a survey for such ship can TAKING MTIONAL BANK STOCK.
Mr. BLAINE, by unanimous consent, submitted the followiu resolution; which was read, considered, an agreed to: Resolved, That the comBankin and Currency be instructed to inquire into the expediency of making the stock in national banks taxable in the city or town where the holder thereof has his legal residence.
Mr. BLAINE mtRtv the resolution was agreed toand a so moved that the motion to reconsiderbe laid upon the table. Agreed to. OCEAN STEAM LINES.
Mr. KASSON, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, an agreed to: Resolved, That the ComCommerce consider and report. by bill or otherwise, whether Congress may without conflictwith the provisions of any cgnsting treaty, discriminate by appropriate Igghlation in respectto duties or chargesupon the ship or film. in behalf of stem "mils lag mil the flag of the U.S. running without public subsidy baentdwaegeaninpsotrftosroefigthnes U.S. naingforeitihiznthpeoartisd. of a public subsidy in competition with them. CHANGING THE NAMES OF VESSELS.
Mr. RAYMOND, by unanimousconsent, introduced a bill to aut orize the SecyTreasury to change the names of certain vessels; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. LARCENY, ETC., IN DISTCOL.
Mr. INGERSOLL, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill definin and providing for the punishment of grand an petit larceny, and the employment of prisoners in jail in the DistCol; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComDistCol. BENJAMIN HOLLIDAY.
Mr. WINDOM reported back from the ComIndAffrs a JtResolution to refer the petition of Benjamin Holliday to the Court of Claims, with a recommendation that it ass.
Skip Skip The JtResolution was ordered to be engrosse and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. WIN DOM mtRtv the JtResolution was passed; on the table. Agreed to. WINNEBAGO INDIANS.
Mr. WINDOM reported back from the ComIndAffrs a hill (H.R.No. 416) for the benefit of certain half breeds and mixed bloods of the Winnebago tribe of Indians, with a recommendation that it pass. The bill was read in extenso. It proposes to authorize the POTUS to exempt from the operations of the act of Congress approved February 21, 1868, entitled “An act or the removal of the Winnebago Indians and for the sale of their reservation in Minnesota for their benefit, ” such half breeds and mixed bloods of the Win ncbago tribe of Indians as are in his opinion sufficiently advanced in civilization, an have abandoned or may abandon their tribal relations, and permit them to return and occupy the severaiptracts of land that have been allotted to them respectivel under the provisions of the 1st article of a treaty made and concluded at the cit of Washington, April 15, 1855), between the U.S and the Winnebago tribe of Indians; and that said half breeds and mixed bloods be permitted to hold said tracts in severalty, for which patents shall be issued to them in fee simple, and they shall be subject to taxation as other lands from and aftert e date of the patent.
Mr. WINDOM is bill simply provides for issuin patents to some 15 or 20 half breeds of the Winnebago nation who, under the treaty of 1859, had their lands assigned to them in severalty. Those lands are upon the old Winnebago reservation in Minnesota. Those Indians have adopted the habits of civilization; they are voters in our State; and it is desired by them, as well as by the people of the county and of the State, that those lands shall be patented and become subject to taxation, an that the Indians may have the right to control them. The committee are unani monsin favor of the bill.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordinvl read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. WI DOM mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. MTAH INDIANS OF INDIANA.
Mr. WINDOM. I am instructed by the ComIndAffrs to submit a report in arrow to a resolution instructing that committee inquire who constitute the Miami tribe of Indians of Indiana. The report, which was read, states that the committee, after a careful investigation of the facts of the law appertaining thereto, are satisfied that no further legislation is necessary on the subject. The committee are of opinion that the tribe of Miami Indians ofIndiana consist of the persons named on the list or pay roll as added to by the SecyIn terior under the act of June 12, 1868. The committee, in confirmation of their views, append to their report the o inion of the AttyGen of the U.S., dated October 26, 1865. The report was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. WINNBBAGO INDIANS.
Mr. WINDOM, from the ComIndAffrs reported back Senate bill No. 121, to provide or the enlargement of the Winnebago reservation in the Territory of Nebraska, and for other purposes, with the recommendation that it do pass. The bill was read.
Mr. STEVENS. That bill contains an appropriation, and must. under the rules, have its 1st consideration in the ComWhole on the state of the Union.
The SPEAKER. IThe bill does contain an appropriation, and must, under the rules, be retiirred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union, objection being made to its consideration in the House.
Mr. WINDOM. I move, then, that the bill be referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union, and ordered to be printed. The motion was agreed to. WYANDOTTE INDIANS.
Mr. ROSS, from the ComIndAffrs, reported a bill for the relief of the W and otte tribe of Indians; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill was read in ezlenso.
Mr. STEVENS. The bill contains an apro riution, and must, under the rules, have its 1st consideration in the ComWhole on the state of the Union.
Mr. ROSS. I should prefertohave the bill recommitted to the ComIndAffrs, and ordered to be printed. But I do not understand this is such a bill as is required by the rules to have its 1st consideration in the ComWhole on the state of the Union, as it only provides for carrying out treatystiulations. I think the bill ought to be consi cred now.
The SPEAKER. The motion to recommit is in order. If the bill makes a new appropriation, it must be referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union. If it is out of an appropriation already made in an appropriation bill, then it does not go to the ComWhole on the state of the Union.
Mr. ROSS. The appmpriation has already been provided for by treaty.
Mr. STEVENS. It not only makes an approriation, but it changes existing law.
Mr. ROSS 1 move that the bill be recommitted and ordered to be printed.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. That will accomplish nothing, as the bill will have to go to the ComWhole on the state of the Union after it is reported back.
The SPEAKER. It does contain a direct appropriation.
Mr. ROSS. I withdraw in motion to recommit, and move that the hi i be referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union, and ordered to be printed. The motion was agreed to. DAMAGES BY SIOUX INDIANS.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa, from the ComIndAffrs, reported back House bill No. 305, for the relief of persons for damages sustained by reason of depredations and injuries by certain bands of Sioux Indians, with a substitute.
Mr. STEVENS. appropriation. AH. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I will statethat the substitute contains an appropriation of 3,000. If there is objection to the consideration of the bill now, of course it must under the rules go to the ComWhole on the state of the Union. It is to provide for the relief of parties who have suffered from depredations of Sioux Indians, and contains only an appropriation of $3,000 to pay expenses.
Mr. STEVENS. Let it be reerred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed.
Mr. KASSON. I ask my colleague whether he cannot strike out the clause maing a small appropriation, leaving the bill so that it may be acted upon now in the House. I understand this is a most. meritorious measure, and on ht to be passed.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I think when the substitute is read there will be no objection to it. The substitute was read.
Mr. STEVENS. That is a long bill, and ought to be printed before we are called upon to consider it. It is creating a new commission. I remember some years the cry was loud in regard to some Indians in Minnesota, and we granted a commission which took one or 2 millions out of the Treasury. I am not going to inquire where it has gone to. It seems this is a remnant to pay those who did not get enough.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that if the bill is debated that waives the rule which requires it to go to the ComWhole, because that is considering the bill.
Mr. STEVENS. I was just going to move that it go to the ComWhole and that it be printed.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I am able, I think, to exElain the principle of the bill. That also embraces an
Mr. conLING. Does the bill contain an op propriation?
The SPEAKER. It contains an appropriation of $3,000, and a single objection Will send it to the ComWhole.
Mr. CONKLING. Then I insistthat it shall go to the ComWhole.
Mr. HUBBARD, ofIowa. Iask, then, that it be printed.
The SPEAKER. The bill and substitute will be printed. INDIAN LANDS IN KANSAS.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I am instructed by the ComIndAffrs to report back House bill No. 259, subjecting In ian lands and allotted lands in Kansas to the laws thereof, with an amendment, and with arec ommendation that it pass. The bill was read, to ether with the amendment, which is to add the following: Provided. That nothing herein containedshall be construed to authorize any of said Indians or Indian tribes to soil. grant or leaseany of said lands.unless the same be made by treaty or convention entered into, pursuant to the Constitution of the U.S.; nor shall anything herein contained be construed to give the State of Kansas power to tax any pfspid lands. exceptsuchasure heldin severaltyby Individual membersot said Indian tribes.
Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would like some explanation of this bill. It seems to me it is subordinating the U.S. laws to the laws of Kansas.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I have here a map indicating the condition of the lands in the State of hansas. The parts colored red indicate the lands belonging to the Indians. Upon those lands the laws of the U.S. are in force. The State of Kansas has no jurisdiction over them or over the persons residing upon them. The portions of the map that are not colored indicate lands belongin to the Government of the U.S and to individuals. Over those lands thrlaws of the State of Kansas prevail. They arr within the limits an I jurisdiction oi the State of Kansas for all legal purpoiel This condition of affairs, as any man can readily perceive, results not only in n great deal of injustice, but in a great deal of inconven ience, and the provisions of this bill are intended to remedy this injustice and inconvenience. That is the simple object of the bill. It provides that the laws of Kansas shall be extended over these Indian lands, which have been set apart to them in severalty. It provides, also, that they shall not have the power to convey except under the revisions of thqlaws of the U.S. think the provisions of the bill are ample and sufficiently arded.
Mr. STEVENS. I would as whether this is by any treaty with the Indians.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. There is no treaty stipulation.
Mr. STEVENS and it is now proposedto extend the laws of the State of ansas over these Indian lands?
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I have examined all the treaties on the subject, and also the acts of Congress, and I see nothing in either which prohibits the passage of this bill. Every person can see from this map, showing the location of these lands, that the citizens of Kansas must labor under a great deal of inconven lellce
Mr. STEVENS. How would it be if we pass that law? Would they have more convenience?
Mr. HUBBARD ofIowa. I understand that a great many of these lands are held by the In inns in severalty. They have farms and improvements, and yet they are exempt from taxation and from all the obligations imposed upon the citizens of the State of Kansas by the laws of that State. Men who commit crimes on these Indian lands are to be punished, accordin to the provisions of this bi I, under the laws ot the U.S., and not under the laws of the State of Kansas.
Mr. WIN DOM. I believe the provisions of the bill extend only to those lands that are held in severalty by the Indians.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I believe I have already stated that the bill only extends to lands held in severalty by the Indians; the lands upon which they are living, the lands upon which they have farms and improvements.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I desire to ask the gentleman who has reported this bill
Mr. UB BA 0, of Iowa] whetherit is intende to confer ju isdiction upon the State of Kansas over these udians, who are now under the jurisdiction of the U.S., and to requine them to pay taxes upon lands held in severalty by them to support the State government of Kansas. If that is so, I desire to ask further whether under this act it is proposed to confer the right of franchise upon these Indians who are thus to be taxed for the support of the State government.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I will answer the last question 1st. I understand that some of these Indians, or some who are considered a part of the tribe, are now exercising the right of voting in the State of Kansas and one of them, one of the very men who is holding these lands in severalty, and who will be embraced within the provisions of this bill, is now a member of the State Legislature of Kansas. It is the object of this bill to extend the laws of the State of Kansas over the lands held in severalty so far as to subject them to taxation and we believe that that is right and just.
Mr. ROSS. It is proper, perhaps, as I am one of the members of the ComIndAffrs, that I should state that this bill did not meet my approbation. I do not think it is expedient to pass any such bill as this. Indeed, I regard it as violative of all treaty obligations between the Government of the U.S and these Indians that these lands should not be subject to taxation. I know that there exists on the part of the citizens of Kansas a feeling of hostility toward those Indians. These Indians occupy lands in the State of Kansas under treaty stipulations with the Government of the U.S.; and I do not believe it is good policy for congress to subject them to the lation of the State of Kansas. It. tinual trouble between the In whites. Now, it is true this bill does r taxation the Indian lands in Kansas} far as they are set apart in severalt, why should even those lands be subjeTQ h this State taxation? The dividing those laiius among the Indians in severalty does not release the Government of the U.S. from the performance of its treaty stipulation, that these ends should not. be subject to taxation. This bill was agreed to by a majority of the ComIndAffrs and perhaps I should not have said this muc about it. But it did not receive my assent there, nor can I vote for it in the House.
Mr. DAVlS. I wish to inquire of the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. HUBBARD] whether he is certain that any of these lands are held in severalty under any fee which would be held g9od in law? We have in the State of NewYork several Indian reservations, on which have been located certain premises which are occupied by the Indians“ year by ear; but they do not hold under any individual title. Their title is that of the tribe; there is no separate title and I doubt whether there is a single Indian reservation within the U.S. where there is a title which the Indian could convey to another. In my judgment it is a mere permissive occupation and I therefore ask the gentleman to give us any information upon that subject which he may have in his possession.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. The Gentfrom Kansas [Mr. CLARKE] is much more fa miliar with these Indian lands than I am. But I will endeavor to answer the question of the Gentfrom NewYork, [h
Mr. DAVIS.] I understand that under the provisions of the treaties between some of hose Indians and the Government of the U.S. provision is made for the issuing of patents, or rather of certificates, to the Indians for these lands assigned in severalty; and under the provisions of these treaties some of these lands may be certified to the Indians in such a manner that they will hold an absolute fee in the land. That is the way I understand it. I now yield to the Gentfrom Kansas [Mr. CLARKE] for a moment.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I certainly cannot see my was clear in reference to this legislation. The U.S. courts now have jurisdiction of all these matters. They me now all left, and I think very properly, under the jnrisdiction of the laws of the U.S. to be administered by the courts of the U.S. I am entirely opposed to changing the principle which we have heretofore followed. f we put this power into the hands of the white men we cannot tell how it will be abused or what will be the result. I think, sir, that we had better let matters remain as they are. The Gentfrom Kim sas [Mr. Camus] says that the U.S. court there is an efficient. court. That court has full jurisdiction; and if the Indians are guilty of any crimes, the may be punished in that court. I do not believe that it will tend to the public interest or the ends of justice to have this jurisdiction vested in the courts of the State of Kansas.
Mr. STEVENS. I remember, sir, when a law was passed by the State of Georgia extending the jurisdiction of that State over the Indian lands within the State, the U.S. still, as it was thought, holding jurisdiction. But as the U.S. never annulled the laws of the State of Georgia, although the Government evidently had the jurisdiction, what was the result? In a short time, under those State laws, a system of persecution was, carried on against those Indians. A man named Tassels was ordered to be hanged without the least authority of law without his having committed any crime. The case was car ried to the SCOTUS, and when that tribunal was about to reverse the decree of the State court, the man was hanged, and that ended the case. That is the manner in which the Indians are treated whenever they are put out of the protectionkof the U.S., and placed under the control of the State laws. I trust that we shall never disgrace the national legislation by any act which will give the sanction of law to such an outrage as I have cited. These unprotected and helpless people are oing out of existence fast enough by the natural operations of the white mans crimes, without anything further.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I do not know, sir, what may have been the experience in the case of Georgia, but I apprehend no injustice can be effected or grow out of the passage of this bill. I am satisfied, under the present law, in the manner in which those Indian lands have been selected, a rent deal of injustice grows out of the mixed and interlaced jurisdiction which exists in the State of Kansas. any person can see, from an examination of this ma, and the location of the lands named in the bill, that the administration of law and the punishment of crime in the State of Kansas will be wealt
Mr. SLOAN. I understand one object of i this bill is to protect the lands of this iese rva{tion from tit predation. These lands are held partly by whites and partly by Indians. Is it to protect the Indian lands from depiedations or the lands held by the whites? I should like also to know whether it is the whites upon this reservation or the Indians who are asking for this legislation.
Mr. HUBBARD, ofIowa. I understand the pepple of Iaiisas ask for this legislation. i
Mr. SPALDING. Do any of the Indians ask for it?
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I cannot say; but it does not matter whether the Indians ask for it or not. The people there are suiIcring from this mixed and interlaced jurisdiction.
Mr. HIGBY. I ask when Indians went off from lands reserved in Kansas and committed crimes whether they are not punishable under the laws of the State instead of the laws of the U.S.?
Mr. HUBBARD, ofIowa. I do not understand it so. Practically at least it is not so. I understand that the Indians are under the protection of the laws of the U.S.
Mr. STEVENS. If an Indian goes out of his tribal domains and commits a crime, does the gentleman say that he is not to be tried by the laws of the place where the crime was committed? Does the gentleman want to take him away from his own reservation, and let white men go in there and try him?
Mr. HIGBY. I should like to have my question settled. It would be extraordinary if the laws of Kansas did not have full jurisdiction within the limits of Kansas excepting Indian reservations. I hope the committee will let us have some information on the subject.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I understand the Indians are punished under the laws of the U.S. I understand the jurisdiction of the laws of the U.S. is not extended over them, and if an Indian does commit a crime upon his reservation he is not punishable by the laws of the State where the reservation is located. That is my idea of the law and it is an answer to the question of the Gentfrom California.
Mr. BURLEIGH. I havelived there for 5 years, and not less than 100 citizens are been murdered by Indians, yet not one has been arraigned or punished under the pris ent laws. It is next to impossible to punish an Indian. It is very well so saythat the laws of the U.S. protect the white people upon the frontiers, but the fact is that t. ey do not protect them. 1,000s of horses, 1,000s of cattle have been stolen, buildings burned, and property destroyed of our citizens, and I have not heard ofasingle instance where the Indians were brought to justice and pan ished.
Mr. STEVENS. Were not these Indians out in a war of nation against nation?
Mr. BURLEIGH. we regard all Indians as hostile who come down and ravage our frontiers.
Mr. STEVENS. Does the gentleman refer to the terrible slaughter of Indians by the white chief Chivington?
Mr. BURLEIGH. I do not refer to anything of the kind. I say that the present Indian policy cannot be changed for the worse. As at present managed, it is a system of corruption from the beginning to the end.
Mr. HALE. I understand the Gentfrom Dakota to say that no Indian has been unislied under the laws of the U.S. had an impression that in Minnesota, a few ears ago, some 30 or 40 Indians were ung under tha military laws.
Mr. BURL IGH. The gentleman speaks of the little hanging bee. I believe there were some 20 or 30 Indians hnn, but the balance of them I learn are about toilie turned loose in the Territory of Dakota, by order of the Indian Dept, to commence again their work of robbery and ra inc upon our citizens.
Mr. HUBBARD, of own. have no knowledge of a single instance in which an Indian has been punished under State or territorial laws for the commission of any crime under the civil law and the cases referred to by the Gentfrom Pennsylvania and the Gentfrom NewYork are cases of punishment under trials by military tribunals. I do not believe a singib instance can be found where during the last 20 years an Indian has been punished by a civil tribunal in any State or Territory. So far as these Indians are concerned, they are under the jurisdiction and laws of the U.S.; they are regarded as being outside of and not under the jurisdiction and laws of the States or the Territories. By the provisions of this bill it is not intended to bring these Indians within the jurisdiction the laws of the State of Kansas. It is only intended to bring the lands of these Indians within the jurisdiction of these laws; that is, such lands as have been assigned to these Indians in severalt, and for which cer titicates have been issue by the SecyInterior, vesting in them the absolute title to the land.
Mr. ROSS. Does not this bill propose to extend the laws of Kansas over these Indians?
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. Simply over the land; not over the Indians. It does not affect the jurisdictionof the Government of the U.S., so far as the persons of these Indians are concerned; it relates only to jurisdiction over the land. Now, as to the justice and propriety of this bill: these Indians are holding these lands in severalty under titles from the General government, with their farms and improvements, living there in style and splendor and yet Gentlemen say the are to e exempt from taxation; exempt mm the operation of the local laws of the State.
Mr. SPALDING. I would ask the gentleman how the jurisdiction can be extended over the lands without being extended over the persons on the lands?
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I have no time to speak of or discuss questions of this kind. liff. SPALDING. If I can be convinced that that can be done I might be induced to vote for the bill.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I think I could eXplain it if I had the time. I am directing my attention to another point or feature of this law. I will ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. STEVENSfi and the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. Ross] whether it isjust and right for these Indians to hold these lands in 7 nity, and be benefited by the erection of school houses, the construction of roads, and by alL other improvements of a local character, and yet be exempt from the burdens imposed upon others, in the shape of taxes, for the purposes of making these improvements?
Mr. STEVENS. That depends upon the original bargain, which it is proposed we shall now try to evade.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I undertake to say that an investigation of that subject will show that we have a right to pass this law. If we have the right to pass the law, I maintain that it is politic and expedient that we should do it. Any man who wi I look at the condition of those lands can see how the citizens of Kansas are situated in regard to those Indians. A man commits a crime upon the lands of the whites, and then flees to the Indian territory, where he is out of the way of arrest, so far as the officers of the law in the State of Kansas are concerned, for he has placed himself be yond the power and jurisdiction of the State and yet. gentlemen demand that this state of affairs shall continue. Now, we ask that the laws of Kansas shall be extended over these lands, so that when a man commits a crime upon the lands of the whites and goes a on the lands of the Indians he maybe arrested and brought to justice, like other criminals in the State. Here the hammer fell.]
The SPEAKER. The morning hour has expired, and this bill will go over until tomorrow morning.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I move that the bill and amendments be printed. The motion was agree to.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. On motion of Mr. FARQUHAR, leave of absence was granted to Mr. Duuosr for 2 weeks from Friday last. RECONSTRUCTION TESTIMONY REPORTED.
Mr. CONKLING. I rise to a privileged questiou. The JtComReconstruction, which is authorized to report at any time, have directed me to report to the House the testimony taken by them in relation to the States of Virginia, NCarolina, and SCarolina. The testimon taken by that committee has alread been or ered to be printed.
Mr. El. RIDGE. Is it in order to call for the reading of what. has just been reported?
The SPEAKER. It is not, as there is no motion pending. The order to print this testimony was made some time ago.
Mr. CONKLING. I am sorry the Gentfrom Wisconsin [Mr. ELDRJDGE] should be disappointed as there is some very good read in in this testimony.
Mr. ROSS. Would it be in order to move to add 2 more members to this reconstruction committee according to the decision of the Chair yesterday?
The SPEAKER. It would be by unanimous consent.
Mr. CONKLING. Is there any hope that we can have the benefit of the services of the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Ross] on that committee 1
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom llli nois [Mr. Ross] spoke of the decision of the Chair on yesterday in reference to adding 2 members to a select committee. That was done on yesterday by order of the House, not by any action of the Chair.
Mr. SCHENCK. The order which was made about printing extra copies of the testimony taken by the JtComReconstruction was based u ona resolution which I introduced relating to the reports already made. I doubt whether a reference to the Journal will show that that order includes the testimony just reported by the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. CONKLING.]
Mr. CONKLING. The Chair willvery likely remember, if the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] does not, that when the resolution was reported from the committee I myself asked to have it amended so as to cover testimony to be received thereafter.
Mr. LAFLIN. I desiroto state to the House that it certainly was not the intention of the ComPrintg, when they reported that resolution, that it should a ply to all the reports that were yet to be made. Not even after the resolution was amended was it so understood. I may say here that the committee have been inquired of by the Superintendent of Public Printing upon this very point, and the interpretation they put upon the order was not of the character intimated. Neither did we suppose, as m colleague [Mr. Comt Lnvo] has suggested, that his amendment was for any such nr ose.
Mr. LAFLIN. I do not remember what it did cover. I have seen the resolution as it was sent to the sufferintendent of Public Printing, and I certain y do not think it is suse ep tible of that inte retation.
The SPEAKE t. The Chair has sent for the resolution, and when it is found it will be read by the Clerk.
Mr. CONKLING. In the mean time permit me to say that at the very time that resolution was reported from the ComPrintg, the testimony which I have just submitted to the House was reported in every sense but the mere manual sense of handing itin to the Clerk of the House. The testimony was all completed, was all ready to be handed in, and was only delayed in deference. to the Senfrom Michigan, [Mr. Howmn] who was absent, as Imentioned at the time the resolution was adopted. After the action of the JtCommee the testimony was in truth reported; but the handing it in to the House, and sending it to the Public Printer was postponed merely for the reason I have suggested. Nevertheless, when the ComPrintg reported the resolution referred to, it occurre to me that there might be some misap prehension about it; and I thereupon rose and asked that the resolution be emerged so as to make it read, “the testimony ready prethe chairman of the Committee on [Mr. Lamas] means that that commiPttreinetidnig not understand the resolution as amended to include testimony which might be taken there after, then I have no controversy with him at this time upon that point. But it did include that which in truth had been taken, and which in point of form had been reported, and only lacked its appearance here; there can be no doubt of that, as my colleague will agree. If so then there is no necessity for any question at this time. If the question shall arise about testimony taken hereafter, that question can be decided when it comes up. But the count certainly wants the testimony printed, an wants this I have just reported as much as it wants any of the testimon. lhyeSPEAKER. The Clerk will read the resolution as adopted by the House.
The Clerk read: as follows: Rrmhv rl, That 205,000 extra copies of cut hof thereportso testimony taken by thooint selectcommittee onreconstruction.toge the rwit the accompanyingdocuments.be printed withoutoovers for the useof the House.
Mr. CONKLING. That is quite broad enough. This is one “ of the reports of testimony taken by the joint select ComReconstruction.”
Mr. LAFLIN. I suggest that that applies only to such reports as had then been made. I know the question was thoroughly canvassed in our committee whether the resolution applied to reports yet to be made, and it was not so intended. Most assuredly it would argue a very great want of judgment on the part of the committee to report in favor of a certain number of extra copies of testimony and reports which did not then have an existence. Certainly that was not our intention.
Mr. CONKLING. I would like to inquire what became of the amendment which was adopted.
The SPEAKER. The Chair is not certain but what the suggestion of the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. CONKLING] was made when the resolution was 1st introduced and referred to the committee.
The SPEAKER. The resolution as it now appears has been read, strictly construed, it would refer only to the reports which had then been made.
Mr. CONKLING. Then I will submit amotion, to go to the ComPrintg, that 2500 copies of the testimony just presented be printed for the use of the House.
The SPEAKER. That motion is in order. It will be referred, under the law, to the ComPrintg.
Mr. CONliLlNG. I think that the number of copies to be printed ought to be even larger than I have named. I trust that the ComPrintg will be as liberal in reference to printing this testimony as they can be in regard to any matter to be printed by this congress. If there is anything that it is desirable shall go before the country it is this testimony.
Mr. SCHENCK. My object in calling at tention to this matter has been accomplished.
Mr. CONKLING. I oppose to add to my motion a provision that this testimony be printed with that previously presented or in such a form that the 2 documents can go together.
The SPEAKER. If the other has already l been printed, this cannot, of course, be printed seated, and that to be presented.” how, if with it. The committee can report as to that. The reference of the motion to plllll. gives them jurisdiction of everything relating to that mat
Mr. ROSS. I desire to ask, Mr. Speaker, whether this motion to print can be may c without unanimous consent?
The SPEAKER. It can. When a report or any other document is presented to the House, a motion to print extra copies is in order, and must go to the Committee of Printing under the law. NAVAL APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. STEVENS. I am directed to report back from the ComAppropriat Senate amendments to the naval appropriation bill. I desire that the House shall consider them now.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Have these amendments been printed?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I believe there is quite a large number of amendments. I hope my friend roin Pennsylvania will not press their consideration until they are printed. f Mr. STEVENS. The amendments are very cw.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I have looked over them, and it seemed to me that they were quite important, involving large amountsof money. As we are in no particular hurry so far as these appropriation bills are concerned, I submit to my friend that we had better in all these cases have the report of the Comappropriat printed, showing by numbers the Senate amendments in which the committee recommend concurrence, and those in which they recommend non-concurrence. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania knows that I would not interpose any objection for the purpose of delaying unnecessarily any of these measures.
Mr. STEVENS. My reason for desiring the consideration of these amendments at the present time was that several gentlemen who must go away this afternoon have a doe interest in this bill. However, I will say to those gentlemen that I will not ask the House to consider this subject till they have returned. I do not myself like to consider amendments of this sort without having them printed. I move, therefore, that the consideration of these amendments be postponed and made the special order for next Wednesday week, immediately after the morning hour. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I so gest to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, the c iair man of the ComAppropriat, as there seems to be no business particularly pressing upon the House, that we proceed to call committees for reports and go rightthrough with them.
Mr. JENCKES. I object to that. The bankrupt bill has been made the special order for today, and I demand its consideration.
The SPEAKER. There is only one riation bill now before the Committee apfpro of the Vhole on the state of the Union the Indian appropriation bill. BANKRUPT BILL. The House then proceeded to the consideration of the special order, being House bill No. 7, to establish a uniform system of throughout the U.S. bankruptcy; the pening amendment being that of Mr. Rooms to the 14th section.
Mr. ROGERS. [Will so modify my amendment as to niove to strike out “six and insert “ 3;77 so that it Will read: That as soon as said assignee is appointed and qualified the judge, or, where there is no opposing inteif est. the register shall, by an instrument under his hand, assign and conveytotheassnrnce all the estate real and personal, of the [debtor] bankrupt. with all his deeds. books and papers reliitin thereto and such assignmentshall relato back to the commencement of said proceedinnsin bankruptcy, and there upon. by operation of law. all such property and estate both real and personal, shall vestin said asstgnce, although the same is then attached on mcsne process as the property of the debtor and shall dissolve my such attachment made within 3 months next preceding the commencement of said proceedings.kc.
Mr. JENCKES. If the Gentleman will make it 4 months I will accept it.
Mr. JENCKES. It is not longer than in most of the States. This is simplyto prevent fraudulent preferences by way of attachments. I have looked through the laws of all the States and think that 4 months would be a fair average.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I hope that amendment will not prevail. In my own State attachment proceedings may be commenced and concluded within 3 months. I do not know what the effect would be, but I think it would set aside sales of property. If so, it would reduce a g. sat deaT otP injustice.
Mr. JENCKES. Not at all. In the gentlemans own State, and in most of the other States, no order for attachment can issue except that which would authorize an adjudication of bankruptcy under this net. This is to prevent the procurement of fraudulent preferences by way of attachment. If the gentleman will look at the laws of the States, I think that 4 months will be found to be a very fair average. I think that it is 60 days in Connecticut and 6 months in Massachusetts. In some of the States attachments are set aside 2 years what are called in technical phrase “sleeping attachments."
Mr. H UB ARD, of Iowa. If the objection I have made to this provision is corrected by other provisions of the bill, I will not insist on moving any amendment.
Mr. ROGEnss amendment and it was disagreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I now move to amend by making it 4 months instead of 6 months. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. When the bill was last up several amendments were proposed to this section, and I would like to know what has become of them.,
The SPEAKER. Gentlemen only gave no tice of the amendments, but did not offer them.
Mr. JENCKES. I have prepared an amendment which I think will meet all the objections to this section. I move after these words Promded, however.That there shall be exoepted from the operation of the provisions of this section the necessary household and kitchen furniture and such other articles and necessaries of such bankrupt as the said ussigpee shall designate and set apart having reference in the amount to the family, condition, and circumstances of the bankrupt. but altogether not to exceed in value, in any case, the sum of $500;and also the warm apparel of such bankrupt, and that of his wife an children, and the uniform. Arms and equipments of any person who is or has beena soldier in the militia or in the service of the U.S.; and such other property us now is, orhereafter shall be, exempted from attachment or seizureor levy on execution by the laws of the U.S. To add the following: and such other property not included in the fore going exceptionsas is exempted from levy and sale upon execution by the luws of the State in which the bankrupt has his domicile at the time of the commencement of the proceedings in bankruptcy to an amount not exceeding that allowed by such i State exemption laws which were in force in the year 1864.
Mr. HALE. I ask the chairman of the committee whether the amendment is not open to the objection that it is a departure from the provision of the Constitution that the law shall be uniform in its operations?
Mr. JENCKES. I think not sir; I have considered the question carefully and have consuited those learned in the law on this subject. The better opinion seems to be that the requirement of the Constitution in using the word “uniform” or “uniformity” is that the Uniformity shall be with regard to persons and not with regard to any particular exein t onor any particular allowance. A person who comes to take possession of the property of a bankrupt whose assets amount to noting, of course there is no estate out of which to pay him. Another bankrupt whose assets amount to $1.000.000, the allowance may be made to the fullest extent of the laws of the State where he lives. The provision of the Constitution requiresity with regard to any allowances that may be made or of payment of costs or of dividends in the course of proceedings and l will say further for the information of the gentleman that 1 consider that this law if now made applicable to the business and property of the country must take effect upon that property according to the laws by which it is he d. The laws of the several States affecting the title to property, the rules for its transmission by conveyance or descent, and the terms and conditions under which it maybe held are not to be altered by the laws of the U.S. What may be done hereafter may be a different thing.
Mr. HALE. It seems to me the gentleman is in error in the construction which he gives to the language of the Constitution, that by a uniform system of bankruptcy is meant one which shall operate with uniformity throu hout the Union, with uniformity as to the rights of persons or of property which persons may hold. Take the case of homestead exemption. I think there is now in nearly all the States a homestead exemption to a greater or less extent.
Mr. HALE. 1n the State of Vermont the homestead exemption is limited to $500 in value; in NewYork it is limited to $1,000 and in some of the western States there is, I believe, an exemption of land without limitation in value.
Mr. JENCKES. I beg leave to correct the gentleman. There is no State except Texas, under the laws existing there before the rebellion, in which there is an exemption without limitation.
Mr. HALE. I beg pardon;I think Wiseonsin and Iowa both exempt real estate to the amount of a certain number of acres.
Mr. KASSON. I will state that in Iowa there is a limitation of 40 acres for a farm, and half an acre for a dwelling.
Mr. HALE. Without limitation as to value and I understand Iowa is not the only State.
Mr. SPALDING. In Wisconsin, I believe, it is without limitation, provided it shall be a homestead.
Mr. HALE. There are States again in which there is no exemption of real estate. It seems to me it cannot but strike every one that in introducing this question of bankruptcy, if we are going to adopt the exemption laws of the States, we are going to have the greatest possible latitude.
Mr. KASSON. I moveto amend the amendment by striking out the last word. I regret that my friendfrom NewYork [Mr. HALE] should oppose a proposition of this kind, touching a question as precious to the judgment, conseience, and heart of western men as this idea of a homestead exempt from violent seizure under the law. If other States have not seen fit to adopt this great principle of legislation then it is their fault and should not be made our misfortune. Every debt incurred for years among our people has been incurred with reference to just these exemptions, and the equality of the proposed provision of the Gentfrom RhdIs and consists in the fact that it neither takes from nor adds to the fproperty which was liable for the payment of debts. The property which the creditors had claims to at the time the debt was incurred remains. That is the general rule, and it is equitable. It also leaves intact the rights and customs of the State, which, in some respects, are more important than a bankrupt law itself. am ready and anxious to support a bankrupt hill, but without protection of the homesteads of my people against the action that might result under it, f would refer to have no bankrupt law at all. The debtor cannot make his 1st start in the recovery of his prosperity and the comfort of his family unless he as a shelter for his wife and children. It is a very fuidamental condition of a return of ii prospect; to this interest of the country, which i releasing these debtors from the burden now imposed upon them by the laws. It will stim ulate their efforts for the deliverance of themselves lrom burdensome debt. For these reasons, I hope the House will allow these exemptions to take effect aud secure the equal operation of this law as to debtors in all the States by adopting a rule that leaves to the creditor only that c pass of property with reference to the security of which his debt was contracted.
Mr.SPALDING. I rise to oppose the amendment of the Gentfrom Iowa. However much I may be disposed to support a national bankrupt bill an I think there is no man on this floor more disposed to do it I must as as a lawyer that I agree with the Gentfrom NewYork, that if you establish this inequality which must arise from excepting these homesteads as reserved to debtors by the respective States, you no longer have a uniform rule of bankruptcy in the U.S. I say it reluctantly, but I say it from my honest conviction as a lawyer that this cannot be done consistently with the Constitution of the U.S. New, I have the greatest respect for the legal capacity of my friend, the chairman of the committee, [Mr. JENCKES] but I think with the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. HALE] that in this particular his zeal for the passage of this bill outruns his knowledge of constitutional law. Suppose I should live in the State of Illinois, and should contract debts beyond my ability to pay. I there hold a homestead worth say $25,000. The laws of the State of Illinois would allow me to reserve a homestead of the value say of $1,000. This bankrupt law is passed with the provision which my friend wishes to insert. I have only to sell my homestead and pass over into Wisconsin and invest the whole amount in a homestead there, and it is protected from my creditors: whereas if I remain in Illinois I could only hold $1,000. In my own State, Ohio, I could hold to the value of $600. So it is in many of the States. But in some of them there is no limitation of the value of the homestead, provided it is considered as such; and in Texas, we are told, it runs to any extent in land. Now this is an in equality. I say it as a lawyer, and not because I wish to defeat the measure. because I should hope, even if this provision should be inserted, that the bill should ass.
Mr. SLOAN. I offer an amendment to the amendment, by adding the following: Provided, That the foregoing exception shall operate as a limitation upon the conveyanceof the property of the bankrupt to the assignee and in no ease shall the property hereby excepted pass to the as signee or the title of the bankrupt thereto be impaired or infectedby any of the provisions of this act.
Mr. HILL. I think that is not germane to the amendment.
Mr. SLOAN. There is no doubt about its being germane, as I will show.
The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks it is germane.
Mr. SLOAN. The object of this amendment is this: while I believe with the Gentfrom RhdIsland that the exemption of a homestead or other property as provided by State laws is valid, and is not in conflict with the Constitution, which provides for uniformity, yet there may be some doubt upon thatquestion. It may be true, as the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SPALDING] has just ar ed, that the provision excepting a homestead will be held y our courts to be void for want of uniformity. If that be so the exemption will simply become void, but the bankrupt law will be operative, and the homestead, with all other property exempted by the law of the State, will be swept awn from the debtor. the object of this amendmentis to make that exception a limitation upon the grant of the property; so that, if the exception should be liel void, in no event can the proeitv pass, and the whole law will fall, insteatfof simply the exception falling, and the law remaining uniformity with regard to the person, not equal I this law is intended, I apprehend, to secure by.i good. While I am disposed to support this bill, and believe it will be a beneficial measure to the country, provided the exemption ofhoine stead and other property can be preserved to the debtor; yet am op used to the bill if it is to result in depriving ebtors of their homestead and other property exempted by the laws of the State.
Mr. JENCKES. I desire to ask whether the Gentfrom Wisconsin [Mr. SLOAN101 any othei gentleman who has spoken has ever known the question of the constitutionality of those exemption laws to be raised in any suit for the collection of debt in their respective States. I have never known that question to be raised in my State.
Mr. SLOAN. The gentleman means raised in the courts of the U.S.
Mr. SLOAN. I have never known the question to be raised in the U.S. courts. But I have no doubt that those exemption laws are valid.
Mr. JENCKES. Then the question has not been raised within the knowle go of any Gentleman resent.
Mr. ALE. I do not wish my silence to be mken as an assent to the proposition of the Gentfrom RhdIsland, and therefore the Gentfrom Wisconsin must permit me to say that the question has been raised and decided in the State of NewYork.
Mr. HAEEI. The constitutionality of those laws has been sustained.
Mr. SLOAN. The question is not whether any or all of these laws are valid and constitutional, but whether the various State laws exempting different kinds and amounts of property, an exemption recognized in this bill, are invalid for want of uniformity. In my judgment, the risk is too rent to allow the simple exception to go into tie law, as proposed by the Gentfrom Ohio. We should add some such proviso as I have offered. I think that this which I propose will accomplish the object. It provides that the exceptions shall operate as a limitation upon the conveyance of the property from the debtor to the assignee, and that in no event shall the property pass if the exemption is held to be void for want of uniformity.
Mr. JENCKES. I think that the Gentfrom Wisconsin should be satisfied with the amendment which I propose. The law with reference to this matter stands, as I understand it, in this way: the Constitution authorizes Congress to pass “uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the U.S. ” The Congress which 1st met under the constitution passed no law on that subject. If they had done so, the question about equality or in equality, and whether inequality is want of Uniformity never could have been raised in the passage of a law. They did pass the judiciary act of 1789; and the 34th section of that act provides "That the laws of the several States. Except where the Constitution. treaties or statutes of the U.S shall otherwise require or plOVidG, shall be regarded as rules of decisionin tria s at common law in the courtsof the U.S. in caseswhere they aim Y Under that section, the laws of the States have been held to establish rules concerning peoperty; and the courts of the U.S. have conformed to the decisions of the States. Now, it is proposed to pass a law of the U.S. upon the subject authorized by the constitution; It must, as I view the law, step in and apply to the state of things now existing, recognizing that which has been lawful hith erto, under the laws of the States by the recognition of that statute of 1789, as the rule of property now existing with regard to bankrupts as well as other persons. But I do not conceive the word “uniformity ” or “uniform” applies to this class ofex emptions any more than to equality in divi dends. You might as well require one as the other. The fac eliminated from the question put just now seen s very conclusive on the subJect, as expressive not only of the judicial opinions but the opinion of lawyers of the U.S. as to the question that the constitutionality of these exemption laws has never yet been raised, or if raised
Mr. SLOAN. The gentle man is so thor oughly convinced that this exception is valid he can have no objection to the proviso.
Mr. JENCKES. I have objection to it, because of the laws I find in the statute books of Texas and elsewhere. I wish it to stand as an excepton, and not as a limitation on the grant.
Mr. HALE. It seems to me the real point of the question here has been lost sifht of by many on the floor. The objection make is not to the allowance of the existing homestead exemption to the bankrupt, but allowmg exemption in one State utterly disproportionate to that in the other, so that one man is exempted to the extent of $40,000 in Wisconsin, $500 in another State, and nothing at all in Kentucky. If that is a uniform system of bankruptcy, then I am unable to understand what is not uniformity. As to the constitutionality of exemption laws, referred to by the chairman, these decisions are under State laws before the power of the U.S. is exercised in passin a law of bankruptcy. This law, when passe, will not control State laws as to taking property in execution. It is only when a man is driven into bankruptcy. It is only then when he is brought under the operation of the law. Under this a man may remove from one State to another, and keep $40,000 from his creditors, which he could not do in his own State.
Skip Skip Mr. JENCKES. I move that all debate be closed on the pending amendments. The motion was agreed to. the questionrecurred on
Mr. SLOANs amendment. The House divided; and there were ayes 11 noes 12; no quorum voting. hMr. KASSON. I hope it will be understood that a vote will hereafter be taken on this proposition. Mr. SLOAN. I do not object to that. The SPEAKER. As the count has shown that no quorum is present, the only motion in order is to adonrn. Mr. FAR. SWORTH. be a call of the House. Mr. JENCKES. I have no objection to lettin this amendment go over for a vote in a full I House. The House divided; and there were ayes 15, noes 23. Mr. JENCKES demanded tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. JENOKES and SPAIDING were appointed. Mr. ELDRIDGE moved that the House do now adjourn. Mr. DARLING demand the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the negative yeas 10,nays 115, not voting 58; So the House refused to adjourn. During the vote, Mr. BAKER stated that his colleague was detained from the House by sickness. The vote was then announced as above recorded.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I move that further proceedings under the call be dispensed with. The motion was agreed to. The question recurred upon the amendmentof mr. SLOAN to the amendment of Mr. J sx exss.
Mr. SLOAN. I understand the amendment to the amendment will be aece ted by the n Gentfrom RhdIsland, [Mr. Jsn exssfie Mr. JENCKES. Iwill accept it. The amendment, as modi ed, was then adopted.
Skip Skip Mr. HALE. I did not understand the question as just taken. I mtRtv the amendment, as modified, was agree to. The question was taken; and upon a division there were ayes 17, noes 46; no quorum voting. The SPEAKER appointed Messrs. HALE and JENCKES to act as tellers. The House again divided; and the tellers reported that there were ayes 16, noes not counted. So the motion to reconsider was not agreed to.
Mr. PAINE. I move to further amend section 14 by striking out the words “all the estate, real and personal, of the bankrupt, " and inserting in lieu thereof the following words, namely:. such real and personal estate of the bankrupt as shall not be exempted from attachment or seizure or levy on execution. by the laws of the U.S or of the State where t a bankrupt resides. Also to strike out the following proviso: Provided, however.That there shall be excepted from the O oration of the [LHOViSiODoSf this section the necessary Household and kitchen furniture and such other articles and necessaries of such bankrupt as (he said iissigiico shall designate and set apart, having reference in the amount to the family. condition and circumstancesof the bankrupt. but altogcther not to exceed in value. in any case.the sum of $300, and also the wearing apparel oi such bankrupt and that of his wife and children and the uniform arms and equipmentsof any person who is or has been a soldier in the militia or in the service of the U.S.: and such other property as now is or here after shall be. exempted from attachment or seizure or levy on executionbythelawsof the U.S.: and the determination of the assigneoin the matter shall on exception taken. Be subject to the final decision of the said court. The question was upon agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. JENCKES. I have but a word to say in regard to the amendment proposed by the Gentfrom Wisconsin, [.Mr. Puss] I think that all that he seeks to accomplish, and perlia s more than he asks, has already been provied for. I hope the amendment will not O adopted. the question was taken, and the amendment of Mr. AINE was not agreed to.
Mr. HOLMES. I move further to amend this section by striking out the words “ the district” in the lust clause of the section, and inserting in lieu thereof the words “that portion of the district in which the bankrupt and his creditors shall reside." The clause Will then read: The assignce shall immediately give notice of his appointment, by publication atleast once a weekfor 3 successiveweeks, in such newspapersas shall, for that purpose, be designatedby the court, duo regard bein had to their general circulation in that portion of the district in which the bankrupt and his creditors shall reside and shall within 6 months, causethe assignmentto him to be recordedin every registry of deeds or other office within the U.S. where a conveyance of any lands owned by the bankrupt ought by law to be recorded: and the record of such usSigumont, or a duly certified copy thereof, shall be evulencothereof in all courts.
Mr. JENOKES. Iknow the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Homes] has reference to his own district. I would suggest to him that he leave the words “the district" in the section, and then insert the words he suggests, prefa cin them with the word “or.” by Mr. HOLMES. Very, well; I will accept the suggestion and modify my amendment. accordingly. The amendment of Mr. HOLMES was then agreed to as modified.
Mr. ROGERS. I desire to call the attention of the Gentfrom RhdIsland Ji ixc kusj to the following clause of the 14th section: and provided further, That no mortgage of any vessel or of any other goods or chattels, made as security for any debt or debts, in good faith and for present considerations and otherwise valid, and duly recorded.pursuant to any statute of the U.S or of any State, shall be invalidated or af feeted heroby. Does the gentleman mean that a mortgage given for good and valuable considerations, and not for present considerations, shall be set aside by this bankrupt law?
Mr. JENCKES. This proviso is intended to prevent the classes of preferences which have hit eito been referred to in the debate. Val uable consideration might refer to a consideration passing between the parties years before.
Mr. ROGERS. Suppose a mortgage had been given long before for a valuable COHsideration?
Mr. JENCKES. It would be perfectly good.
Mr. ROGERS. Suppose a mortgage had been given on Tuesday for a consideration obtained on Monday?
Mr. JENCKES. That would certainly be for a present consideration.
Mr. ROGERS. For how long a time would this provide?
Mr. JENCKES. For 4 months, by an amendment already adopted. Sections 15 to 19 inclusive were then read.
Mr. HALE. This section 19 contains the following clause: Any person liable as bail, surety, uarantpr or otherwisefor the bankrupt, who shall have paid the debt or any part thereol in dischargeof the whole, shall be entitled to prove such debt or to stand in the place of the creditor if he shall have proved the same, although such pay merits shall have been made aftertheprouaodmgsm aukruvtcy were commenced. I move to amend by inserting after that clause the following: and any personsoliable for the bankrupt, and who has not paid the whole of said debt, but is still liable for the someor any part thereof.may. if the creditor shall fail or omit to prove said debt. prove the same either in the name of the creditor or otherwise. as may beprovided by the rules of the court, and subject the such regulations and limitations as may be established by such rules. Mr. JENCKES. I have no objection to that amendment. The amendment was agreed to. Section 20 was then read.
Mr. HALE. The 1stclause of this section is as follows: That in all cases of mutual debtsor mutual credits bewcen the parties. the accountbetween them shall be stated, and one debt set off againstthe other and the balance only shall be allowed or paid, but no setoff shall be allowed of a claim in its nature not provable against the estate. I think that requires some amendment, and therefore I move to amend by adding the following: Prouirlrd, That no set oil shall be allowed in favor of any debtor to the bankrupt of a claim purchased py or transferred to him after the filing of the peti ion.
Mr. JENCKES. I presume that would be the law without any such amendment, but I have no objection to it. The amendment was then agreed to. Section 21 was then read.
Mr. HALE. I move to amend this section by inserting the words “ against the bankrupt” after the following clause: That no creditor proving his debt or claim shall be allowed to maintain any suit at law or in equity therefor.
Mr. JENCKES. That is the proper construction of the words of the clause as it now stands. I have no objection to the amendment. The amendment was agreed to. Sections 22 and 23 were then read.
Mr. HALE. There is one clause in this section which I think needs amendment. It is as follows: Any person who, after the approval of this act, shall have acceptedany preference, having reason able cause to believe that the samewas made or given by the debtor contrary to any provision of this act, shall not prove the debt or claim on account of which the preferencewasmadeor given, nor shall he receive any dividend therefrom. I move to amend by adding thereto the following:. Until he shall 1st have surrendered to the as gneoall moneys, property and advantagereceived y him under such preference.
Mr. JENCKES. I am willing that amendment should be made. the vamendment was agreed to. Section 24 was then read.
Mr. DAVIS. I wish to call the attention of the gentleman having charge of this bill to that portion of this section which relates to the issue of an execution against the assignee. It is as follows: I That a.supposed creditor who takes an appeal to the circuit court from the decision of the district court rejecting his claim, in whole or in part, shall, upon entering his appeal in the circuit court, file in the clerks office thereof a statement in writing of his claim. setting forth the same, substantially, as in declaration for the samecauseof action at law, and o assignceshall plead or answer thereto in like manner, and like proceedings shall thereupon behad in the pleadings. trial and determination of the cause.as in an action at law commencedand prose cuted, in the usual manner, in the courtsof the U.S. except that no execution shall be awarded against the assigneefor the amount of a debtfound due to the creditor. I would inquire of the gentleman whether there is any intention on is part to have a judgment even proforma against the assignee personally? If there be any such thing, it ought to be provided against in this bill.
Mr. JhNChES. e gentleman will see that the bond is at all times within the control of the court. Instead of enterin a judgment against the asSignee personally, the court can order the amount recovered to be paid out of the fund, and the receipt of payment will be a discharge of the asSignce.
Mr. DAVIS. I do not see how the execution can issue except upon a judgment; and if the execution is tqgbe against the individual the ud rment must be against the individual.
Mr. DAVIS. Then there will be no neces sit for providin that no execution shall issue.
Mr.JENCKLS. Under the judiciary act as it now stands, without amendment, an execution may be ordered to issue upon the judgment, unless this provision is interposed. Sections 25 and 26 were then read.
Mr. DAVIS. I move to amend section 26 by striking out the following: On the application of any creditor and on such reasonable notice as the court may direct and for good causeshown, any bankrupt may be required to ring his Wife before the court, to the end that she may be examined as a witness; and if such wife do not attend at the time and place specified in the order, the bankru t shall not be entitled to a discharge unless he shall prove to the satisfaction of the court that he was unable to procure the attendance of his wife. I make this motion forthereason that I doubt the policy of bringing the wife of abankrupt before a court to testify in a case of bankruptcy. I know that of recent years we have had some legislation in various States authorizing the wife to be awitness for or againstherhnsband. But I have never yet seen any good ground for any such polic; it is but offering a premium for perjury. I have seen wives examined for and against their husbands, and I am sorry to say that I have seen scarcely an instance in which not only I myself but others were convinced that there was perjury. There doubt less have been exceptions. But the interest of the husband over the wife is controlling, and I do not believe it is best for us by our legislation to do anything that may seem to offer a premium for perjury.
Mr. JENCKES. I agree entirely with what the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. DAVIS] has said, but this provision has reference to an entirelydiiferent class of cases. This does not relate to any personal matter of the bankrupt, but as to the rightsof propertyin the wife; and if the gentleman will examine the section, he will find in the 46th line that no such order for the examination of the wife is to be made by the court, except “for good cause shown, ” which, it is expected, will bring this provision entirely within the rule of the civil aw, and not inflict upon either husband or wife the hardships of the rule of the common law, but will protect the wifes property where she has it in her own right, and will prevent the husband from settling property upon his wife in fraud of his own creditors.
Mr. DAVIS. Then, if that be the object, it appears to me the language used in the bill fails to accomplish it fully.
Mr. JLNOKES. The “good cause shown” covers it, if you have a wise judge.
Mr. DAVIS. If the object is for the protection of the wifes propert, then certainly she should be authorized to eawitness, even if the creditor does not apply. According to the bill as it stands, the wife can be a witness only on the a lication bf the creditor.
Mr. JEIRICKES. If the gentleman will move an amendment to insert “upon her own application, ” I have no objection to such an amendment.
Mr. DAVIS. I withdraw the amendment which I have offered, and move the following: Insert after the word “creditor” at the end of the 4th line the words “0r of the wife of the bankrupt;" so that it Willread. 0n the application of any creditor or of the Wife of the ban upt and on such reasonable notice as the court may direct and for good cuuse shown. any bankrupt maybe required to bring his wife before the court, to O and that she may be examined as a witness. The amendment was agreed to.
The Clerk read the following: Sac. 27. Abife; That all creditors whose debts are dul proved and allowed shall be entitled to share in the bankrupls property and cs Statepromla, with eutiiny priority or prelbrence whatever. except that wages nc from him to any operative or clerk, or house servant. to an amount not exceedinl 50 dollars. for labor performed within p 6 months next preceding the adjudication of b: nk ruple shall be entitled to priority, and shall be 1st paid in full. 8:0.
Mr. HALE. I move to amend by inserting after the word” full” in the paragraph just read the followmg: Provided. That any debtproved by any personliableas bail surcty. guarantor or otherwise for the bankrupt, shall not bepaid to the personso roving the same until satisfactory evidence shall i: producedof the playment of such debtb such person so liable: and t a share to which such l debt would be entitled may be paid into court or therwise held for ltilic btencfit of the party entitled. the court may irec.
Mr. JENCKES. I would inquire of the Gentleman whether that is not the law at present. Here is a debt payable by the bankru t. To whom 2 Why, to the person with whom he contracted.
Mr. HALE. I think the gentleman misapprehends. I will explain. I moved to to 19thsection an amendment which was adopted, providing that any person liable as bail, surety, guarantor, or 0t crwise, for the bankrupt, not having aid the debt, and stillliable, might, if the cre itor should fail or omit to prove said debt, prove the some, either in his own name or otherwise, as might be provided by the rules of the court. New, in order to correspond with that amendment it is necessary to provide that whenever a person in that sit uation shall prove a claim no dividend shall be paid until satisfactory evidence is produced of the ayinent of such debt.
Mr. JENCKES. I believe that such would be the law without the amendment which the gentleman proposes; but still I do not object to it.
Mr. HALE. I really do not see how it can be the law when the law saysotherwise. The amendment was agreed to.
The Clerk read the following: At such meetin the majority in value of the creditors present shn ldetermine whether any and what part of the net proceedsof the estate, after deducting and retaining a sum sufficientto provide for all undetermined claims which, by reason of the distant residenceof the creditor, or for other sufficient reason. have not been proved, and for other expenses and contingencies, shall be divided amen: the eyed itors; but unless 1/3rd in value of the creditor! shall attend such meeting, it shall be the duty of the assigneeso to determine.
Mr. MILLER. I move to amend by striking out the words “1/3rd, ” before the words “in value, " and inserting “ one half." It sometimes happens that a single. creditor controls one thir or more of the indebtedness and “1/2 ” should be inserted to give all an equal chance.
Mr. JENCKES. I have no objection to that amendment if the gentleman will insert after the words “ attend such meeting” the words in person or by attorney.”
Mr. MILLEl. I accept the gentlemans su ccstion, and so modify my amendment. e amendment as modified was agreed to. Mr; MILLER. I move to amend the 28th section ip that part which provides for the priority or preference of the claims to be presented for dividends so as to change the 2 following paragraphs, utting the 4th in place of the secon, an the 2nd in place of the 4th: 2. All debts dueto the U.S and all taxes and assessmentsunder the laws thereof. 4. Wagesdue to any operative clerk or house servnnt. to an amount not exccedins: 50 dollars, for labor performed within 6 nionthsn ext preceding the 1st publication of thenoticeof proceedingsin bankruptcy.
Mr. JENCKES. The trouble about that is it would alter the Constitution of the U.S., which gives priority to this class. It is independent of the bankrupt law. I think it ought to be done, and the bill has been drawn as far as possible to give these debts preference, but the Constitution and the laws forbid us from going any further. The amendment was rejected.
Mr. DAVIS. I move to add, at the end of the 77th line, ppge 40, these words: “county or city, ” so that it Will read: 5. All debtsdue to any personswho. by the laws of the U.S. are or maybe entitled to a priority or preference, in like manner as if this not had not been passed: Alwnyn provided, That nothing contsiiied in this act shall interfere with the assessment and collection of taxes by the U.S or any State, county, or city. As it now stands it relates simply to State taxes which may or maynot be collected through the instrumentality of the county collector and treasurer. It seems to me that the tax levied by county or city should be protected in the same way as a tax due to the U.S or the State.
Mr. JENCKES. I would suggest, as a mod ification of the gentlemans amendment, to insert in the 76th line, after the word “ by, ” these words, “ the authority of;” so that it will read, “by the authority of the U.S or an State.”
Mr. JENCKES. Mere municipal tax is another thing.
Mr. DAVIS. That satisfies me, and I accept it as a modification of my own amendment. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HOLMES. I move the same amend meutto section 29 that has been moved to previous sections, after the word “district” insert “ or that portion of the district in which the bankrupt and his creditors shall reside.” The amendment was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: Sac. 33. Abife: That no debt cre ated by the fraud or embezzlement of the bankrupt, or by his defnlcation as n. public officer, eXccutor.ad ministrator, guardian. trustee, assigneo, or factor or while acting in an pther fiduciary character, shal be discharged under this net; butthe debtmay beproved, and the dividend thereon shall be a payment on ae connt of said debt; and no discharge ranted under this act shall release discharge, or u ect any person liable for the same debt for or With the bankrupt, either as. Partner doint contractor, indorser surety, or otherWise and in all proceedings in bankruptcy commenced after oney car from the timethis nota all O into operation, no discharge shall begranted to n ebtor whose assets do not pay 50%. of the claims againsthis estate, unless the assentin writing of ammority in number and viilue of his creditors who have proved their claims is filed in the caseat or before the time of application for discharge.
Mr. ALLEY. Mr. Speaker, I wish to as in reference to this section that it was adopts in the committee mainly through my efforts. It does not meet my views fully nor the views of those whom I represent as we would desire.
The SPEAKER. The House is under the 5 minute rule, and the gentleman must move some amendment.
Mr. ALLEY. I move to strike out the last word of the section. I simply wish to say that this section is deemed y some to be of vital importance to the creditor interest. Its provisions are in the Massachusetts law. I have consented to the revision as it stands here postponing the time or its operation one year as a compromise. Believing the time has come when a good bankrupt lawshould be enacted; believing the enactments in the several States are conflictiu and unsatisfactor, I am of o inion if a bankrupt scheme could be devised similar to thatin Massachusetts it would be productive of great good both to the creditor and debtor interest of the country. I believe that is the feeling not only in Massachusetts but universall, that if that Massachusetts provision could e inserted in the bill it would be eminently satisfactory to all interests. In the absence of that it meets With strong Opposition. A communication addressed to the chairman of the committee from the Boston Board of Trade sets forth, I believe, the views of the creditor interest in Boston fully and clearly, and I ask that it be read.
Mr. ALLEY. Will the gentleman allowme to add a word further?
Mr. ALLEY. I concur entirely with the views expressed by the eminent merchants whose names are attached to that communication. I have labored earnestly in the committee to procure the adoption of those views in full, but being unable to accomplish that, I consented to the reporting of the bi l and promised my support to itif they would insert a provision like this as a compromise. I understand from the chairman of the committee that the creditor interest, as represented by the Boards of Trade of the several States with which he has had communication, assent to the bill as it now stands and agree to the provision in its modified form. Believing, as I do, that a uniform law for insolvent debtors is of great importance both to the debtor and to the creditor interest, I shall give this bill my support. I regard it as the best bankrupt bill ever presente to the American Congress. While it does not contain all of the best features of our Massachusetts insolvent law, it contains many of its wisest and most beneficent provisions. Within my reeol lection Massachusetts has had all sorts of laws in relation to debtor and creditor; but her present bankrupt law has been in existence nearly 20 years, and gives to all the most eminent satisfaction, and nothingwould induce her people to fall back upon the old system, So long since cast off by lier, and which, I am sorry to say, is so persistently adhered to in so many of the other States of the Union.
Mr. SPALDING. I desire to add the action of the Board of Trade of Cleveland, Ohio: Bonn or TRADE Itooiis, CLEVELAND, March 14, 1866. DEAR 812: The following resolution was pn.ssed by the Board of Trade of this city at its sessionthis da held: yRmlved, That in view of the considerationse ontained in the report of arbitration committee of the ChamberofCommoreoof the city of NewYork, dated FebruaryZ, 1865, and found on page 76of the prooeedingsof that body for that year; and also of the like considertions oontained in the report of Earn Farnsworth, illiam Claflin, and Hami ton A. Hill which hasrecentlybeenadopted by the Boston Board of Trade, recommendin the passage by congressof the bankru tbill now before the louse of epresentatives, t 15board do concur in such recommen galtlign, and t{lespeetfultulryge the enactment of said i iirin e resen session. n J Att “at. 0. SAGE SecretaryBoard of nude. Hon.
Mr. J. M. HUMPHREY. Allow me to add the followiniproceedings of the Board of Trade Of BulTalo, NewYork: Boase or TRADE Ronns. Cssrniii. Wriiiir. Borneo. NewYuan. March 13.1866. Ettraclfrom minutesofmcehnQfmembersofllie Board of Trade, held 1 ianiorning. "The following resolutionwaspasse dunanimously: “Resolved. That in view of the considerationse ontained in the report of the arbitration committee of the Chamber of Commerceof the city of New 1 ork. dated February 2.1btxa5n. d found on page 76of the proceedin of that bodyfor that year, an alsoof the Iike considerations contained in the report of Ezra Farnsworth. William Claflin and Hamilton A. Hill. which has recently been adopted by the BostonBoard of Trade. recommendinithe passageby Congressof the hankru t bill now eforo the HoRep is boarddoconcur in such recommendations and respectfullyurge the enactment of saidbill during the presentsession." WILLIAM THURSTSOeNereEta.ry.
Mr. JENCKES. I withdraw the amendment. The Clerk proceeded with the reading of the bill.
Mr. JENCKES. I move to amend section 35, in line 2, by striking out “six” and inserting “ 4;” so as to make it conform to other amendments. Also, in line 11, afterthe word “thereby” to insert the words “or by such attachmentfY so as to relieve the section of ambiguity. Also. in line 13, after the word "such" and before the word “payment” to insert the word “attachment.” The foregoing amendments were agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I move to amend section 38, by strikin out in lines 3 and 4 the wor s “or the issuing of” and inserting the words “ upon which” in lieu there of; and inlinc 4,ater the word “ order, ” by inserting the words “may be issued.” Also, in line 5 by striking out the word “ 40, ” leaving the word “four.” It is a mispririt. The foregoing amendments were agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I move to amend section 41 by adding at the end thereof the words “ and the respondent shall recover his costs.” The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I move to amend section 46 in line 14, by striking out the words “to be imprisoned” and inserting in stead thereof the words “by imprisonment.” The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I move to amend the 47th section by adding at the end thereof the following: Or from reducing the fees prescribed in this sec titziiielin classesof casesto be named in their rules and or So that the paragraph will read: The enumeration of the foregoin fees shall not prevent the commissioners.who shal frame general rules and orders in accordance with the provisions of section 12, from prescribing a tariff of fees for all other services of the officers of courts of bankruptcy or from reducing the fees prescribed in this section in classesof casesto be named in their rules and order. There are some persons who, if this bill goes into effect, will have to sue in the form of aiipers, having no property, and possibly no riends; persons who may in some States be imprisoned for debt. In such cases, special rules should be made so that the fees should not be excessive. The fees provided by this bill may stand for all cases in which there are estates of the bankrupts. They provideafund for the payment of the register, without whose services this law could hardly be carried into effect. This amendment gives the commissioner power to reduce them and provide for certain classes of cases, so that the provisions of the act shall not be a burden upon them, and /relief shall not be denied them on account of poverty. 1 do this also preliminary to a motion to strike out the next section.
Mr. HOLMES. I am not quite satisfied to leave these fees as they are. While this provision permits the commissioner or judge to reduce them it does not impose any such obli ! gation upon him, but leaves them to be paid. unless the judge sees fit to reduce them.
Mr. JENChES. If the gentleman will look back to the section providing for the establishment of rules and or ers, he will see that it puts it entirely in the power of the commissioner to prescribe e nit. ible rules for the different classes of cases, which I see no way of providing for by the act itself.
Mr. HOLMES. I would ask the gentleman whether these allowances for every day s service in section 47, can be made on the same occasion when they are performing this service.
Mr. JENCKES. That is prescribed by the rule. It is not for the register or commissioner to say what is a da s service, but the general rule to be establish ied by the court under the authority of the SCOTUS shall prescribe what it shall be.
Mr. HOLMES. The gentleman does not understand my question. Here are certain services for which they are aid a satisfactory fee. Now, can they, in addition to that, have aperdiam. allowance? For instance, on the day they issue a warrant, or perform any other servicc, can they also be paid aperdiem?
Mr. JENCKES. No, sir. forever days service while actually employed under the special order of the court, the court shall define what the duty shall be. For instance, in the district in which the gentleman lives the judge sends a register to Ogdensburg. He wiil de fine in the order sending him there what he shall be aid whether a perdiem, or otherwise an not allow the Officer himself to increase his own fee.
Mr. HOLMES. I prefer to offer an amendment, by moving to strike out “ 5 dollars” in the 47th section, line 7, and inserting “two dollars;” so that it will read: For issuing every warrant. 2 dollars. I think that is ample compensation.
Mr. DAVIS. I move to amend by inserting “ 3 dollars.” The amendment of Mr. DAVIS was not agreed to. The amendment of Mr. HOLMES was agreed to. The amendment of Mr. JENCKES, to add to the section as above, was also agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I now move to strike out section 48. The section was read. as follows: SEC.48. Abife: That the following stamp duties shall be paid and stamps to the several values be affixed to the papersin each of the several proceedingsin bankruptcy as follows. to be prepaid in every caseby the petitioner: Upon everydebtors petition. ten dollars. Upon every creditors petition. 20 dollars. Upon everywarrant to messenger, 2 dollars. Upon everymesse ugcrsnotice bymail, ten cents. Upon every messengersnotice by advertisement. 50 cents.upon every assignment. 3 dollars. Upon every or or for meeting of creditors, 2 dollars. I Upon everyorder for dividend. 2 dollars. Ilpon every petition to vacate proceedings. 5 O ars. Upon every citation to debtor.25 cents. inUpon every other citation. warrant and summons. the courseof proceedings.25 cents. Upon every dischargeof a bankrupt, 5 dollars. The motion to strike out the forcgoing section was agreed to. The last section was read, as follows: SEC. 51. Abife: That this act shall commenceand take effect as to the appointment of the OHICGISe reatedhereby and the promulation of rules and general orders.from and afterthe date of its approval: Provided. That no petition or other proceeding under this act shall he filed. reeeived or commencedbefore the 1stday of September. A. D. 1866.
Mr. MILLER. I move to strike out “Sep tember, ” and insert “January, ” and also strike out the last word “six” and make it “7; ” so that it shall read, “the 1st day ofJanuary, A. D. 1867.”
Mr. JENCKES. I hope not. If the gentleman will substitute “November” for “ ep tcmber, ” I will not object.
Mr. MILLER. Very well; I so modify my amendment. The amendment as modified was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I now move the previous question on the passage of the bill.
Mr. JENCKES. The vote may be taken tomorrow, immediately after the morning hour.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I object to fixing a time for taking the vote.
The SPEAKER. Then it will come n immediate] after the reading of the Journa.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. You can take your hour. EVENING SESSION.
Mr. WASHBURNE, ofI1line is. I now move thaktl the session of this evening be dispensed Wit. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I move that the House adjourn. 1 he motion was agreed to; and thereupon (at 4 oclock and 25 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. WEDNESDAY, March 28, 1866. The Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY, offered the following prayer: O God! Truly in the midst Of life we are in death. Passing away is true of us and true of our friends. The places now knowing us will soon know us no more forever. May we hear the voice of the Lord, and may all the dispensations of Th providenee, which are wise and righteous and land kiud even though they seem to be severe be sanctified to our ever lasting good and when God 5 eaks to us from His throne and comes into the midst of our circle of friends, may we remember that it is God who speaks, and not man. We pray that Thou wilt teach all of us to number our days that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom, and that we may keep the great object of life constantly in view, and be prepared for Thy glory and Thy service in the kingdom of heaven. Bless, we pray Thee, the Senate and all of its members, and grant that each of them may be made to realize that death is commissioned to go to the high places of trust and of power as well as to those of the lowly, and that it be comes us all to recognize the hand of God in the dispensation ofailliction as well asof mercy. Grant, we pray Thee, that all of us today may realize that we are passing on to the unseen world, and that there is no work nor device not knowledge nor wisdom in the path which we take. Bless the fainil in affliction; sustain and support them, and help them to feel today that God is their trust and their everlasting strength. Bless us all, and prepare us with fidelity to discharge the duties of life; and when we have accomplished our work and fulfilled our sojourning s here on earth, prepare us for places of trust, of honor, of praise, of glory in the kingdom of heaven, forJesus sake. Amen. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
Mr. SUMNER. Mr. President, a great be reavement has fallen upon the Senate.
Mr. FOOT, the Senator of Vermont, one of our most honored associates, and the oldest among us in continuous service, died this morning at 8 oclock. He has passed from this scene of duty and of honor. 1n the presence of such a sor row, it seems better that public business should be suspended in this Chamber for today. accordingly, I shall make a motion which I will believe have the sympathetic concurrence of the Senate. I make it in the absence of the surviving Senator of Vermont, who is now necessarily engaged in attendance upon the family of the deceased, and after consultation with him. I more that the Senate do now adjourn. The motion was unanimously agreed to; the and Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wiinnssmv, March 28, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borxron. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. LEAVE O]?ABSENCE.
Mr. BERGEN asked and obtained further leave of absence for one week for his colleague, Mr. Goonrm.
Mr. PIKE asked and obtained leave of ab sence for 2 weeks for his colleague, Mr. Lixen.
Mr. TAYLOR asked and obtained leave of absence for one week for his colleague, Mr. Jose s.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts, asked and obtained leave of absence for one week for his colleague, Mr. BANKS. REFUGEES and FREEDMEN.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, by unanimous consent, reported back from the ComJudiciaryar House bill No. 406, to provide for the sett ement Of accounts Of certain public officers, without amendment, and with a recommendation that it be passed. The question was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a 3rd time. The bill was read at length. The 1st section provides that all moneys raised in the U.S. for the support of refugees or freedmen, and received by any officer of the U.S. Army, shall be chared against such officer on the books of the Treasury Dept and accounted for by him in like manner as if such moneys had been drawn from the Treasury of the U.S.; and if any part thereof shall have been exended for the use of refugees or freedmen, tosame shall be passed to the credit of the officer, if, upon the examination of his accounts, it shall a pear to the properaccounting officer of the lreasury Dept that the amount expended was properly disbursed for such refugees or freedmen; and on the adjustment of the accounts of the officer, if any balance shall remain in the hands of such otheer, the same shall be aid into the Treasuryof the U.S. fora, und for the relief of refugees and freedmen and any officer having such balance in his hands, who, after being duly required, shall refuse or neglect to pay Over the same or who shall, after no notice, fail to settle his accounts, shall he proceeded against in the same manner as is provided for by existin laws in the case of disnrsing officers who neg ect or refuse to account for moneys drawn from the Treasury of the U.S. Section 2 provides that where accounts are rendered for expenditures for refugees or freedmen, under the approval and sanction of the properofficers, and which shall have been properand necessary, but cannot be settld for want of specific appropriations, the same may be aid out of the fun for the relief of refugees an freedmen, on the approval of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Refugees and Freedmen.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. This bill is necessary in order that the 3rd Auditor of the Treasury may settle the accounts of the officers of the Freedmens Bureau for funds which have been received by them, other than by appropriations from the Treasury of the U.S., by way of donations or otherwise. All the funds received 1) the officers of that bureau are reported by them to the Treasury Dept, and are charged againstthem upon the books of that Dept. But. there is now, no law authorizing the settlement of their accounts for the expenditure of the funds received by them for the purposes specified in the act under which they are acting. I had an interview this morning in regard to this bill with the 3rd Auditor, and he told me that itwas highly important that this bill should be passed at once, in order that these accounts may be adjusted. I now demand the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the mainquestion was ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill was orderedto be engrossed and read a 3rd time. Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I call the previous question on the passage of the bill. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question was ordered; and under the operation thereof, the bill being engrossed, was read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, mtRtv the bill was passed on the table. Agreed to. BRITISH AMERICAN TRADE.
Mr. KELLEY, by unanimous consent, submitted the lollowing fGiOluIlOIl; which was read, considered, and agreed to: reRqeuseosltveedd. That the secretaryof the Treasury be to communicate to this House a statement of thotrade of the Provinces of British North America especial] Canada, in 1854and 1865 66r, espective y, the values being estimatedin gold, and specifing what proportion of { and trade was with the s, ivneitleyd States, and what articles. if any. were exclu exportedto the U.S.: also, the tariff laws now in force in Canada, With a nature and extent of the changes statement of the 1854;also, the madethereinsince returns of Canadian canals for 1865, inllauvsitgraattiionng their value and theimportanceof the free of the river StLawrence to commerce together with American brought down to the presesnut cthimgee.nietsral information. possessionand may assistin correctly mesatyimbaet ining his trade, resources.&c. of said Provinces and the their ret1lq.ctsio. nto the trade and production of the U.S. INTERNALREVENUE.
Mr. MORRILL. Iain instructed by the ComWays&Means to report a bill to amend an act entitled “An act to provide in ternal revenue to support the Government, to pay interest on the public debt, and for other purposes;7 approved June 30, 1864, and the act ainendatory thereof, approved March 3, 1865. I will merely state, Mr. Speaker. that it is the purpose of the ComWays&Means to report a bill extensively modifying the income tax; and in order that the bill may take effect this year, we desire to have the levying and collection of that tax postponed for 5 months. This will give time to mature and pass the bill which the committee have now under consideration. The bill was read a 1st and 2nd time. It provides that all proceedings touching the levy and collection of the annual tax provided in schedule A of section 100 of the act entitled “An actto provide internalrevenue to support the Government, to pay interest on the public debt, and for other purposes, ” approved June 30, 1864, and the act amendatory thereof approved March 3, 1865, and all proceedings for the levy, return, and collection of the income tax provided by said not be, and the same are hereby, postponed for the space of 2 months; provided, that all the provisions, remedies, and penalties of said act shall remain in full force and effect in all respects, except so far as the same are changed as to time by the postponement aforesaid.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. MORRILL mtRtv the bil was passed; on the table. Agreed to. ISABELLA STRUIHING.
Mr. ANCONA, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the relief of Isabella Strubing; which was read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComInvalidPens., IOWA CENTRAL RAILROAD.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa, by unanimous consent, presented a JtResolution of the Legislatureof the State of Iowa, askin a rant of lands to aid in the construction of the own. Central railroad; which was referred to the ComPubLands, and ordered to be printed. PAYMENT FOR SLAVES.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I ask unanimous consent to report back from the ComJudiciary a JtResolution (H.R.No. 43) proposin an amendment to the Constitution of the U.S.
The SPEAKER. The JtResolution will be read for information, after which the Chair will ask for objections, if any in chitpter 108.
The Clerk read, as follows: Be it resolve by the Senate and HoRep of the U.S.A. in Congresn assembled, (2/3rds ofboih Housese oncurring.) Thiitthe following article be proposedto the Legislatures of the severalStates, which, when ratified by 3/4thsof said Legislatures, shall be valid. to all intents and purposes.as a part of said Constitution. namely: Anrictr. See.1. Neither Congiess nor any State shall over authorize, provide for or make payment to any personor personson account of the emancipationof any slzweorsliives or ase ompensationtherefor exceptus SIOVKIECI by statute in torco prior to the lst day of unuiuy, 1865. Size.2. Congress shall hays power to enforcethis article by appropriato legislation and the Judicial power of the U.S shall extendto all cases arising under this article and the laws made in pursuance thereof.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to permitting the Gentfrom Ohio to report back this oiut resolution from the ComJudiciary?
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. ope the Gentleman will withdraw his objection. My object is simply to move an amendment to the pending amendment, and then move that the resolution be recommitted.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. The intention is not to brin it up for action?
Mr. ANCONA. Will the gentleman consent that a motion to reconsider the recommittal shall be laid on the table?
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I want to recommit the bill to the committee, and I hope there will be no objection to it.
Mr. ANCONA. I must object unless it be the understanding it is not to 6 brought back by u moton to reconsider.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. cept that. ORGANIZATION OF THE noose.
Mr. RAYMOND, by unanimous consent, submitted the followmg resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the comJudiciary be instructedtoin one into the expediency of sonmend laws of 1863.entitled " An acttoreg ulatethe duties of the Clerk of the HoRep in preparing for the organization of the House, " as to provide that no memberwhosename may becalled y the Clrrk in accordance with that act shall participate in the election of Speaker or in any other businessof the House until he shall 1st have taken the oath of officeprescribedby the constitution and the laws. U.S. COAL and IRON LANDS.
Mr. JULIAN, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved.That the Committeoen Public Lands be instructed to inquire into the expediency of reporting a.bill extening the principles and polic of the laws new in force regulating the saleof cool lands to the iron of the U.S. PAYMENT FOR QUARTERMASTERS, STORES. Mr. NOELL, by unanimous consent, submitted the followm resolution; which was read, consulered, an agreed to: Resolved.That the committee on the debtsof the loyal States be instructed to inquire into the expodicucy of innendii ig the not entitled “An act to resptrroicvtid tehefoJurrtihsodipeatiyomn conftnthf ece Crtoauinrtdoefm Claimss and to termasiers forquur stores and subsistence supplies furnished to the Army of the U.S., ” approvedJuly 4 1864, so as to authorize the QuarterMGen to passupon and recommend for settlement to the 3rd Auditornll supplies taken from loyal citizens of States not in rebellion for the quartermasters or commissary Dept, whether Said stores iind supplies were taken by the quartermnstersor commissioners or by othersunder orders of olficcrse ommanding itmhepfroerse seesd., faonrdtthoereupsoerot f by wbhiicll hor suocth hesruwpis poli.eswere TAX 01vSLAUGHTERED ANIMALS.R. DARLING, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: IgeaoleedT.hat the ComWays&Means ibsehiinng sttrhuectteadxtuopine qnusilraeuignhtote the expediencyof abol animals. NEW POST ROUTE 1N Illinois.
Mr. BAKER, by unanimous consent, submit ted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Beaolind. That the comPostOffice be instructed to inquire into the propriety of establishiuiz it mail route from Edwardsville, Illinois. to Troy, Illinois and report bybill or otherwise. HARLEY FREE OF DUTY. IMr. STROUSE. I ask unanimous consent to submit the following resolution of inquiry: Resolved. That the ComWays&Means be instructed to inquire into the expediencyof admitting burlc. use for in nlting, free of duty. from Canada and the other British Provinces.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I object, and call for the regular order of business. BANKRUPT BILL. The House then proceeded to the consideration of the special order, being House bill No. 7, to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the U.S.; the pending question being on the 3rd reading and engrossment on which the main question had been ordered.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I ask the Gentfrom RhdIsland [Mr. JENCKEH] to agree to the postponement of the bankruptlaw until later in the day, so that we may proceed to the consideration of reports from the ComIndAffrs.
The SPEAKER. That can only be done by unanimous consent, as the previous question has been 2nded and the main question ordered.,
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I understand the gentlemn from RhdIsland agrees to it.
Mr. JENCKES. I will agree to a postponement if a day and hour be fixed for the consideration of the baukru t bill.
Mr. SCHENCK. I o ject. I think it is a good time to vote on the bill when we have a ull House.
Mr. JENCKES. The reason why I consent to the suggestion of the Gentfrom Iowa is that many members who have obtained leave of absence have reuested me not to push the bill to a vote until the had returned.
Mr. SCHENCK. I know of 2 applications for leave of absence to be made this morning; such a )plicutions always occur about this season of the year, and it is not probable we will have a.fuller House than we have now. I object to postponing to a late hour of the day, and think it is better to vote now when the House is reasonably full.
Mr. JENCKES. My suggestion is this I will state it again so that the gentleman may hear and understand it that many members are now absent.
Mr. SCHENCK. That is what I understood the gentleman to say, and my reply is that it will be the same for weeks to come.
Mr. JENCKES and many of these have asked me not to press this measure to a vote until they can be present. I therefore assent to the proposition of the Gentfrom Iowa, [Mr. UBBARD] thatthe previous question shall be postponed until an hour certain, whether a week or a fortnight from today, so that ever member of the llouse may be notified that it will be voted 11 on.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. We have fully considered this bill; the Gentfrom RhdIsland has had the fairest consideration that a member could possibly have; the previous question has been 2nded, and the main question ordered and now he comes in and makes the extraordinary request
Mr. JENOKES. The gentleman is wrong; I do not make any personal request. I stated that I had been requested by others not to press it to a vote.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I do not mean to say that the gentleman himself has made an extraordinary request, but that it is an extr ordinary one to come from gentlemen who have left the House and gone away from their business, that we should postpone it on their account.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I would inquire of the Chair, when will the regular busmess come u, provided we proceed with the bank ru t bil now?
The SPEAKER. As soon as this bill is disposed of. The only way of proceeding with the call of committees will be to reconsider the vote by which the previous question was or dered on the bankrupt bill, and then postponinguirt.
Mr. JENCKES. In accordance with the request of members who are absent, I move to reconsider the vote by which the previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered.
Mr. SCHENCK. It was my intention to respond to the appeal of the Gentfrom RhdIsland, but really I can hear nothing, there is so much noise in the House. I understand that his appeal to postpone is not on his own behalf, but on behalf of those who are absent. I certainly do not wish to do any thin discourteous toward that gentleman, but the ifficulty is there are other gentlemen who are about to obtain leave of absence who also desire to vote for the bill, and it is not easy totell when there will come a time, even with notice, when we shall have a fuller House than now and besides, I understand that the objection is likely to be renewed by others if I withdraw it.
Mr. JENCKES. I hope the gentleman will hear me.
Mr. SCHENCK. I am always happy to hear the gentleman.
Mr. JENCKES. Gentleman who are absent on leave have made a request to me that I should ask the House to fix a time when the vote shall be taken. As matters now stand, that would not interfere with any public business. It is a mere courtesy to our absent friends.
Mr. ROSS. I rise to a question of order. I understand the previous question has been 2nded , and I do not understand by what rule this debate goes on.
The SPEAKER.obicchte. Gentfrom RhdIsland moves to reconsiderthe vote by which the previous question was ordered.
Mr. JENCkES. Gentlemen will understand that this motion is not made on my own behalf.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I rise to a privileged question. The bill has been fully considered, engrossed, and read a 3rd time.
The SPEAKER. Not yet. The previous giifistion is ordered on the engrossment of the i.
Mr. ROSS. I move to postpone the question till the 1st Monday in December next.
Mr. JENOKES. Is there any objection to having an hour certain fixed for action on this bill?
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Illinois objects.
Mr. JENCKES. Then I withdraw the motion.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom RhdIsland has the floor.
Mr. SCHENCK. I want to have it under stood that I am willing to withdraw my oh jection and allow the Gentfrom RhdIsland to manage his bill.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Illinois has objected.
Mr. CONKLING. Does the Gentfrom RhdIsland [Mr. JBNCKES] address any inquiry to me?
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I wish to inquire of the Gentfrom RhdIsland whether he will give me 3 minutes of his time.
Mr. ROSS. Is my motion now in order to postpone till December next?
The SPEAKER. It is not. The previous question cuts that 06, having priority over it, as the gentleman can find by reference to page 186 of the Digest.
Mr. ROSS. I do not care about destroyin" the bill, but I thought next December would be time enough to dig it ii.
Mr. JENCKES. It oes not take effect until the 1st of November.
Skip Skip Mr. ROSS. Imove to lay the bill on the table. The motion was not agreed to. The bill was then engrossed, and read a 3rd time. Mr. JENCKES. I demand the previous question on the passage of the bill. I he previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered. Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I call for the yeas&nays on the passage of the bill. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question Was taken on the passage of the bill; and it was decided in the negative yeas 59, nays 73, not voting 51;. So the bill was reJected. During the roll call, Mr. INFIELD said: I have paired with my colleague, Mr. Kerenan. Mr. NICHOLSON. I have paired with the Gentfrom NewYork, Mr. CHAXLER. Mr. WARD. I desire to state that my colleague, Mr. Mortals, is unavoidably absent, and if present would undoubtedly vote for the bill. Mr. ANCONA. My colleague, Mr. Dissi sort, is paired with Mr. Luvnizse s, of Pennsylvnnia, and my colleague, Mr. Joussox, is still confined to his room. The vote having been announced as above recorded, Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill was rejected, on the table. The question being taken on the motion, there were ayes52. noes 53. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I call for the yeas and nnys. The ycas&nays were ordered. The question being taken on the motion tolay the motion to reconsider on the table, it was dectded in the negative years 59, nays 68, not voting 56; So the motion was not agreed to. The question recurred on the motion to reconsider. Mr. BEAMAN. I move to postpone the further consideration of the motion to reconsider for one week, and on that I demand the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered.
Mr. JENCKES. If the House will allow me, I will repeat what I said at the o ening of the diseussion this morning, when asked a postponement for one week, that I did it at the request of absent. members. I hope the House will grant it.
Skip Skip The question being taken on the motion to postpone the motion to reconsider, there wereayes75, noes 36. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. the eas&nays. the ens&nays were not ordered. So the motion to pestponc was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURN, of Indiana. mtRtv the motion to reconsider was postponed, and on the table. Agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. W. J. McDosALD, its Secretary, announced that the Senate had pleased without amendment a JtResolution (H.R.No. 96) in relation to the public lands appertaining to the armory at pringfield. DISMAL SWAMP CANAL COMPANY.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the SecyTreasury, recommending an appropriation or some other relief for the Disma Swain Canal company; which was referred to the comommerce, and ordered to be printed. MAUMEE BAY and RIVER.
The SPEAKER also laid before the House a communication from the SecyWar, transmitting, in complihnce with a resolution of the House of March 23, 1866, information as to the amount of money necessary for the improvement of Maumce bay and river at the I demand 1 their tribal condition. city of Toledo, Ohio; which was referred to the ComCommerce, and ordered to be printed. INDIAN LANDS IN KANSAS. The House resumed, as the 1st business of the morning hour, the consideration of House bill No. 259, to subject Indian lands and allot ted lands in Kansas to the laws thereof, uion which
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa, was entitle to the floor. The nestion pending was on the amendment reporte from the committee, as follows: Provided, That nothin: herein contained shall be construedto authorize anyof said Indians or Indian tribes to sell, grant, or leaseany of said lands, unless the same be madeby treaty orconvention entered into, pursuant to the Constitution of, the U.S.: nor shall anything herein contained be construed to give the State of Kansas power to tax any of said lands, exceptsuch asare hed inse veralty by individual membersof said Indian tribes.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I ask the previous question on the amendmentjust reported.
Mr. INGEHSOLL. I hope it will not he 2nded. The amendment is bad, and ought not to pass.
Skip Skip The previous question was not 2nded.
Mr. NGERSOLL. Mr. Speaker, I believe I have now 5 minutes to discuss the proposed amendment.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman hes one hour.
Mr. WIN DOM. Will the gentleman yield to me one moment for a question?
Mr. WINDOM. Is What declared in a provision of the treaty which the gentleman just read, that this exemption shall continue “ until otherwise provided by law?”
Mr. INGERSOLL. es, but it is limited by another portion which I was about to read.
Mr. WIN OM. Then why does the gentleman claim now that the treaty declares that these lands shall be exempt from taxation, as if we had no right to pass a law providing for their taxation?
Mr. WINDOM. I ask the gentleman to yield to me for a moment.
Mr. WINDOM. The gentleman read from one clause of the treaty which declares. as the House heard, that these Indians shall not have the power to alienate their lands, and he said he was in favor of that . I would like to know, then, why he opposes this bill which containsa revision that nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to authorize the alienation of these lands. I do not understand what the gentlemans theory is, when he opposes a proposition for doing what he is contendingitis our duty to do.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I am not talking about technicalities, or about fine constructions of these treaty stiulations. Varnish it over as you please, ift is bill becomes alaw, the white men of Kansas will by operation of their tax laws become the owners of these lands, and the Indians will be driven out. I am taking broad ground in favor of justice.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. My colleague will let me interrupt him for a moment. I know that he does not wish to do injustice to a distin uished citizen of our own State. He referre to Major General Pope.
Mr. ROGERS, (in his seat.) He meant the Pope of Home.
Mr. wASHBUEtLNaEu, ghotfeIrlJline is. I ask my colleague to read the report which Major General Pope has recently made to the Commander in Chief on this subject, and he will find that Major General Pope entertains the same views in regard to these Indian difficulties that my colleague does, as well as myself. In the allusion which to colleague made to Major General Pope, I t ink, without intending it, he has done a great injustice.
Mr. INGEBSOLL. I do not believe that my remarks can be considered as imputin anything wrong to Major General Pope. thank my colleague for calling my attention to it, for I certainly have no disposition to do in stice to anyone; but so far as the Pope of Rome is concerned, I only wish he could be dispersed among the Indian tribes of America. [Laughter] I know the report of Major General Pope, to which my colea c has referred, only confirms the position have taken here. that the white men, 9 times out of ten, are the assessors; that if they were disposed they could have in amicable relations with the Indian tribes upon our frontiers. Why, sir, from the 1st Indian war down to the present hour you will find that in almost every case the whites have been the aggressors, not the Indian race. Now, sir, I do not propose by this bill to place the power to invade the rights of these Indians in the hands of the people of Kansas. I do not suppose these gentlemen of the committee who report this bill are interested in any invasion of the rights of t Indians in Kansas, but I say that men so disposed can take advantage under this bill and deprive these Indians of their lands under the tax laws of Kansas. We ought not to pass such a bill and I am opposed to the amendment proposed by the committee in addition to the bill as rerted by them this mornin. It leaves these ndians to the Operation of the laws of Kansas. Now, it is not to be supposed that they are acquainted with the laws of Kansas, and I for one am opposed to yielding our jurisdiction over them to that State.
Mr. STEVENS. I ask the gentleman to yield to me for the purpose of moving a substitute for the bill.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I yield for that purpose. p
Mr. STEVENS. I move to strike out all alter the enacting clause and in lieu thereof to insert the following: That whenever a crime shall be committed by an Indian in Kansas he shall be arrested wherever he may be found and tried wherever the crime was alleged to have beencommitted. The only excuse there seems to be for this law against a people who are not represented here is that they go into different parts of Kansas, commit crimes, and fly back into their own territory which has been secured to them by treaty. Now, if that is the only object desired my amendment secures it. If these Indians commit a crime, my amendment allows them tobe arrested anywhere within the State and taken to the bailiwick in which the crime was committed and be tried there, and unless something more is wanted than justice I think my amendment is sufficient.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I am willing the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Steven] should be received.
The SPEAKER. The question will be 1st upon the amendment of the ComIndAffrs; then upon the substitute of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srsvsss.]
Mr. WARD. Will the Gentfrom minnesota [Mr. Wixnou] allow me to ask the Gentfrom Pennsyvania [Mr. Srnvnrts] a question?
Mr. WARD. I would ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania if his substitute, contemplates the extendin State jurisdiction all over the U.S.; that the process of the State court for the arrest of an Indian shall extend anvwhere throughout the U.S.?
Mr. STEVENS. It does not propose to change the court in which he is to be tried; but empowers the State authorities to arrest him in is own territor where he may flee.
Mr. WARD. By what process would he be arrested 1
Mr. STEVENS. The same as a white man, or anybody else, would be arrested.
Mr. STEVENS. By any process which would arrest any other man for tesame crime.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I do not suppose the Gentfrom Minnesota [Mr. Wisnou] m tends to do me injustice, when he makes special allusions to the Minnesota outrages of the Indians upon the whites, and the defense of the white people by General Pope. He in timates that I said General Pope was sent to murder those Indians. I meant nothingoft lie kind in what I said. I meant simply this: that take the last 25 years, yes, the last hundred ears, more Indians have been killed, murdere, butchered, call it what you please, in consequence of the a gressions of the whites upon the Indians, than t iere have been Indians lulled in any justifiable defense of the rights of the whites. In the case of the Minnesota troubles, I admit that the Indians deserved chastisement, and a great many of them received it.
Mr. HENDERSON. Mr. Speaker, I should not attempt to say anything on this bill but for the fact that I am a member of the ComIndAffrs, and concurred with other members of that committee in reporting the bil. The Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Isom soi.i.] appears to imagine that this bill is cal culated to defraud the Indians, because they do not understand the tax laws.
Mr. INGERSOLL. The Gentfrom Oregon [Mr. Hnxnsnsox] will allow me to correct him. He is advancing the same idea which has been put forward by the Gentfrom Minnesota, [Mr. Wisnon] that I insist that this bill was framed for the especial purpose of defrauding the Indians. I disclaim any such idea. I simply insist that, under this bill, crafty, designing men can take ndvanta e of the Indians, an in all probability will do so. Idid not mean to intimate that the committee had an such design in framing the bill.
Mr. STEVENS. I modify my substitute so as to make it read, “wherever found within the State, ” kc.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I am very happy to find, Mr. Speaker, that the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. INGERSOLI] has such a strong feeling of sympathy for the Indians; and I hope when measures are presented for the relief of Indians, and for their benefit and protection, especially for the protection of their interests, he will be found acting with us. He says this bill is based upon a scheme of swindling; that it is propose here with that view by the men who have presented it and brought it before the committee for consideration; that it has been presented for the purpose of swindling, and for no other purpose than to cheat these Indians out of their lands.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Allow me to correct the gentleman. I do not believe that the Gentfrom Iowa wishes to do me injustice.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I yield only for a moment. I have no time to spare as most of my time has been already taken up by the speeches of other gentlemen.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Idise laim any intention of impntiag dishonest motives to the gentleman who presented this bill. If my langua Q will bear any such construction I certainly with raw it.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. Then withdraw your whole speech.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Withdraw the bill and I will do it.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I will say to the Gentfrom Illinois that I stand here for the purpose of defending the provisions of thil bill against the unjustifiable assaults which he has seen proper to make upon them. I under take to say, and I do it without fearof successful contradiction, that there is no swindling lying at the base and foundation of this bill. Not only has it for its object the protection of the rights and interests of the citizens of Kansas, but also the protection of the rights of property and the interests of the Indians themselves. Some of the men whom the gentleman has so large a sympathy for are as intelligent as I am or the gentleman himself. White men have been adopted as members of this tribe who are living there with Indian women, with families, upon farms which they are cultivating. These are the men in reference to whom the gentleman has been speaking. He says if you pass this law you will confer upon the citizens of Kansas the power to take from these Indians their land. I repudiate any such idea. such a thin is not in contemplation. These lands, sir, if they are taxed at all, must be taxed under the laws of Kansas, laws which bear upon white men as well as upon Indians.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I cannot yield. I have not time to do it. I would gladly yield ifI could do po. If these lands are taxed the must be taxed under the laws of Kansas, under the same laws that impose burdens upon white men and I appeal to the Gentfrom Illinois and to every other gentleman on this floor, and them if it is not right. These lands are set apart in severulty to these Indians who are living on them and enjoying the benefits of civilization. The have the benefit of the construction of may s and bridves, schools and school houses, and why, therefore, should they be exempt from taxation? The Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVaxs] we offered an amendment, and upon that I will make asingle remark. We not only want this bill for the purpose of punishing ln dians, but for the purpose of punishing white men who commit crimes upon the lands that belong to the State or under the jurisdiction of the State, and then ese ape by going upon these Indian lands outside of the State jurisdiction. We want to punish such men according to the laws of the State of Kansas.
Mr. STEVENS. If my friend will allow me, I will modify my amendment by adding after the word “ Indian " the words “ or white man.”
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. The Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. INGERSOLL] says be is in favor of suffrage for the Indians. Isay to him that he need not ask us to confer suffrage upon these Indians. Many of the men for whom I am speaking here today are already exercising the right of suffrage. Men who are counted as part of these tribes are today voters, and one of them, as I stated yesterday, is now a member of the Kansas Legislature.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Will the gentleman an swer this question? Is the full blooded Indian in the State of Kansas allowed to vote?
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. No, sir; but a great many men are included in these tribes who are not full blooded Indians. There are a great many half breeds and white men who have been adopted among them and are counted and included under the term Indians when ever we refer to them as such.
Mr. DRIGGS. By the permission of the gentleman, I offer the following substitute, which makes the provision apply generally to all the States and Territories: That the laws of each State and Territory and to be enacted are hereby extended enacted and shall have full force and etfect on all lands in said States or Territories reservedor granted to Indiana or Indian tribes. which have been or shall hereafter be allotted in severulty to said Indians or to the members of said tribes. whether the somehe by treaty or otherwise; also over all lands sold in trust by the U.S. for any tribe of Indians in said States or Territories: Provided. That nothing herein contained shall be construed to authorize any of said Indians or Indian tribes to sell. grant or leaseany of said lands. unless the same be made by treaty or convention entered into pursuant to the constitution of the U.S. nor shall anything herein contained be construed to give the States or Territories power to tax any of said lands except such as are ucLd in severalty by indiVidual members of said i as. SEC. 2. Abife:.That.whenever a crime shall be committed by an Indian in any State or Territory he shall be arrestedwherever he maybe found within the State or Territory and tried where ever the crime is alleged to have beencommitted. My object in offering this is simply to make the law general, applicable to other States and Territories and reservations as well as in Kansas.
Mr. STEVENS. That will abrogate every treaty with the Indians in the U.S.
Mr. HUBBARD, of Iowa. I rise to call the previous question on the amendment reported y the committee, which is as follows: Provided, That nothing herein containedshall be construed to authorise anyof said Indians or Indian tribes to sell. grant or leaseany of said lands unless the same be made by treaty or convention entered into pursuantto the constitutionof the U.S. Nor shall anything herein contained beconstruedto give the State of Kansas power to tax any of said lands. except such as are old in severalty by individual members of said Indian tribes., This is simplya restrictive provision upon the general object of the bill, which is to extend the State laws over these lands that are assied to the Indians in severalty, for which they old titles by certificate or by patent from the SecyInterior; lands which are held by them in the same manner that they are held by white men. I call the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the amendment was disagreed to.
Mr. wINDOM. I move to amen the bill by striking out the following at the end thereof: Also over all landssoldin trust by the U.S. for any tribe of Indians in said State. So that the bill will read as follows: That the laws of the State of Kansas. enactedand to be enacted. are hereby extended and shall have HI llforce and effecton all lands in said State reserved or granted to Indiana or Indian tribes which have been.orshall hereafterbe.allottedin severaltytosaid Indians or to the membersof said tubes. whether the samebe by treaty or othe.wise.
Mr. ROSS. I move to lay the bill and amendment on the table.
Skip Skip The question being taken, there were ayes 60 noes 30.Mr. WINDOM. Days. The yeas&nays were ordered. the question being taken on the motion to lay the bill and amendment on the table, it was decided in the affirmative yeas 69, nays 48, not voting 66; So the bill and amendment were laid on the table. Mr. INGERSOLL. mtRtv the bill was laid on the table; on the table. Agreed to. JACOB B. LEESE.
Mr. SLOAN. I desire to report back from the ComClaims the papers in the case of Jacob B. Leese. It is a case on which the Court of Claims has passed favorably. The committee have come to the conclusion that the claim ought not to ass; but inasmuch as Congress has passed a law authorizing all the judgments of the Court of Claims to be paid, it becomes unnecessary for the committee to make an adverse report. I therefore simplymove that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of these papers, and that they be laid upon the table. The motion was agreed to. EVENINC SESSION.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that the evening session of today be dispensed with. The motion was agreed to. EXPORT DUTY 0N COTTON.
Mr. STEVENS. I ask leave to introduce the following JtResolution: Resolvedbythe Senate and HoRep $0. (2/3rds of both Bonsese oncurring.) Thatthe following article he proposed to the Legislatures of the severalStates in an amendmenttot e Constitution of the U.S. which. when ratified by 3/4ths of said Legislatures shall be valid as a part of said Constitution: Congress shall have powerto lay a duty on cotton exported from the U.S. I move its consideration now.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. I object. POSTAGE STAMPS and STAMPED ENVELOPES.
The SPEAKER. The next business ine rder I demand the yeas and Dixon. Eckleil. ative to the sale of postage stamps and stamped envelopes, postponed some time since uiitil today. On t iat bill the Gentfrom Massachusetts {BIL ALLEY] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. ALLEY. I move thatit be recommitted to the comPostOffice and Post Bonds.
Skip Skip The motion was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to reconsider the vote by (which the bill was recommitted, and to lay that motion on the table. Agreed to. supine HOSPITALS.
The SPEAKER. The Senate has asked for a committee of conference on the disawreeing votes of the 2 Houses on House bill 0. 84, authorizing the sale of marine hospitals and of revenue Cutters.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move that the House appoint a committee of conference. The motion was agreed to. PAY of NAVY OFFICERS.
Mr. DAVIS, by unanimous consent, presented concurrent resolutions of the Legislature of NewYork, in regard to increase of pay of Navy officers; which were referred to the ComNavAffrs, and ordered to be printed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. W. J. McDONALn, its Chief Clerk, announced that the Senate had passed bills of the following titles, in which they requested the concurrence of the House: A bill (S.No.221) relating to lands granted to the State of Minnesotato aid in constructing railroads; and A bill (S.No.216) to provide for the transfer of the custody of the library of the Smith sonian Institution to the Library of Congress.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. WASHBURN of Massachusetts. asked and obtained leave of absence for ten days. AMENDMENT OF HOMESTEAD LAW.
Mr. WINDOM, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved.That the comPubLands be instructedto inquire into the expediency of soamending the homesteadact as to give to soldierswho have been permanently disabled in the service and to the widows or other legal representatives of deceased soldiers who have locate land under said act the title to lands so located by them without the delay of occupancyrequired by said not.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved that the house adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and thereupon (at 3 oclock and 35 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Taunsnn, March 29, 1866. The Chaplain, Rev. E. H. Git AY, offered the followin pra er: O Lor l T on hast been our refn e and our dwelling place in all generations. eforo the mountains were brought forth or Thoughadst created the earth and the world, Thou art from everlasting to everlasting God. We are the creatures of a day. We ook up unto Thee for a blessing now to rest upon us as we are about to engage in these solemn services. May we be suitably admenished, may ourminds be properly impressed with our frailty, with our igno rance of our future, not knowin what a day may bring forth; and may we tfius be better fitted from the solemnities of this hour for the discharge of all the duties and responsibilities resting upon us, and better prepared for Thy lory in the kingdom of heaven. Command hy blessing, we pray Thee, upon us, and enable as to look up unto Thee as that God who disposes of all events and of all beings as it l seemeth good in His sight; and when He has done with us here. may we be dismissed from our earth]; scene of labors with honor, and reared for a place oftrost and honor and g cry in heaven. Though Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. Senfrom NEWJERSEY.
Mr. SUMNER. I move that the SecyS be directed to communicate to the Governor of NewJersey a copy of the resolution in reference to the seat of Mr. Stockton. The motion was agreed to. DEATH OF SENATOR FOOT.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I see by the arrangements that the body of our deceased colleague is not to be brought to the Chamber until one oclock. I move therefore that the Senate take a recess until that hour. The motion was agreed to. i
The President protempore resumed th chair at one oclock.
Mr. WILSON, it was Ordered, That when the Senate adjourns today, it be to meeton Monday next. On motion of
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. TunasnAY, March 29, 1866. 8 The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borsrox. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. KANSAS RAILROAD and TELEGRAPH.
Mr. LOAN. I rise to a privileged question. I see that in the Globe of luesday, Senate bill No. 145, for a grant oflaud to the State of Kansas to aid in the construction of the Northern Kansas railroad and telegraph, is stated to have been referred to the comPostOffice. The reference of the bill, which was on my motion, was to the ComPacificRR. I ask that if the Journal be incorrect in this respect it may be corrected.
The SPEAKER. The Journal will be examined, and ifincorrect, will be corrected. DEATH OF SENATOR FOOT. A message from the Senate by Mr. Former, its Secretary, communicated the following extract from its Journal. which was read: In Saiurn or rm: U.S. Alarch 29, 1866. Resolved.(unanimously.) That the membersof the Senate. from a sinceredesireof showing every mark of respect to the mcmor of Hon. SOLOMONFoor. deceased, late a Senator mm the State of Vermont. will go into mourning for the residueof the present session.by the usual modeof wearing crape on the left arm. Itcmloed, (unanimously). That the Senate Will attend the funeral of the deceased from the Senate Chamber at oneoclockto dny and that the commit tco of arrangements, consisting of Messrs. Doolittle. Anraoiw. Howann. HENDRICKS, Susanna and BtrKALsw, superintend the same. Orderrd. That the Secretary communicate these proceedings to the HoRep.
Mr. MORRILL. Mr. Speaker, I learn that Senators who desire to submit remarks in relation to the life and character of the eminent Senfrom Vermont whose decease has just been communicated to this House, are not ready to do so today. The family of the deceased were desirous to reach home this week, and therefore the funeral ceremonies could not be deferred. I may also state that some of my colleagues are at the present moment absent; and I trust that at some early day the usual opportunity will be afforded for submitting such on ogies upon the character and public services of the deceased as members may desire to offer. I present the following resolutions: Rnolqed. That this House has heard with deep sensibility the announcement of the death of Hon. Sonmms Foor. a Senator in Congress from the State of Vermont. Hemloed. That as a testimonial of respect for the memory of the deceased the membersand otheersof tthhiirstyHoduasyes.Will weartheusual badgeof mourningfor Ilecolued, That the proceedingsof this House in relatiop to the death of Hon. Sonouox FO01. be communicated to the famil of the deceasedby the Clerk. liemloed. That this House will as a body repair to the Senate Chamber.to attend the funeral of the de cucpuoend. at the hour of one oclock p. In. this day and its return to the Hall, that the Speakerdeclare the House adJourned. ADJOURNMENT TILL MONDAY.
Mr. STEVENS. If the Gentfrom Ver mont will consent to postponethe question upon these resolutions for a few moments, I desire to submit a motion in regard to the adjournment.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to meet on Monday next. I do it because several committees have business accumulating on their hands. I learn from the gentleman behind me, chairman of the ComMilAffrs, [Mr. Sensx exd and others, that they are desirous to have these 2 days to perfect business for presentation to the House. a
Mr. GRINNELL. I move to amend so that the House will meet on Saturday for debate onl.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I hope the House will agree to the motion to adjourn over till Monday.
Mr. ltIORRILL. Most of the members of the ComWays&Means would not be able to attend even if there were a session of the House.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I hope the House will adjourn until Saturday so that we may have the usual session for speech making.
Mr. STEVENS. 1i eat of the House desire to adjourn over until Monday. I do not say it is necessary for the ComAppropriat, because we are through most of our business.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I renew the amendment that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to meet on Saturday next, when no business shall be in order but speech making. I do this in behalf of some of the new members who wish to be heard, and objection comes with ill grace from men who have had the same favor more than once during this session. I have no speech to make myself.
Mr. CONKLING. It requires unanimous consent for the House to meet on Saturday next as in ComWhole on the State of the Union for debate only, and I object. The House divided; and there were ayes 51, noes 50. Mr. THAYER demanded tellers.
Mr. STEVENS. I am informed that they have been waiting for an adjournment of 2 day s to repair the roof, which absolutely needs re air.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. If the Gentfrom NewYork will withdraw his objection to the latter art of the motion of the Gentfrom Ohio there will be no difficulty. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. ASHLEY of Ohio, and THAYER, were appointed. Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. y motion will not take a single man oil“ of any of the committees. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 60, noes 49. So the amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER. It can only be done by unanimous consent, as the gentlemans motion has been amended by the House.
Mr. STEVENS. I hope, then, the motion will be voted down.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I move to amend to adjourn till tomorrow, and that both Friday and Saturday be devoted to debate.
Mr. SCHENCK. If it be in order, I wish to propose an amendment, that all these Satur day speeches be handed in in manuscript and published without taking up any time. [Laughter.]
Mr. SCOFIELD. I move further to amend by saying that speeches made on all other days he treated in the same way. [Renewed laughter.]
Skip Skip Mr. Seorisnps motion was disagreed to. The question recurred on Mr. Srnvsxss motion, as amended. The House divided; and there were ayes 59, noes 45. So the motion was agreed to.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I move that the session of Saturday be limited to speeches as in ComWhole.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I move that the rules be suspended for that purpose.
The SPEAKER. That motion is not now in order. DEATH OF SENATOR FOOT Again. The question was then taken on Mr. Men RILLs resolutions, and they were unanimously adopted.
The SPEAKER. At one oclock, then, the House will proceed in a body to the Senate Chamber. ADJOURNMENT OVER Again.
Skip Skip Mr. ROGERS. I move to reconsider the vote by which the House agreed to adjourn over until Saturday. Mr. ANCONA. I move to lay the motion to reconsider upon the table. The House divided; and there were ayes 50, noes 63. So the House refused to lay the motion to reconsider upon the table. The question then recurred on the motion to reconsider.The House divided; and there were ayes 75, noes 30. So the motion was agreed to. The question then recurred on the amendment of Mr. Asnnnv, of Ohio, to adjourn until Saturday. Mr. JENCKES. I demand the yeas&nays. I want to see the chairman of the ComCommerce record his vote in favor of adjournment. The yeas&nays were not ordered. Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio, demanded tellers. Tellers were not ordered. The amendment was then disagreed to. The question recurred on the original motion, that when the House adjourns it adjourn to meet on Monday next. The motion was agreed to. Mr. STEVENS. mtRtv the House agreed to adjourn over till Monday, on the table. Agreed to.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. STEVENS asked and obtained leave of absence for his colleague, Mr. MILLER, for next wee. Mr. LATHAM asked and obtained leave of absence for his colleague, Mr. Hunnmn, for next week. Mr. MORRILL. I move that the House take a recess till one oclock. The motion was agreed to. OBSEQUIES OF SENATOR FOOT At one oclock the House reassembled, and the members, headed by the Speaker, the Clerk, and the Sergeant at Arms, proceeded to the Senate Chamber to attend the funeral services of Senator FOOT; and when they afterward returned to the Hall, The SPEAKER declared the House adjourned till Monday next.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Mayan, April 2, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY. The Journal of Thursday last was read and approved. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS.
The President protempore laid before the Senate a message from the POTUS, transmitting a memorial of the Legislature of Alabama, asking for an extension of the time for the completion of certain railroads in that State; which, on motion of
Mr. Gaines, was referred to the Committee (in Public Lands, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. LANE, of Indians, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred the petition of John H. Farquliar, praying thata pension may be ranted to Marl in.Stevens, widow of the late olin F. Stevens, of Grcciisburg, Indiana, who was murdered while in the discharge of his duty as a provost marshal, executing the enrollment act, submitted a report accompanied by a bill (S.No.237) granting a pension to Mrs. Martha Stevens. The bill was read and passed to a 2nd reading, and the report was ordered to be printed. e also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a petition of citizens of Cam bridge, Guernsey county, Ohio, praying that a pension may be granted to rs. Ainnrilla Cook, submitted a report accompanied ba bill (S.No.238) rantin a pension to It rs. Amarillo Cook. The bil was read and passed to a 2nd reading, and the report was or dered to be printed. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 264) granting a pension to Mrs. Altazera L. Willcox, of Chenango county, in the State of NewYork, reported it without amendment. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 265) granting a pension to John Hoffman, of Madison county, in the State of NewYork, reported it without amendment.
Mr. WILSON. The ComMilAffairs and the Militia, to whom was referre a bill (S.No.104) to promote military education, have directed me to report it back, and as the Senate has acted on the subject, I move the indefinite postponement of the bill. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WILSON, from the same committee, to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 420) to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territory, reported it without amendment. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred aJtResolution (H.R.No. 101) for the relief of certain officers of the Army, reported it without amendment. calso, from the same committee, to whom was referred a JtResolution (S.R.No. 51 respecting bounties to colored soldiers, reports it without amendment.
Mr. WILSON. The same committee, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.207) to provide for the equalization of bounties to soldiers in the late war of rebellion, have directed me to report a new draft for the bill. I move that it be printed, and recommitted to the committee. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WILSON. I am also directed by the ComMilAffrs , to whom the subject was referred, to report a JtResolution (S.R.No. 55) to provide for the representation of the U.S. at the International Health Congress. at Constanti nople. I believe it is important to act npon this resolution speedily, and as it is a small matte I ask to have it considered now.
The PRESIDENTprotem ore. It requires unanimous consent to considerthe resolution on the dafit is reported. Is there any objection 7
Mr. WILSON. If anybody desires to examine it carefully, let the report be printed, and I will call up the resolution in the morning.
The PRESIDENTpro temper c. The motion to proceed to the consideration of the resolution is withdrawn. The order to print will be entered if there be no objection.
Mr. VANWINKLE, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred the etition of Sarah Rodmnn, widow of Robert. Rod man, late a sailmaker in the Navy of the U.S., praying for arrears of pension, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, and that the petitioner have leave to withdraw her petition and other papers from the files of the Senate; which was a eed to.
Mr. WILLIAMS, from the ComClaims to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 215) for the benefit ofJohn W. Campbell, reported it without amendment.
Mr. FESSENDEN, from the ComFinance, to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 207) to amend an act entitled “An act to provide Ways&Means to support the government, ” approved March 3, 1865, reported it without. amendment.
Mr. NESMITH, from the ComMilAffrs , to whom was referred a bill (S.No.62) to amend an act entitled “An act granting lands to the State of Oregon to aid in the construction of a military road from Eugene City to the eastern boundary of said State, ” reported it without amendment. Mr. WADE, from the ComDistCol, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.214) to incorporate the General Hospital of the DistCol, reported it without amendment. WASHINGTON CANAL.
Mr. WADE. I will not ask to have that amendment considered now, but Imove that the bill and the amendments be printed, and that the bill be postponed to some early day. It has just been reported, and probably the Senate are not ready to act upon it now; but I shall call it up at a very early period. I give notice that I shall endeavor to call it up tomorrow, and I hope thzttSenators willbe ready to act upon it at that time. I now move that the bill and amendments be printed, and its further consideration postponed until tomor row. The motion was agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLOYD, its Chief Clerk, announced that the HoRep had agreed to the conference asked by the Senate on the disa reeing votes of the 2 Houses on the bill (H. t. No. 184) to authorize the sale of marine hospitals and revenue cutters, and had apxointed Messrs. E. B. wASHBURNE of Illinois. osmium Ecctssroiv of Ohio, and Janus HUMIHREY of NewYork, managers atghe same on its part. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the following bills, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: A bill (H.R.Nof406) to provide for the setzllement ofaccounts of certain public officers; an. A bill (H.R.No. 433) to amend an act entitled “An act to provide internalrevenue to support the Government, to pay interest on the public debt and for other purposes, ” approved une 30, 1864, and the act amendatory thereof, approved March 3, 1865. at; ROLLED BILL SIGNED. The message further announced that the Speaker of the HoRep had signed an enrolled JtResolution (H.R.No. 96) in relation to the public lands appertaining to the armory at Springfield; and it was there upon signed by The President protempore. E. W. EDDY.
Mr. NESMITH. The ComMilAffrs , to whom was referred the bill (H.R.No. 394) for the relief of the estate of E. W. Eddy, have directed me to“ report it back without amendment and recommend its passage. I ask for its immediate consideration. No objection bein made, the Senate. as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill. It proposes to require the proper accounting officers of the Treasury to allow to the estate of E. W. Eddy, late paymaster in the U.S. Army, a credit of $200,000, the amount of public funds in his hands as paymaster on board the steamer Brother Jona than, lost by the wreck of that steamer, on the 30th of July, 1865, off the coast of California. It is provided. however, that the final order for the allowance of the credit shall not be made until the whole subject connected with the alleged loss shall be fully investigated by the PayMGen, and he shall certify to the properDept of the Government that the loss of the vessel has been fully proved.
Mr. CLARK. I do not think that bill ought to be passed in the shape it is, to refer the matter of the loss to the Paymuster General. Wherever these cases have come before the ComClaims. we have investigated them ourselves, to see in the 1st instance and satisfy ourselves whether the loss was clearly proved; and I think it is rather an unsatisfactory way of legislation to turn it over to any officer of the government to allow him to do what shall seem to him meet after his exami nation. I think the examination ought to be made here. I hope the bill will not be pressed at this time.
Mr. NESMITH. I desire to state to the Senfrom NewHampshire that the proviso to which he refers struck me as an unnecessary provision in the bill; but it is a House bill, and the committee did not think proper to amendit. There is a report from the Asst PayMGen, Colonel Lamed, who convened a board of officers at SanFrancise o to make an investigation of the circumstances. They report that IaymasteiEddy went on board the steamer Brother Jonathan, with a safe containin $200,000 in Government funds, in July last; that the steamer was lost off the coast of California; that there were 18 passengers saved. The declaration of the pas sengers saved accompanies the papers, shou in that Major Eddy was lost and that no part of the wreck was recovered. The proof is of the most positive character that Major Eddy and the money were both lost. The case is established most clearly. Not a cent of the funds has ever been recovered.
Mr. CLARK. I have never been satisfied myself with an examination in the HoRep, not to say that they do not do it on their partsntisfactorily to them; but I have never felt that the Senate committee discharged its duty by taking the result of the investigations of a committee of the House; nor have I ever felt that they discharged their duty by taking the result of a commission of inquiry. I think we are bound to go beyond that, and not to take the judgment of other people, but to ascertain the fact ourselves and come to our own conclusions. lfthe Senfrom Oregon can say that the ComMilAffrs have examined this case upon the roofs, that the proofs are satisfactory, that they are entirely satisfied in their own judgment that the loss has been suffered so as to report that fact to the Senate, I am content; but 1 am not content without an examination beyond that of the HoRep.
Mr. NES; 1TH. [will say to the Senfrom NewHampshire that a full examination of the papers an reports was made in the ComMilAffr, and the committee unanimously came to the conclusion that it was a just case and that relief ought to be granted. The evidence adduced before the committee in the form of official reports is incontrovertible.
Mr. CLARK. of course I cannot know what papers were before the committee, but the reports of other bodies, committees and commissions, are not satisfactory to me.
Mr. NESMlTH. Before the committee was the report of the PayMGen and the report of the board of officers convened at SanFrancisco subsequent to the loss of the steamer, and the testimony of the officers who took the safe on board the steamer, and so on.
Mr. CLARK. I desire to know of the Senfrom Oregon whether the facts on which that commission acted went before the committee and were found by them, in their judgment, to be true.
Mr. NESMITH. The facts were before the committee the statements and depositions of the personswlio were brought before that mil v itar commission.
Mr. CLARK. I have no desire to impede the bill if it has been satisfactorily examined, but it is a very large amount, and seems to me should be very carefully looked into before it is passed. ,
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. examined the case carefully, and adopted the report of the House committee, deeming no further report necessary. The proof is clear, and it is impossible to make it any clearer.
Mr. HO) E. The feature in this bill that attracted in attention was that it proposed to allow a cre it of avery large amount, not upon the ground that Congress was satisfied that the otheer was entitled to it, but it refers the claim to another officer of the Government, and proposes to allow the credit when he becomes satised that it is due. If the ComMilAffairs have seen the testimony which establishes this loss, and have it here, there is no objection to Congress saying absolutely that the credit ought to be allowed; but I think there is always an objection in the way of congress referring these matters to be settled after the passage of the law by any other Officer of the Government. Before we authorize any such credit to be allowed we ought to be satislied ourselves. The bill ought to be put upon that footing.
Mr. NESMITH. I will state to the Senfrom Wisconsin that that struck me as an unnecessary part of the bill, as surplnsage. The reports and testimony being so conclusive that the money was lost, and that the officer was lost at the same time, it did seem to me thore was no necessity for a provision of that kind, that the account should be readjusted by the PayMGen. I suppose the House incorporated that provision in the bill thinking it might afford some additional guarantee or security to the Government. It can possibly furnish none. The facts, as I stated, are proved conclusively. There is no possibility of the money ever having been recovered, and there is no possibility that the officer ese aped from the wreck. It is a mere bill for the relief of his estate.
Mr. HOWE. Allow me to inquire if the military commission which examined this case report the testimony which was laid before them? Do they report the testimony on which the vadjudicated 7 (
Mr. NESMITH. They report the testimony of several officers who saw the money counted and put in the safe and taken on board the vessel. In addition to that is the protest signed by 18 passengers who ese aped in small boats, and they state positively that Major Eddy did not ese a e.
Mr. CLA K. As the bill is only reported this morning, ifthe Senator will allow it to lie over until we can look into the papers, I think it will be better.
Mr. NESMITH. Very well; but if the bill goes over I move that the report of the House committee be printed with the bill. The motion was agreed to. BILL INTRODUCED.
Mr. VANWINKLE asked, and by unan imous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.239) for the classification and grad uation of invalid pensions; which was read twice by its title, referred to the ComPensions, and ordered to be printed. OATH OF OFFICE.
Mr. SUMNER. I desire to introduce a resolution, and as it is in my handwriting, with the permission of the Chair I will read it my self and save the Secretary the trouble: R Resolved. That the SecyTreasury and the PostMGenl be requestedto report to the Senate, so far as the records of their respectiveDepts will allow, whether at any time since the report.of Decemberlast any personshave been permitted to enter upon the duties of office. an to receive the salary taking or emolumentsthereof.without the oath prescribedby act of Congress:or. if the have taken it. adding thereto explanations; or i! they have altered the oath. than the they alterations havemade;and if such thingshave beendone. then to report the names of such persons and the oath they have taken and the reasonsfor allowing thesame. I ask the unanimous consent of the Senate to consider this resolution now.
The President protempers. Objection being made, the resolution hes over. l l nousn BILLS nnrnlmnn. The following bills from the HoRep were severally read twice by their titles, and referred as indicated below: A bill (H.R.No. 416) for the benefit of certain half breeds and mixed bloods of the Win nebago tribe of Indians to the ComIndAffrs. A bill (H.R.No. 433) to amend an act entitled “ An act to provide internalrevenue to support the Government, to pay interest on the ab ic debt, and for other purposes, ” aproved um: 30, 1864, and the act amendntoryt iereof, approved March 8, 1865 to the ComFinance. A bill (H.R.No. 406) to provide for the settlement of accounts of certain public officers to the ComMilAffrs . A bill (H.R.No. 281) to amend the postal laws to the ComPostOffices. A JtResolution (H.R.No. 103) to refer the etition of Benjamin Holliday to the Court of laims to the ComClaims. HYDROGRAPHIC OFFICE.
Mr. GRIMES. I move that the Senate take up Senate bill No. 174. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.174) to establish a hydrographic office in the Navy Dept. It proposes to attach a hydrographic Office to the Bureau of Navigation in the Navy Dept for the improvement of the means for navigating safely the vessels of the Navy and of the mercantile marine, by providing, under the authority of the SecyNav, accurate and ycheap nautical charts, sailing rections, navigators, and manuals of instructions, for the use of all vessels of the U.S and for the benefit and use of navigators generally. It also authorizes the SecyNavy to cause to be prepared at the hydro graphic othee attached to the Bureau of Navigation in the Navy Dept, maps, charts, and nautical books relating to and required in navigation, and to publish and furnish them to navigators at the cost of printing and paper, and to purchase the lates and copyrights of such existing maps, c arts, navigators, sailing directions, and instructions as he may consider necessary, and when he may deem it expedient to do so, and under such rules, regulations and instructions as hemay prescribe. The moneys which may be received from the sale of all such maps, charts, and nautical books are to be returned by the SecyNavy into the Treasury of the U.S. to be used in the further preparation and publicationof mnps, charts, navigators, sailing directions, and instructions for the use of seamen, and to be sold at the rates set forth in this bill; and the bill makes an appropriation for the objects recited in it.
Mr. GRIMES. I move to fill the blank in the 8th line of the 3rd section with the words “ 15,000” as the amount to be appropriated for the objects of the bill. The amendment was agreed to.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amend ed, and the amendment was concurred in. The bill was orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. SUPREME COURT REPORTS. On motion of
Mr. STEWART, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.186) amendatory of an act to provide for the reports of decisions of the SCOTUS which had been reported from the ComJudiciary with an amendment to strike out all of the original bill after the enacting clause, in the following words: That so much of the proviso to the act of August 29.18, entitled "An act to provide for thereports of decisionsof the SCOTUS " as providesthat the compensation of $1.3Qtl given by thesaid not to the reporter of the said (lecisionsshal not be paid unless the reporter shall print and publish. The committee 1 Branch lish the decisionsof said court madeduring the time he shall not assuch reporter within 6 monthsalter the decision shall be made, is hereby amendedso u to allow him 8 month: insteadof 6 and to insert in lieu thereof the following: That the relporterof the decisionsof the SCOTUS shall hereafter be allowed the terni ef 8 months for the publication of his reports. instead of am, as provided by the act of August 29.1842. The amendment was agreed to.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amend ed, and the amendment was concurred in. The bill was orderengross for a 3rd reading, was read the 3rd time, and passed. PILOT KNOB and HELENA RAILROAD.
Mr. BROWN. I move to take up for consideration Senate bill No. 87, making a grant of lands in alternate sections to aid in the construction and extension of the Iron Mountain railroad from Pilot Knob, in the state of missonri, to Helena, in Arkansas. The motion was agreed to; and the bill was considered as in ComWhole. The 1st amendment reported by the comPubLands was in section one, line 24, after the word “that” to insert “all mineral lands except those containing coal and iron, and;” so that the clause will read: and provided further, That all mineral lands, except! osecontaining coal and iron and any lands heretofore reserved to the U.S. by any act. of Congress or in any other manner by competent authority. for the purpose of aiding in any object of internal improvement or for any other purposewhat ever, be and the samearc. reserved to t 9 U.S. from the operation of this act. The amendment was agreed to. The next amendmentwas in section 2, line 24, after the word “that” to insert “all mineral lands except those containin eoa(ll and iron, and, ” so that the clause will rea: and prooiddfurlher, That all mineral lands. except those containing coal and iron and any lands heretofore reserved to the U.S. by any act of Congress or in any other manner by competent authority. for the purpose of nidin In any ObJCClof internal improvement, or fornny at orpurposewhat ever, be and the same are. reserved to the U.S. from the operation of this act. exooptso far go it may be found necessaryto locate the routesof sald railway through thesame.in which casethe right of way only shall begranted.subjectto the approval of the POTUS The amendment was agreed to.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendments were concurred in. The bill was orderengross for a 3rd reading, was read the 3rd time, and passed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM rnn nousn. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLOYD, its Chief Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed the bill of the Senate (S.No.82) granting a pension to Sarah Fitzgibbon, with an amendment, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed, without amendment, the following bills of the Senate: A bill (S.No.165) more effectually to provide for the punishment ofcertain crimes against the U.S.; and Abill (S.No.216) to provide for the transfer of the custody of the library of the Smith sonian Institution to the Library of Congress. REAR ADMIRAL PAULDING.
Mr. SUMNER. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the Senate JtResolution No. 63. The motion was agreed to; and the JtResolution (S.R.No. 53) authorizing Rear Admiral H. Pauldin to accept a decoration from the King of Itagly was read the 2nd time and considered as in ComWhole. It is a permission to Rear Admiral H. Paulding, of the Navy, to accepts decoration of the equestrian order of Saint Maurice. which has been tendered to him by the King of ltaly as a reward for assistance rendered to the ltalinn frigate redItsha when she got ashore near Longiigg o The JtResolution was reported to the senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. nisrnier surname COURT. On motion of
Mr. WADE. I wish the Senate to understand what this amendment is. It is a matter of a good deal of importance, and I see that the Senate are not attending particularly to it. The judges of this court now receive $3,000 perannum for their services.
Mr. JOHNSON. All receive the same, I thin.
Mr. CLARK. Only where he goes away without paving.
Mr. JUHINSON. But he may O away having paid and then be charged will not having paid; such things have occurred. Iwill not make any presumption to embrace members of Congress, for they always pay, and they go away without anything to attach [laughter] unless they happen to lave houses here, as is the case with some. It maysubject people to a good deal of inconvenience. I do not know (I have no experience on the subject) that the absence of the power has been the cause of any material loss to the residents of the District; I submit, therefore, to the Senator that perhaps he had better consider the question whether that particular provision of the bill should not be so guarded as to protect the citizon against improperproceedings of this kind.
Mr. WADE. I believe it is very well guarded. Whoever wishes to get out an attachment for the property of another person must file his own affidavit, and in addition to that must prove the facts by other independent testimony. This, I believe, is morea restriction on the issue of nttachments than exists in most of the States. I think the bill in that particular is unusually well guarded.
Mr. JOHNSON. Permit me to ask the Senator whether there is any provision for giving notice in the public prints of the attachment.
Mr. WADE. No. It is not a forei at tachment. It does not seize property in the absence of the party, and therefore that notice is not required. As to what the Senator has remarked in rerd to the admiralty jurisdiction of the court, Insaid that I believed they had exercised that jurisdiction which this bill expressly gives, but they had exercised it under a bill that did not expressly give it. They took it by implication., It was thought that that matter had better be made positive and certain, and therefore this bill gives the jurisdiction expressly. I do not know that there is any ground for any considerable doubt as to the authorityof the court to exercisejurisdiction in maritime cases, where they have done it; but that jurisdiction is not now expressly given by law, and therefore it might be supposed that there was some reason for making a question on that point. This bill gives it expressly. I think it well to do so as we are passing a bill on the subject. The main revisions of the bill relate to the practice of the court, and were got up under the authority of the court by their clerk, I believe. It is their desire that the practice should be altered as this bill proposes to alter it. It is not altered very materially from what it is now, but in some particulars the court thought it would be convenient to have modifications made. The bill does not touch the rights of anybody, and does not alter the law, materially, upon any subject. It alters the manner of process, and of seizing the property of a person about to abse ond to the injury of his creditor, when affidavit is made and propertestimony given. In such cases the paintitf can attach the property; but if the defendant sees fit to traverse the allegations he may do so, and have the question of fact tried before the judges of the court, notice being given. Then, i the charge is a groundless one, it will be dismissed by ajudge at chambers. I think the bill is very cautiously drawn, and is very proper. bill]
Mr. JOHNSON. I have no objectiontothe i.
Mr. WADE. Several Senators about me do not seem to understand what this amendment is. it is to increase the salary of the chief justice of the supreme court of the DistCol $1,5 0, and of the associate justices $1,000, so that hereafter the chief justice will receive $4 500, and the associatejustices $4,000. That is all there is in the section.
Skip Skip The question being taken by eas&nays, resulted ycas 24, nays 5; ABSENT 19. So the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HARRIS. I did not see this billbefore it came up for consideration today, but I think the 5th section is very objectionable. It authorizes the issuing of an attachment by the clerk of the courta thing which I think scarcely allowable. An attachment is a pretty serious sort of thing. It seizes a mans propertyin advance. It isa preliminary execution. It takes a mans property out of his possession before he has an o portuuity to be board. This 5th section provides that a mans property may be seized upon a warrant to be issued by the clerk of the court a thingI never heard of before. There is no limit as to the amount. A mans store may be shut up at once without any previous knowledge or notice, upon a process issued by the clerk, without any authority or warrant from the judge. I do not think that. will do. It is said that the man who applies for an attachment must give security to cover all the damage that may be sustained by the defendant, but the amount and character of that SOCurity are not prescribed. I think this provision will be liable to very great abuse. It is one of the highest offices ofajudicial tribunal to issue an attachment in advance of atrial, and the case ought to be submitted to some judicial officer before that warrant goes. It never was heard of before that a clerk of a court was authorized to issue an attachment like that.
Mr. MORRILL. My honorable friend is greatly mistaken in supposing that the issuing of a writ of attachment in this way was never heard of before in the jurisprudence of this country.
Mr. HARRIS. I have never known of a provision to seize a mans property without ctter care than this.
Mr. MORRILL. Why, Mr. President, it is ordinary, it is universal. There is not a State in NewEngland where it is not universal, where it is not ordinary. It is the ordinary course of proceedinrs. A man desires to sue out a writ of attachment; he never sees the judge; he never applies to the judge; the only thing he is bound to do in my State, is to state on the back of the writ that he has reason to believe, and does believe, that. the party is about to absent himself, and then he not only takes his property but he takes the man himself; he arrests him. He wants to hold him for the security of his debt. This recess of attachment in all the NewEngland States is the ordinar proceeding for the collection of a debt, an it issues precisely like a summons in every State of NewEngland; I believe there is not an exception; and it issues without the guarantee contained in this bill; it issues as a matter of course. A plaintiff having a debt goes to a law er; the lawyer has ablan of the court signs by the clerk; the court is 50 miles away; the judge is 50 miles away; the lawyer issues that writ, and on the face of the writ it commands the otheer to l attach the party.
Mr. VANWINKLE. Permit me to ask the Senator whether a bond is required in such a case.
Mr. MORRILL. No bond of any description.
Mr. VANWINKLE. Certainly it is an anomaly that no bond should he required to indemnify the party.
Mr. MORRI L. No, it is not anomalous; it is usual, general and universal. That is the very character of the writ of attachment. The remedy, on the other hand, which the defendant has is, 1st, to pay the debt; and, 2nd, to give security that the property shall be i I fortheoming, to give what we call a receipt to t the officer by some resonsible party that the property shall be fort looming on judgment. he law is satisfied and the creditor is satis Y tied, and that is all that is ever exacted, and that is the whol onrse of judicial proceedings in all the NewEngland States. know that that is not common in NewYork and not common to this part of the country, but I can as sure my honorable friend that the whole ju dicial experience in NewEngland is that no wrong ever comes from it, that no oppression and no abuse ever come from it. But to meet the objections that might well be anticipated in a community where they were not accus tomed to it, it will be seen that this bill proceeds with very eat caution. In the 1st place, it does not a low the attachment to issue at all until an affidavit is made and that affida vit is corroborated by testimony. It is to proceed upon the assumption of evidence of u just debt. Then it is not to go out unless, in the 1st place, the defendant is a non-resident of the Bistrict and has property here, or, in the 2nd place. he is attempting to evade the collection of his debt, or, in the 3rd place, he is about to move and take his property be yond the jurisdiction. I submit, therefore, that if in any instance the attachment is allowable, as on mesne process for the securit of debt or for the collection of debt, l can ardly conceive that it can be better guarded than it is in this bill.
Mr. HARRIS. I submit to the chairman of the committee whether he ought not to allay such apprehensions as those I indul e, even though it. may be that they are unounded. Thisquestion of an attachment should be submitted to a judge to pass upon the sufficiency of the affidavit and the sufficiency of the security before such a process is issued to take a mans property out of his hands. Here are 4 judges in the District. I submit it to the Senator himself, would it not be better to provide that before such process as this should go, which is very serious in its consequences, the case should be submitted to ajndgeto approve of the security, to see that it is sutheient, to see that a sufficient case is made out by the affida vit, and then if he will indorse the warrant, let it 0; but it seems to me, the clerk of the court is not the properofficer tojudge of such a serious question as this.
Mr. MORRILL. If my friend will allow me, I will refer him to the proviso in this section and see whether that does not answer his objection. If a party proceeds according to this bill and states these facts, and the defendant chooses to arrest the proceedings, all he has got to do is to file a counter atlidavit and then appeal to the judge and invoke the judgment of the judge whether he stands within the conditions contemplated in this bill. If he does not, the writ is to be quashed and the attachment is 06. That proviso, it seems to me, as a matter of precaution, meets any difficulty that might be contemplated by the suggestions of the honorable Senator.
Mr. HARRIS. An amendment may not be exactly appropriate. but I will move to strike out the word “without, ” in the 3rd line of this 5th section, and toinsert the word “upon;” no that the warrant shall not be issued except upon the authority of the judge. The section will then read: That writs of attachment and garnishinents shall he issued by the clerk of the supreme court of the District. upon any authority or warrant from any judge oriustice, dec.
Mr. CLARK. I think the apprehensions of the Senfrom NewYork are in a great measure groundless. I think the experience of the States where they have had writs of attachment shows thnt thercis no well grounded objection to the billas it stands. In the State of NewHampshire, from time immemorial, a man could go to an attorney of the court, sue out his writ, have it filled out for the purpose of attaching property, take it to the sheriff, and have the property attached to a reasonable amount to secure his debt, without asking the clerk, the judge, or anybody else, and such is the law now. No dama e ever comes from it.
Mr. HENDERSON. as not the defendant the right to sue in case of damage to his propert?
Mr. CLARK. Not unless the plaintiff has done it unreasonably, and for the purpose of injury and mise hief. If he has done it in that way, for the purpose of oppressing the defendant, for injury and mise hief, with malice, of course an action would lie; but if he has done it for the purpose of securinghis debt, no action lies against him. There are various ways in which a defendant can relieve his property from attachment, as where the officer uttaelies uquau tity of personal property, sayn store of goods, and the defendant gets some responsible parties to say “ We will take that property and be responsible, ” precisely the same as giving a bond.
Mr. CLARK. We give bail for persons, not property. In case of the attachment of aperson wc have the same process that this bill ves. A person may make an affidavit on the ack of the writ ifhe apprehends that his debtor is going without the jurisdiction, and may ar rest him without going to a judge and then the law provides for this same method of examination before a justice of the peace or 2 jus tices of the peace, and setting him at liberty if he is not goitn7 without the jurisdiction. hut we do not find that that works any mise hief, and it is oftentimes the means of securing a debt that ought to be paid. I apprehend that the reason suggested by the Senfrom Maryland why this s lOUltI not be the law here, to wit, that the people here are a movable people, is one of the very reasons why it should be the law. Here, for instance, is a man who has established himself in Xiis District; he has a stock of goods, and, he has got those goods packed up and is about to move out of the district; should you notattaeh those goods? Should you not have some lien upon them? The very fact that these people are moving about from place to place is a good reason why the attachment should issue. It becomes a lien upon the goods. I think there can be no objection to the bill as it stands. I do not believe the Senfrom NewYork need have any a prehension from it.
The PRESIDENT protempore. The question is on the amendment of the Senfrom NewYork to strike out the word “ without, ” in the 3rd line of the 5th section, and to insert the word “11 on." The amendment. was rejected.
Mr. HENDERSON. I think all that the Senfrom NewYork desires to accomplish can be accomplished by inserting in the 18th line of the 5th section, after the word “suretics, ” the words “to be approved by the clerk;" so that it will read: and shall also file his [the plaintiffs] undertaking. with sufficientsurety, or sureties, to be approved by the clerk. to make good all costs and amass which the defendant may sustain by reason of the wrongful suing out of the attachment.
Mr. WADE. There is no objection to that, though I suppose the section means exactly the same thing now.
Mr. HENDERSON. It does not require that there shall be an approval of the bond by anyone, and I suppose the plaintiff would be left to file any sort of a bond that he in his own judgment and discretion might regard as good. owever, as there is no objection to the amendment, 1 will say no more about it. hllll. wADE. There is no objection to it at a The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HENDERSON. I should like to ask the Senator who has charge of this bill whether an action can he brought upon the bond. in his judgment, under the bill, in case of a dissolution of the attachment; whether the question as to the malaftdes of the plaintiff in prosecuting the suit is open in a suit upon the bond, and can be inquires into, or whether the failure of the plaintiffs suit is of itself sufficient to authorize a suit upon the attachment. bond.
Mr. WADE. suppose it is not a question of good faith. If the writ was honestly sued out, and damage should accrue to the defendantin consequence of its not being well founded I suppose that damages could be recovered against him whether he really intended an in jury or not. I do not think it involves any question of bad faith.
Mr. JOHNSON. The bond is to indemnify against all cause of damage.
Mr. WADE. It is to indemnify the defendant in this proceeding if it is imprudently or inenutiously taken out. It is to secure him at all events for any damage he may be put to in consequence of this proceeding, if he suffers nny. That is my opinion about it.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross for a 3rd reading, and was read the 3rd time and passed. On motion of
Mr. WADE, the title of the bill was amended by adding the words, “and for other purposes;” so that it will read: A bill to define more clearly the jurisdiction and powersof the supremecourtotthe DistCol, and for other purposes. DISTRICT BUSINESS.
Mr. MORRILL. I desire to ask the Senate to assign a day fothe consideration of business pertaining to the DistCol. There are a great many bills on the docket relutingto the District, and the affairs of the District have occupied but very little of the time of the Senate at this session. With the indul gence of the Senate. therefore, I move that tomorrow at one oclock be assigned for the consideration of business relating to the District The motion wusagreed to. COMMITTEE SERVICE.
Mr. BROWN. I move that The President protempore of the Senate be authorized to till the vacancy on the ComPubBldg and Grounds, occasioned by the death of Senator Four. The motion was agreed to. REORGANIZATION of JUDICIARP. On motion of
Mr. HARRIS, the Senate, ” in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.103) to reorganize the judiciary of the U.S. The ComJudiciary reported the bill with several amendments. The 1st amendment of the committee was in section one, line 3, to strike out the word “July” and insert “September;" so as to read: That on and after the 1stday of September.1866, thgegirzuitcourts of the U.S shall be ubol is, c. The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was in section one, line 14, after the word “judge, ” to insert, “may be assigned by the justice of theSupreme Court for the circuit to hold a court in district in said circuit or.”
Mr. HARRIS. There is a clerical omission of a word in that amendment. The word “any” should be inserted before the word “ district" in the 15th line, so that it will read: Any district judge may be assigned bi the insticl of the SpprpmgCourt for the circuit to old a court 1 “I my dutnct did and circuit, or may hold. to. 1112 Tim.
Mr. HOWE. If agreeable to the Senfrom NewYork, I wish he would consent to let the vote on the amendment in lines ten and 11 of this section be postponed. I have a suggestion to make about it, but I have not my memoranda here now.
Mr. HARRIS. Let it be suspended for the present.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Thatamendment will be passed over for the present and the remaining amendments to this section will be regarded as agreed to. The next amendment was to insert the following as a new section at this point: SEC.12. Abife:.That to render an appeal under the proVisionsof the iorogoing section effectunl for any purpose.a bond shall be executed on behalf of the appellant. by at leastone sufficient surely.to the clfect that the appellantwill pay all costsand damageswhich maybe awardedagainst Sim on the appeal. not exceeding If the apeal be from a judgment or decree directing the payment of money.it shall not stay the exccution of the judgment or decree unless a bond With suro as aforesaid shall be executed to the cticct that the judgment or decree appealed from or any part thereof, be ntiirmed or the appeal be dismissed, the appellant will paythe amount directed to be paid by the judgment or decree or the part thereof as to which the judgment or decreesliu lbo afliryned. The bonds prescribed by this section may he in one in strument or several. at the option of the appellant; such bonds shall be of no ctieci unless they shall be accompanied by the ntiidavit of the surety or sure ties, showing that he or they are worth double the amount specified therein over and above all debts and liabilities and such bond and nflidnvits are filed with the clerk with whom the judgment or decree appealed from was entered. In other casesn.stay of execution may be granted upon such terms as any judge of the court may prescribe.
Mr. HARRIS. desire to amend that section a little before it is voted on. Alter the word “ bond” in line 3 I move to insert “in the penalty of $5;" and after the word “ bond" in line 9to insert “ ina penalty of double the amount of such Judgment or de cree.” The amendments to the amendment were agreed to.
Mr. HOWE. Is the question now upon adopting the 12th section as amended?
the PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment of the committee as amended on the motion of the Senfrom NewYork.
Mr. HOWE. I had some memorandu of amendments which were suggested to me by a member of the bar from our State and they seemed to me to be very reasonable. Isup posed they were with the chairman of the committee, but he has sent for them and cannot find them.
Mr. HARRIS. Let me suggest to the Senfrom Wisconsin that he allow us to go through the bill now and he can offer those amendments afterward in the Senate.
Mr. HOWE. But there was one of the amendments which I think should come in here, providing fOr a stay of proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr. CLARK. That can be offered in the Senate.
Mr. HOWE. Very well. The amendment as amended was agreed to. The next amendment was to insert as a new section at this point the following: Sec. 13. Abife: Thating in any circuit court on the said lst deaaso0sfpSeenpd tember upon appeal or writ of error shall O transferred to the proper court of appeals and shall be heard and determinedbysuch court according to the proviswns 01this act. The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was in section (ten) 14, to strike out the word “circuit” before “courts” in line 2, and to strike out the words “at the 1st session thereof” after the word “shall” in line 2; in line 4 to strike out the words “time and ” before “inanner;" in line 4, to strike out “making” and insert “taking, ” in lines 5 and 6, to strike out the words “and may prescribe the terms and conditions upon which thesame may b“eFomrade;" and at the end of the section to ad: this purpose special terms of said courts of a peals sha I be held in the several circuits at t ie places hereinaftermentioned, on the 1st Tuesday of September, 1866;" so as to make the section read: SEC. [10]14.Abife: That the said courts of appeal shrill. Respectively adopt such rules as they may deemproper to regulate the manner of taking such up cals. They may also establish such other rules as they may deem necessaryfor the regulation of the practice of their respective courts and may from time to time alter an revise the same. For this purpose special terms of said courtsof appeearelsinsahftaollr bmeheen ldtioinnethde.osnoVtheerafilcrisrtenTiutse, sadtathyeo places September. 1866
Mr. HOWE. Let me inquire of the Senfrom NewYork if it is the intention of the bill to restrict the power of these courts in making rules to this particular time.
Mr. HARRIS.No. The Senator will no t“ice in the 8th and 9th lines the words and may from time to time alter and revise the same." The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was in section ( 11 ) 15 to strike out all after the enacting clause of the section, in the following words: That the final judgment of a district court in spy ccrniimt cine aulrtacotfioanppmeaalysbuepornevaiwewritedofby the proper cir error. such writ may be allowed by any judge of the circuit court of appeals. but such writ of error shall not operateas a stay of proceedings unlessitisso orderedbytho judse who allowed the same and in lieu thereof, to insert: That an appeal maybe taken from the final judgment ofa. district court in anycriminal action to the proper court of appealswithin 90 days after the entryof such judgment. But such appeal shall not operate as n sta of proceeding, unlessit is so ordered by ajudge of the court. The judgment or decisipn upon such appeal shall be remitted to the district court to be enforcedaccordingto law.
Mr. HOWE. Let me suggest to the Senfrom NewYork if it won d not be proper to make an amendment there, in the 9th line perhaps, so as to insert after the word “ap peal ” the words “except in capital cases.”
Mr. HARRIS. That is aquestion that has been discussed somewhat or myself I have no choice about it. There is no doubt the judgment would he stayed if there was any sort ofHru.esHtiOonWaEb.out it. The right of appeal is given absolutely bylthe section, butif the judge should take it into is head that the appeal was friv olous, he mightnot ordera stay of proceedings.
Mr. HARRIS;1 If the man was executed, the a pal would not do him any Good. MriuHOWE. That is very cleaii.
Mr. JOHNSON. The appeal, as I understand it, is given absolutely, and if the punishment is death, it certainly ought not to be in the power of the judge to say whether the appeal should supersede the execution of that sentence or not. Would you grant an appeal and permit a judge to have the man hung in the mean time? Is that right?
Mr. HARRIS. It is done; a writ of error is often allowed without a.stay.
Mr. JOHNSON. It seems to me it would be better to deny the right of appeal altogether than to tell a party who is under sentence of death, “ You may appeal. but you may be hung in the mean time unless the judge interpose s.
Mr. HARRIS. It may be a question wor thy of consideration whether a.man sentenced to execution should in all cases be allowed an apeal and then a stay.
Mr. JOHNSON. But that strikes at the bill altogether. There is no appeal, now, in cases of that sort in the U.S. courts, but it always seemed to me to be right that there should be an appeal in cases of that description. It cannot make much difference to the public whether the man is hung today or hung 6 months hence. The case can always be disposed of in that time. But if you permit the bill to stand as it is, where the judge thinks the man ought to be hung, he will not interfere, and when the man is hung the appeal falls as a matter of course. I concur with the Senfrom Wisconsin in thinking an exception ought to be made of capital cases.
Mr. HARRIS. The questionis this. whether in all capital cases the part convicted shall have an appeal as a matter of right to operate as a stay of proceedings, perhaps for a year, for this court is to sit but once a year, without submittin the question to a court or ajudge whether there is any probable cause for such stay. If the amendment suggested be adopted, that will be its effect. On the other hand, if the section is left as it is. unless the party convicted satisfies some one of 5 or 6 judges that there ought to be a stay of proceedings he may be executed before he can have the case heard on appeal. That is the way it stands. anyone of live or 6 judges, whatever number there may be in the circuit, may stay proceedin s. It a man cannot satisfy anyone of them t iat there ought to be a stay, I think his chances very poor on the appeal.
Mr. JOHNSON. It seems to me the properway to avoid that would be to make the up eal dependent on its allowance by some onejuldge.
Mr. HENDERSON. That is not the case here.
Mr. JOHNSON. I know it is not the case here. The case here is one in which we give the appeal absolutcly, and then we do notpro vide against what may happen very often, that amen may be hung pening the appeal. If it be improper to give the appeal absolutely, the propermode to guard against the mise hief that may result from a provision of that description would be to make the appeal itself dependent on the allowance of the judge in ca ital cases.
Mr. TRUMBULL. This bill is in precise accordance with the practice in the State of Illinois. We allow appeals in criminal cases in that State; but in order to obtain a suspension of the judgment of the court, the party appealing must satisfy some justice of) the supreme court that he has reasonable cause for the appeal, and then he indorses on the record an order to stay proceedings. That is the practice in my State. In all capital cases where the dayis fixed for the execution, it is always some day more or less remote from the day of entering the judgment. In the mean time the party, if he desires to take his case to the supreme court, obtains a copy of the record and presents it to some judge of the supreme court. If the judge thinks there is probable ground for taking the appeal, he in orses on it an order staying proceedings. That is the precise proceedingherc. However, lthink if the Senfrom NewYork will look at the language he will see that it is not quite clear but ! that it would require this order to be made by the judge of the district court who tried the case. will read the section: That an appeal maybe taken from the final judgment of a district court in an ycriminal action to the proper court ot a peniswithin 90 days after the entry of such 1“ gment. But such appeal shall not obpyerateasa stay of procoeding unlessitis soordered the Judge of the court. What court? A judge of the court of appeals I suppose is meant. If that language were inserted I think it would be precisely right, for it seems to me that the result of allowing an appeal to Operate as a superseded r in every capital ease might be to postpone the execution in every case for a year, because thil court of appeals will sit but once a year.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Perhaps there may be no harm; but the objection to it is that it is not usualI know it is not in my State; I do not know how it may be in others to fix so remote a day for the execution of persons charged with capital offenses. Of course after conViction they would not be out onbail, but they are confined in the county jails, and they are not, perhaps, the best places for the confinement of arties. The result would be in every capita case, the party would take his appeal and would be confined there for a year or more. If it is thought advisable by a general law to declare that no capital execution shall take place within a year, be it so; but it seems to me this whole thing being aninnovation, no appeal now being allowed at all, it is taking quite a step in a vance to allow a stay of proceedings in those cases where any judge may be found who will indorse upon the record that thereis probable causelor the ap cal. Thatcer tainly extends to the convicte party a privilege which he did not have before, and I think it is going far enough to begin with. If we find it does not operate well we may extend the time afterward.
Mr. HARRIS. In accordance with the suggestion oi the Senfrom Illinois I move to amend the amendment by inserting the word “appellant” before “court” in the 10th line. he amendment to the amendment wal agreed to.
Mr. HOWE. I do not propose to move an amendment here against the judgment of the committee which reports this bill. One reason is because I am not exactly reputed to decide what terms I would conch teamendment in, but I do not see the propriety of giving to all defendants in criminn cases absolutely a right of appeal, and yet making it discretionary with the judge whether the appeal shall be of an use to him, as it certainly is discretionary with the judge if the defendant is sentenced to death and may be executed before the appeal can be tried. If this section did what the Senfrom Maryland suggests, made the right of appeal itself to depend upon the discretion of the appellate court, or ajudge of the appellate court, then it would be sensible, and the 2 provisions would be in harmony with each other. But on the question of appeal the judge has no discretion whatever. On the question whether the appeal shall be of any benefit to the do fendant the ud c has full discretion.
Mr. TRUldBULL. I think the Senfrom Wisconsin can readily conceive of cases, even capital cases, where a party could have the benefit of appeal without a supersedeas. It will often happen that convictions take place throughout the U.S. within a few days of the assembling of the court of appeals, some times cases where the party could have his appeal tried before the day fixed for execution. In all other cases, not capital, the court could take up the case and try it at any time while the party was undergoing sentence. ME. HOV Undoubtedly in many cases the judge would order a stay of proeeedings. It does not follow, if this amendment is not made, that every defendant who is sentenced to death and takes an apeal will he hung before his appeal is tried. Fconcede that very readily; but whether the statute should he so framed as to make it possible that my defendant might be put to death pending an ven to him bylaw from one court to an appeal, is the question. That will be the etfect of the law if the section is passed as it is reported. I do not think such a law ought to b. but on the statute book. It may never operate arshly in any given case, but the committee evidently contemplate that a case may arise in which a man may take an appeal to which you give him a legal right, and yet be hung or put to death before the up eal can be tried. If on ve him an appea, I think you should a low imto live until the appeal is tried. If you think appeals are liable to be abused, then give them only in the discretion of the judge.
Mr. CLARK. I agree entirely with the Senfrom Wisconsin. I think that in favor of life, the words “except in capital cases” should be inserted. If a man has a suit about property the court may deny a stay of proceedings, and still he may go on and have the trial of his appeal and be rectified in the court above; but if he is tried for his life and the proceeding is not stayed, and he is executed, what becomes of his appeal? You thus "we more consideration and favor to property than you do to life. I do not quite like. as a law maker, to put on the statute hook a law of this kind without exception, saying that the judge shall have power to let the man go to exccution, notwit standing his apeal, and be exc cuted before he can be tried. lpwould rather the man should live and have the 2nd trial. If he be confined in jail for 6 or 8 or 10 months or a year, so much the more is it in favor oflifc.
Mr. JOHNSON. In Massachusetts they keep him a year anyhow.
Mr. CLARK. So in Maine; a man cannot be executed until a year has passed. When I had given a man the righto appeal to save his life, I would not say that anyjudge should refuse him the benefit of that appeal and have him hung by the neck before the time came for the trial of the apeal. It seems to me little.better than a moc cry of the appeal. I think the words should be inserted.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendments of the committee have all been acted upon except the one passed over at the request of the Senfrom Wisconsin.
Mr. HARRIS. I suggest that that be acted on now, and the Senfrom Wisconsin can propose any amendment to it when we go into the Senate.
Mr. HOWE. Yes; that may boasted on. I have no amendment to be suggested there. The amendment was in section [9] 11, line ten, after the word “decree” to insert “upon the questions of law and fact arising upon the record;” and in line 11 to strike out the word “or” after “aflirm;" so that the clause wrll read: Upon such appeal the court shall review such judgmentor decree, upon the questionsof law and act arising upon the record. an mayaffirm modi, or reversethe same or mayorder a newtrial or sue other proceedings to be had in the properdistrict court as shall bojust. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HOWE. I move to amend the bill by adding to it as a new section: Abife: That after the 1st day of Septembernext, the State of Wisconsin shall be annexed to and constitute a part of the 8th circuit.
Mr. CLARK. It ought to be in a separate 1.
Mr. HOWE. I do not know that I shall get a separate bill. I will say that the only purpose in the world I have in otfering the amendment is for the better convenience of suitors in the State of Wisconsin.
Mr. HARRIS. What circuit are you in now?
Mr. HOWE. The 9th circuit. Its courts of appeals are required to be held at StLouis, and in the eichth circuit the courts of appeals are to be hed at Chicago. It will be much more convenient for us to attend the appellate court at Chicago than at StLouis. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CLARK. I move to amend the bill in section one, line 16. alter the word “ or” by inserting “such district judge or justice of the Supreme Court for the circuit;” so that the clause will read: Any district judge may be assigned by the justice of the Supreme Court for the circuit to hold a court in any district in said circuit, or such district judge or justice of the SupremeCourt for the circuil may hpld such conrtu on the rpquest of the judge of the district in which the someis to be held. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HARRIS. I proeon amendmentto be added at the end of this 1st section: and the clerk of any such district court may. with the approval of the co urt, to be entered of record, appoint a deputy who in caseof the death or resignation of the clerk may perform the duties of cler until another shall be appointed. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HARRIS. I offer this amendment to be added to the end of the 2nd section: The application to the State court for such removal shall be deenied tohave been made in time, if the petition therefor is filed in the proper clerks officeat any time within 20 daysafter service of the declaration. complaint, or 1st pleading on the pay}of the plaintilf or party instituting the prosecution. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HARRIS. I offer the following amendment in section 11, line 11, alter the word “record, ” to insert “and any interme diate order involving the merits and necessarily affecting the judgment or decree, ” so that the clause wrll read: Upon such appeal the court shall review sunlijndgment or decree upon the quostiops of law and fact arising upon the record, and any intermediate order involving the merits and necessarily affecting the judement or decree.rind may nlfirni. modity or reverse the samemrmay order ii newtriril. orsueli other procectling s to be had in the properdistrict 00urt as shall bejust. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HARRIS. I offer this amendment in section 11, line 12, strike out “the same” and insert “such judgment or decree”, The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HARRIS. I offer this amendment, to come in at the end of section [ten] 14: By consent of parties, appeals may be heard and decided at such special terms. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SUMNER. I notice that there is no provision for appeals in the ease of patents, unless, indeed, it may be considered as coming under the very general language to this effect, that there may be appeals “where the court shall certify that the adjudication involves a legal question of sufficient importance to require that the final decision thereof should be made by the Supreme Court.” Of course if the court make such a certificate in a patent caSe an appeal may be had; but except under such a certificate, as I understand this proposed statute, there could be no appeal in a patent case.
Mr. CLARK. It would depend on the amount of damages. –
Mr. SUMNER. There is an appeal where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $10,000, but Senators are aware that very often ina patent case the damages may be very trivial in that individual case, and yet that case may at in issue the value of a patent right of great importance. The case itself may perhaps involve damages only to the amount of 100 or 200 dollars; the It is that peculiarity in intent cases that does not seem to me infringement may be slight. to have been met adequately by this statute. The question with me is whether, considering that the Constitution of the U.S. gives a special jurisdiction in the case of patents, which of course is exercised exclusive of the State courts, an appeal in all cases of patents should not be secured. I observe that there is an appeal “where the adjudication involves a question upon the construction of the Constitution of the U.S., or any treaty, or Now, I propose to insert after those words in the elev enth line of the 17th section, these revenue law of the U.S. ” words, “ or any question of patents.”
Mr. SUMNER. would be required. enormous value. appeal 2ment.
Mr. HARRIS. For myself I have no objection to amend the bill so as to allow an appeal from the apellate court that is created under this bill to the Supreme Court in patent cases. however, that object would be accomp ished if the bill were allowed to stand as it is now, because in an important patent case like that which the Senator suggests there is no doubt that the court would give the proper cer tificate to take it up; but I have no sort of objection, if he desires so to amend the bill, to insert the word “patent” alter “revenue, ” so I suppose, us to read, revenue or patent law."
Mr. SpUMNER to a remark of the Senator. I doubt whet suitors in patent cases would be satisfied that. their appeal should stand on such general langnage as leaves the appeal within the discretion I think thatiu cases of such magnimde as intent cases often are, suitors would. be bettenlgleased if they saw that their right of the court Why not say “revenue or I do not know that that I am endeavoring to meet what seems to me a peculiarity in the case of patents, because all see that in determining a patent case where the infringement has been trivial you may disaruge a patent right of [Tudor the circumstances, therefore, I ask the Senfrom NewYork if there is not something so peculiar in patent cases, and in the jurisdiction which is given to the national Government in the case of patents, as to justify us in including those among the cases with regard to which there shall be an I had not looked at this before I list ened to the bill as it was read at the desk, and I speak now from the impressions of the mo ER. That will meet my case, but I should like to make one word of repleyr to an appeal stood on the actual text of the statute.
Mr. CLARK. The Senfrom Massachusetts will see, if he turns to page 0, that an appeal may be taken to the court of appeals from any final judgment or decree of any district court within the circuit, when the amount claimed or the value of the property shall be $500, or shall exceed that, and a patent is not a very important one that does not exceed in its value $500. It is already provided for.
Mr. SUMNER. That is an appeal to the circuit court?
Mr. SUMNER. I am providing for an appeal to the Supreme Court; and if the Senator turns to the 17th section, on the 10th page, he will see that there is no language which does precisely meet the ease of patents. I do not say that they might not by construction come under the language there, but it is not met precisely. I think, upon the whole, the word “ patent” had better come in before the word “ aw” in line ten, after “ revenue;” poasto read, “or anytreaty orrevenue or patent aw.
Mr. HOWE. I suppose the object of giving an appeal to the Supreme Court in all cases invo ving the construction of the Constitution or involving the construction of a revenue law is for the purpose of having a uniform rule of decision upon those questions as well as upon treaties. ow, is a uniform rule more absolutely demanded on the construction of a revenue law than any other law? Ought we not to have and provide for by our system of juris prudence a uniform rule of interrotation of all laws of the U.S.? Wliy not make the amendment that I suggested to the Senfrom Massachusetts, so as to make the clause read, “revenue or other law of the U.S.?” I merely make the suggestion.
Mr. HARRIS. The suggestion of the Senfrom Wisconsin accords very much with the views that l have entertained on the subect of appeals. As I 1st introduced the bifl it allowed appeals in all cases to the Supreme Court; but it was objected to, and I thought the objeetion was sound, that it would be impossible for the Supreme Court to get through the business if there was no restraint on appeals. The Supreme Court are some 3 years behind with their business, and probably have more business on their docket now than they can dispose of in 3 sessions. Unless there is some restriction that court will he effectually blocked up. How to make iIt do not know, unless we make it in the way provided for in this bill. It was that necessity which reconciled me to such a restriction upon appeals as is here provided. My preference would be to allow an appeal in all cases. should be glad if the Supreme Court could do the business, to allow every party who is de feated in the court below to a peal; but we cannot do it; it is impossible, uness we greatly enlarge our judiciary system, and that we cannot do in these times. I regard it as one of the excellencies of this bill that it makes no new judge and no additional expense to the Government. It seems to me we had better leave it as it now is, and if we find a necessity for enlarging the class of cases in which apeals are allowable, do it by some subsequent Fegislation. I would be lad to have it passed in the shape it is now. quite agree With the Senfrom Massachusetts that patent cases Ought to be added.
The PRESIDIhG OFFICER. The question now before the Senate is on the amendment of the Senfrom Massachusetts, to insert the word “ patent.”.
Mr. HOWE. must say, in justice to the Senfrom Kentucky, thatI am notcouvinced by the remarks of the Senfrom NewYork that the amendment I suggest oughtnot to be made. I did not, however, inten to move the amendment except with the permission of the honorable Senator who has charge of the bill. I shall be compelled to offer one or 2 other amendments, and one to this very clause, in justice to the State I represent an amendment which will be Open to the same objection that he urges to this, and I am dissuaded by that fact from pressing this amendment since I find he objects to it.
Mr. CLARK. I suggest to the Senfrom Wisconsin that this amendment proposed by. the Senfrom Massachusetts may e made, and then it will read, “ or any treaty or reve nue or patent law, ” and then if he desires to have his amendment, saying that a question arising on any law of the U.S shall be open to appeal, he can move to strike out “revenue or patent.” That would leave it to stand “or any treaty or law.” He can get it in that way.
Mr. HOWE. Now, Mr. President, I must do what I am reluctant to do, that is, submit an amendment in the 8th line of this section t“o strike out “ten” and insert “5” before 1,000.” I am not very familiar with the cases in the Supreme Court, but I believes very large proportion of them involve less than $10000 in mnouut.
Mr. HOWE. Then I suggest to the Senator as there must be a limit, and he is not ver urgent that it shall be placed at $10,000, let it be placed at $6,000, and let us make the exl periment with that. If we find the practical operation of the bill is such as still to incumber the records of the Supreme Court beyond its capacity, it is easier to restrict hereafter than it is to give apeals.
Mr. HAR tIS. am not inclined to strug gle against the amendment.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I should like to know in what way you will exactly determine as matter of practice that the amount in controversy excee s $10,000. How is that to be ascertained? I suppose you will confine yourself to the addamnum.
Mr. HARRIS. It is a case of final judgment, and the record will show.
Mr. JOHNSON. Suppose that the amount claimed is more?
Mr. HARRIS. It is an appeal from a final judgment, and the record shows.
Mr. JOHNSON. I believe that is the rule; but the plaintiff often claims a great deal more than he gets, and thinks he is entitled tomore. The plaintiff may claim $20,000, and may, in the opinion of a court and jury, be entitled to recover less than $10,000; and he is debarred from appealing to the Supreme Court because the judgment below does not give him what he thinks he is entitled to receive. There ought to be some mode in which the case may be brought up.
Mr. HARRIS. The Senator is more famil iar with the practice of the SCOTUS than I am; butI understand this is precisely the language that has been in the statute for a great many years, only limiting the amount to $2,000. I think the present statute is that an appeal will lie to the Supreme Court where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $2,000. The law now uses precisely the language here employed pnder which the court has been acting all our tves.
Mr. SUMNER. For those whom he is supposed to represent now and those whose interest is under $5,000. By protiding an appeal for them, I fear that he is going to continue this burden on the Supreme Court, so that in point of fact the bill will suppl but a very slight remed.
Mr. CLARK. What do we have courts for, Mr. President? To do justice. What do we have a SCOUTS for? To do justice. Then, if that court is established to do justice, why should it. not do justice to as many citizens of the U.S. as it can accommodate at its doors and in its hall? Why should not everybody have the privilege of approaching that court? Why should the man whose controversy involves an amount of $10,000 have the right to go to that court, and the man whose controversy does not involve that amount be shut out? If this bill should stand as it is the result would be that the suits which originate in the cities where the amou this large, and the large landed cases only, won d reach the Supreme Court; the others would not reach the Supreme Court. What I desire is that as many of the people be permitted to reach that court as is consistent with the convenience of the court. The court must not be overburdened: but. if you relieve that court of the examination of the facts, and if you more than double the amount required to be in controversy under the old law, it seems to me you will relieve that court sufficiently. It is ver true that a poor man may contend with a rich man; it is very true that the rich.man may prevail againstthe poor man in your district court; it may be very true that the rich man may prevail against him in the court of appeals; but will you then shut out the poor man because he is oor, and not let him go further, when, by gomg to the court above, he might prevail against the rich man? It will not do to shut the doors of the court on any such account. The doors must be open to the our man as well as to the rich man; and it is because I would make the court satisfactory, and would have it open fo as many people as possible. that I am for amending this amount Iicre and striking it down to $5,000. I hope the amendment will prevail.
Skip Skip Mr. HARRIS. adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned. I move that the Senate
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Moron, April 2, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borxrox. The Journal of Thursday was read and aproved.
The SPEAKER stated as the 1st business in order the call of the States and Territories for bills audJtResolutions on leave for reference, not to be brought back into the House on a motion to reconsider, commencing with the State of Maine. MEDICAL OFFICERS OF THE NAVY.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Indiana, introduced a bill to provide for continuing in service the acting medical officers of the Nav, and to supply vacaucics in the regular list; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComNavAffrs. CATHARINE QUIGLEY and THOMAS ROGERS.
Mr. ALLISON introduced a bill for the relief of Catharine Quigley and Thomas Rogers which was read a 1st and 2nd time, an referred to the ComJudiciary. PAPERS REQUIRING STAMPS.
Mr. KASSON introduced a JtResolution allowing a limitation of the time for perfecting papers requiring stamps to be affixed) thereto; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComWays&Means. CIVIL RIGHTS., Mr. SHELLABARGER introduced a bill to declare and protect all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the U.S. in the several States; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComJudiciary, and ordered to be printed. COURTS IN WASHINGTON TERRITORY.
Mr. DENNY introduced a bill in relation to the courts of Washington Territory; which was read a.1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComJudiciary, and ordered to be printed. RAILROAD IN WASHINGTON TERRITORY.
Mr. DENNY introduced a bill grantin lands to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from Puget sound, on Admi ralty inlet, in Washington lerritory. to the Columbia river; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComPacificRR, and ordered to be printed. 11thREGIMENT OHIO VOLUNTEERS.
Mr. HAYES introduced a bill to provide for the payment to the 11thCincinnati regiment of Ohio volunteer militia during the time they were in the service of the U.S. in 1862; which was read a 1st and moond time, and referred to the Committee tary Affairs. LAND GRANTS IN CALIFORNIA.
Mr. BIDWELLintroduced a bill to confirm the selection and location of certain lands granted to the State of California by the U.S., and for other purposes; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComPubLands, and ordered to be printed. FRANKING rnivitsos.
Mr. NIBLACK introduced a bill conferring the franking privilege on err Presidents of the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPostOffice. TAXI NC U.S. SECURITIES. The call of the States for bills and JtResolutions having been completed, the Speaker stated as the next business in order the call of the States and Territories for resolutions, commencing with NewJersey, the pending question being upon the resolutions offered by Mr. Roosus, which were under consideration at the close of the morning hour on Monday last.
Mr. PRICE. 1 move to refer the resohrtions to the ComWays&Means.
Mr. ROGERS. I ask to modify the last resolution by adding these words: and that all Government securities heretofore issuedshould beartheir fair shareof Federal taxes. The resolutions as modified are as follows: Resolved.That the federalGovernmenthasnoconstitutional right to assumeor pay the debt of the socalled confedorate government ot the insurgentStates or the rebel debt of any of said States and that it would be an outrageeven to attain r.to do so. Resolved, Thatt ic honor of the edernl Government and every principle of Justice deuiaud that the Federal debts hould be paid to the utmost fin thing: tphliagthrtecpdufdaiiathtioonf tshhe ocuold unhtordyissacocrueudtleynparnecseedr, vaendd.tho Resolved, That equal taxation is Just und right and that ever personin this country should bearhis cqunl shurcoft 0 Federal and State taxes that thereshould he no privileged class: and that all edt rrilsecurities heretofore issuedshould hear their fair shareof federal taxes.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the mainquestion ordered; and under the operation thereof the resolutions were referred to the ComWays&Means. Mr. PRICE mtRtv the resolutions were referred; upon the table. Agreed to. EQUALIZATION of BOUNTIES.
Mr. WARD submitted the following preamble and resolution, upon which he demanded the previous question: Whereas this House on a previous occasion instructed the ComMilAffrs to report a bill equalizing the bountiesof soldiers and sailors and whereas early action by Congressis demunde by many of these soldiers and sailors, and by the widows and orphans of thosewho have perished in the field, in hospitals and in rehcl prison pens: and whereasthis sessionof Congressis far spent and no definite action has yet been had upon the subject: Therefore Resolved.That the ComMilAffrs he requestedto report at an early day. by bill or otherWise, upon the subJect and that they have liberty to make such report at any time.
The SPEAKER. The resolution is not debatable under the rules.
Mr. SCHENCK. I merely wish to make a statement to the House.
The SPEAKER. The last part of the resolution requires unanimous consent.
The SPEAKER. The resolution is not debatable.
Mr. WARD. I ask the unanimous consent of the House to make a single suggestion.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. object. The previousquestion was 2nded.
Mr. LEBLOND. I wish to suggest to the Gentfrom NewYork who introduces this resolution, that he withdraw the latter part Of it.
Mr. SCHENCK. It will save all trouble if the House will allow me to make a statement. I ask unanimous consent to say a word. No objection was made.
Mr. CONKLING. I submit, then, that my colleague [Mr. WARD] ought to be a owed to say a word. It would be invidious to a low the Gentfrom Ohio to be heard and not the Gentfrom NewYork.
Mr. SCHENCK. I make no objection to an body bein heard.
The SPEAHER. The Gentfrom Illi is [Mr. HARDING] objected to the gentleman E)!!! NewYork being heard; does he with draw his objection?
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I decline to withdraw my objection. I think the resolution itselflias a speech in it.
Mr. WAR. I only wanted to make a statement.
Mr. SCHENCK. I have simply to say that there is.robably not a single member in this House who feels more namely to ct forward this subject and have it properly disposed of than every member of the ComMilAffrs. It is perhaps an easier matter to consider it in all its lights to some gentlemen outside of the committee than it is to the committee themselves who have to take the responsibility of utting in shape the best bill they can, which shall provide liberally for the soldier according to his just expectations, and at the same time take care of the interests of the country at.large. Now, sir, it may relieve gentlemen to know that the committee have had a sub committee at work on this subject, that they are prepared to report a bill, but that the Gentfrom Maine, [Mr. 131mm] who is on the sub committee which has had the subject in charge, has been called away suddenly by the death of a near connection in Boston; he is there now, and the committee would prefer to wait for a period of about 8 days, during which, as I understand by letter and telegraph from him, he may be detained there, before making their report. I hope, however, leave will be given to the committeeto make that report at any time; and the House may rely on it, if such leave be given to the committee that at the earliest possible da, which certainly will not be 2 weeks from this time, the Gentfrom Maine BLAINE] having returned, the report will [iMbne made, and I think the report will be satisfac tor to the House. As to the committee not having reported before, gentlemen must bear in mind that the ComMilAffrs has not been called since early in the session, so that we have had no opportunity of reporting without asking it specially, but we had proposed to ask it specially, knowing how generally anxious gent enien here are upon this subject pud how much anxiety there is outside. Imake these remarks because there seems to be a sort of reflection on the committee in this resolution.
Mr. WARD. Will the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] ield to me for a moment?
Mr. SCHENJK. I will do so if I have the right.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SCHENPR] has no right to yield the floor to another, as he holds it by unanimous consent of the House.
Mr. WARD. Then I ask unanimous consent. No objection was made.,
Mr. WARD. When I asked permission a few moments ago to make some remarks, I desired to state that this resolution was not intended as any reflection u n the patriotic Gentlemen who comose the ComMilAffrs. The ease by a prior resolution have already directed the ComMilAdairs to report a bill equalizing bounties and the point and object of this resolution, the only intent of it, was to give the ComMilAffrs the right to report at an time.
Mr. SCHENCH. If that is all the gentleman desires, I hope he will limit it to that, and that the House will grant it. I was myself instructed by the ComMilAffrs to ask that permission of the House.
Mr. WAD. I will modify the resolution so ss to 5 the committee leave to report at any time.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I ask unanimous consent to say a word. No objection was made.
Mr. HARDING, ofIllinois. I did not object to the resolution because I was oppose to the bill to which it refers; I objecte to it simply because I thought it tende to reflect upon the House for not acting earlier on the subject. ow, I want to bear witness that so far as I know the sentiments of the House they are unanimously in favor of the measure, no one individual more than another. It is a work of difficulty and labor, and I have waited patiently for an opportunity to vote for it. T hat is all I desire to say. 1 hi
Mr. WARD. I ask leave to modify my resolution.
The SPEAKER. The previous question having been 2nded, the gentleman cannot modify his resolution without unanimous consent.
Mr. WARD. Then I ask unanimous consent. NOobjection was made.
Mr. WARD. I modify my resolution, as follows: Whereas the House on a previous occasion instructed the ComMilAffrs to rpport a bill equalizing the bounty of soldiers and sailors and whereas early action by Congressis demapd by the wants of many of those soldiers and sailors, and the widows and orphansof those whohave fallen on the field, in the hospital.andin rebel prison pens: and whereasthis sessionof Congress is far spentand no definite action has yet been had upon the subject: Therefore Resolved, That the ComMilAffrs have liberty to make such report at any time. The resolution was agreedto.
Mr. SCHENCK. I desire to state that the ComMilAffrs are only waiting for the return of Mr. Bums, who has been called away, as I have stated. TRANSPORTATION FROM WEST TO EAST.
Mr. RAYMOND submitted the followrng concurrent resolution: Resolvedbythe HoRep (the Senate coneurriuir.) That aeominission of live persons beappointed by the POTUS to consider and report to Congressat its next session upon the necessityof some more speedy, cheap and reliable meansof transportation between the west;ernStatesand the Atlantic sea board: and to submit some plan. whether by law or treaty. whereby the national Government can aid in providing for said nfecssityifit shall befouiidto exist: Proof 1!, That saideommissioners shall receivenocompe nsationfor their services, and no payment of any kind except for such traveling expensesas they may actual y ibnyetuhrisinIOd SisOcIhHaHrOgBing the duties imposed upon them
Mr. RAYMOND. I have no desire to have the question taken upon this resolution today if it gives rise to any debate, as very possibly it may. I do not know but it should be in the form of a JtResolution instead of in the form of a concurrent resolution.
Mr. SPALDING. If the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Rsruoxn] will consent, Iwill move that this resolution be referred to the ComCommerce.
Mr. RAYMOND. I do not desire to have the resolution referred until some little debate he had upon it, and the objects and reasons for offering it have been stated. I prefer, therefore, to have it go over.under the rule. The resolution accordingly went over under the rule.
Mr. SPALDING. resolution be printed. The motion was agreed to. PAYMENT OF BONDS LOST and STOLEN.
Mr. HUBBARD, of NewYork, submitted the following resolution, upon which he called the previous question: Resolved, That the ComWays&Means be instructed to inquire into the expedioncy of providing by law some means by which theowners of the bondsof the U.S. heretoforeissuedmay realm“ paymentin caseof their lossby robbery or at; and that they have leaveto report by bill or otherwise.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question was ordered; and under the operation thereof the resolution was agreed to. DICTIONARY of CONGRESS.
Mr. HART submitted the following resolution, on which he demanded the previous question: Resolved, That there be printed, for the useof the House, an edition of the Dictiona of Conness sufficientto ma}: the quota of the I House equal to the quotaof the en to: and that. the author of the iationsry heallowc for the copyrightthesameprice hitherto paid by Congress.
Skip Skip Mr. BEAMAN moved that the resolution be laid upon the table. The House divided; and there were ayes 41, noes 52. Mr. BEAMAN demanded the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered. Skip The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative yea 60, nays 48, not voting 76; So the resolution was laid upon the table. Mr. RICE, of Maine, mtRtv upon the table. Agreed to. ENROLLEDJtResolution.
Mr. TROWBRIDGE, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that they had examined and found tru y enrolled the following JtResolution; when the Speaker signed the same: JtResolution (H.R.No. 96) in relation to the public lands appertaining to the armory at Springfield. FISHING GROUNDS.
Mr. PIKE submitted the following resolution, on which he demanded the previous question: Whereas the Governors of several of the British Provinces have publicly warned our fishing ileets off the fishing groundsadjacentto their coasts and thul indicated a designto renewthe unreasonable claim made by them prior to the reel rocity treaty, and annoy our peaccable commerce: herofore, Revolves, That the SecyNavy be requestedto send a sufficient naval forceto the fishiu grounds to protect our citizens in the enjoyment of their rights asrecognizedby the treaty of 1783.
Mr. MORRILL. I suggest to the Gentfrom Maine that there is aquestion whether the rights we claim accrued under the treaty of 1783 or the treaty of 1818, and that therefore this is a propersubject of a preliminary investigation by one of the committees of the House.
Mr. PIKE. I modify the resolution so as to say “the treaty o 1783 or subsequent treaties.”
Mr. CONKLING. This is too important a matter to be disposed of under the previous question.
Mr. PIKE. It is a more police force which seems to be rendered necessary.
The SPEAKER. If it gives rise to debate it must go over.
Mr. PIKE. 1,000vessels are on their way to the fishintr ounds now.
Mr. RAYMON. n a motion to refer in order?
Skip Skip On 2nding the call for the previous question, the House divided; and there were ayes 27, noes 45, no quorum voting. Mr. SPALDING emanded tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Pill and Rsruosn were appointed. The House again divided; and the tellers reported ayes 22, noes not counted. So the previousquestion was 2nded.
Mr. CONKIHIN. Let it goto the ComWays&Means.
Mr. ROSS. I suggest the ComReconstruction.
Mr. RAYMOND, by unanimous consent, moved that the resolution be referred to the ComForAffrs, with leave to rejiort at any time. he motion was agreed to. QUARTERMGENS DEPT.
The SPEAKER stated, as the next business in order, a resolution offered on the 19th of March, by Mr. McCULLOUGH, as follows: Rmlped. That the SecyWar he directed to furnish this House with a list of the officers, volunteer and regular, employedin the QuarterMGens Dept in this city; also their rank, the partle ularduticsperformed by them, and the number of y clerks SE dividRin each bureau under them: what tenure the SecyWar holds the Corporan Art Building, what amount of rent is paid for it perannum, and lfa lessexpensiveand equally commodious and suitable buildlnKf of the headquartersof the QuarterMGen cannot be procured and thereby a large saving to the country O made.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to amend by adding: and to report also whether any steps have been taken for the confiscationof the aforesaid Corcoran Building. I demand the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question or cred; and under the operation thereof the amendment was agreed to. The resolution as amended was then agreedto. APPROVAL OF THE PRESIDENT.
The SPEAKER stated. as the next business in order, the following resolution submitted by Mr. DAVIS on the 10th of January last: Resolved, That this House cherish the most entire confidencein the patriotism and ability of the POTUS and in his desire to restore the Union on a basisof permanent ros crity and peace: and that the cooperation of this {ouse is pledged to him in support of the general policy of reconstruction inaugurated by him in all modesau thorized by the Constitution and consistentwith the security of republican institutions.
Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Speaker, how much time is there remainin of the morning hour?
The SPEAKE t. The morning hour will expire inten minutes. But the Chair will state that there is no special order pending in the House for to da, except an authority of the ComMilAffairs to report an Army bill.
Mr. RAYMOND. I suppose, Mr. Speaker that this resolution would not, under the existing circumstances of the case, pus the House by a unanimous vote at least without some discussion. [Laughter] I am desirous, when it is acted upon, to have it pass, and by a vote as nearly unanimous as can he commanded for it. The Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Borrrwsl.1.] thinks we had better not discuss it. I differ from him entirely on that point, as I have the misfortune to differ from imon many others. M own opinion is that in that matter, as in all others, the truth is most likely to be reached by discussion, provided that it be frank, manly, and fair, on grounds of judgment and conviction, instead of grounds of prejudice and preconceived opuuon. I do not know whether the House is at present in a propermoodto enter upon the discussion in that spirit. I hope its discussion will not now be entered upon. I have no intention to enter upon it myself unless it should be necessary to do so in order to prevent what might me called a snap judgment. I would like to know distinctly what will be the effect upon this resolution of the expiration of the morning hour.
The SPEAKER. By reference to page 34 of the Digest it appears that “it is the inva riable practice to permit a member, upon the expiration of the morning hour, to take the floor, even though another may be occupying it, to make the motion to proceed to business on the Speakers table." If the Gentfrom Ohio 5dr. Seusse x] does not rise to report the rmy bill, and no member makes the motion to proceed to the business on the Speakers table, the debate will go on.
Mr. RAYMOND. I yield to my colleague, [Mr. I intend to make I suppose there is no intention on the part of the House to pfess this resolution to an immediate vote. All that I desire is that it shall be acted upon fairly when it is acted upon at all and if it is understood that upon the expiration of the morning hour this resolution shall be laid aside for subsehuent consideration, I shall be quite content, as I have no doubt the gentleman who introduced it will be.
Mr. SMITH. I would inquire whether or not this question will not come up each morning hour until disposed of.
The SPEAKER. It will come up in the morning hour on Monda., whenever resolutions are called, and itwil have to be disposed of in some way before the call of the States for resolutions can be resumed.
Mr. SCHENCK. perhapsI can relieve the mind of the gentleman in this matter.
Mr. SPALDING. Allow me to say that I will not ress my motion to take up the business on the Speakers table.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Iowa [Mrz WILSON] states that he will make that motion.
Mr. SCHENCK. The morning hour, I believe, has not yet expired, but the moment it does expire it will be in orderfor me to report the Army bill and proceed with it as a special order.
The SPEAKER. It is the special order after the mornin hour.
Mr. SCHENCK. I am compelled to ask the House to name another day for the consideration of that bill. I have itready with all the amendments which have been agreed upon, but, as I said in reference to anot ier matter this morning, the Gentfrom Maine, [Mr. BLAINE] a member of the committee who has taken special interest in and has been instrumental in putting into sha e several portions of the bill, has been calle away to Boston by the death of a member of his family. He writes and telegraphs that he sees no possibility, on account of the condition of the estate and the family of the deceased, for his return here before the 10th or 11th of April. I would ask the House, under these circumstances, ont of consideration to at least one member of the committee, to let the 12th of April be assigned for the consideration of this bi l as a special order, and in the mean time I will report back the bill and have it printed just in the form in which I wish it considered by the House, with all the amendments made. I there be no objection, I ask permission to report back the bill now, to have the amendments and the substitute printed, and that it be made the special order or the 12th of April after the morning hour, and from day to ay until disposed of.
The SPEAKER. Will the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. RAYMOND] yield for that purpose 7
Mr. RAYMOND. Iwill make a single statement. All I desired was to have an understanding on the part of the House that this resolution will not be acted on now, and that whenever it is called up, such gentlemen as may feel that justice to themselves as well as to the subject requires them to say something on it may have opportunity to do it. With that understanding I am ready to ield the floor.
Mr. PAIN. I wish to say that I object to any understanding that would prevent any member from moving to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. RAYMOND. I certainly should notwish it laid on the table the moment it is called up; and I desire whenever it is called up to say something in regard to it and of my own relations to the subject. Unless that arrangement can be made, I shall be compelled to retain the floor and O on now.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I wish to make an inquiry of the Chair. If the resolution should be referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union, I suppose the House could at any time, by a majority vote, O into committee and take it up; could it not
The SPEAKER. The special orders in committee would have priority. There is an appropriation bill in the ComWhol) on the state of the Union; when that is disposed of there is no others ccial order.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. but a majority can lay aside a special order.
The SPEAKER. They can as soon as it is reached.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Then I suggest to the Gentfrom NewYork that he refer the resolution to the ComWhole on the state of the Union.
Mr. RAYMOND. The only objection to that is, that just now the resolution, so far as m object is concerned, is under my own contro, and I canspeak upon it now. I cannot, under the arrangement he so gests, without the consent of the majority of the House. It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that the disposition of the House is to leave this matter in such a condition thatitcan be disposed of without any discussion whatever. that will be the policy of the majority. I have no right to put myself against e willof the majority, except in this particular case, so far as my own rightto be card is concerned. There, I think I have, and I shall proceed with the discussion of the resolution until the expiration of the morning hour unless the suggestion I have made can be received and adopted by the House. [Cries of “ Go on 1" “Go onl”]y Mr. Speaker, the resolution proposes to de clare the confidence of this House in the integ rit and patriotism of the POTUS, and the Wisdom of the policy by which he proposes to restore the Union. Under ordinary circumstances the passage of this resolution would be simply a matter of course. This House contains a very large majority of Union men.
The SPEAKER. The morning hour has expired and it is the duty of the Chair to call up the special order made on the motion of the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. Summon] The Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. RAYMOND] is entitled to 50 minutes on this resolution when the House resumes its consideration. The Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Sennsen] has the authority of this House to report the Army bill today.
Mr. SCHENCK. I now report back from the ComMilAffrs House bill No. 361, to reorganize and establish the Army of the U.S., with certain amendments thereto. This bill, by order of the House, was made the pecial order for today. For the reasons I have already stated, I move to post pone the further consideration of this bill until Thursday, the 12th instant, after the morning hour, and from day today until disposed of. The motion to postpone was agreed to.
Mr. SCHENCK. I now move that the bill and amendments be printed. The motion to print was agreed to.
Mr. TAYLOR. I would suggest that the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] submit a motion to print extra copies of this bill, as it is a matter in which the country feels great interest.
Mr. SCHENCK. I will submit a motion to print 1000 extra copies.
The SPEAKER. The motion will go to the ComPrintg under the law.
Mr. TAYLOR. I would suggest 5,000 extra copies.
The SPEAKER. The ComPrintg can report any number they think proper. J. C. G. KENNEDY.
Mr. THAYER. Allow me to make a remark. I do not understand that Mr. Kennedy has ever made a claim toa copyright, or that his position has been at all of that character. I ppen to know a little about that matter, and I wrsh simply to say this: I do not wish the House to suppose that the claim set up by Mr. Kennedy was of the character of a copyright. I understand that Mr. Kennedy claimed as an ordinar act of literary justice, he having had impose upon him the labor and responsibility of the preparation of the 3rd volume of the Census, it was right and proper that the preface which he had written or that volume should go into it. If the gentleman will excuse me a moment, I wish to add that Mr. Kennedy in that position was entirely right; and it has always seemed to me to have been a great act of discourtesy, to have been what, among literary and scientific men, would have been considered a great act of imropriet in the ComrGLO to take the work of Mr. Kennedy and put into it a reface of his own, cqnveyiu to the public the impression he performe the W0r( which went into that volume. In my judgment, that was an act of discourtesy and of impropriety, and I be e the House will not adopt it.
Mr. GRINNELL. I wish to ask the gentleman if he does not consider that 5 years was a sufficient time in which to execute that liter ary trust.
Mr. THAYER. I do not know that that has anything to do with it. I do know that the gentleman referred to is a man of great industry and ability in the matter of statistics, and I do not think that anybody who is acquainted pith his abilities in that respect will den that act. consumed, I have no doubt it will turn out. that it was necessary for the work to be accomphshed.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the resolution was ado ited. Mr. LAFLIN mtRtv the resolution was adopted; upon the table. Agreed to. SMITHSONIAN LIBRARY. On motion of
Mr. HAYES, by unanimous consent, bill of the Senate No. 216; to provide for the transfer of the custody of the library of the Smithsonian Institution to the Library of Congress, was taken from the Speakers table and road a.1st and 2nd time;
Mr. HAYES. The ComLibrary recommend the passage of the bill.
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to a 3rd reading; and it. was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. HAYES mtRtv it was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. NEWYORK CONTESTED ELECTION.
Mr. DAWES. I desire to state that it was my intention to call up today the contested election case of Dodge vs. Brooks, but at the request of the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. MARSHALL] my colleague on the committee, I postpone it until tomorrow. If the House is willing to take it up tomorrow, I should like to call it up immediately after the reading of the Journal, or, if a morning hour is desired, immediately after the morning hour.
The SPEAKER. The Chair would state that the call of committees is progressing very slowly indeed.
Mr. DAWES. Then I will call it up after the morning hour. PURCHASE OF PAPER, ETC.
Mr. GRINNELL, by unanimous consent, submitted the follovnng resolution: Resolved, That. the ComPrinting be reqnested to report to this House what reforms, if any are needed in the purchaseof paper. the orderin of books. documents. bills and othermattors print at the ublic expense, in the management of the printing Smcc. for the collectionand sale of the wastepa perei ther at said otheeor in any other place under the control of the Government or in anything connected with the consumptionof paperand the purchase of the same; and to this end. they are herebyern powered to sendfor persons, books, and papers, and to make such examinationas shall, in their judx men t. be necessaryto attain the and herebysought, with authority tosit during the sessionsof the House.
Mr. GRINNELL. I wish, simply to state that I know from letters which I have received that the country is looking with great interest to this question of the reduction of the expenses of printing. I did not see any way in which to get at this matter but to require the ComPrintg to investigate the subject and report. I knOW there is a public de may ml for an investigation. I now yield to the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. LAFI.IN.]
Mr. LAFLlN. I certainly cannot allow this resolution to be adopted without 1st inquiring of my friendfrom Iowa [Mr. Gunman] whether there is any intention by the intro duction of this resolution to reflect upon anyone in any way connected with the Government Printing office, or anyone comiected with the purchase or sale of paper.
Mr. GRINNELL. wish to say, in reply to the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. LAii.i.V] that I know of nothing against the Superin tendent of Public Printing, or against the purchase of paper, or against any expenditures whatever in that Dept. But it is whis pered about by gentlemen on the other side of the House that they will show us something one of these days. Now, we have committees which can investi to these matters, and the other side of the House has a.member upmf this committee. Now, I do not wish to have a fire in the rear after we have gone home. Let us have the investition now; let the committee be empowere to send for persons and papers, so that they can recommend any contraction or reduction of the expense that they may deem necessary. But have no imutation to cast upon anyone.
Mr. LAFLIN. Iam ver glad tohear the statement of myfriendfrom own, for it agrees entirely with what has been my experience, so far as I have been called upon to investigate the subject referred to in the resolution. I should dislike very much to have this resolution go before the world without some explanation of the kind which has already been made by the gentleman who introduced it. I felt it due to a faithful odicer that such an exlanation should be made. For as I have become acquainted with the duties and respon sibilities connected with the Printing office, as lhave observed that it involves the exenditure of over $2,000,000 ayear, I have fe t that the Government of the U.S. was prac ticing a most niggnrdly economy in paing the Superintendent of Public Printing sue a miserable pittance in the way of a salar. Now, I am very lad indeed that no reection is intended to e cast upon this officer and I wish to say another thing: if this investigation is to be ordered by this House, it will impose a burden upon our committee which we cannot perform in connection with our other duties unless we have some assistance and if this resolution is adopted, I shall ask the House to furnish us acerk for the purpose of this investigation.
Mr. wasnsnaiia, of Illinois. We already have a stenovra hie clerk.
Mr. cairimiLL. I now call the previous question.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Will the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. GRINNBLL] yield to me for a moment?
Mr. GRINNELL. I will yield for a question.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Idesire to make a suggestion. I suppose, the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. GRINNELL won d not have offered this resolution for investigation unless he had some warrant for so doing. I agree with that gentleman that if an investi:1tion is to be had it should be had at once y those who are here, and not by those who may come after us, who are not familiar with the subject matter to be investigated and I am glad to know that so good a gentleman as the member from Iowa wi act as chairman of that committee. I hepe he will use his influence with the Speaker of the House to secure a majority of the committee in favor of a thorough and complete investigation; a majority adverse to any process of white washing, which may at this time be slight by the parties implicated.
Mr. GRINNELL. The gentleman entirely misap rehends the resolution. It does not provide for the appointment of a special committee, but calls upon the ComPrintg to investigate and report to the House. I certainly should not have offered any resolution with the idea of being chairman of any committee
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I sup mittee. I have myself entire confidence in the Committceon Printing and I may be allowed to express the hope that they will make their investigation a comlate and thorough one, because the people oi2 the country believe there is something wrong about this matter, and it should be settled at once whether there be or not. If these gentlemen are conducting the printing Dept with economy and probity they should have the benefit of that statement before the country. If, on the contrary, they are extravagant and without full warrant for their proceedings, then the corrective should be promptly a plied by this House.
Mr. Gltl) NEL. As this provides only for an investigation, and not. for the creation of a select committee, I demand the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered. The resolution was again readI
Mr. LATHAM. Can the resolution be now modified?
Mr. LATHAM. It ought to be a JtResolution and referred to the JtCom on Public Printin.
Skip Skip Mr. GRINNELL. I object to that. The resolution was adopted. Mr. GRINN ELL mtRtv the resolution was adopted; upon the table. Agreed to. TAX UPON calms PETROLEUM. Mr. MYERS, by unanimous consent, submitted a JtResolution of the Legislature of Pennsylvania for the repeal of the tax on crude petroleum; which was referred to the ComWays&Means, and ordered to be printed.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. On motion of Mr. SCOFIELD, leave of ab sence was granted to Mr. BARKER for 4 days from today. Mr. KELLEY asked and obtained leave of absence for ten days for his colleague, Mr. Winusiis. Mr. BENJAMIN asked and obtained leave of absence for 2 weeks for his colleague, Mr. Asnnasos. On motion of Mr. COOK, leave of absence was granted to Mr. Knrxaxnannfor 2 weeks from today. BRIDGE ACROSS THE MISSISSIPPI. On motion of
Mr. HOGAN, Senate bill NO. 38, to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi river, at the city of StLouis, in the State of Missouri, and the city of East StLouis, in the State of Illinois, was taken from the Speakers table,
Skip Skip read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. Mr. HOGAN mtRtv the bill was referred; upon the table. The latter motion was agretedto. ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution, on which he demanded the previous question: Resolved.That the ComJudiciary be instructedto inquire into the expediencyofso amending chapter 108 of the lawsot 1863, entitled “An act to regulate the duties of the clerk of the HoRepin preparing for its organization, " as to designate.in caseof the death, resignation or inability of the Clerk to perform the duties prescribed in organizing the House, the person on whom the duties of Clerk in such a contingency shall devolve.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered: and under the operation thereof the resolution was adopted. Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio, mtRtv the resolution was adopted; upon the table. composed it was the intention to have a new agreed to.
Mr. J. L. THOMAS, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the SecyWar he and he is hereby.directed to inform this House what appropriation will benecessaryto completethe ship canal i omFort McHenry to the mouth of the Patapse o river in the State of Maryland. together with such information of the practicability and the character of the work as may be in the possessionof the Dept. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF science. On motion of
Mr. KASSON, by unanimous consent, the annual report of the National Academy of science was taken from the Speakers table, and referred to the Committee on Coinagc, Weights, and Measures. CRIMES AGAINST THE U.S.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, by unanimous consent, from the ComJudiciary, reported back Senate bill No. 165, more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain crimes against the U.S., with a recommendation that it do pass. The bill was then read.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, the subject to which this bill relates wasvbrought to the attention of the committee of the Senate by communications sent to the chairman of that committee by the 6th Auditors office; and to show the necessit for its immediate passage, I will send to the lerks desk to have read a statement of one of the cases which has recently occurred. "
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I will state that a case of similar character has arisen in the postoffice Dept, and that such cases are likely to occur in every Dept of the Government. I hope there will be no objection to the passage of the bill.
Mr. JENCKES. Will the gentleman allow me a question 7
Mr. JENCKES. Why not extend the proVisions of this statute to the counterfeiting of any record in any court of justicein the U.S.?
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, I have no doubt there are a number of thin that mightbe very well provided for in this bi l, but. it so hap oiis that the Senate committee have extende its provisions only thus far, and it will only delay the matter and subject the Government to great inconvenience if we undertake to amend it. these cases of forgery may occur day by day, and we need a law to punish them.
Mr. JENCKES. I wish to call the attention of the chairman of the committee to the fact that there is an omission in the criminal statutes of the U.S. to provide for the punishment of such offenses.
Skip Skip Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I am aware of that. I demand the previous question. The previous question was 2nded and the main question or ered; and under the operation thereof the bill was read the 3rd time and passed.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I move to rQcon sider the vote by which the bill was passed, and to lay that motion on the table. Agreed to. COLORED TROOPS.
Mr. IVILSON, of Iowa. I offer the following resolution: Whereas it is reportedthat ordershave been issued directing that all colored troops shall bemusteredout of those rvico; and whereas it is also repprted that very many of said troopsdesireto remain in the servico and that the white volunteers generally desire to be mustered out in order that they may roturn to theirhomes and engagein their accustomed OlVlI pursuits: Thercfore 12c it resolved, That the ComMilAffairs be instructed to inquire whether saidreports are true: and if true, that the committeereport all the factsto the House concerningsaid orders and the do sires of said troops, together with such other information relative to the subject matterof this inquiry as the committee may obtain.
Mr. WILSON of owa. I understand from the chairman of the ComMilAffrs that that committee has now all the information. If that is so, and they are ready to report, of course this is unnecessary. TAKING MINING CLAIMS.
Mr. HENDERSON, by unanimous consent, presented the joint memorial of the Oregon legislature, against taxing mining claims; which was referred to the ComMining, and ordered to be printed. CAPITOL DECORATION.
Mr. SMITH, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution: Revolve d.That a committee of live be apointed to inquire into the propriety of haying n ocoration preparedfor thesouth winieof tho Capitol as a match pieceto the “ progress of civilization " on the north wing; and that t icy have power to call for plans. designs, and casts for.such work and report at any time by bill or othermse.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to refer that to the ComLibrary. The motion was agreed to. ELIZABETH YORK.
Mr. BENJAMIN, by unanimous consent, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill granting a pension to Mrs. Eliza licth York, widow of Shubal York, late surgeon of the 54th regiment of Illinois infantry volunteers. The accom anying report was read, showing that the ( eceased was shot and killed by disloyal citizens in an unrevoked attack upon him on the 28th of March, 1862.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. BENJAMIN. mtRtv the bill was passed, on the table. Agreed to. SARAH FITZGIBBON.
Mr. TAYLOR, by unanimoil consent, from the ComInvalidPens, reported back Senate bill NO. 82, graiitin a pension to Sarah Fitzgibbon, with an amendment. The bill grants a pension of 25 dollars permonth. The amendment proviso: Provided. That in the event of the marriage or death of said Sarah Fitzsribbon the pension allowed by this act shall be continued to the children of the late Major Thomas C. Fitsgibbou.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to is to insert the following The bill as amended was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. TAYLOR. mtRtv the bill was passed, on the table. Agreed to. LEWIS W. DIETRICH.
Mr. TAYLOR, by unanimous consent, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill granting a pension to Lewis W. Dietrich; which was read a 1st and 2nd time.
Skip Skip The report was read. The bi l was then orderengross and read a 3rd timeand being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. TAYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. REPRESENTATIVES OF BETSY NASH.
Mr. SAWYER, by unanimous consent, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill for the relief of thelegal representatives of Betsy Nash;
Skip Skip which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The report having been read, the bill was or dered to he engrossed and read a 3rd time and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. SAWYER mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. NICHOLAS HIBNER.
Mr. VANAERNAM, by unanimous consent, from the Committee bn Invalid Pensions, reported a bill for the relief of Nicholas Hibneiz ate a private in the 6th regiment MissouriState militia;
Skip Skip which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The report having been read, the bill was orderengross and read a3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. VANAERNAM mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. LAND GRANT RAILROADS.
Mr. PRICE. I ask the unanimous consent of the House to report back from the ComPacificRR Senate bill No. 83, to extend the time for completin certain land grant railroads in the States therein named, With an amendment in the nature of a substitute, and I ask that it be passed.
Mr. PRICE. I hope the gentleman will not object. It is only a bill to extend the time of the Iowa roads.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Well, I will hear the substitute read, reserving the right to object. The substitute was read. The 1st section provides that the time allowed for the completion of the several railroads in the State oflowa, named in the not approved May 16, 1856, be extended 8 years from the time named in said nct, provided that the unsold lands shall revert to the U.S., as provided in said act, if the railroads shall not be completed within the period fixed by this act. the 2nd section provides that such portion of the lands granted to the State of Iowa by the act of May, 1856, as would revert to the U.S. at the end of 12 years from the passage of said act, by reason of the noncompletion of the roads named therein, if there were no extension of time given, shall be subject to preemption, settlement, and purchase and that any bonafide settlers upon any of ssi lands, upon making due proof of settlement, occupation, and improvement, under the reemption laws of the U.S., shall be entitled to enter the same in quantities not igse. exceeding 80 acres each, at 3 dollars peracre. The money obtained from such sales is to be retained in the Treasury of the U.S. until the particular line of road to which the said lands were granted has been so far completed as to entitle the State to the lands, when the money is to be paid over to the State of Iowa for the use of the company constructing the road, and to which the preempted lands were granted. The substitute further provides for a change in the route of the road from Dubuque to SiouxCity.
Mr. KASSON. I want to so. to my colleague [Mr. PRICE that that bi l is evidently one of very great importance to the State of Iowa, particu arly to the western part of the State. I should very much like to see it printed. I shall make no objection to the bill being reported to the House if it can be postponed a few days and printed in time to give an opportunity for its properexamination. The Legislature of our State has been very much excited upon this general subject of railroads in the State. If my colleague has no objection, I would ask that this bill when reported may be postponed for a week, more or less, and ordered to be printed. If he will not consent to that, then I shall be compelled to object to its being reported at this time.
Mr. PRICE. Then the gentleman will have to object. My only objection to fixingafuture time for the consideration of this bill is simply this: this bill has been before the Pacific Railroad Committee for a great many weeks; the Legislature of the State of Iowa will adjourn within a very few days, and this bill should be passed before they adjourn. All that this bill provides for is to extend the time for building the roads, to allow reieinptions upon the land if the road is notbui t within a certain time, and to change in some respects the route. Those 3 points are all that this bill embraces. The bill as it came from the Senate and was referred to our committee contained a revision extending the time of other roads. hat part of the Senate bill the committee have struck out, and have instructed me to report the substitute which has been read by the Clerk. If the reporting of the bill is objected to at this time, then I will move to suspend the rules in order that I may report it for action at this time. Any gentleman who knows anything about the condition ofaffairs, and the time when our Legislature will adjourn, must know that it is necessary that this bill should be passed at once.
Mr. KASSON. I must object to the reporting and passing of this bill without some provision is put in it to open up to settlement these lands, which are now tied up in these grants.
Mr. GRINNELL. There is such a proVision.
Mr. KASSON. I understand that there is no such provision in the bill, except one that opens these lands for settlement after a certain time. I must object to the reporting of this bill, unless consentis given to its postponement and printing.
Mr. PRICE. My colleague will discover that there is a specific provision in the bill allowing these lands to be preempted and settled. I now move to suspend the rules that I may be allowed to report this bill at this time.
Mr. JU] LIAL. This bill properly belongs to the ComPubLands, and I hope if it is reported now it will be referred to that committee.
Skip Skip The question was taken upon suspending the rules; and upon a division, there were ayes 37, noes not counted. So 2/3rds not votin in the affirmative) the rules were not suspen ed.
Mr. PRICE. I now ask leave to report the bill and have it postponed until some ay next week and irinted.
Mr. JU.IAN. I ask that the bill be referred to the ComPubLands, with leave to report at any time.
Mr. PRICE. The bill has already been cannot lands be granted to them? before the ComPacificRR and been considered by them.
Mr. JULIAN. It was referred to the comPubLands of the Senate, and should go to the corresponding committee of the House.
The SPEAKER. That is not a question to be decided at this time. No objection being made, Mr. PRICE, from the Committee, on the Pacific Railroad, reported back to the House Senate bill No. 83, to extend the time for completing certain land grant railroads in the States therein named, with an amendment in the na ture of a substitute. 0; motion of
Mr. PRICE, the further consideration of the bill was postponed until Mon day next after the morning hour, and the substitute was ordered to be printed. CALIFORNIA and OREGON RAILROAD.
Mr. BIDWELL. I ask unanimous consent to report back from the ComPacificRR, for consideration at this time, House bill NO. 339, granting land to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Central Pacific railroad, in California, to Portland, or the navigable waters of the Columbia river, in Oregon.
Mr. BIDWELL. Then I move to suspend the rules for that purpose, and I ask the unanimous consent of the House to make a statement in explanation of that motion. No objection was made.
Mr. BIDWELL. There is probably no subject of more consequence to the interests of the Pacific coast, and I may say to the whole country, than this subject of the construction of railroads, for it is by those communications that we are enabled to develop the resources of the country. I may say that there is nothing that will tend more to the development of our unsettled agricultural lands and the devel opment of our mineral regions, than the construction of railroads within our borders. Now, sir, here is a bill which has been before the House for months, and it is desired that it should pass in order that these companies may be able to begin the work early in the present season. If another month pass without its consideration it will be impossible to commence work until the next year. I hope, therefore, the House will consent to suspend the rules and consider the bill at this time. I do not believe that any well grounded objection can be found to its provisions. It has been carefully considered, and its provisions care fully framed by the ComPacificRR, and I am empowered unanimously to report it from that committee.
Mr. JULIAN. Mr. Speaker, this bill prouses to revolutionize our whole land policy. t makes a direct grant of lands to an incorporated company for which there is no precedent, except in the case of the Pacific railroad where we could not grant the lands to anyone State on account of the great length of the road. I ask that it be referred to the ComPubLands so that we have an opportunity to examine it. Certainly so radical a change in our land policy should not be made at this time without proper consideration by the appropriate committee.
Mr. BIDWELL. Ihope the rules will be suspended. If it be a new idea fop Congress to grant lands to aid in the construction of railroads, then certainly I have come to the wrong place. But, wsir, I do not believe that it is any new idea.
Mr. JULIAN. To grant lands to companies is a new policy.
Mr. BIDWELL. I understood, on the contrary, objection was to grant lands to the States, and that the policy was to grant them to companics. These companies are responsible organizations. Because they are organizations, why To whom would the gentleman grant lands 7 States. If lands are to be granted to States only for building roads then we ought to abandon the idea of building roads altogether. If we do grant lands to the States it will give an opportunity to speculators in the States to gain some particular advantage for some particular class of speculators. But this proposes a grant of lands to a company after they have constructed 20 miles ofroad, and when they have constructed 20 miles more other lands, and so on.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I wish to inquire whether this bill has been printed.
Mr. BIDWELL. It has. I do not wish to deprive any committee of any business which legitimately belongs to it. The House refused to suspend the rules. CATTLE PLAGUE.
Mr. BIDWELL, from the ComAg, submitted a communication from the SecyState to the chairman of that committee, transmitting correspondence on the subject of the cattle lague; which was laid upon the table and or ered to be printed. NEW POST ROUTE IN Illinois.
Mr. ROSS, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to establish a post route between the towns of Bedford and Pearl, in Pike county, Illinois; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the comPostOffice. MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT. On motion of
Mr. WINDOM, Senate bill No. 107, to provide for ii term of the district court for the district of Minnesota to be held at the city of Wine na, in said district, was taken from the Speakers table and read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill provides that hereafter, and until otherwise provided by law, there shall be held annually, on the 1st Monda in June, a term of the district court of the U.S. for the district of Minnesota, at the city of Wine na in said district, and that all acts or parts of7 acts which require a term of said court to be held at Maiikato, in said district, be, and the same are hereby, repealed.
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to a3rd reading; and it wasl accordingly read the 3rd time and asse. p Mr; WINDOM mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. COURTS IN CALIFORNIA and LOUISIANA. On motion of
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, senate bill No. 179. in relation to district courts of the U.S. in the States of California and Louisiana, was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill was referred to the ComJudiciary; upon the table. Agreed to. SHIP CANAL IN WISE ONSIN.
Mr. ECKLEY, from the ComPubLands, reported back without amendment Senate bil No. 85, grantin to the State of Wisconsin a donation of public land to aid in the construction of a breakwater, harbor, and ship canal at the head of Sturgeon bay, in the county of Door, in said State, to connect the waters of Green bay with Lake Michigan in said State. The bill was read. It grants 200,000 acres of land for the aforesaid improvements.
Mr. WRIGHT. I would like to ask a question of the gentleman who reports this bill. This a proriates 200,000 acres oflan, am I understand an appropriation has already been made for the same object of 200,000 acres. Now, I would inquire what is the length of this canal, and whether it is not owned by a private corporation, which seeks this aid from the public lands which should be appropriated for the payment of the national det?
Mr. ECKLEY. This is not an additional tpppoprialon of200,000 acres of nc.
Mr. DRIGGS. With the leave of the Gentfrom Ohio, I would say, in answerto the Gentfrom NewJersey, that at the last congress the Senate passedahill appropriating 100,000 acres of land or this canal, which is abonta mile and s half in but the hill failed in the House. Someleong the Wisconsin members were absent and there was not a very full explanation given of it. Upon a complete surve it was ascertained that appropriation would be entirely inadequate, and therefore the amount now asked is 2 100,000acres. Nothing has been granted heretofore. The Senate by a nearly unanimous vote, I believe, has passed the bill, and the comPubLands after a thorough investigation have reported the bill back with a unanimous recommendation that it pass.
Mr. ECKl.l. V] ield to me to say a word?
Mr. SLOAN. I desire to add to the expla nation nlreadygiven by the Gentfrom Michigan [Mr. Dames] that although this canal is but a mile and a halfin length, yet a large part of the proceeds of this land is to be devoted to constructing a harbor at the entrance of the canal. There is now, from Milwaukee north ward, at distance of nearly 250 miles with no safe harbor for vessels in a storm. The construction of this canal is but a small portion of the work proposed. The bill provides for the construction of a harbor which will benefit the entire commerce of Lake Michigan.
Mr. ltADFORD. Will the gentleman an swer me one question, for the purpose of determining my vote on this bill? Would it not be chea or for the Government to construct the cans and save the land?
Mr. ltADFORD. It seems to me the proceeds of the land ought to be enough to construct twice or 3 times this work.
Mr. SLOAN. The gentleman should be aware that under the homestead act the General Government has ceased almost entirely to derive any revenue from our public lands. They are taken u largely by settlers, under the homestead act, w 1opay nothing for them and in regard to the disposition of the public lands in the West, it is a matter of far more interest to the States themsglves in which the lands are located, how they are disposed of, than to the General Government, under the operation of the homestead act. Now this improvement will tend to increase very largely the commerce of the lakes. Green bay is quite a large body of water extendin fir into the State. Already the lumber on manufacturing interest has become very great and by constructing this canal a distance of 150 miles can be saved for all the vessels engaged in that carrying trade, which in the one article of lumber amounts now to 250 million feet produced on the shores of that aka. The entrance to that body of water is through a dangerous channel which was named on that account “Deaths Door.” That is the name it bears on the map. This bill appropriates 200,000 acres of public land, from which the General Government could hope to derive no benefit, for this improvement, which will save a distance of 150 miles, 75each way, to the navigation, and it will also provide an excellent harbor. There is nowa istance of 250 miles in which there is no safe harbor and this improvement will benefit the entire navigation of Lake Michigan. I venture to assert that no proposition has come before the House where. so arge a benefitwas to be derived, not only to the States more immediately interested, but to the General commerce of the lakes, from so small a grant as is proposed in this bill, and that this bill has more merit in it than almost any other that has been presented to Congress.
Mr. RADFORD. Will the gentleman tell us what is the estimated entire cost of this canal?
Mr. SLOAN. The cost of the canal and harbor is estimated at $800,000. It is not expected that this rant of land will do the work. The men who are interested in it in that section of the State are willing to contrib ute money to the result; but no larger grant is asked of Congress. When this subject was under discussion in the Senate at the last congress, several Senators, who had fully investigated the facts, expressed the opinion that it was an object which was worthy ofan appropriation of money from the General Government. by llllir. WRIGHT. I desire to speak on this i.
Mr. WRIGHT. What is the area in acres of the State of Wisconsin?
Mr. WRIGHT. I should like to say a few words upon this subject.
Mr. WRIGHT. 5 minutes will be enough for me.
Mr. ECKLEY. I will withdraw the call for the previous question, and yield to the Gentfrom NewJersey [Mr. Wales r] for 5 minutes.
Mr. WRIGHT. I amopposed to this modern system of legislation by which the Representatives of the people in Congress attempt to donate lands to some particular State because there arepublic lands of the U.S. that happen to be within the borders of that State. We have appropriated lands for agricultu ral colleges, but that appro riution was made generall to all the States which complied with the conditions of the grant and again, when the revenues of the country derived from the sales of the public land were distributed, all the States had the benefit of them. But now propositions are made to grant the public lands to States that are able to get along without them. Wisconsin is as able as NewYork to build her own canals and make her own public improvements, and yet gentlemen come here and ask for 200,000 acres of land to aid in the construction of a canal a mile and shelf long. I know it is asserted here that the grant is not merely for the canal, but also to make Sturfleon bay a safe harbor. perhaps itwill he made a safe harbor for sturgeons. ir, the State of Wisconsin ought to be able to build her own canals and works of improvement. You might as well donate public lands in Wisconsin to the Air Line Railroad company between Washington and NewYork, to aid it in the purchase of lands along its route. If the one is right in principle so is the other if one is wrong in principle so are both of them. This is a violation of our pledges to our constituents. I speak for the pee lo and the State of NewJersey which I have the honor in part to represent. It has been a maxim with us that the ConstitutiOn was the supreme law of the land with us; and that our powers are clearly defined in that instrument, and any step beyond is exceeding our powers. That is all I have to say.
Mr. DAVIS. Will the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Benn] yield to me for 5 minutes?
Skip Skip Mr. WlNFlELD. I ask the gentleman to yield to me for a moment. Mr. ECKLEY. I must decline to yield any further. I demand the previous question. The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered. The bill was ordered to a 3rd reading, and it was accordingly read the 3rd time. Mr. ECKLEY demanded the previous question on the passage of the bill. The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered. Mr. WINFIELD demanded the yeas and na s. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the aflirniative yeas 76, nays 30, not voting 77; So the bill was passed. Mr. ECKLEY mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. MINNESOTA LAND GRANTS. On motion of
Mr. DONNELLY, Senate bill No. 221, relatingto lands granted to the State of Minnesota to aid in the construction of railroads, was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands. MILITARY RESERVATIONS.R. CLARKE, of Kansas, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to authorize the SecyWar to sell a portion of the Fort Leavenworth military reservation to the city of Leavenworth, in the State of Kansas, for a public park; which was read a.1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComMilAffrs.
Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas, also, by unanimous consent, introduced abill to authorize the construction of a railroad through certain lands of the U.S. in Kansas; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComMilAffrs. CEMETERY AT ATLANTA.
Mr. KASSON, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution: Ilewlved, That the SecyWar he requested to inform this House whether any eEort has been madeto collect into burial ground sot apart jor that purpose the remains of the officers and soldier skilled and buriedon the various battle fields abqut Ath intn: and itnot. whether any special appropriation is necessary therefor.
Mr. KASSON. I ask the Clerk to read the letter which I send up to his desk.
The Clerk read, as follows: ATLANTA, Gnosou, March 26.1866. DrAu Sin: Last Saturday I rode over the battle ground of 22dJuly, 186i. It seemsto mesomething on lit to be done about getting our brave (lend to got or. They areburied all about the country; some in fields that are now preparing for plowmf: then all tracesof the gal answill heo literated. fOund gravesof Iowa.Wise onsin.Minnesota, Illinois. In iana. Michigan. Pennsylvania. Ohio, NewYork, Massachusetts, and Connecticutsoldiers. Many are buried in privatelotsthesewill soonbe do over. Cannot you call attention to this subJoctand. are it attendedto. Yours truly. A. Y. RAWSON. Hon. J0112A1. KAssou.
Mr. SCHENCK. I wish to make a suggestion to the gentlemen who introduces this resolution, an it is, that he strike out “SecyWar” and insert “President.” The law places this matter especially in the hands of the President, and it oes not legitimately belong to the War Dept.
Mr. KASSON. If the gentleman considers that it would be more properly in that shape I will change it. I will) strike out the words ““SecyWar be directed, ” and insert President be requested.” The resolution was agreed to. VOLUNTEERS IN SERVICE.
Mr. SCHENCK. I have here a communication from the SecyWar, showing precisely how many volunteers, both white and colored, are now in the service. There has been some misapprehension nboutthat matter, and some gentleman introduced a resolution to get this information. I present the papers which have been communicated to me as chair man of the ComMilAffairs, and move that they be laid upon the table, and printed for the information of members: The motion was agreed to. PAY OF THE ARMY.
Mr. SCHENCK, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to reucc and establish the pay of officers, and to reulate the pay of soldiers of the Army of the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComMilAffrs, and ordered to be printed. PAPERS WITHDRAWN. On motion of
Mr. SCHENCK, by unan imous consent, the ComClaims was discharged from the further consideration of the petition of Columbus L. Lancaster, and leave was granted to the petitioner to Withdraw his papers from the files of the House, copies being left. ADDITIONAL PORT or ENTRY.
Mr. PIKE, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill making the cit of Calais an additional port of entry in the assamaquoddy district; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. CHANGE on REFERENCE. On motion of
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, by unanimous consent, the ComNavAffrs was discharged from the further consideration of the petitions of Captain J. M. Partridge and James Thompson, and the same were referred to the ComMilAffrs. EIGHT HOUR SYSTEM.
Mr. WARD. I ask leave to introduce a petitition 15 feet long, signed by several hundred citizens of my district, asking that a legal days work for labor on the Government works be 8 hours. There being no objection, the petition was received and referred to the ComJudiciary and then, on motion of
Mr. THAYER, (at half past 3 oclock p. m.) the House adjourned.
Mr. 0. Warinner. late paymiister of U.S. Army. asking for relief. Also. the petition of citizens of Chicago for additional duties on foreignw ool. Also. the petition of citizens, of Du Page county. Illinois. for an increasedduty upon foreign wool. Also. the petition of sundry merchantsof Chicago asking that Petreis hydroineter be made the test of the dtrength efspirituous liquors. By Mr. WILSON. of Pennsylvania: The petition of citizens of Center county. Pennsylvania praying Congress to enact such just and equal laws for the regulation of interstate insurances of all klhd8 M may be effectualin establishing the greatestsecurity for the interestsprotectedby policies. die. By Mr. WINDOM:JtResolution of theLegislature of the State of Minnesota in relation to the settlement of certain Indians in Minnesota. Also. a memorial of the Legislature of theState of Minnesota for the improvement of the Mississippi river. Also. a memorial of the Legislature of the State of Minnesota for the establishtneutofamail route from Shakopee in Scottcoiiiity. via Maple Glen. New Dub lin. New larket and Cedar Lake. in said county.to Oral, in the county of LeSucur and from thencere turning via Helena, Lydia and Marystown to Shak opoe. NOTICE OF A BILL. The following notice for leave to introduce a bill wasgiven under the rule: By Mr. llILL: A JtResolution proposing an amendmentto the Constitution of the U.S. to apportion Representativesaccording to the number o votersin the several States.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. TUESDAY, April 3, 1866. Prayer by Rev. A. D. GiLLEirr i, D. D., of Washington. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
Mr. WILLIAMS, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the petition of Anthony S. Robinson, praying to be compen sated for the servicesof his deceased father as a brigadier general in the Mexican army during the struggle for independencein that country, and for indemnity for losses and injuries sustained while acting in that capacity, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. HOWARD, from the ComPacificRR, to whom was referred a bill S.No. 100) to rese ind the order of the President desi noting the Sioux City and Pacific Railroad ompany to construct the branch of the Union Pacific railroad from Sioux City, reported it without amendment. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.224) to aid in the construction of the southern branch of the Union Pacific railway and telegraph, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes, asked to be discharged from its furtherconsideration, and that it be referred to the ComPubLands; which was agreed to. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a resolution of the Legislature of Iowa in favor of grantin to the Iowa branch of the Union Pacific railroad the same aid, under the same restrictions and limitations, as has been granted to the Kansas branch of the Union Pacific railroad, asked to be discharged from its furtbr consideration; which was agreed to. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the petition of Charles Fosdick Fletcher, prayiu for the passage of an act authorizing the [Sanding of a railroad to the Pacific ocean, on the southern route along the line of the 32nd degree of latitude, asked to be discharged from its further consideration; which was agreed to. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a petition of persons engaged in running coal to market down the Ohio river from littsburg, praying for an appropriation for the improvement of the Ohio river between Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, and Butfington Isl and, WestVirginia, asked to be discharged from its fdrther consideration; which was agreed to.
Mr. HOWARD. The same committee to whom was referred a resolution of the Legislature of Nevada in favor of the passage of an act prohibiting the Central Pacific Railroad Company, or any other railroad compan, from no niring any right, title, or interest to the minera s, of whatever character, except iron or coal, which have been, or may hereafter be, discovered in the lands donated by Congress to such companies, have instructed me to ask to be discharged from the further consideration of the resolution, for the reason that they are not aware of the existence of any law now in force which does grant that kind of minerals to those companies, and they see no necessity for the legislation contemplated by that resolution. The report was agreed to.
Mr. DAVIS, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred the petition of Sehley & Emer, praying that a pension may be granted to HlS. Agnes W. Laughlin, reported a bill (S.No.241) directing the enrollment of Agnes W. Laughlin, the widow of a deceased soldier, as a pensioner; which was read and passed to a 2nd reading. BILL INTRODUCED.
Mr. HENDRICKS asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a.bill (S.No.240) for the relief of Minerva Lewis, administratrix of the estate of Ezekiel Lewis, de ceased; which was read twice by its title and referred to the ComClaims. INTERNALREVENUE.
Mr. SHERMAN. I am directed by the ComFinance, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.No. 438) to amend an not entitled “An act to provide internalrevenue to any port the Government, to pay interest on the 1 public debt, and for other purposes, ” approved Ju] ne 30, 1864, and the act amendatory thereof, approved March 3, 1865. to report it back ad, versely, and as the opinion of the Senate ought, to be expressed on this bill now I will explain i the matter with a view to have the action of the Senate at once upon the report of the committee. The bill proposes to extend the time for collecting the income tax of last year 2 months. Under the present law the income tax lists are made up about the lst of May. The blanks are now ready to be distributed for the purpose of making up the income tax for last year, and the HoRep propose to extend the time 2 months in order to give effect to the proposed amendment to the in come tax now pending in that House. The bill also proposes to extend the time of levying the tax on certain schedules of personal property with a view to the same modification. The ComFinance are of opinion that it is wiser to collect the income tax of last year according to the present law, allowing any changes that may be made hereafter to o erate on the tax in the future, and as the blan s are now ready for distribution this matter ought to be acted on at once, so that the officers of the Government may proceed to execute the law. I move, therefore, that the further consideration of the bill be postponed indefinitely.
Mr. GRIMES. I suggest to the Senfrom Ohio that he allow that bill to lie over until there is a fuller Senate than there is here now. For my own part, I have thought some what on this measure, and do not agree with the report of the ComFinance.
Mr. SHERMAN. Very well, I have no objection to its going over.
The PRESIDENT proiemporc. The motion of the Senfrom Ohio is withdrawn for the present; the bill will lie over. LAND DISTRICT IN NEBRASKA.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas, submitted the following resolution; which was consideretgby unanimous consent and agreed to: Rmloell, That the ComPubLands be instructed to inquire into the expedienc of establishing an additional land district in the Iirritory of Nebraska. the office for which shall be located at Fort Kearney and that they report by bill or otherwise. REMOVAL OF CASES FROM STATE COURTS.
Mr. MORRILL submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent and agreed to: Resolved.That the committee on the judieiarybein structedto inquire into the expediency ot so restraining by law the act of the 2dof March, 1833, as that the sumoshall not confer the right of removal from a court ofanySlnto on indictments for salesofspirit nous liquors, under the laws of said States, to the SCOTUS before trial of the samein the State cOurts. COMMITTEE SERVICE.
The President protempore. The Chair will announce, under the order of yesterday directing the vacancy on the ComPubBldg and Grounds to be filled, the appointment of Mr. POLAND, of Vermont. to fill that vacancy. Under the practice of the senate, the Senfrom Missouri[Mr. BROWN] will now be the chairman of the committee, and will be so entered if no objection be made.
Mr. BROWN subsequently said: I find myself assigned to the cliairmanship of the ComPubBldg and rounds. In view of that fact, I should like to be excused from further service on the Committee to Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. SHERMAN. In order to enable the Chair to constitute the ComContingent Expenses, which has been disarranged cutirelybythe death of ourlamented colleague, Mr. Foot, I ask to be relieved from service on that committee. One of the members has already been excused by death and another by his own act. I ask to be relieved from further service on that committee, so that the Chair may make up a new committee. he motion to excuse
Mr. SHERMAN. I move that the Chair be authorized to fill up the Committee to Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate. The motion was agreed to by unanimous consent.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. There are 2 vacancies in the ComPensions occasioned by the withdrawal of Mr. YATES and Mr. Stoc ton. I move that the Presideutpro tempore be authorized to fill these vacancies. 1 lo motion was agreed to by unanimous consent.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLOYD, its CliiefClerk, announced that the HoRep had passed the following hills, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: A bill (H.R.No. 443) granting a pension to Mrs. Elizabeth York, widow of Shubal York, late a surgeon in the 24thregiment Illinois infantry volunteers; A bill (H.R.No. 444) grantingapension to Lewis W. Dietpich; A bill (H.R.No. 445) for the relief of the legal representatives of Betsey Nash; and A bill (H.R.No. 446) for the relief of Nicholas Hibnev, late a private in the 6th regiment MissouriState militia. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the following hills of the Senate: A bill (S.No.85) granting to the State of Wisconsin a donation of public lands to aid in the construction of a breakwater and harborand ship canal at the head of Sturgeon bay, in the county of Door, in said State, to connect the waters of Green bay with Lake Michigan in said State; and A bill (S.No.107) to provide for a term of the district court for the district of Minnesota to be held at the city of Wine na, in said district. APPROVAL OF A BILL. A messn e from the POTUS, by Mr. Moons, his Secretary, announced that the President had, on the 3lst of March, O proved and signed a JtResolution (S.R.No. 50) in relation to the publication of the laws of the U.S. OATH of OFHCE.
Mr. SUMNER. There is a resolution of inquiry which I offered yesterday that was obfected to, so that it went over under the rules. move that the Senate take itnp and act on it. The motion was agreed to; and the Senatn proceeded to consider the following resolution: Resolved.That the SecyTreasury and the PostMGenl berequestedto report to the senate.so far as the records of their respective Depts will nllow, whether at any time since the report of December lust any persons have been permitted to enter upon the duties of officeuand to receive the salary or cmolumentsthereof.without taking the oath prescribedby not of Congress;or, if they have taken it, addingthercto explanations; orifthey have altered the oath. then the alterations the have made; and if such things have been done, t on to report the namesof such persons and the oath they havetaken and the reasonsfor allowmg the same.
Mr. HENDRICKS. A resolution of that sort implies, to say the least of it, a censure or aquestion of the fidelity of a Cabinet officer. I wish to inquire of the Senfrom Massachusetts whether there is any information upon the files of the Senate that calls for an investigation of that sort.
Mr. SUMNER. I am very much obliged to the Senator for making the inquiry. he Senator perhaps has forgotten that as lonfr ago as December last a resolution passed thisl) y on my motion calling for specific information on this very question. I have in my hand the reply of the SecyWar and of the SecyTreasury letting us know that in many cases persons had been apponited and had been allowed to proceed with the execution of the duties of their Offices without taking the oath required by Congress, and the report sets forth the various alterations made in the oath, the modifications. I hold the reports in my hand. The present inquiry is a dressed to the time subsequent to this for mer report. Now, the question is whether anything has occurred to suggest the present inquiry. I am obliged to say that something has occurred which has come to my own knowledge. In deed I may state to the Senate that last Satur day I called on the ComrIntRev and he put in in hand from 20 to 30 different oaths o asst assessors which had been reported to the Dept; being so many mo ifications or alterations of the oath required by Congress; and I under stood from him that notwithstandin those alterations or modifications these parties had been recognized as incumbents of their offices respective y. It was to bring that information before the Senate that I felt it my duty to make this 2nd call, which it will be erceived is only an lementary to the 1st cal.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I was aware of the information so far as it came from the Treasury Dept; I had not noticed the reply of the War Dept; and I thinkt ere is nothing in the communication from the i SecyTreasury that calls for on further investigation. As I now recollect the reply of the SecyTreasury, it amounted to about this: that there were some persons who had been apointed to office in the southern States who ha modified their oaths, but in no ver important respect, as I now recollect; and I think he said that no sale. had been aid in any case where the party held, not taken the oath prescribed by law. I suppose there is no Senator who doubts the fidelity of the SecyTreasury to the Union, or his fidelity in the execution of the laws. I think, as a public officer, he stands very closely by the laws. I am justified in saying that of him. He may in some instances find it exceedingly difficult to execute the laws, the duty of the execution of which devolves on him in some localities; and he may have to use as officers for the time being some persons who cannot take the oath without some modification; but he has not permanently, as I recollect his report, appointed men to office and paid them the salaries who failed to take the oath. If the Senator says that he wishes to institute any proceedings against the Secretary, or to call inquestion because of this investigation his fideityto the discharge of the duties of his office, then there is a purpose in it; otherwise there is no purpose in this kind of resolutions. They simply go to the country as a sort of impeachment of the officer. I do not like to see it done in regard to a man from the State of Indiana who I think is faithful in the discharge of his duties, as I think Secretary McCulloch is. I think he is an able officer and a very worthy one. Therefore, I am oppiosed to all such resolutions.
Mr. SUMNER. There is a law on our statute book requirin that all Officers before entering on the discarge of their duties or receiving any salary or emoluments thereof, shall take a certain oath. Now, I presume“no Senator imagines that any functiona of this Government is invested with what, in o (1times, was called the dispensing power; that even an officer so important to us all as the SecyTreasury can disease with the law of the land. For myself, insist that the law of the land, so long as it continues law, shall be obeyed both by citizen and by may strate. I do not believe that the SecyTreas u can be exempted from any such obedience. ow, sir, at this moment I make no crit icism; on former occasions I felt it my duty to criticise his conduct in this respect; I do not know that I shall deem it my duty to crit icise it again; butI do think the Senate on ht to have before it allthe facts in the case. We ought to know to what extent the law of the land isset aside, if it be set aside. The resolution on your table does not affirm that it has been set aside; it simpl addresses an inquiry to certain officers, asing them if in their respective Depts it has been set aside, and then it proceeds, if they report that it has been set asi e, to ask the circumstances under which it has been set aside. Sir, this resolution is entirely according to the course of business in this body, and, at this moment, I submit that it is of peculiar importance. The Senate ought to have this information; the country ought to have it and I submit still further that the character of the SecyTreasury himself is involved in an accurate statement of these facts. We ought to know to what extent the SecyTreasury is disposed to set aside the awe of the land.
Skip Skip The President protempore. The question is on agreein" to the resolution offered by the Senfrom lRIassachusetts. The question being put; there were, on a division ayes 16, 110es7; less than a quorum voting. Mr. GRIMES and Mr. SUMNER called for the yeas&nays, and they were ordered; and being taken, resulted yeas 25, nays 9; ABSENT So the resolution was agreed to. DEALS and DIXON.
Mr. COWAN. I am instructed by the ComFinance to report a JtResolution (rS.R.No. 56) authorizing the SecyTreasury to adjust the claim of Beals d: Dixon against the U.S. I ask that it be put upon its passage now. it: JtResolution was read a 1st time by its title, and passed to a 2nd reading. The President protempore. The Senfrom Pennsylvania asks the unanimous consent of the Senate to consider the resolution now. Is it objected to?
Mr. GRIMES. I ask for the reading of the ioint resolution at length for information.
The Secretary read it. It proposes to authorizethe SecyTreasury to cause the accounts of Beals dz Dixon, for deliveries of material after May 1, 1861, under their contract with the U.S., to be adjusted and paid, allowing to them such additional prices or material delivered after May 1, 1861, as, in his opinion, they may bejustly entitled to under the provisions of their su.lementary contract, dated January 1, 1857, i, in the opinion of the AttyGen, they have a legal claim upon the U.S. for an increase of prices under their contract.
Mr. CLARK. I think that had better lie Over.
The President protempura. Objection being made, the JtResolution lies over.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate hill 0. 62. The motion was agreed to; and the bill (S.No.62) to amend an act entitled “An act granting land to the State of Oregon to aid in the construction ofamilitar road from Eugene City to the eastern bouu ary of said State” was considered as in ComWhole. It proposes to amend the act entitled “An act granting lands to the State of Oregon to aid in the construction of a militar roa from Eugene City to the eastern boun cry of said State, ” so as to grant to the State, for that purpose, such odd sections or arts of odd sections, not reserved or otherwise c ally appropriated, within 6 miles on each si e of the road, to be selected by the surveyor general of the State, as shall be sufficient to supply any deficiency in the quantity of the grant as described occasioned qby an lands sold or reserved, or to which the rights of reemption or homestead have attached, or which for any reason were not subject to the grant within the limits desig nated in the act.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. GUNBOAT FOR. LIBERIA.
Mr. SUMNER. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate hill 0. 229. The motion was agreed to, and the bill (S.No.229) to authorize the POTUS to transfer a nboat to the Cowernment of the republic ofuLiberia, was read the 2nd time, and considered as in ComWhole. It authorizes the POTUS to transfer to the Government of the republic of Liberia anyone of the gunboats now or hereafter included in the Navy of the U.S., her armament, tackle, a parel, and furniture, which may be acceptable to that Government and can, in the judgment of the SecyNavy, be convenientlys ared for that purpose, and upon avaluation to e fixed by him. It also directs the SecyN av to enter into a contract with any person du y empowered by the Government of that republic, by which that Government shall engage to repay to the U.S. the value oi the gunboat to be transferred; but the contract is to nlate for the full reimbursement to the U.S. of the value of such gunboat in annual installments, not exceeding ten in number, with interest on each at 6%. perannum from the date of the contract.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed; HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. The following bills from the HoRep were severally read twice by their titles, and referred to the ComPensions: A biMr. No. 448) granting a pension to Mrs. Elizabeth York, widow of Shiibal York, late a surgeon in the 54th regimentllli nois infantry volunteers; A bill (H. It. No. 444) granting a pension to Lewis W. Dietrich; A bill (H.R.No. 445) for the relief of the legal representatives of Betsey Nash; and A bill H.R.No. 446) for the relief of Nicholas ibner, late a private in the 6th regiment MissouriState militia. “ASIHINGTON CANAL. On motion of
Mr. WADE, the Senate resumed, as in ComWhole, the consideration of the bill (S.No.190 to incor porate the DistCol Cana and Sew erage Company, the pendingquestion being on the amendment reported by the comDistCol to insert the following as a new section 1 SEC.12 and be“ Abife: That in order to aid the said “ DistCol Canal and Sewerago Corn any" in fulfilling the objects and requirements of this act. that all the right. title, property interests and estate, in law or cquity, of the LU.S. of. bridges in and to the Washington canal and the crossin the same and the lands upon which said canal, brigee.basins. locks. rese rvmrs. (locks and whnrves are now located. occupied. used. an constructed.be, and the same are hereby.yestedin the said “DistCol Canal and Sewerage company." to have and to hold the samefor the use and anefit of the said company.
Mr. GRIMES. I should like to have the Senfrom Ohio, who has charge of this bill, explain its provisions. As I understand it, this section grants to this company all the rights of the U.S. to the canal, and the bridges, basins, locks, reservoirs, docks, and wharves that are constructed, or that may be constructed, upon the public lands in this city. What I want an explanation about is this: the 2nd section declares that this company shall do certain things; that they shall dig out the canal so that it shall be ten feet below high water mark; bntI do not see that there is any power of limitation reserved by Congress, or any power left on the part of anybody to enforce this performance on the part of the company, and no power even to change, alter, or amend the charter itself that we create by the passage of this bill.
Mr. WILLEY. I propose to offer an amendment at the end of the 2nd section, which will, perhaps. cover the difficulty to which the Senfrom Iowa refers.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr.PonsnoY in the chair.) The question now is upon the amendment of the committee.
Mr. GRIMES. I should like to know what the amendment that the Senfrom WestVirginia proposes to offer is before we give away all our interest in the canal
Mr. FESSENDEN. Does it affect the public rounds? L
Mr. GRIMES. Then they will follow it down from the Eastern branch along the river.
Mr. GRIMES. The 2nd section reads: Between the watersof the Anacostin. river, commonly known as the Eastern brnnch. where it enterl tithsejuDnicsttiroient wofitChotluhme Pboiato. Rmuanenning river along said river to Right through the navy yard and through the arsenal grounds and tlho Potomac river and the Chesapeakeand Ohio cans and then it follows up the Potomac.
Mr. wILLE Y. The Senfrom Ohio will remember I do not see it in the amended bill as reported that an amendment was agreed upon in the committee so as to obviate the difficulty suggested by the Senfrom Iowa, striking out all after the word "branch ” in the 6th line of that section down to and including the words "river and " at the end of the 8th line; and I have also an amendment which I think will meet the objection of the Senfrom Iowa entirely.
Mr. WADE. There is an amendment to obviate that. I am only speaking now of the general scope of the bill. There are one or 2 amendments that are proposed by the committee to be made to the bill which I think will make it entirely safe. I know of no other plan contemplated that will relieve us of the danger of that nuisanceat this season. This company assure us that in 3 weeks from the time this bill shall pass they will put this stream ofwater through the banks of this canal entirely covering up the dangerous matter there. Of course it will take another season to dig it all out, but they will immediately do what will prevent its being dangerous on such a nuisance as it is now. No other plan contemplates any such thing. There is another. Surveyors have been sent out, but we cannot hear anything from them, and do not know whether they are making any progress in the surveys or not. There has been a proposition to cover u the canal, and give the land which would be t icreby made to a company for doingit, but nobody seems to be responsible for it, and there is nothing doing in thatline, nothing that promises any immediate action on the subject. I thinkthis is a vig orous company, ready to go to work now, and I can see no real objection to granting them this privilege, provided the properrestrictions are applied to it, and of course nobody objects to such as are eccssnry to make it entirely safe. I think it m?t to be done, and if it is done at all, it should be done speedily. That is all I wish to say about it just now.
Mr. HENDRICKS. It is not my purpose to oppose this bill, but I think it properthat I should make a statement. At the last meetin of the ComPubBldg an Grounds before the sickness of its chairman, Senator FOOT, the subject of the improvement of the public grounds, particularly of the improvement of this canal, was discussed. What was the exact conclusion of the colnmittee I am not able to say; but I had the impression that it was decided that the committee ought to report a resolution to the Senate providing for the appointment of an engineer.
Mr. GRIMES. We have nssedthrough congressa resolution orderingt of SecyW at to detail 3 engineers to survey the canal; and report what was advisable and ought to be done, and they are now engaged on that work.
Mr. HENDRICKS. W as that adopted at this session?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair understands it was a resolution of the Sehate, not a JtResolution.
Mr. HENDRICKS. The purpose of the chairman of the committee was, as I recollect, to secure the services of the engineer of the city of NewYork who had charge of the improvement of the great park in that city. That engineer was before the committee at the last session, I recollect, and he explained the improvements that he thought advisable, and they struck the committee with a great deal of force. This particular improvement was to be made in connection with the general improvement of the city and of the public grounds. unquestionabl it will invollfe a large expenditure of money; at, sir, this expenditure as to be made. This is the seat of Government; our public buildings are here; people are coming here from every part of the country; and was willing to appropriate a very handsome sum of money for the improvement of the city and particularly this part which is so offensive both to the health and to the taste of the people; and I am not sure whether we ought to tie our selves up by iving this canal to a company; I am not satistied u out it. It is very certain that there ought to be an improvement in this art of the city. That was contemplated; and I feel that this cit has sustained a very great loss in the death of that cminent Senator. He was giving attention to it, and being so devoted to the subject himself, and his tastes being so accurate, the rest of the committee, I believe, did not give the attention to the subject that they otherwise would. For myself, Iam scarcely able to say what his views were, but he contemplated a very handsome improvement in that part of the city.
Mr. BROWN. I will remind the Senfrom Indiana that at the same meeting of the committee one of its members was instructed to move an appropriation of some 25,000 dollars, in connection with the same subject to which he has alluded. Thatis probably what he refers to. I believe the resolution was introduced by the Senfrom Del aware, [Mr. Bloom 1] and the engineers are now engaged in making surveys on the grounds.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I should like to make an inquiry of the Senfrom Ohio as to the effect of this bill. When it is passed, if I understand it, the right and title to this canal and all its appurtenances are vested in this company. Suppose, then, that the company refuse or neglect to imrove the canal, as contemplated by this bill: does not that put it beyond the power of Congress to provide any remedies, and does it not leave the health of this city, so far as this canal may affect it, at the mercy of these private individuals?
Mr. WADE. My idea on that subject is, that unless they went on and performed the stipulations of this charter they forfeited all right and title to it at once.
Mr. CLARK. There is no provision of that kind in the bill.,
Mr. WADE. There may not e a provision of that sort in the bill, but that condition would attach to it, in my judgment. However, I am perfectly willing that an amendment of that ind should be made, that unless they progress by such a time with it, and unless they finish it in such a time, they shall forfeit all their rights to the Government. I have no Objection to such an amendment as that; but I suppose the bill itself would forfeit the right unless they did perform the stipulations contained in it. I think it is so drawn that they would. However, there is no objection to such an amendment as that. I have no desire not to have the bill entirely guarded, but I have a desire, when it is made right, that it shall pass, and pass speedily.
Mr. CLARK. I wish the Senfrom Ohio, if he can, would tell us what property specific l ally it is proposed to pass to this corn any, if he knows what it is. It passes all that the U.S. have, but what is that “all?”
Mr. WADE. All that I could ever see or find out was the ditch. the canal, and some bridges that cross it at some of the streets. I do not know that there is anything else in it or about it. I do not suppose that there is anything else. h
Mr. CLARK. I observe that the amendment now under consideration proposes to transfer the canal and the bridges, basins, locks. reser voirs, docks, wharves, &c., as they BIGVUOW located, but this transfer is not to affect any public rights. Can the Senator tell us, if this cororation should take down one of those briges, whether it would affect any public right?
Mr. WADE. I do not know but it would affect a public right. It mightbe said that if abridee crossing a public road was taken down it would affect a public right; but they are required to keep upthe briges, and they would not take them down unless it was absolutely necessary; and of course if the did they would have to build them again. I0not suppose, however, that it would be necessary for them to interfere with any bridges.
Mr. CLARK. Does that clearly appear from the bill?
Mr. WILLEY. There is a provision in the bill to that effect. Mr. CLARK. I will thank the Senator to point it out to me. There is a provision in section 13That nothing in this act contained shall be or deemed.in any held manner or way.to micro or impair any public or private rights or interests.
Mr. WILLEY. The 7th section provides That the said companyshall, at their own costand expense, erect and maintain good and substantial bridges over and acrosssaid canal and sewerwhere over it crossesany public road or street.
Mr. CLARK. Exactly; that may be, because if it was where a public street crosses it might impair a public right to take away the bridge; but there may be other things that are very convenient to the public which they might undertake to remove and which we would not desire to have removed. It seems to me we ought to know exactly what we are doing when we undertake to transfer this property to them, and I conceive it may be very possible that the city, which may have some interest, more or less, I do not know what, but the Senator intimates that they have something.
Mr. CLARK. They may have something, and they might not desire to have a corporation made in this way who might have conflicting interests with them. I tiink we ought to understand what interests the city have and what the U.S. have, and what we are parting with, and what situation we are coming to when we have done it. I do not know but I shall agree entirely with the provisions of the bill if they are found suflieiently guarded. I will say that I agree entirely With the object that the Senfrom Ohio has to get rid of this nuisance, but I want to get rid of it in a propermanner. I desire now to call the attention of the Sea ator, because I do not. wish to trouble the senate many times, to the 2nd section of the bill, that we may know whether that is sufficiently guarded. By that section this company is Authorised and empoweredto survey. locate. lay out. construct, o crate and useand enjoy a continu ous line of cuna and sewer, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof. between the watersof the Anacoatiariver. commonlyknown as the Eastern branch, whereit enters the DistCol. That is the northeast part of the District, and then it is to run along down that river until it comes to the Potomac river, and then it is to go by the Potomac river to the Chesapeake and Ohio canal, at or near the city of Georgetown, to that point, running completely around the angle of the city. Now, I wish to know from the Senfrom Ohio whether there is anything that fixes the line of this canal, or whether this corporation have the discretion to pass here or pass there, provided they keep along the line of the river.
Mr. WADE. The line has not been located. It is, in that particular, like every other survey that I have ever known. They have not got it staked out so as to describe it exactly. but the line of it is to be, conveniently, along the rivet. If it does injury to anybody where they carry it, of course they have got to pay for it, like any other railroad or canal company. They do not expect, however, to go very far from the bank of the river. They could not locate it more certainly than it is stated in the bill until the engineers have staked it out.
Mr. CLARK. I supposed it must be so, and I want to call the attention of the Senate, and of the Senfrom Ohio in particular, to this feature of the bill, because it seems to me one of very great power. It proposes that these gentlemen sha 1 build this canal along the line of the Anacostia river, and the may go here or go there, a little more or a ttle less near the river.
Mr. WILLEY. It is proposed, as I stated some time ago, and itwas so agreed in the committee, to strike out, in the 6th line of the 2nd section, after the word “ branch" down to and including the word “and” at the end of the 8th line, and to insert in lieu of those words, something like the following: At a point near where it intersects the Potomac river. tience to the nearest and most practicable point of intersection with the presentold canal now running through the city of Washington and thence iii and by and with the said old canal. through the cororntclimitsof the citiof Washingtonmndthence to t ie Chesapeakeand O io canal at or near George town.
Mr. WILLEY. Thatis the way it will read. It is proposed to strike outthe words, “where it enters the DistCol, running along said river to its junction with the Poto mac river and the Potomac river, and, " and to insert after the word “ branch” the words I have just read, so that the section will read, when those words are inserted, as follows: That the said coin any is hereby authorized and empowered to survey ocatc.luy ont.construct. operate and use and enjoy a continuous line of canal and sewer. with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof. Between the waters of the Anacostiaqiver. commonly known as the Eastern branch. at a point nearwhere it intcmccts the Potomac river, thenceto the nearest and most practicablepoint of intersection with the presentold canal. now running throu lithe city of Washington and thencein and by. up with the said old canal through the corporatelimits of the city of Washington and thence to the Chesapeake and Ohio canal.at or near the city of Georgetown.
Mr. CLARK. I desire to understand the Senfrom WestVirginian little more clearly than I now do. The effect of his amendment, as I understand it, would be to start from the Anacostia river, near its mouth down near the arsenal, and strike the old canal, and follow that up.
Mr. CLARK. It would abandon that part of the scheme which proposes to take water from the Anacostia river near the point where it enters the District and carry it down toward the arsenal and thence up along the river. It abandons a large part of the route as it is now in the bill. a
Mr. WILLEY. It abandons the whole of the route from where it strikes the DistCol down to near the mouth of the Anneostia river.
Mr. CLARK. That is as I understand, and of course that would avoid any question about the navy yard or any public ground in that direction. That would be so much the better in so much as it makes the damage that might be done the less. But, sir, I desire to call the attention of the Senfrom Ohio and the Senate to the provision of the bill it may be necessary, but it should be more guarded it seems to me which allows this corporation for a purpose of this kind to take individual property. Every body at once objects to their taking the property of the navy yard or the public property for any such purpose; but if they should not take public property, why should they take private property? Ifyou Will uard your own property so securely that they should not touch it. why should they take the private property ofan individual?
Mr. WADE. We always take private property and condemn it for public uses. We have a right to do that, on paying for it, under the Constitution; but we can hardly take public property that is necessary for the Government. We might do it constitutionally, because the Government can do what they please with their own. But what this bill grants to this company is what every company that ever built a canal or a railroad is compelled to do. Let them agree with the (private owners if they can as to the transfer an sale of the property that they require; but if they cannot agree, there must be some equitable way of ascertainin the value of the oranges, and those that see the privilege must pay for it. I know of no other way. If you cannot do that, of cause you must abandon the matter at once; the thing cannot be done.
Mr. CLARK. That may be, but we should alwa 5 consider the thing to be attained and the amage we are going to do in securing it. IVe propose here, without a survey, Without markin out the route, without ascertaining what 1; e damage to individuals Will be, or where this canal is to go, except in a very General way, to give these people the right to do this and to take private property. wish to call the Senators attention to the provision in the bill in regard to that matter: and in case the owners of such property cannot agree upon the terms of the sale thereof or shall be afemme covert.infant mmcompoamentori, mprisoned, or resident beyond the DistCol. then application may he made by the resident of said company to the chiefinstice of the U.S.district court for the DistCol, for the appointment of 3 persons, who shall be freeholders in said District. as a commissionof inquest of dam ages and who shall gouponpnd inspectanyproperty proposed to be taken by said company for the purposes contemplated by this act; and beforeany person so appointed assuchcommissionershall proceed to act, he shall take an oath or ntiirmation that he will fairly and truly value the damagessustained by the ownpr or ownersof any property by the useand occupation of any such real estate.water rights or other property, by said company; and said commission shall reducetheir inqumtion or findimr to writing, and sign and seal the same and it shall then he returned to said chicfjustice, who shall file the same in the Office of the registerof deeds of the city of washington: and said report shall be confirmed by the supreme court of the DistCol at its next term after the return of said report, unlessfor cause shown to the contrary. Now, is there any provision here that the party who is in any way interested shall be notified by this in uisition?
Mr. WADE. do not think there is. I think that the bill is deficient in that respect.
Mr. CLARK. It does not provide or a hearing. It provides that these 3 men shall go on, assess the damages without any hearing, as they think best, and make a report to the court, and if the court say it is all right, very well, and then the owner is concluded forever. I understand the Senator to say that he thinks that defective.
Mr. WADE. I think notice ought to be given.
Mr. CLARK. I have no doubt that will commend itself to his sense of justice. But I want to go a little further With this provmion: and in case there be good cause shown. said in nest may be set aside and said chief justice shall direct ther inquisition to be taken in the manner above scribed. Supose they take another inquest, and the landiolder is no better satisfied, what then?
Mr. WADE. There is the end of it, I suppose. p
Mr. CLARK. There is to be no notice in either case, and there is the end of it. I do not think the Senator himself would say that that was fair to the man whose property is to be taken against his consent for a purpose of this kind.
Mr. wADE. I agree that those interested in this adjudication should have notice. There is no doubt about that; but I see nothing else in the way. I think that is usual, and it ought to have been in here.
Mr. CLARK. It is usual in a case of this kind, and I should (very much prefer, instead of the court appointing these 3 men, to let the 2nd trial he by ajury.
Mr. WADE. The committee talked over that subject of a jury trial. We in Ohio, I believe, generally condemn property by a jury, but I believe in most of the States they do not. The committee thought that the condemnation by these commissioners would be just as good and as valid as by a ury; but I am not particular about that. If it is thought better to have it determined by a jury rather than by this commission of t ree men, I have no objection to such an amendment.
Mr. CLARK. I have no preference for any particular mode, whether by a jury or by a commission; but what I do want in a case of this kind is that where you take a mans propert, and where he has properl a right to find fau t, he shall have a full and air hearing, and shall have fair and equitable damages assessed to him by some cometent tribunal. I suppose the Senator wants t at.
Mr. CLARK. I do not think this provision oes quite as far as it should in that particular. should hardly be willing to give a corporation who want to build up an immense coal depot along the banks of the canal the power to take a mans property in that way.
Mr. CLARK. In some cases it has to be done, and in all cases where the public service and interests warrant it. I am only calling the attention of the Senator and the Senate to some features of the bill. There is another feature to which I wish to call his attention, and that is in the 12th line of the 2nd section: That said canal or sewer shall form a duct or depositoryfor the sewersof Washington. I suppose that is an object to be secured by the U.S. in granting these privileges to this company. Will the Senator tell me whether that is to be without the consent of this rest. company or without pay to them, or whet or it is to be under their control or not, because the public have a very large interest in this matter. As I understand, this canal must be the depository of the sewerage. Then it should be abundantly guarded, so that the city should have the right, either with or without pay, as might be found just and proper, and as it might be the intention of Congress in making I this grant.
Mr. VADE. That subject was under consideration in the committee, and we thought this provision sufficient: That said canal or sewer shall form a duct or depositoryfor the sewersof Washington. We supposed that in this general manner the grant in favor of the city was larger than it would be by any words we could put upon it. This company could nbt restrain the city under this provision, as we believe, from making such sewerage into the canal, and in such manner and form as they thought best for the pnr oses of sewerage. We thought that it won d be an advantage to the city to give them the general power to empty their sewers into the canal, without prescribing exactly the means, because the means not being prescribed, they can take such means and in such way as they think best. That was the opinion of the committee, and we thought it would he better to leave it in that way than to have it more spe cific on that subject. I will state here in regard to the sewerage that one great advantage tobe gained by this navigable canal will be that sewers may be let into it and they will empty into the river. The engineers in this city have heretofore been unable to find a way in which sewerage can be effective into the river, because it has been found on survey that between the canal and the river there is a rise of ground which renders it extremely difficult to make the drainage and sewerage.
Mr. CLARK. The Senator does not come quite to the question which I wish to present to his mind, and that is, whether this city will have the right, without any expense paid to this company, to drain into the canal.
Mr. CONNESS. That can be very easily given.
Mr. CLARK. The Senfrom California says it can be easily given, but if we do not call attention to it now and the bill passes without any provision on the subject, we shall have all thesequestions hereafter. It is very true it can be easdy given, and that is one of the things I want to provide for. I want to know the senators idea about it, and what is intended by the bill, so that we may amend it in that particular, if it shall be found necessary.
Mr. WADE. I think myselfthe bill is better for the corporation of the city as it stands than in any other way. It is to be without any expense, and the canal company is compelled to allow the sewerage in there, and it will be in their own interest, too.
Mr. CLARK. Will the Senator allow me to inquire whether the committee intended that it should be without expense?.
Mr. CLARK. Then it should be clearly expressed in the bill.
Mr. CLARK. I think not. It reads: That said canal or sewer shall form a duct or do pository for the sewersof the city of Washington.
Mr. CONNESS. If the Senator will permit me, by adding there the words, “ and the corporate authorities “of the city of Washington shall always have the right, his purpose will be accomplished.
Mr. CLARK. This would give the right, but the question of expense is not settled, and you might have that coming into the court.
Mr. WADE. Rather than debate that matter, I will add the words “without expense to the city.”
Mr. CLARK. I have not the least doubt that the Senator desires to do everything in regard to the bill that can be done, and ido not wish to defeat it. I desire to call his attention to it, and show how it is necessary to or fect the bill, in my judgment, and show im the objections that I have, and the defects in the bill.
Mr. WADE. I certainly have no desire to have any insecurity in the bill, but my idea of the construction of the bill in reference to that was that it did not require an amendment in that particular; but perhaps it does, and if it does Iain willing to insert the words “without expense to the city.”
Mr. CLARK. Here we are granting to this corporation very large corporate powers, and beside that we are granting them I0not know how much property in the wa of the canal and bridges; the Senator himseltydoes not seem to know; and for what are we doin itl For the purpose of clearing out this cana and securing sewerage and a depository for the filth of the city. lhcu it ought to be made entirely clear when we pay for this advance by granting this property that we have not got to ay over again, and thatwe shall always have this privilege. I only desire to secure what the Government and the public should have for these large privileges, in thus criticising the bill. That brings me again to what has been suggested by some other Senator, that if we grant these large corporate powers, and this corporation does not go along and perfect this canal and thus render a fair equiva cut to the public and put it in such a situation as that it shall secure the benefits intended by it, these privileges and this property should revert to the public or to the U.S. They might form their corporation; they might take up the grant and the property under this bill, and then stop; what thenlj here is noprovision here that they shall forfeit anything. They may say, “ We intend to go on by and b;” but when are you to make them do it? Vlmt ii the limit here? I am not aware of any.
Mr. JOHNSON. Is there no limitation on the completion of the work?
Mr. CLARK. I do not know but there may be some limitation in regard to the time for commencing the work, but there is no forfeit ure if they do not fulfill it. If there is a limitation, will the Senfrom Ohio point me to it.
Mr. JOHNSON. Is there no limitation about the beginning of the work?
Mr. CLARK. Neither the beginning nor en l nor middle. It is a grant of this property to them for the purpose of doinv this thing, without the survey of a route, without specihcation of the time when they shall berin or specification of the time when they shaIl end or ever doingit at all. It seems to me all these things ought to be provided for. I am ready to aid the Senfrom Ohio in perfecting this bill, if I can. I do not desire to throw any obstruction in his way or the way of the public in etting rid of this nuisance. Whether this is the best way of doing it, I am not prepared to say. I should rather hear the report of the engineers, if any have been appointed to make a survey, as to what they think best in regard to it. I know very little about it myself. I only desire to secure to the public a fair equiv alent for what we grant.
Mr. WADE. If the Senator has ot his amendments ready, and can perfect tie bill now, it had better be done now; but if not, it can be recommitted.
Mr. WILLEY. here is an amendment pending.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 1stquestion is upon the amendment reported from t 10ComDistCol, to insert a new dection as section 12. The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment of the committee was lating tie passage to insert. as section 13, the following: through the same." SEC.13 and he 1! Abife: That nothing in i this not contained shall be held or deemed.in any i manner orway. to injure or impair any public or privnterihts or interests or in any manner to affect the same cyond the mere transtertif the rights of the U.S. to said “DistCol Canal and SewerageCompany."
Mr. GRIMES. I move to amend the amendment by inserting atter the word “ private, ” in the 3rd line, the words “ or corporate;” so that it Will read: That nothing in this act containedshall be held or deemed.in any innnner or way. to iniure or impair any public or private or corporaterightsor interests. The amendment to the amendment. was agreed to. The amendment as amended was adopted.
Mr. WILLEY. In the 22nd and 23rd lines of the 1st section, perhaps there ought to be a little verbal amendment. It now reads: and upon its franchises, to borrowmoney.to nego tiate loans upon their franchises, bonds. mortgages or other securities. I move to strike out the word “itsH in the t“wenty 2nd line and to insert the word their, ” so as to make the clause correspond. We should have it either singular or plural.
Mr. CLARK. In a previous part of these ction the Word “its” is used, and perhaps it had better be changed to “ its" all through the section.
Mr. WILLEY. Then I will vary my motion and move to strike out the word “ their” in the 23rd line, before the word “ franchise, " and insert the word “its.” The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WILLEY. In the 2nd section, after the word “branch, ” in the 6th line, I move to strike out the words “ where it enters the DistCol, running along said river to its junction With the Potomac river, and the Potomac river and, ” and in lieu thereot to insert: At a point near where it intersects the Potomac river. thenceto thenciirest and mostpracticablepaint ofinterseetionWith the present old canal nowrun ningthrouigh the citg of Vashington and thence in, by. iindwi.h the sui old canal throughthe corporate limits of Washington and thenceto. So that the section will read: That the said company is hereby authorized and empoweredto survey, locate. lay out, construct. operate and use, and enjoy a continuous line of canal and sewer.with all the pllVllCZGSandappurtenances cthocmremooln.blyctwcen the waters of the Anacostia rivrr. known as the ha ternbranch. at a point near where it intersects the Potomac river, thence to the nearestand mostprncticablepaint of intersection with the presentold canal now riinning through the city of Washington, and thencein. by and W1!!!the said old canal through the corporatelimits of the city of Washington and thence to the Chesapeakeand Ohio canal. at or near the city office rgetown. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WILLEY. In the 12th line of the 2nd section I move to strike out the word “that” at the beginning of the sentence, and to insert the word “ the ” so that it will read: The said canal or sewershall form a duct ordepos itory for the sewersof the city of Washington.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is a mere verbal amendment and will be considered as adopted.
Mr. WILLEY. I call the attention of the Senfrom Ohio to the clause in the 2nd section commencin at the 14thlineI where it says, “an said company shall have the exclusive right to use said canal for the purpose of conveying freights and regulating the passage throu 11 the same of all vessels, boats, rafts of lum )0!“ and crafts of all kinds capable of navigating said canal and ewer, and ask him to compare it with the 11thsection on page 9. That section reads as follows: That said canal and sewer, when completed, shall forever thereafter he esteemedand ts on to be a public hiighwayfor the transportation of all goods, commodities, or produceof every kind and description. It seems to me there is an inconsistency here. The clause in the 2nd section gives to the company “ the exclusive right to use said canal for t ic purpose of conveying freight s and relglili a other section mn es it, as I think it ought to be, a.public highway for the transportation of all freights that anybody may bring upon it upon the payment of tolls and freights. It strikes me that this clause in the 2nd section which I have just read after the word “Washington, ” in the 14thline, down to and including the word “sewer, ” in the 18th line, ought to be stricken oht, and I make that suggestion to the honorable Senator.
Mr. WADE. I think that would be an improvement. There does seem to me to be an inconsistency between the 2 sections.
Mr. WILLEY. Then I move to strike out the clause commencing in the 14thline of the 2nd section in the following words: and said companyshall have the exclusive right to usesaid canal for the purpose ofconveying frei ts and regulating the passage through the someo all vessels boats rafts of lumber and crafts of all kinds, capable of navigating said canal and sewer. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WILLEY. I propose further to amend the 2nd section by a ding at the end of it the following werds: and in casethe said companyshall fail to keepsaid canal and sewerin such pro)air, clearof sediment and deposits as aforesaid. for t ree consecutive months the franchise hereby granted to said companyshall be forfeited and the rights and privileges creby granted shall revert to the U.S.
Mr. CLARK. I suggest to the Senfrom WestVirginia that he had better incorporate in that amendment a provision that they shall commence the work at such a time and have it finished at such a time, so that we shall have only one provision on that subject in the bill. There ought to be a provision that they shall commence the work by a certain time and have it finished by such a time.
Mr. will EY. I have no objection to that, if the Senator will suggest an addition.
Mr. CLARK. It requires a little time to frame an amendment of that kind and I was just turning my attention to it.
Mr. WI. EY. With the leave of the Sea ate, I will withdraw the amendment for the present and I ho c the Senator will perfectit.
The PRESIDI G OFFICER. The amendment is withdrawn.v
Mr. CONNESS. I desire to call the attention of the Senator who has reported this bill to the 12th and 13th sections, which appear to be new ones. They may be right as they stand. but they appear strange to my mind. The 12th section is in these words: SEC. 12. Abife: That in order to aid the said "DistCol Canal and Sewer age Company" in fulfilling the objectsand requirements of this act. that all the rig it, title. proIcrty. interests and estate.in law or equity, of the U.S.A and to the Washington canal and the bridges crossing the same and the lands upon which said canal. bridges.basins.locks, rese rvotrs, docks and wharves are now located. occupied. used and constructed. be, and the sameare hereby.vestedin the said " DistCol Canal and Sewerage Corn any " to have and to hold the samefor the use and enent of the said company. Why convey the bridges? You are required to keep them Open as public easements and highways, and why convey to this company a property in them? Why not let the property in those bridges remain where it now is, in the public? It appears to me to be a very questionable matter tolgrant to a company.
Mr. WADE. suppose the right to the material should belong to the company. They are obliged by the bill itself to keep up these bridges across the roads as they are now; but it was really desrgned that the bridges should pass to them, for they are useless for any other purpose than to be used for the company, who are compelled to keep them up for the public convenience.
Mr. CONNESS. The next section provides That nothing in thisact contained shall be held or deemed. in any manner or way. lOlYlJUIOo rimpair an y public or private or corporaterights or interests. the question is whether that is a sufficient protection against an exclusive control of those rid es.
Mr. wADE. Of course they will keep the bridges up in their own way. They are to be kept. up for the public convenience and if they lhOuld fail to do so, of course they will be nable for any damage that may accrue in consequence.
Mr. SHERMAN. I will ask my colleague what section of the bill imposes on them the duty of keeping up the bridges?
Mr. CONNESS. The control overthe tolls is in the 8th section, but that refers to the canal, I presume.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate, in ComWhole, have adopted the 12th section, and it is not in order to amend it now. It can be amended in the Senate, when the bill is reported to the Senate.
Mr. WADE. I have a few verbal amendments that I wish to offer to perfect the bill before it passes out of committee. There are some verbal alterations necessary in the names of the corporatorsmentioned in the 1st section. The name “John Van Reswick, ” in the 3rd line of the 1st section, should be “John Van Riswick.”
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That correction will be made.
Mr. WADE. In the 6th line of the 1st section, after the words “ NewOrleans, ” I move to insert the words “ William H. Noble, of Minnesota." The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WADE. In the 7th line of the “1st section, the name “Martin H. Cossell” should be “Martin H. Cassell.”
Mr. GRIMES. The argument that is urged in favor of the passa c of this bill is, that it is necessary that someting should be adopted as a sanitary measure. I should like to know from the Senfrom Ohio how soon he supposes this canal will be completed under the provisions of this bill.
Mr. WADE. I suppose I can answer that. I understand the gent emen who have charge of this work to say that if they get the right to do this work, they are willing to bind themselves and perhaps we had better make them hind themselves that within 3 weeks after we pass the bill they will put a current of water through the canal that will answer all the sanitary purposes. They say they will fill it with fresh water from the upperPotomac within 3 weeks after the passage of the bill, and then they intend in another season to complete the work. They do not expect to do it short of that. I am willing to insert a provision in the bill bindin them to do that within that time. They will O immediately what we want done for sanitary purposes; they will fill the canal with a current of fresh water right away.
Mr. GRIMES. I have no doubt the gentlemen who are seeking this charter will make very fair promises; but the question is, not what do they promise now, but what does the bill require them to do. By reference to the 10th section of the bill it will be seen that it provides: That the said company shall assoon aspracticable after the passage 0tp this act, commencework upon said canal They of course being the parties to determine whether it is practicable to commence at once or not and shall, within 8 months after said company shall have acquired by condemnation or purchase the right of way for said canalI fully complete the same. They are required to complete it within 8 months after they have condemned the last portion of the property; but it is left entirely within their own control to determine whether they will condemn that property this year, or 15 years hence. Now, I desire to call the attention of the Senate to the 6th section. It will be observed that according to this section there is no limitation whatever upon the amount of real estate or other property that this company is authorized to own. Just as much as, the corn any themselves deem necessary the are entited to hold, neither more nor less. I); the Senate prepared to intrust such an authority as that to this corporation? This section provides That said company is hereby authorized and empowered to pure iase. lcuse, receive and hold real estate, and anyotherproporty which shall be deemed necessaryfor the useof said company. Who deems it necessary? The corporation. There is no limitation whatever upon it.
Mr. WILLEY. I have got a limitation here.
Mr. WADE. No, I do not proceed upon that groun I believe it does su stantially belong to the government, inasmuch as, from all the investigation I have been able to make, the Government has aid all the money for constructing it; but the legal title I suppose to be vested in the cit. The bill proceeds upon the ground that if the city own it in whole or in part or have any interest in it, this corporation must acquire hot right either by agreement with the city, or by the other mode of condemnation.
Mr. GRIMES. I do not understand that the Senator cofitroverts my proposition that the legal title isin the city of I: asington. I know that when those bonds fell due, and the city government could not pay them, we stepped in and paid them, but we did not thereby acquire any title. That was a mere gift to the government of the city of Washington. If the legal title is in the city of Washington, it seems to me there ought to be some conference or some acquiescenceon the part of the city of Washington before we undertake to legislate this property out of their hands entire y. It is a matter of a good deal of moment; it may be of infinite moment. If it be so necessary as is alleged, I trustthat there will be perfect drainage, and that perfect drainage can only be secured by means of this canal. trust this bill will be recommitted. The amendments which the Senator has on his desk and which he proposes to oEer, I have no doubt are properly matured now, but we can better consi or them if the are presented to us in the bill as reporte by he committee than when they are im ly read from manuscript at the Secretarys es.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator make a motion 2
Mr. GRIMES. Yes, sir, I make the motion that the bill be recommitted to the ComDistCol.
Mr. WILLEY. I have no objection to that motion, but I will say while I am up, in answer to the Senator, that by the act of Congress of 1832, allthe right, title, and interest of the U.S. in and to this canal were transferred to the mayor and the corporate authorities of the city of Washington, but upon the express condition that they should make the canal so many feet deep, 8 or 10, I forget which, and that they should constantly keep it in repair and clear of all sediment, &c., and in operation. Whether they have complied with that condition or not, I suppose the Senfrom Iowa can very well judge.
Mr. GRIMES. But there was no forfeiture.
Mr. WILLEY. No forfeiture has been de clared by any judicial tribunal. That is exactly the way it stands at this time. What right the U.S. by that act of congress did really transfer to the corporate authorities of Washington city is not very clear from previous levislation on the subject.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. SETTLEMENT OF TREASURY BALANCES.
Mr. GUTHRIE. I move to take up Senate bill No. 158.
Mr. MORRILL. I do not like to interpose, and if the bill of the honorable Senator will take no time Iwill not object, but this day was assigned for the consideration of District business.
Mr. GUTHRIE. I think it will not take any time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. This is a very necessary and properbill. The chairman of the ComFinance requested me to take it u and see General Spinner about it. I took it ligand had it examined by the experts in the O cc, and they believe it is exactly right. I found a ditheulty of the same kind about bal ances while I was in the Treasury. The last act passed by Congress authorizing the settlement of balances was in 1837, and it was so construed as not to be continuing, looking for ward to future balances, but only to those that had already accrued. This bill keeps this money under the control of the Government to settle the claims forwhich it was issued, but it brings it into a separate account, so that the particular accounts of the office rs can be closed. Ihcse balances arise from accident and misfortune, and sometimes it takes a long time to settle them, and sometimes they are for pretty considerable amounts. Very often they are very small; but sometimes they amount to 500 and 1000 dollars. It is very easy to bring them into the Treasury by a war rant and carry them to this account where they stand and the particular officergets his account closed. I recommend very decidedly the passage of the bill.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. WASHINGTON COUNTY LEVY COURT. On motion of
Mr. MORRILL, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.190) enlarging the powers of the levy court of the county of Vashington, in the DistCol.
Mr. MORRILL. The ComDistCol. have reported the bill with an amendment striking out all after the enacting clause in the original bill and inserting a substitute, and I suggest that the amendment only be read.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The reading of the original bill will be dispensed with, and the amendment reported by the committee only will be read, if there be no objection. l
The Secretary read the amendment, as follows: That the levy court of the county of Washington. in the DistCol is hereby empoweredto declare and locate as public highways such roads known and used as military roads in during said district the rebellion as said court may deem advisable: Provided That the damages which the owners of the land over which said roads prms shall sustain by reasonofsaid roads being declared public highways shall be assessedas provided for in section tehnrteiteleodf "tAhen aaccttocfoEnofenrzrriensgs caeprptraoinvepdoJwuelyrs1o, n18th1o2. lcyy court for the county of Washington, in the DistCol.” The amendment was agreed to.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amended; the amendment. was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be eng ossed for a 3rd reading, was read the 3rd time, and passed. wouuxs HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION. On motion of
Mr. MORRILL, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.167) to incorporate the Womens Hospital Association of the DistCol. It proposes to constitute Mrs. Adelaide J. Brown, Mrs. Jane L. Smith, Mrs. Harriet M. Blanchard, Mrs. Maria M. Carter, Mrs. Jane Farnham. Mrs. Hannah J. Gillette, Mrs. Mary W. Kelly, Mrs. Kathleen Carlisle, Mrs. Sarah C. Jones, Mrs. Mary K. Lewis, Mrs. Elmira W. Powell, and Mrs. Elizabeth Sampson, and their successors duly chosen. a body corporate in the DistCol, with the usual powers of a corporation. The object of the association is to found in the city of Washingtona hospital and dispensary for the treatment of diseases peculiar to women, in which those unable to pay therefor shall be furnished with medicine and medical attendance gratuitously.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. EVIDENCE OF MARRIAGES. On motion of
Mr. MORRILL, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.185) to preserve evidence of marriages in the DistCol. It provides that. every minister of the gospel, appointed or ordained according to the rites and ceremonies of his church, may be licensed to solemnize and attest marriages in the DistCol. The license is to be issued by the clerk of the supreme court of the District, under the seal of the court, in the following form:.To any person ebleunfizrriaqesaleldtic.iiiiingrizeiZiwiiiii:ia:uulma a mYoaurriaargee hbeeretw be licensed to solemnize and witness an. if you find thut there is no lawful impediment thereto: and bovine O done. you are commanded to appear in the clerks office of the supremecourt of the DistCol without delay, and certify the same. r c. The clerk is to provide a book of his Office, consisting of licenses printed in blank, one Oh which he is to till up with the names of the parties for whose marriage any license is issued; and beneath it is to be printed a certificate, to be made by the person attesting the marriage, in the following form: I certifythat on the day of. 18 hun c an. witnessed the union. in due and legal form. of the parties aforesaid. Minister of. The clerks fee for issuing the license, felling up the blank, receiving the certificate, and indexing the same, is to be one dollar; and for each copy of the license and certificate of solemnization, and verifying it by his signature and the seal of the court, his fee is to be one dollar; and every such copy is to be conclusive evidence of the facts it contains. The ComDistCol reported the bill with an amendment, to add the following as an additional section: Sirc. 6. Abife: That ifany minister or other person.not licensed as aforesaid to solemnize marriages. joins any personsin marriage, he shall be punished by confinement in the penitentiary for a term not exceeding 5 years, or by fine not excceding 31.000.
Mr. JOHNSON. The effect of a.marriage without a license has been recently discussed in the Supreme Court, and is not yet decided. It is a doubtful matter with the profession I speak more particularly of the profession in Maryland and the courtsin Maryland whether a marriage solemnized by a clergyman without a license is void because of the want of license. I rose for the purpose of asking whether there is in this bill any provision that the marriage is to be a valid one or is to be an invalid one if there is not a license.
Mr. MORRILL. No, sir; there is no provision touching that particular subject at all. It is left entirely as the law now provides.
Mr. JOHNSON. Then I so gest to my friend that perhaps it would be advisable that a provision should be made on that subject, because it is a matter of very grave doubt, and it is a question that ought not to be left in doubt. The general rule, as the Senate are aware, is, that. any contract made contrary to the policy of the law is void. Whether amar riage contract falls within that rule is aquestion upon which there are differences of opinion; but I suggest to my friend, the chairman of the committee, whether it would not be advisable to clear away that doubt in this bill. I will not move an amendment myself. Let it be passed by now and it may be thought of hereafter. I will vote for the amendment reported by the committee because that amendment is clearly right. The minister in such a case ought to be punished. The amendment was agreed to.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross for a 3rd reading, was read the 3rd time, and passed. NATIONAL SAFE DEPOSIT COMPANY. On motion of
Mr. MORRILL, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.177) to incor crate the National Safe Deposit Company of Yoshington, in the DistCol. It proposes to declare A.
Mr. Shc erd, William S. unting tou, S.P. Brown, G.W. Riggs, Nathaniel Wilson, G. H. Plant, together with the subscribers to the stock of the association and their successors and assigns, abodypoliticandeorporate, by the name and style of the National Safe Deposit Company of Washington, with the usual powers of a corporation. The capital stock is not to exceed $200,000, divded into 2000 shares of $100 each; nd the company are authorized to receive and keepon deposit all such valu ables, gold, silver, or papermoney, bullion, precious metals, jewels, plate, certificates of stock, or evidence of indebtedness, deeds or munimeuts of title, or other valuable papera of any kind, or any other mile or thing what soever, as may be left or deposited for safe keeping with them, and be entitled to charge such commissions or compensation therefor as may be agreed upon, an for their complete preservation and safe keeping are to construct, erect, lease, or purchase such fire proof and burglar proof building or buildings, vaults, iron or composition safes, or other means which may become necessary, and generally to transact and perform all the business relating to such deposit and safe keeping or preservation of all such articles or valuables as may be deposited with them, and also to invest the capital or funds of the company, or such money or funds as may be deposited with them for that purpose, from time to time, in the public funds of the U.S., or in any stock or property whatsoever, and to dispose of the stocks, money, and property in such manner (not contrary to law) as to them shall appear most advantageous to the company.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, orderengross for a 3rd reading, was read the 3rd time, and passed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLOYD. its ChicfClcrk, announced that the HoRep had passed the following bill an JtResolution of the Senate: A bill (S.No.94) to amend an act entitled “An act for the relief of seamen and others, borne on the books of vessels wrecked or lost in the naval service, ”.approved July 4, 1864, and for other it oses; and A Jtresolution (S.R.No. 2) for the restoration of Commanders William Reynolds and Melancton B. Woolsey, U.S. Navy, to the active list from the reserved list. V The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the following bills, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: t A bill (H.R.No. 163) to further regulate. the appointment of certain volunteer officers to the regular Nav; and A bill (H.R.No. 107) to provide for the better organization of the pay Dept of the Navy. EXEMPTION of Damons PROPERTY.
Mr. WADE. I move to take up Senate bill No. 218.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Pour: ROY.) The Chair understands that the bill referred to by the Senfrom Ohio is in the hands of the ComDistCol, the committee not having yet reported it.
Mr. MORRILL. I move to proceed to the consideration of House bill No. 228. The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H.R.No. 223) to amend an act to incorporate the Mutual Fire Insurance Company of the DistCol was considered as in ComWhole. The bill had been reported by the ComDistCol with an amendment, which was to strike out in line 3 the words “said not" and insert “An act entitled An act to incur orate the Mutual Fire Insurance Company of the DistCol, approved on the 10th day of January, 1855; so as to make the bill read: Be it enacted.ike" Thatthe 3rd sectionof an not entitled " An act to incor crate the Mutual Fire insuranceCompanyof the DistCol." Apsparomveeidsohnet rheeby 1.0stoh day of January. 1855be, and the amendedas to road "$0,000" in the place of “$20,000.” The umendmentwas agreed to.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. It was ordered that the amendment be engrossed, and the bill readthe3rdtime. The bill was read the 3rd time and passed. POTOMAC NAVIGATION COMPANY. Mr. MORRILL. I move to take hill No. 51; it is the last bill I shaul p Senate to consider today. The motion was agreed to; and the hill (8. No. 51) to incorporate the Potomac Navigation and Transportation Company of the DistCol was considered as in ComWhole.
Mr. MORRILL. I move to amend the bill by inserting after the word “company, ” in the 9th line of the 1st section. the words “for the purpose of transacting the businesspf common carriers;” so as to make the section read: That George W. Riggs, M. G. Emery. Fitghu h Coylc. Ward H Lnnion. Moses Kelly. Henry Cooke. S. A. Ieugh. Riley A. Shinn. Esau Pickcrell and GeorgeHill.jr and theiriissociatesand assigns. be and are hereby. created a body corporate and politic. under the name.style and title of the Poto mac Navigation and Transportation company. for the purpose of transacting the businesso common CRITICIS the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MORRILL. I move further to amend the bill by addin, at the end of the 2nd section these wor 5: Provided. however, That said corporation shall not be authorized to enter upon the businessof the company until at least $500,000of its capital stock has confully subscribed. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MORRILH. I move further to amend the bill by insertin after the word “river” in the 4th line of the 4th section the words “upon and at some point, " so as to make the section read: That said corporation is hereby authorized to purchase and hold lands and may locate and construct.wharves.docks and railways into the potomac river upon and at 9 point in front of Masons Island. socalled. as may lie necessaryfor the objects of said company. to be built under the supervision of the Superintendent of the CoastSurvey. soasnot to interferewith thqnuvigation of the potomacriver and the use and maintenanceof saidwharvos.docks. Senate ask the and railways shall be subjectto the municipal regulations of the city of Wasliinirton. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MORRILL. I move further to amend that section by, striking out the words “so called” alter the word “island” in line 4; they do not add anything to it. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MORRILL. I now offer the following amendment as a new section: 530. 7. Abife: That this act may be altered. annulled or repealedby Congress. The amendment was agreed to. i
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a 3rd reading, and was read the 3rd time and passed. HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. The following bills from the HoRep were severally read twice by their titles, and referred to the ComNavAffrs: A bill (H.R.No. 163) to further regulate the appointment of certain volunteer officers to the regular Navy and A bill (H. No. 197) to provide for the better organization of the pay Dept of the Navy. SARAH FITZGIDBON. The Senate proceeded to considerthe amendment of the HoRep to the bill of the Senate (S.No.83) granting a onsion to Sarah Fitzgibbqn, which was to ad the following proviso: Provided. That in the event of themorriago ordeath of the said Sarah Fitzgibbon. the pension allowed by this act shall becontinued to the children of the late Major Thomas C. Fitsgibbon. The amendment was referred to the ComPensions. REORGANIZATION OI" JUDICIAHY. On motion of
Mr. HARRIS, the Senate. as in ComWhole, resumed the consideration of the bill (S.No.103) to reorganize the judiciary of the U.S., the pending question being on the amendment of Mr. HOWE to strike out “5” and insert “ ten" before “1,000” in line 8 of section 17.
Mr. HARRIS. I hope the Senfrom Wisconsin will not insist upon pressing this amendment. 1 find that the judges of the Supreme Court, who have given considerable at tention to this bill and are deeply interested in it, are very much opposed to reducing this limit. Really, in principle, there is no reason in the world why anaction involving $10,000 should go to the Supreme Court when one involving less is not allowed to go there. We have provided for the more important questions involving constitutional construction, involving treaties, involving revenue and patent laws. It seems to me that in this experiment we had better at least leave it at $10,000. I hope, therefore, the amendment will not be pressed. 7
Mr. CLARK. would ask the Senfrom Indiana why if we stop a part we should not step the whole?
Mr. HENDRICKS. The Senfrom missouri[Mr. Hannansox] yesterday gave a very satisfactory reason for that. It is exceedingly desirable that there should be uniformity of decisions, and I admit that this bill will, to some extent, introduce conflicts of decisions. We must have a court of final resort, and that is the SCOTUS, to settle great questions. All gravequestions, all importantquestions should go is ere, and this bill provides that the may go there. But, Mr. President, I do nott ink that the Supreme Court on ht to be bothered with cases t at.involve smal amounts and no important question. The Supreme Court ought to have jurisdiction of those cases thatare important because of the gravity of the question involved, as constructions of the Constitution, or the statute law of Congress, or of treaties.
Mr. CLARK. That is very true; but here is a case involving $10,000, and another case involving $9,000; no constitutionalquestion arises in either; and where the case involves $10,000 the suitor may have his writ of error, and have his law settled in the Supreme Court. The man who has his $9,000 case cannot do it, and the question of law in the $0.000 case may be of more importance vastly than the question arising in the other case.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I A will say to the Senator that if the question is of sufficient importance the court elow may certify an appeal.
Mr. CLARK. Where it is of general importance.
Mr. HENDRICKS. But the distinction must be arbitrary. If you have this intermediate court of appeals do not let all the causes go to the Supreme Court. You have got to establish arbitrarily the point. at which you stop.
Mr. CLARIx. That is very true; the point must be arbitrary; but I want that point to be made so low that while it accommodates the business of the court it shall satisfy suitors as Iwell; that you shall not make it so high that there will be complaint. The Senfrom NewYork will allow me to say that we are making a bill for the accommodation of the public and the answering of the ends of justice, and not to satisfy the court. I should not think of going to the Supreme Court to ask them what questions they would choose to try or what they would like.
Mr. HENDRICKS. But I will ask the senator if he would not ask those learned judges what cases they can try. If the Senator will allow me, I will illustrate this. In the circuit court. of the U.S., a few years ago, I tried a cause that occupied 9 days. It was a very important cause, not so much because of the amount that was involved in that particular case, but to settle the rights to a very important work of general interest that affected the commerce and trade and business of the capital of the State. An apeal was taken to the Supreme Court. It lay mm; the judges reached it as soon as possible, but it was impossible to reach it until 2 or more years adrolled around. In the mean time the business of that city was very much hindered, enterprise was checked, because that question was not settled. Any court would have de cided that that question ought. to go to the Supreme Court 01 the U.S.; and yet, because the judges could not hearitproniptly, great injury was done. Now, is it not proper to ask the judges how many cases they can try 1 They know better than we do. Therefore, I submit to their judgment on that question how many cases they can decide in view of the interests of the litigants.
Mr. CLARK. Let us see, Mr. President, how this may be. Itake it that we are not always to accede to what may be the opinions of the court in that regard, that we may have some knowledge ourselves and may act on our own judgment. Now, we propose, in the 1st place, to relieve the Supreme Court of all questions of fact, which ta:6 a 3rd or a half of their time. That of itself will so facilitate the business that they may transact that which is before them. But in addition to that, we propose to carry the sum which limits theirappel atejurisdiction up to $5,000instead of $2,000; and then when you go into the circuit court we relieve the supreme judge of all circuit business. He is obliged to go into the court of appeals and spend some time there, but the Supreme Court may spend much more time here; the court may have more leisure, more time to recuperate and recover strength, and to come here and work with much more efliciency if the vacation is so valuable, as stated by the Senfrom Massachusetts, and I have no doubt it is. The point is this: I think the Senate would go too far in carrying the amount fixing the Jurisdiction to $10,000. We had better try $5,000 in the 1st instance. The Senfrom Maryland [Mr. Joussox] says to me, “Make it $6,000.” I agree to make it $6,000. I am not disposed to have any controversy about the matter, but I am satisfied that very much of the business coming from my section of the country never could and never would reach the Supreme Court as the bill stands, and the people would be dissatisfied. It would be shut ting the door and be a perfect bar to them; and so it must be in a great many other sections of the country. If the Senfrom Wisconsin assents to $0,000, I am willing to take that as a compromise.
Mr. HENDERSON. I have taken no part in this debate, and do not expect to do so, because the gentlemen who are conducting it understand the subject much better than I can possibly do; but I rise to suggest to the Senfrom NewHampshire and to the Senfrom Wisconsin and others, who have argued this subject, that they seem to supjlimose that no a.peal or writ of error will go to the Supreme ourt unless there be a judgment for $10,000 in the court of appeals.
Mr. HENDERSON. If a plaintiff claims $10,000 in his declaration an women: only 8100, he can take the case to the Supreme Court.
Mr. CLARK. diet me say to the Senator that there was a bill of that kind introduced by myself and sent to the ComJudiciary.
Mr. CLARK. It was considered by the committee with this bill and did not receive their. aprobation.
Mr. HOWE. Mr. President, I must say another word on this amendment. If we were providing a court of appeals here for the ben efitofplaintilis alone, as the Senfrom Oregon and the Senfrom Missouriseem to imagine, this bill would be sufficient, for any laintiff can get into this court on appeal ifhe is careful to lay his addamnum high enough, and they would all understand that. Ordinarily, however, it happens that there are 2 parties to a lawsuit. The defendant can only come here by appeal when he gets a judgment against him, under this bill, of $10,000. 10,000 dollars, 1151took occasion to say to the Senate yesterday, is as importantto a man who has got no more as a milion is to a man who has a million. When a judgment involves ones whole estate, it isa very important judgment to him, and he is not prepared to acquiese e in that judgment unless it is right, and you cannot justify yourselves to the people of the U.S. for excluding this class of suitors from your highest and therefore your best court, except upon the plea of stem necessity. That brings us to the question of necessity: is it absolutely necessary, to enable this court to transact its business, to limit the sum at 810,000? The Senfrom Indiana says we must rely upon the judges of this court; their judgment should be conclusive; they know how much business they can do. Certainl upon that point I take their opinions; they O know how much business they can do; but I respectfully submit that they do not any better know how much business they will have to do under this bill than lawyers practicing in that court. The Senfrom Maryland, who has for 50 years, more or less, practiced in that court, and whose opinion is erha s
Mr. CRLSWIJLL. I hope the gentleman does not look at me when he makes any such assertion as that. I have not been practicing 50 years in any court. [Laughteiz]
Mr. HOWE. Mr. President. I was looking in the other direction when I made that remark. I was referring, not to the Senfrom Maryland before me, [Mr. Enaswsi.i. ] but to the Senfrom Maryland over the way, [Mr. Journos] I hope my friend understands me now. [Laughter] The Senfrom Maryland over the way [Mr. Jouxson] told us ves terday that 2/3rds of the causes heard in this court now, under the present laws, involve less than $10,000; so that your bill. if there were no other clauses in it but just this, would lsltrike out 2/3rds of the cases that come ere.
Mr. HENDERSON. It is to be supposed that 1/2 of those cases are brought here by plaintiffs who have recovered a less sum than theyaskedin theirdeclaration. Therefore, when the Senfrom Maryland said 2/3rds of the cases here of course he meant 2/3rds of one half.
Mr. HOWE. No, Mr. President, I submit that my friend is mistaken. The Senfrom Maryland says that 2/3rds of the causes heard in this court, as the law now stands, involve less than $10,000 in amount.
Mr. HENDERSON. I am satisfied that must be the case, because the Senator was of the impression, and so was I, yesterday, that the judgment determined the amount; that is, that the judvment must be $10,000.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment of the Senfrom Wisconsin as modified.
Mr. HARRIS. I am very anxious that this bill shall be disposed of before the adjournment, and therefore hope the question will be taken on this amendment now. I hope it will be voted down; that we shall tr the experiment of allowing the limit to stun as it is in the bill as reported by the committee. I hope the question will be taken now.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. the question is on the amendment of the Senfrom Wisconsin.
Mr. CLARK. I ask for the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted yeas l3, nays 22; ABSENT 15. So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. HOWARD. I offer this amendment to come in at the end of section 7: Final process from said district courtsmay run into any judicial district of the U.S and shall be executed by the proper marshal of such district, whoseduty it shall be to executethe same nndinnko duo return thereof and who shall besubicct to the orders of the court issuing the same: and all interlo culor and final orders of saideourtsin casesin equity may O served and executed in any other district where the person to beservedor the personadjudged. to bebliabla or where the subject matterof the suit may a
Mr. HARRIS. That amendment is a W: sweeping one in its operation. If I understan it upon its reading it would authorize the district court of the U.S. for the northern district of NewYork to issue an execution to be executed in California or Oregon or any where else within the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Mr. HARRIS. It would be a very extraor dinary provision.
Mr. HENDERSON. Idesire to ask the senator a question before he takes his seat. Ifhis amendment should be adopted, and an execution should be sent from the district in Michigan to the district in California, for instance, and placed in the hands of the California marshal, and indorsed by him on the 1st day of the month and on the last day of the preceding month a State court had rendered ajud ment against the defendant, and a sale should take pace. under the process of the State court and also under the process of the district court of the U.S. for Michigan in the State of California, who would hold the title?
Mr. HOWARD. The party serving the process 1st upon the property. “1st come, 1st served, is, I believe, not only the rule of themill but the rule of the courts.
Mr. HENDERSON. The Senator may be correct; but I think it is the judgment that cre ates the lien, and not the execution. I do not pretend to say that I have any objection to the proposition, so far as it will enable a court to send its process to another district. I believe that the Senator is correct when he says that most of the States enable their courts to send process from one county into another county in the State. That is the case in my State; but we have a special provision, that when final process has been sent and placed in the hands of the sheriff of another county than the one in which the judgment was rendered. it operates as a lien on the real estate only from the moment when it is indorsed by the sheriff. Without some provision of this character, I think the Senator will fail to accomplish what he desires; or if he does accomplish the object of giving some convenience to the plaintiff, who is entited to the process, he will yet produce agreat deal of inconvenience in the State to which the process may have been sent, unless he provides somethiu further.
Mr. HOWARD. am not aware that the rendition of a judgment in a Federal court Operates as alien either upon real estate or personal property.
Mr. HEN EltSON. It operates as a lien on real estate within the district. There is no doubt about that.
Mr. HOWARD. I do not know how it may be in the State of Missouri; certainly it is not so in the State of Michigan. There is no lien created on the property until there is an actual seizure of it on execution.
Mr. HENDERSON. I think the Senator must be mistaken. The judgment itself is a lien within the limits of the district. There can be noquestion about that.
Mr. IOWARD. I think the Senator is mistaken as to the facts.
Mr. HOWARD. It may depend on the rules established by the courts; I do not know how that is; but it might depend also on the law of the State.
Mr. CRESWELL. Allow me to make a suggestion. I aprove of the general scope of the amendment, at I think great inconvenience may result from it in its present shape. The Gentfrom Michigan speaks of the pit actiee of the States. We have a practice in Maryland by which we send authenticated copies of judgments from one county into another to be executed there; but our law requires that the return shall be made to the court of the county in which the property lies. I think we might make a similar arrangement here by requiring that the execution shall be returned, and the proceedings, if any, had in the court of the district where the property lies, and I would suggest that with a view to the interests of 3rd parties. Take this case: in the city of NewYork, for instance, a judgment is rendered in the district court; execution is issued and sent to California, levied there upon lands, and returned again to the district court in the city of NewYork. Those lands may pass through the hands of half a dozen different parties; they may have other landsin connection with those lands; and those parties will be comielled to travel all the way from California to NewYork to protect their rights of property by litigation in the city of NewYork. I think it would be much more equitable and much more just to give the party holding the judgment aright to proceed against the part who litigated against him as defendant in NewYork by sending an authenticated copy of the judgment to California and requiring the proceedings to be had in that court with a view to enforce the lien acquired.
Mr. HOWARD. I shouldi have no objection to that. M object is to make the judgment effective without putting the party to the necessity of recommeneing a suit and trying his case over again in another district.
Mr. CRESWELL. My suggestion gets rid of that difficulty.
Mr. HARRIS. The amendment proposed by the Senfrom Michigan contemplates a great and radical change in the execution of judgments. There may be something in it; I am not sure thata imposition of that sort properly matured would not meet my approbation; but it is quite too important a measure to attach to a bill of this kind in a single sentence. It will not do. Every State has its own peculiar laws in relation to the lieu of judgments and the effect of the lieu of executions; perhaps no 2 States agree in that respect. I so pose the different States have their different laws in relation to the liens to be created upon judgments of the Federal courts. We have a statute on that subject in my own State, and I suppose every Senator will say that there is a statute in his own State in ref erence to it. How can you possibly adapt the execution to be issued undera proposition like this to the different State laws reative to the lien of judgments? It is impossible. A measure of this sort ought to be matured with great care. I am not sure that the general principle contemplated by the Senfrom Michigan may not be right; I am ratheriuclined to think it is: I think I might agree to it; but I hope it will not be attached to this bill. I hope that a bill will be matured by him in reference to that, and let us consider it. It will never do to adopt a pro.osition like this in an amendment such as that presented to the Senate now.
Mr. GRIMES. Several Senators around me here suggestthat this is too important a measurefor as to pass upon with this slight consideration, and have suggested the propriety of adjourning in order to give further time to consider it. I therefore move that the Sonata do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tunsnsr, April 3, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Burxrox. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. PRINTING OF A REPORT.
The SPEAKER. On yesterday a report was made from the ComPrintg which was not ordered to be printed. If there be no objection, the order to printwill be made. No objection was made. “ DBSTITUTE PEOPLE OF THE DISTRICT.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I desire to ask the unanimous consgpt of the House to report from the ComDistCol JtResolution of the Senate No. 49, for the tem porary relief of destitute people in the DistCol. I may state that it is for the relief of destitute people without regard to color; it includes whites as well as blacks.
Mr. ANCONA. I would like to have the resolution read.
Mr. WENTWORTH. I wish to reserve the right to object after the reading.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I desire to say before the resolution is read that I hope gentlemen who feel disposed to object will reserve their objections until they hear the report of the Superintendent of Police, Mr. Richards, upon this subject read. The JtResolution was read. It appropriates $25,000 for the temporary relief of the destitute population of the DistCol, to be expended under the direction of the Commissioner of the Freedmens Bureau.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I now ask that the communication be read.
Mr. ANCONA. After the reading of that report 1 am not disposed to make any objection.
Mr. DAWES. If it comes out of the morning hour I will not object.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I object, if it is intended to take action on the resolution this morning. I will not object if the gentleman does not design to take action this morn in. gMr. INGERSOLL. I would like to have action on it this morning, but if the House has no objection I am willing it shall be postponed, Bay until tomorrow.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. Let it. be referred.
Mr. INGERSOLL. It has been referred. It passed the Senate without adissenting vote. It was referred to the ComDistCol, and they ask leave to report it back this morning. Action is desired upon it at the very earliest day possible for the benefit of these destitute people, and if there is no really good objection to iIt should like to have it disposed of this morning. I am willing, however, that. it shall be postponed until tomorrow.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. Say the day lfier tomorrow.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the bill being reported and postponed and made the special order for the day after tomorrow?
Mr. ANCONA. Would that prevent its being referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union?
Mr. ANCONA. Would it not necessarily go there, as it contains an appropriation?
The SPEAKER. It would not, because that point will be waived if the House receives the report for consideration in the House by unanimous consent. No objection being made, the jtResolution was reported from the ComDistCol. postponed until the day after tomorrow, and made the special order imme diately after the morning hour.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. FoaitnY, its Secretary, informed the House that the senate had passed a bill (S.No.184) to define more clearly the jurisdiction and powers of the supreme court of the DistCol; and also a bill (S. No.27) making agrarit of lands in alternate sections to aid in the construction and extension of the Iron Mountain: railroad from Pilot Knob, in the State of Mis, souri, to Helena, in Arkansas, in which he was directed to ask the concurrence of the House. ORDER or BUSINESS.
Mr. DAWES. I call for the regular order of business.
The SPEAKER. The regular order ofbusiness is the call of committees for reports, commencing with the ComMilAffrs.
Mr. SCHENCK. In consequence of the ab sence and sickness of several members of the ComMilAffrs, I have agreed with the chairman of the ComNavAffrs, if the House will consent to it, that the Naval Committee shall change places with the Military Committee. No objection was made; and the ComNavAffrs was called for reports. NAVAL APPOINTMENTS.
Skip Skip The question was taken upon the substitute, and it was agreed to. The bill as amended was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the3rd time and passed. Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. PAY DEPT OF THE NAVY
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, from the ComNavAffrs, reported bpek, with snndr amendments, House bill No. 197, to provi c for the better organization of the pay Dept. of the Navy. The bill was read at length. The 1st section provides that the active list of the pay corps of the Navy shall consist of 100 paymasters, 50 passed asst paymasters, and 50 asst paymasters; promotions to be made subject to such examinations as are now required by law and may be hereafter establised by the SecyNavy. Section 2 provides that passed Asst paymasters sha 1 give bonds for the faithful perormance of their duties in the sum of $15,000; and their annual pay shall be, at sea, $1, 876 each; on other duty, $1,500; on leave or waiting orders, $1, 200.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I will explain the amendments which the committee have recommended. They are merel to reduce the numbers named in the bill.The 1st section of the bill now provides that the ay corps of the Navy shall consist of 100 paymas ters, 50 passed asst paymasters, and 50. asst paymasters. The committee propose to amend so as to reduce the number to 80 paymasters, 40 passed asst paymasters, and 30 asst paymasters. The committee also propose to reduce the pay provided in the 2nd section, from $1, 875 to., 1,500 while at sea, and from $1, 600 to $1, 400 while on other duty.
Skip Skip The question was taker. on the amendments, and they were agreed to. The bill as amended was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, mtRtv the bill as passed; on the table. Agreed to. COMMANDERS REYNOLDS and WOOLSEY.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, also reported back, from the ComNavAffrs, JtResolution (S.No.2) for the restoration of Commanders William B. Reynolds and Me lancton B. Woolsey, U.S. Navy, to the active list from the reserved list.,
Skip Skip The JtResolution was ordered to a 3rd rendinw, read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. ICE, of Massachusetts, mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. PERSONAL EFFECTS OF NAVAL OFFICERS.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, also reported back, from the ComNavAffrs, a bill (S.No.94) entitled “An actto amend the act entitled An act for the relief of seamen and others borne on the books of vessels wrecked or lost in the naval service, approved July 4, 1864, and for other purposes.” The bill, which was read in extenso, provides that in case an officer of the Navy or Marine cors on bear a vessel in the employ of the U.S. which, by any casualty, or in action with the enemy, has been or maybe sunk or otherwise destroyed, shall thereby iave lost his personal effects, the properaccounting officers shall be authorized, with the approval of the SecyNavy, to allow to such Officer a sum not exceeding the amount of his sea pay for one month, as compensation for said loss; provided, that such loss has notoccurred through the negligence or want of skill or foresight of the o cer making application for such loss; provided, that the accounting officers shall in all cases require a schedule and certificate from the otheer making the claim for effects so lost; and provided further, that no allowance shall be made by virtue of this act for any loss incurred prior to the Nth day of April, 1861. The bill, further provides for the repeal of soll much of the 7th section of the act of congress, approved February 24, 1864, entitled “An act the amend an act entitled An act for enrolling and calling out the national forces, and for other purposes, approved March 3, A. D. 1863, ” as provides that “the bounty money which any mariner or seaman enlistin from the Army into the Navy may have received from the U.S., or from the State in which he enlistedin the Army, shall be deducted “rain the prize money to which he may become entitled during the time required to complete his military service. ”
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. BRIGADIER GENERAL COMMANDANT.
Mr. DARLING reported back from the comNavAlfairs a bill (H.R.No. 374) entitled “ An act to create the grade of briga dier general commandant in the U.S. Marine corps.” The bill, which was read in cat tensep, provides for creating in the U.S. Marine corps the grade of brigadier general commandant, to be filled by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, by selection from the Officers of said corps; the pay and allowances to be the same as now are or may hereafter be allowed to officers of a similar rade in the Army of the U.S.; provided that the creation of the said grade shall not authorize the apointment of aids do camp except when on duty in the field. The bill further provides that after the up 1 pointment of said brigadier general, the Office of colonel commandant of said corps shall be abolished. The question was on ordering the bill to be engrossed for a 3rd readin.
Mr. SPALDING. I shouId like to hear the reasons for the passage of this bill.
Mr. WILSO, of Iowa. I ask the Gentfrom NewYork to give us some explanation of the necessity for this bill. I understand from the reading it proposes to abolish the office of colonel commandant of the Marine corps and to establish the office of brigadier general, that is, that it provides merely for an increase of rank. I should like to have some exlanation of the amount of pay now received by the colonel commandment and the amount of increased compensation he would receive on the passage of this bill, including pay and commutution. The colonel commandant of that corps, as I understand it, has no active duties to perform. He is stationed at the Marine barracks in this city. He is never upon shipboard and has never any active duty more than that which results from his being at the head of that corps and stationed in this city. He is now receiving pay, if I am not misinformed, equal to that which is paid to the Vice Admiral of the Navy. More I am told. He is now receivingr greater pay than is paid to the Vice Admiral of the Navy. t seems to me, unless there is some reason which does not appear on the face of the bill, it ought not to ass.
Mr. SPALD N G. I desire the Gentfrom NewYork to show us the necessity for making this office. I am opposed to it unless my reason be satisfied by his argument.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Will the Gentfrom NewYork tell us how large the Marine corps now is? Of how many does it new consist? For my own part. I think this isn bad time for us to increase rank or to increase sal ary. Prices are coming down rapidly while taxes are increasing. The war is over. The President says we have peace throughout our borilcrs, that everything is loyal, and what therefore, is the use of increasing the rank and pay either of the Army or the Navy?
Mr. DARLING. Mr. Speaker, the chief Officer of the Marine corps is called colonel commandant. He has 2 officers with the rank of colonel under him, and itseems properthat the head officer of that corps should have the rank ofhrigadier general and if passed, the bill does not increase the emoluments of this officer but a small amount. It will depend upon the pay of the Army, and I have not yet seen the report of the ComMilAffrs, but I understand a reduction of pay is proposed. The bill proposes to give him the ran and pay of a brigadier general in the Army. That seems to be proper. It conforms to the English and French service, the French service particularly, as he has now 2 colonels under him. There are some 3000 in the Marine cors, Officers and men. There have been severa laws passed to confer the rank of brevet brigadier general a )0“ the commandant of the Marine corps. I have been requested to introduce the bill from the committee, and it is the wish of the officers of the corps that it should pass. The ComNavAffrs agreed to it unanimously. The increase of pay will not exceed $600, if it does that. If the bill decreasing the pay of the Army passes I do not think his pay as briadier general will be as much as it is now. e is now a full colonel commanding a corps. If there were only one colonel in the corps there would be no necessity for the passage of the bill; but as he has 2 colonels under him, and in view of the practice in other services, it seems to be propere should have that rank. I will say that the pay of the Marine corps follows that of the Army, and not the pay of the Navy.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. Does the mic man believe there is any propriety in paying the head of the Marine corps more than you pay the head of the Navy? I understand the pay of brigadier general, together with minimumtions, would give this ofilcer more than the pay of the Vice Admiral of the Navy. A member of the ComNavAffrs nods as sent to that.statement. It seems to inc it would be remarkable to provide that the colonel commandant of the urine corps, in command of some 3000 men, the police force of the Navy, shall receive higher pay than the head officer in the Navy.
Mr. DARLING. I am perfectly willingthat the bill should be amened so that the pay should be no more than it is now.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. If we establish the rank now, we shall increase the pay either at this or the nextsession of Congress. increase of pay, according to my recollection, has always followed an increase of rank. It is then said that as the rank is increased the officer ought to have the same compensation as is allowed to others of the same rank.
Mr. KELLEY. If I understand this bill rightly, it is simply to change the title of the office of colonel commandant of the Marine cors. It gives him the title of brigadier Genera, and puts him on s. footing with a general of the Army of that rank, and assimilates the organization of the corps in this respectto that of the Army. This olhcer has under his command some 3000 men, widely distributed on land and sea.
Mr. SPALDING. Will the gentleman tell us whether there were ever more than 300 of these marines together at one time?
Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir; there are 300 of them now at Cairo.
Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir; at one place, Cairo or Mound City, guarding the valuable ordnance and other stores concentrated there. There are not 300 of them on board of any ship; so many are not required. About 60 is the largest number put on board of any vessel. This corps is diffused very widely, and this fact involves the exercise of character, eXperience, and sound discretion. It not only assimilates the organization of the Marine corps to that of our Army, but very nearly to that of the British service, and entirely to that of the French service. The uniform of the colonel commandant is like that of I. brigadier general. His badge of rank is a single star. I do not think the bill will increase our expenditure. If it provides for a slight increase of annual pay it will, if the incumbent enjoy the ordinary eugth of life, probably prove to be a measure of economy, as a brigadier receives no longevity ration. It may not be known to gentlemen that the colonel commandant receives an increase of pay at the end of each successive term of 5 years service. Of this this bill would deprive him. I doubt, therefore, whether the pecuniary question is a consideration in this connection. As the organization of the Marine corps is in all other respects that of our infantry, the committee think that he whose command embraces corporals, sergeants, lieutenants, captains, majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels should be a brigadier general and to give him that rank and title is the object of the bill under discussion.
Mr. ONEILL. If I understand it, the pass sage of this bill will not. absolutel increase the ay of the commandant of the h arine corps. He commands a distinct branch of the service under the general orders of the SecyNavy and the Vice Admiral. He commands some 4 or 5,000 enlisted men. Now, sir, in the Armywe have a PayMGen, a QuarterMGen, a Commissary General, and a Surgeon General, neither with a rank below brigadier general. We have bureaus at the head of which there are brigadier Generals, and in many instances major generals, and why not make the commandant of the Marine corps a brigadier general? In reply to an observation of the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SPALmso] he will doubtless recollect that not many months ago a gallant attack was made on the forts at Charleston by 5 or 600 marines, and that in the Mexican war in many of the hardest contested l)attle s, a battalion of these men won equal distinction with the Army for prowess in the field during its memorable and glo rious campaigns. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania reminds me that the marines also captured John Brown. They did, and I believe history gives them the credit of having made that capture, although the whole militia force of the State of Virginia had been sum moned to Harpers Ferry to quell that great old mans insurrection. This corps, from the time of its organization, has done great service to the country and has covered itself with distinction in all our wars. The commandant is at the head of a large body of men and has important duties to perform. It is, in fact, a distinct Dept, and yet his rank is only that of colonel commandant.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I would ask the gentleman whether the rank of colonel commandant is not superior to that of colonel of the Marine cors.
Mr. WILSON, ofIowa. If that be true, then he already has rank superior to the other colo nels in the corps, and why should his rank now be increased?
Mr. ONEILL. He has the rank of colonel with the afiix of “commandant” to distinguish him from the other colonels of the corps. But he is at the head of a large Dept performing constant and arduous duties, and I do not see why the House should hesitate to pass this bill. I do not see why he should not be entitled by not of Congress to the full rank of brigadier general, as he has command of as many men as a brigadier general in the Army, and is performing duties which occupy the whole of his time, just as much so as the head of any other Dept of the Government. Vhen Colonel Henderson was in command, although his real rank was that ofcolonel, he was always called by courtesy “ General” Hender son. Considering the services which have been rendered by the Marine ours, and the respon sibilities upon the commanting Officer, I thrnk it no more than justice that its present distinguished commandant, especially as the gentle I would answer the Gentfrom NewYork has assured the House that it will not increase the amount of his compensation, should be now rewarded with a brig ndier generalship as a mark of distinction for his faithfulness as an officer, his gallantry and activity in the field during the rebellion, and as a further appreciation of his conduct in his earlier career in the service.
Mr. BALDWIN. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. PIKE. Anything I am capable of an swerin.
Mr. BALDWIN. I wish to ask the gentleman whether the Naval Committee have considered the expediency of abolishing this corps or transferring it to the Army? It has done great service in the past, but in modern navies it is unnecessary and useless.
Mr. PIKE. Of course, if a majorit of the committee had been in favor of abolishing the corps they would not have reported this bill to increase the pay of its commanding officer. ThIat is my answer to the gentleman. say, then, in concluswn that when this matter of pay is arranged, I hope it will be taken as a whole, and not in piecemeal as proposed here.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered; which was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed for a 3rd reading. On the question, there were ayes 40, noes 40; no quorum voting. The SPEAKER, under the rule, ordered tellers, and appointed Messrs. Danuxo and Wnsuzv. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 49, noes 48. So the bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. by lfhe question recurring on the passage of the l 9 Mr. SPALDING called for the yeas&nays. Mr. UISON. I move that the bill be laid on the table. On the motion, there wereayes 62, noes 40. Mr. ANCONA demanded tellers. Tellers were not ordered. Mr. COFFROTH called for the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were not ordered. So the motion to lay the bill on the table was agreed to. Mr. WENTWORTH mtRtv the bill was laid on the table; on the table. Agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Foams? its Secretary, announced that the Senate had passed bills of the following titles, in which they requested the concurrence of the House: An set (S.No.62)to amend an not entitled “An act granting lands to the State of Oregon to aid in the construction of a military road from Eugene Cit to the eastern boundary of said State;” and An act (S.No.229) to authorize the POTUS to transfera unboat to the Government of the republic of iberia. NAVY YARD AT LEAGUE ISLAND.
Mr. KELLEY reported, from the ComNavAffrs, a ill to authorize the SecyNavy to accept League Island, in the river Delaware, for naval purposes; which was read a 1st and 2nd time.
Mr. KELLEY. I move that this billbe post poned till Wednesday of next week, after the morning hour, and be made a special order for that time.
The SPEAKER. It requires unanimous consent to make it a special order.
Mr. ROSS and others objected. The motion to postpone was agreed to; and the bill was ordered to be printed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Former its Secretary, announced that the Senate ha passed a bill (H.R.No. 223) entitled “An act to amend an act to incorporate the Mutual Fire Insurance Company of the DistCol, ” with an amendment, in which the concurrence of the House was requested. REAR ADMIRAL PAULDING.
Mr. PHELPS, by unanimous consent, from the ComNavAffrs, reported a bill for the relief of Hiram Paulding, rear admiral of the U.S. Navy; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill and report were both read.
Mr. ROSS. The bill makes an appropriation, and must, under the rules, have its 1st consideration in the Committee obthe Whole on the state of the Union.
The SPEAKER. The bill does make an appropriation, and if objected to it must be reerred to the Committee of.the Whole on the state of the Union.
Mr. ROSS. I object to its consideration now.
Mr. PHELPS. I hope the gentleman will withdraw his objection. It has been reported upon favorably y many committees of congress. It has been passed by the Senate twice, and has been agreed1to by the ComForAffrs of this House.
Mr. ROSS. There are a great many honest claims before the ComWhole on the state of the Union, and I think this should go there with them.
Mr. PHELPS moved that the bill be recommitted. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WRIGHT. I ask unanimous consent to present a memorial. There was no objection.
Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I have the honor to present the memorial of several 1,000s oft c people of niy district, asking thatthe officers of the Government, so far as they are engaged in mechanical pursuits, shall have the benefit of what is called the “ 8 hour system of labor, ” and to say that I cordially concur in the prayer of the memorialists. I move that it be referred to the ComWays&Means. The motion was agreed to. “WOOL.
Mr. PAINE. I present the followmg resolutions, adopted at a convention of woolowers of southern Wisconsin and northern llinois, held at Burlington, Wisconsin, March 23, 1866, and move that they be referred to the ComWays&Means, and ordered to be printed: Whereas the wool growing interests of the countryare laboring under disadvantages and difficulties seriously affecting its prosperity. the Wool Growers Convention of southernWise onsin and northern Illinois membled at Burlington, Wisconsin, do adopt the followin resolutions: Reqolved. hat it is the duty of Congress to provide sufficientprotection a mustthe low prices of foreign wool rown in warm atitudes. where the raising of food or sheepis uniiecossary, and whero iron] can be grown for from fiY0 i.0 12 centsperpound. Resolved.That it is the duty of Congress to impose a specific duty upon foreign wools competing with American wools.at therate offiftcen centsperpound on all unwashed wool. 30 cents perpound on all washod wool. 45 centsperpoundon all scoured wools and 25 cents perpound on all shoddy and woolen rags. Ruoloed, That we earnestly protest against th and poopntiimonpoorfteadny turiff imposing adealm em duties wools or woolons. Rmlved, That while we arewilling that imrtant woolen manufacturing interest of the U.S.should reccivep ll the protection whichmayhence cs nary to renderit prosperous, Wefirmly insist that the wool growm int crust is equall important, is entitled to cquu protection and that this convention, repnresenting the farmers and wool growersofsonth nest Wisconsin and northern Illinois, doesmostear request our Sens&Repsin Congressto see that our interests in this regard are afuallyd respecml in the proposed adjustment of the on wools and woo on fabrics.
Mr. HORRILL. I hope itwill not be ordered to be printed. If one be ordered to be printed, then we. Will have to print all the others.
Mr. liAINE. I do not insist on that part of myrhme orteiosno.]uti ons were referred to the cominittoo of Ways&Means. TAX UPON STATE BANK CIRCULATION
Mr. PIKE. I ask unanimous consent to submit the following resolution: Remlved, Tint the Committee on Bunking and Carrency be requisted to inquiro into the expediencyof providing for postponement of the assessment of the 10%. tax on State hank circiilution until the 18th of January next. or if that be inexpedient. to provide for allowing State banks to becomenational bunks anytime beforethe 18thof October next. pith all the privileges of national banksnowin operation.
Mr. ANCONA. I object. RETROCESSION or ALEXANDRIA.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I ask unanimous consent to submit the following resolution: Remlved, That the ComDistCol are herebydirected to inquire into the expediencyof repealing the act ofJuly 9, 1846. entitled An act to retrocede tho connty of Alexandria to the State of Virginia."
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Iobject. NEWYORK CONTESTED ELECTION. The House then proceeded to the consideration of the regular order of business after the morning hour, being the followin resolutions reported from the ComElections: Resolved.That Hon. James Brooks is not entitled to a seat in this House as a Representative in the 39th Congress from the 8th district in cw or. rewlved. That William E. Dodge is entitled to a seatin this House as a Representatiys i uthe 39th Congressfrom the 8th district in NewYork.
Mr. BROOKS. Of course the gentleman wants to state the facts correctly. lie states that no place was designated by the common council.
Mr. DAWES. I should have said, probably, by the city authorities.
Mr. BROOKS. The place was designated on September 9, I think.
Mr. DAWES. I said “common council” when I should have said “ city authorities, ” that is all.
Mr. BROOKS. The oint I want to make is that the place was designated, so that every body knew it, by one branch at least of the city government, the common council, on the 9th of September.
Mr. DAWES. I am told that in point of fact the common council wanted it at one liquor shop, and the board of alderman wanted it at another liquor shop. So they diffrred, and could not agree on the place of election until the 3d day of November. Therefore. in point of fact, it was just as I have stated. that the place of election was not designated until the time I have named.
Mr. BROOKS. The learned gentleman is indulging in his wit; but I want to state some facts in connection with the matter. The councilman of the ward was a Democrat and the alderman of the ward was a Republican; and the 2 together probably combined in the selection of the liquor shop of which the gentleman speaks.
Mr. DAWES. I suppose my friend, the sitting member, is as anxious and as impatient as possible to bring polities in this case.
Mr. BROOKS. h, no; I am as impatient as possible if polities are brou htinto this case.
Mr. DAWES. I wish the House to bear in mind that the gentleman has interrupted me for the purpose of introducing politics.
Mr. BROOKS. I beg the gentlemans ar don. He stated that the common of umci of NewYork did not state the place till November 3. I rose to a correction of fact, a l stated that in the month of September the common council did designate the place. Ironsimply to correct the statement of fact, and I humbly rose, for I recognize the gentleman as my judge in this case.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. FARNSWOEtTH. AsIam called upon to vote upon this question, I desire to be fully informed with regard to the facts of the case. I wish to inquire of the gentleman whether there is any evidence in this case to show that any man who desired to be registered in that district, or who desired to vote on election day, was unable to find the place of registry or the place of voting in consequence of its not having been advertised?
Mr. MARSHALL. I ask a question of the chairman of the ComElections, in order to see what position he has taken. He has stated 2 points which I confess are factsin this case. Thatat the time the registers 1st met no place had been designated, and also that the proper authorities, in appointing inspectors and registers, named gentlemen who did not reside in the election district: a portion or all of them. I ask to know whether the chairman of the committee takes the position that that disfranchises the electors of ie district and deprives them of the right to be heard on the question of electing a member of Congress. I want to know whether he takes the position it has that legal effect.
Mr. DAWES. If I ever get to the end of what I propose to say I will endeavor to an swer that interrogatory. I would consider I had made but poor work if I had not foreseen and provided for that objection. I do not refer to it now because it will come in better hereafter. It is a pertinent inquiry, and I will endeavor to answer it hereafter.
Mr. MARSHALL. It seems to me only fair that the matter should be set right in this connection. It should be understood by the House that none of these registers were under the control of Mr. Brooks or his friends, but that on the contrary, the inspectors and reisters, as well as the clerk who has been designated as a self constituted clerk, whereas the proof shows to the contrary, were, a majority of them, the artisans of Mr. Dodge.
Mr. SCOFIELD. Will the gentleman allow me a singlequestion?
Mr. SCOFIELD. twin. to ask the gentleman if, in consequence of this mistake about this registry, he comes merely to the conclusion that it is no evidence of the right to vote of any person; if that is all the conclusion he arrives at?
Mr. DAWES. That is all. I ought to have made that more clear.
Mr. SCOFIELD. There may have been many legal votes cast, but this registry is not evidence of it.
Mr. DAWES. I am obliged to the gentleman for the suggestion.
Mr. SPALDING. I desire to ask this question: supposing the registrars were disqualified under the laws of NewYork, and there were legal votes put in through their agency, would you cast awa those votes?
Mr. DAWES. ot a solitary one, and I will try to showthat I have never, I trust, been guilty of such a violation of the ballot box heretofore, and I hope I shall not be on this occasion. Mr. Speaker, in saying that a registry thus made u in fraud could carry no presumption that a gallot put into the box under and in conformity with it, was a legal ballot, I oughtto have said further, that the registry itsel is made no evidence at all, from the fact that it is shown to have been made in fraud. That leaves the poll, then, without anylegal registry: But as was well intimated in the interrogatory of the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. Sru.nixo] legal voters are not to be deprived of their bal lots for the want of this registry. The law recognizes the fact that they shall not be so deprived, even if there be no registry. But the law oes on to rescribe in what method they shal secure their ballot if there be no registry, and I ask the Gentfrom Ohio to take note of this fact. he law says if a name has not been put upon a registry the person may still vote, provied he comes to the polls and makes an aflidavit stating, 1st, the reason why his name is not registered, and 2nd, that he is a legal voter, residing in such a street and at such a number; and provided that he also brings a householder from the district in which he resides who will make affidavit that he knows him to be a voter residing in that street and at that number. When he does that the law de clares that he may vote notwithstanding there may be no regist of his name.
Mr. MARSHA L. Will the gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. MARSHALL. I was going to ask thisquestion in connection with what the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] was saying, where a registry is made, although it is irregular, informal, and defective, and an elector goes to the polls and no objection is made to his voting, and his vote is received without argument or objection as in this case, is he to be deprived of his right as an elector, and is his vote to be thrown out because an aflidavit was not de manded of him at the time? That is the question presented in this case. It is proposed to cast out the whole vote and to disranchise the entire district.
Mr. DAWES. The gentleman and I have interchanged our views, and he knows verywell the line of argument by which I arrive at an answer to his inquiry, and by which I intend to meet it in due time. Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. MARSHALL obtained the floor, but gave was to
Mr and ALL, of Pennsylvania, who moved that the time of Mr. Dawns be extended. No objection was made.
Mr. BROOKS. I understand the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] to say that if a part comes to the polls and swears in his vote by is own affidavit, verified by the afii davit of a householder of the district, he has a right to vote, and his vote isa legal vote. Do I understand the gentleman correctly as so stating?
Mr. DAWES. I do not say it is a legal vote; but the resumtion is that it is a legal vote.
Mr. BROOKS. Then I would call the attention of the gentleman to the testimony in this big book, from page 522 to page 631, where he will see that 26 persons voted upon an affidavit sworn to by a householder, recorded in the registry here set forth; which 26 votes, notwithstanding his own admission, he has thrown entirely out of the court. How does the gentleman get over that?
Mr. DAWES. I can perhaps best answer that question by asking another. For whom did those 26 men vote?
Mr. BROOKS. Thatis avery Yankee mode of answering a question, though I do not think it is a very proper one.
Mr. BROOKS. But I will answer the em tlemansquestion if he will allow me. lhey undoubt y voted for me. The gentleman has thrown them out.
Mr. DAWES. That is one of the difficulties of the case, which the House is called upon to decide in the end. If it had so happened that the law of NewYork, like the law of Missouri, and of some of the other States, enabled us to trace each mans vote and ascertain for whom he voted, another duty would have devolved upon the ComElections, which they have shown themselves heretofore willing to accept; and that was the ascertaining for whom these votes were cast, and to give the properparty the full benefit of them. There was no evidence whatever submitted by the parties, and it was not in the power of the committee to ascertain for whom a single one of these men voted, and now I suppose it is a sufficient an swer to that that the sittin member insists that they shall be counted for im.
Mr. BROOKS. I do not insist upon that, but I insist that, upon the gentlemans own admission, the who of district should not be thrown out, yet he has thrown out the whole district, when there are aliidavits showing that at least 26 illegal votes were cast in the district.
Mr. DAWES. If the gentleman had presented a particle of evidence that 26 legal voters, or 26 voters concerning whom the presumption was that they were legal, had voted for him, it would have been a ertinent inquiry for him to put to me why I did) not count them for him and here is the contestant ready to ask me why I did not count them for him.
Mr. SPALDING. Is the whole 15th district ruled out?
Mr. BROOKS. I beg pardon of the gentleman, but I am sure that tcHouse will never ive attention to details except in this way. iie recites the testimony of a man by the name of Jung. It is necessary the House should understand the difficult of gettin German names. A man is aske whet era
Mr. Young lives in his house. Although Mr. Jung lives there he says that no Mr. Y o u n g lives there. Now in German the name Jung is pronounced like Toung, but Mr. Jung would not recognize his own name when presented to him spelled Young. In order to see how the English register had blundered in recording German names, the members have only to refer to pages 801 and 302 of the printed testimony: "puma". How do you pronounce your name? will you spell?it ““Answer. Jung. XMUHOH. How is it “ pronounced? " 1mm. Young., “ uemmi. How would an Ammcan write it? newer. ounl. “Question. Is there any diilieulty of Americans correctly spelling German 11311113? "Answer. There is: no American could write my name except I spelled it " for him. Question. How is “ Answer. You cannot rsse phenlluser in English? it in nnyother way. “Question. How would an Englishman give the sound? “Answer. Mor shnuzer; shau is pronounced the saline as show in En is. Question. llowis that pronouneed shorzcr? mwer. That is about as near as you can get to“it. Question. How do you suppose an Irishman or an American poll clerk or anybody exec tnGerman wo"uld be likely to get the nameof Morse ause rl Answer. Cant tell. " Question. Do you think he would be likely to get it "right? Answer. I believenot."
Mr. DAWES. The sitting member will excuse me from yielding to him any further. He will have an opportunity to be heard after awhile.
Mr. BROOKS. I hope the gentleman will read the testimony. I know the weight of his authority, and I want him to read the testimony, and not to state it.
Mr. THAYER. I want to ask the chair man of the committee for it is impossible, of course, that members can read a volumine us mass of testimony like this whether any effort was made in the case of which the gentleman has just been speaking, to correct the return by calling the actual legal voters who cast their votes at that poll and to show how they voted.
Mr. THAYER. I mean in this precinct. I understand this poll to have been thrown out entirely, as being so fraudulent that it was impossible for the committee to give any credit to it. I wish to know whether any attempt was made to correct the poll by calling those who were entitled to vote and who had cast their votes at that oil.
Mr. DAWES. o, sir; no such attempt was made by either party; the attempt was made in other precincts.
Mr. BROOKS. I beg the gentlemans pardon. we called up voter after voter from that precinct who swore to having voted for me. I can read the testimony.
Mr. THAYER. There seems to be an issue of fact here. I should like to know how the truth is, because it seems to me a matter of some importance in forming my opinion on this question.
Mr. DAWES. The sitting member, I suppose, can refer to the evidence. If any votes were proved in that way, they should have been counted.
Mr. SCOFIELD. In the Indiana case, a few weeks a o, the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. BAYER] objected to evidence of that kind.
Mr. THAYER. No, sir; I did not object to such evidence. I maintained that where i you throw out election papers, lisis of voters, tally lists, and everything connected with the pol, you have no right to go to work and make i a new return by callin Tom, Dick, and Harry i to testify for whom they voted. I hold thatl you cannot do that legally. I simply wish to inquire of the chairman whether an effort was made, whether successfully or not, to show the legal voters in this election division by calling those voters themselves.
Mr. DAWES. I have answered according to my examination of the facts. The sitting member will call mynttention toan correction of fact which may exist. I now yied the floor.
Mr. BROOKS. The Gentfrom Illinois Wlll yield to me for a moment, so that I may read a particular case. I have not time now to investigate particularly the testimony in the smaller boo. I will read: “ William Kelly sworn. “ "Exmnined by Mr. Anthon: Question.Where do you reside? "Answer. 40th street, between 1st and 2nd avenues. did stQricute, sttwioenn.tyA rfeirsytowuaardle?gal voter in the seventh "Answer. Yes, sir; I have been a legal voter since James K. Polk was clccle. “ Question, laeflr. Ansve soinmtehfarotmdis Mtraien the avttearnsvinilclce.? question. How long in the 21st ward? "1 Miner. the 21st ward us d to be the 18 th; I have beenvQing about 20 years in“that ward. Question. Do you live in the 19thward? “"Answer. No, sir: in the 21st ward? If any man says you livu in the 19th ward. what do you say of him? Answzr. I say he is a perJurer, sir." The same testimony will be found by others further on. But I will trace this fully and ask the attention of the House to it hereafter.
Mr. DAWES. Does it say whom he voted tor?
Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir; he sayshe voted for me.
Mr. BROOKS. I will have time to show that. If the gentleman had read the testimony he would have found it.
Mr. DAWES. It does not say so in this doposition.
Mr. BROOKS. There are 2 or 3 other depositions.
Mr. DAWES. labored under. the men voted.
Mr. THAYER. That is the point I particularly inquired about. EVENING SESSION DISPENSED wrru.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire to ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts, chairman of the ComElections, whether he is willing to go on to night with this debate.
Mr. DAWES. Personally, I have no objection. I leave that to those who propose to participate in the debate.
Mr. STEVENS. Then I shall make no motion to disense with the evening session.
The SPEAKER. The Chair is informed of several gentlemen who desire to speak on this case, perhaps 2 or 3 outside of the committee.
Mr. STEVENS. Under the circumstances I do not propose to make any motion.
The SPEAKER. Then there will be a night session.
Mr. CONKLING. I will move the House adjourn, if no other member makes that motion. I know of several gentlemen beside myself who would like very much to hear this discussion, but who this evening are compelled to engage in what we deem pressing and important labor in committee. The appointment was made without any suspicion there was to be an evening session.
Mr. DAWES. So far as I am concerned I do not object.
Mr. CONKLING. I move, then, to dispense with the evening session. That is the difficulty we We could not find for whom The motion was agreed to. NEWYORK CONTESTED ELECTION Again.
Mr. MARSHALL addressed the House in support of the resolution offered by the minority us a substitute for the resolution reported by the committee. [His remarks will be found in the Appendix. Inserted below. Speech continued over two days.]
Mr. WARD. Will the Gentfrom Illinois yield for a motion to adjourn?
Mr. MARSHALL. I will yield for that purpose.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Illinois has spoken 55 minutes and is entitled to 5 minutes more.
Mr. MARSHALL. I have but little more time unless my time shall be extended.
The SPEAKER. The gentlemans time will probably be extended. DEPT OF EDUCATION.
Mr. GARFIELD, by unanimous consent, from the select committee on the subject, reported back, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, the bill to establish 2. Dept of Education. The substitute was ordered to be printed, and the bill was recommitted to the select committee.
Mr. GARFIELD offered a resolution for the printing of 1000 extra copies of the substitute; which was referred, under the law, to the ComPrintg. WITHDRAWAL OI" PAPERS. On motion of
Mr. DARLING, leave was ranted for the withdrawal from the files of the Tiouse of the papers in the case of the Mercan tile Insurance company of NewYork. On motionof mr. AFLIN, lcave was ranted for the withdrawal from the files of the House of the papers relatingto the claim of A. Garland. An then, on motion of
Mr. WARD, (at 25 minutes after 4 oclock p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Wsnnssnir, April 4, 1866. Prayer by Rev. A. D. Grummrn, D. D., of Washington. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. COMMUNICATIONS.
The President prolempore laid before the Senate a communication from the PostMGenl, transmitting, in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 3d in stant, information in regard to the oath required to be taken by persons in the employ of that Do artinent; which was ordered to lie on the tab e, and be printed.
The President protempos c also laid before the Senate a message of the POTUS, transmitting a report of the Secrcta of War, in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 7th of March, 1866, respecting the improvement of the Washington city canal, to promote the health of the metropolis; which was referred to the ComDistCol, and ordered to be printed. COMMITTEE SERVICE.
The President profemore. In compliance with the order of the Senate directin the Chair to fill up the Committee to Audit on Control the Contingent Expenses of the Sen ate, the Chair will announce the apointment of Mr. Hasnsasos, chairman, Mr. mass, and Mr. Bucunsw.
Mr. CLARK, from the ComJudiciary, to whom was referred a bill H.R.No. 238) to amend an act entitled “ 11 act relating to habeascorpus, and regulating judicial proceedings in certain cases, ” aproved March 3, 1863, reported it with an amendment.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 266) granting a pension to Mrs. Isa bella Fogg, of the State of Maine, reported it without amendment. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the amendment of the HoRep to the bill of the Senate (S.No.82) granting a pension to Sarah Fitz by bori, reported it with a recommendation that the Senate concur therein.
Mr. WILLIAMS, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the etition of Aaron Van Camp and Virginius. Chapin praying for indemnity for the alleged illegal seizure and confiscation of their property at Apia, in the Navigators Islands, by the U.S. consul at those islands, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. CHANDLER, from the ComCommerce to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 11) to facilitate commercial, postal and military communication among the several States, reported it without amendment.
Mr. YATES, from the ComDistCol, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.175) to incorporate the Pharma ceutical Association of the DistCol, reported thwithout amendment. REPORT BECOMMITTED.
Mr. POMEROY. I move that the report of the ComClaims, on the petition ofClara Moore, widow of Ely Moore, deceased, praying for the payment to her of the amount of the claim of her husband for sums paid for additional clerks and office accommodations in the reisters Office in Lccompton, Douglas county, Esnsas, be recommitted to that committee with the papers which have been re ceived since the report was made. The case was reported upon before those papers were received. The motion was agreed to, and the report was recommitted, and the additional papers referred to the ComClaims. BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. HOWARD asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.242) to amend an act entitled “An act making a grant of alternate sections of the public lands to the State of Michigan to aid in the construction of certain railroads in said State, and for other purposes, ” approved June 3, 1856; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComPubLands.
Mr. CHANDLER asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.243) to extend the time for the reversion to the U.S. of the lands granted by Congress to aid in the construction of a railroad from Amboy, by Hillsdale and Lansing, to some point on or near Traverse bay, in the State of Michigan, and for the completion of said road; which i was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComPubLands.
Mr. CONNESS asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.244) grantin lands to aid in the construction of a railroad from the cit of Stockton to the town of Copperopolis, in he State of California; which was read twice by its title, referred to the ComPubLands, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. MORRILL asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.245) to incorporate the Brewers Association of the DistCol; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComDistCol. He also asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.246) relatin to public schools in the District of ColumSia; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComDistCol. He also asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.247) donating certain lots in the city of Washington for schools for colored children in the DistCol; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComDistCol.
Mr. POMEROY asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a JtResolution (S.R.No. 57) appointing a board of managers for the National Military Asylum; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComMilAffrs . BUBIAL OP SOLDIERS.
Mr. WILSON ked, and by unanimous consent obtained, have to introduce a JtResolution (S. R o. 58) respecting the burial of soldiers w died in the military service of the U.S. during the rebellion; which was read twice by its title.
Mr. WILSON. I do not see any necessity for referring this resolution to a committee, and if there be no objection I ask to have it put upon its passage now.
Mr. JOHNSON. I ask for the reading of it for information.
The Secretary read the resolution. It proposes to require the SecyWar to take immediate measures to preserve from destruction the graves of the soldiers of the U.S. who fell in battle or died of disease in the field or in hospital during the war of rebellion, to secure suitable places in which they may be properl interred, and to have the grounds inclose, so that the resting places of the honored dead maybe secured forever.
The President proIemporc. The Senfrom Massachusetts asks for the present consideration of the resolution. Is there any objection?
Mr. JOHNSON. Of course I have no objection to it, but I will inquire whether there is any appropriation to meet the expense?
Mr. WTLSON. We may insert in the Army appropriation bill whatever appropriation may be necessary on examination. It was thought better to pass the resolution now, by itself. Something has been done in this respect in many localities; but in many nothing as yet been done. I am told that in one Staten field in which there were 200 dead was plowed up and the remains were exposed to view. A gentleman who was on another battle field, the other day told me that the remains of many soldiers could be seen, the rains having washed away the earth that covered them. It is to be remembered that we have many; hundred battle fields and places where men have fallen; and I think it is important to at tend to every part of the country in this respect. It. cannot cost a great sum, and I have no doubt Congress and the country will be willing to vote whatever may be necessary for this ur ose, and we can put it in an appropriation bill.
The PRESIDENT protempore. No objection being made tot is present consideration of the resolution, it is now before the Senate as in ComWhole. The JtResolution was reported to the senate, ordered to engrossed for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLOYD, its Chief Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed a bill (H.R.No. 458) for the relief of orue lius B. Gold, late acting asst paymaster U.S. Navy in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the following bills of the Senate, with amendments, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: A bill (S.No.80) for the relief of J. B. Rittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squad ron; and A bill (S.No.199) to establish the collection district of Port Huron, and the collection district of Michigan, and to extend the district of Puget Sound. ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED. The message further announced that the Speaker of the HoRep had signed the following enrolled bills and JtResolution; which were thereupon signed by the President protempore: A bill (S. o. 85) granting to the State of Wisconsin a donation of public lands to aid in the construction of a breakwater and harbor and ship canal at the head of Sturgeon bay, in the county of Door, in said State, to connect the waters of Green bay with Lake Michigan, in said State; A bill (S.No.107) to provide for a term of the district court for the district of Minnesota tobe held at the city of Wine na, in said district; A bill (S.No.165) more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain crimes against the U.S.; A bill (S.No.216) to provide for the transfer of the custody of the library of the Smith sonian Institution to the Library of Congress; A JtResolution (S.R.No. 2) for the resto ration of Commanders William Reynolds and Melancton B. Woolsey, U.S. Navy, to the active list from the reserved list; and A bill (S.No.94) to amend the not entitled “An act for the relief of seamen and others borne on the books of vessels wrecked or lost in the naval service, ” approved July 4, 1864, and for other purposes. REPRESENTATION OF SOUTHERN STATES.
Mr. STEWART. I desire to take u senate JtResolution No. 48, setting fort certain conditions upon which the States, the people of which have been lately in rebellion against the U.S., shall be restored to their representation in congress. I move to discharge the committee of 15 from its consideration, and to make the resolution the special order for tomorrow at one oclock.
The PRESIDENT protsmpore. The JtResolution is in the hands of the committee of 15. The Senfrom Nevada moves that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of that resolution.
The President protempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday, which is the bill (S.No.103) to reorganize the judiciary of the U.S.
Mr. STEWART. Will the Senate give me a“bout 5 or ten minutes more? [“ Yes.” Go on.”
Mr. TRUMBULL. I have no objection to that; but it was my intention to call up the veto message today at one 0clock.
The President protem ore. The Senfrom Nevada may procee by the common consent of the Senate.
The PRESIDENT proimpure. The motion before the Senate is that the committee of 15 of the JtResolution alluded to by the Senfrom Nevada.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It was understood that we would today proceed to the consideration of the veto message of the POTUS, and in pursuance of that understanding I move that e present and all prior orders be postponed, and that the Senate now proceed to the reconsideration of the bill returned by the President with his objections.
Mr. STEWART. Cannot I get avote on my motion? Several Snnnrons. Not yet.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I supposed there might be objection
Mr. STEWART. I think it is important to have a vote. I want a vote.
Mr. JOHNSON. You cannot get a vote today.
Mr. STEWART. A vote on the question of discharging the committee?
Mr. JOHNSON. Before the vote is taken I desire to say aword or 2, and that will take up the time of the Senate.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Under these circumstances the Senfrom Nevada will not persist, I presume.
The PRESIDENTpro tempore. The question is on the motion of the Senfrom Illine rs.
Mr. STEWART. I shall press a vote tomorrow mornin on my motion. The motion O
Mr. TRUMBULL was agreed to. CIVIL BIGHTS VETO MESSAGE. The Senate proceeded to reconsider the bill gS.No. 61) to protect all persons in the U.S.tates in their civil rights and furnish the means of their vindication, returned by the POTUS with his objections.
The President protemporc. This bill having been returned with the objections of the POTUS, the bill is now to be reconsidered; and the question is, Shall notwithstanding?
Mr. JOHNSON. From what page does the Senator read?
Mr. SUMNER and Mr. JOHNSON. Who was the Senator?
Mr. JOHNSON. On what page is the other quotation to be found? I
MrJOHNSON. Does the Senator cite from the Statutes at Lar e?,
Mr. JOHNSON. Permit me to ask the Senator whether the veto in that case was overruled 1
Mr. CONNESS. That is no reason why a bad exam ple should be followed now.
The Pit SIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Kuwait in the chair.) Is the Senate ready for the question? The question is, Shall t 11pass, the Presidents objections to the cry notwithstanding.I
Mr. JOHNSON. I do not suppose it is the purpose of the honorable chairman of the ComJudiciary to insist upon a vote on the measure today.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It is my intention to continue the measure before the Senate, if the body will sustain me in so doing, until we reach I. vote.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I did not suppose it probable that we should get a vote this evening. f we can do it I shall be glad to do so. I resume the Senate will be full by night. he measure has been delayed for a week in.con sequence of a sad calamity, and i is my intention to press it and to have more than one speech a day upon it. It is now only 20 minutes past 3, I see by the clock, and I think we had better go on with the bill.
Mr. JOHNSON. The honorable member has had the better part of the do to make his speech, and I presume he would not require one who is a year or 2 older than himselfto occupy the attention of the Senate at this hour of the day.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I presume there are others who are ready to proceed with the diseussion.
Mr. JOHNSON. But in relation to taking 1 the vote the same sod event, which we all so much deplore and which has delayed action on the measure until now, keeps from their seats. in the Senate several Senators who will be i here, I suppose. tomorrow.
Mr. TRUMBULL. They have been heard i from by telegraph, and I presume will all be the discussion. I can inform the Senator that I do not expect to have a vote until they return.
Mr. TRUMBULL. But I should be very glad to proceed with the consideration of the I measure, so that we may be able to take a.vote when they do return, unless some of the Gentlemen returning shall desire to discuss it.
Mr. JOHNSON. I have no objectionpersonally to the vote being taken at any time; but if the vote is not to be taken today, as it is my purpose to submit some observations to the Senate in reply to the honorable member from Illinois. I should prefer being permitted to do so tomorrow. If there is any Senator who is prepared to discuss the measure today, he may of course go on, and will not be considered as interfering at all with my desire to address the Senate in the course of tomorrow. The honorable member has prepared his speech with great labor and has delivered it with his accustomed energy and force, and it is rather hard to call upon a Senator the moment he sits down to reply at once to a speech of some 2 or 3 hours, more particularly when the dinner hour has nearly arrived; and I have some reason to believe that that has some effect on those whom I should like to be my audience when I do address the Senate. If, therefore, there is no member ready to proceed now, I1 move that further consideration of the meas1 are be postponed until tomorrow at.one oclock, and that it be made the special order for that hour.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I have been informed that several Senators design discussing this bill. It has already been before us for a week. certainly nobody can complain that wego on with its consideration. We ought to have proceeded with its consideration at once on its return to us. It is one of those measures regarded rather as of a privileged nature, and should therefore he proceeded with. I am very sure that if we adjourn at half past 3 oclock today, the same appeal will be made tomorrow. We have been in the habit of sitting until half past 4. I do not desire the Senfrom Maryland to a go on at his inconvenience; but there are other Senators to speak. I have been informed by several others that they design making some remarks on this bill, and l think we ought certainly to insist that somebody should proceed after this hour.
Mr. JOHNSON. I can only answer for my: self; I know of no one who desires to address the Senate.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I have been informed by several Senators that they desired to speak.
Mr. JOHNSON. I have no knowledge on the subject. Senators can speak for themselves.
Mr. TRUMBULL. If no Senator will go on, we cannot take the vote to night.
Mr. HARRIS. If we are not to proceed with this bill, I should be very glad ift e senage would take up the judiciary bill, and finish t at.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Allow me to suggest to the Senfrom NewYork that I was informed by the Senfrom Pennsylvania that be de signed to say something on the bill before the Senate. Perhaps he may be ready to proceed today.
Mr. TRUMBULL. If no one is prepared, to go on I shall not resist the postponement of l the measure until tomorrow, but I ask that it be made the special order for oneoclock t of morrow.
The President protem ore. That is the motion of the Senfrom Maryland. The motion was agreed to. DEFICIENCY CIVIL BILL.
Mr. FESSENDEN, I can answer any question that any Senator desires to put to me in regard to individual amendments. it is hardly worth while to go into all the details.
Mr. HENDR CKS. I wish to inquire whether the little amendment for the Indianapolis courthouse is iu the bill.
Mr. FESSENDEN. That is retained with a sh ht amendment striking out the words put ting it under the direction of the SecyInterior. It is under the direction of the Treasury Dept that the building has been put up.
Mr. HENDRICKS. The amount is left at $8,000?
Mr. FESSENDEN. The amount is left the same. We were obliged to comromise the best way we could to save the bil in several things. The report was agreed to. JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION.
Mr. HARRIS. I move that the Senate resume the consideration of the judiciary bill. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate resumed, as in ComWhole, the consideration of the bill (S. No.103) to reorganize the judiciary of the U.S., the ppnding question being on the amendment of
Mr. Howssn, to add to the 7th section the followmg clause: Final processfromsaid district courtsmayrun into any judicial district of the U.S and shall be executedbvthepropermarshaloIsuch district, whose duty it sha I be to executethe same and makedue return thereof and who shall besubjectto the orders of the court issuing the same; and all interlocutory and final ordersof said courts in casesin equity may be served and executed in any other district where the personto be served or judgedto be liable or where the subject matterof asuit may be.
Mr. HOWARD. I offered the amendment which is now before the Senate in the earnest expectation that the Senate would view it fa vorably. I reallythink that it embodies a principle of great utilit to the country, and that in some form or ot ier it 8 to be enacted into a law. Ilearn, however, from the honor able Senfrom NewYork, who has the bill in charge particularly, that he regards it as in congruous to the other matter contained in the bill; and under the assurance that I almost assume from him that he will assist me in get ting a separate bill through embodying the same principle, I shall withdraw the amendment by the consent of the Senate.
The PRESIDENT protempore. The amendment is withdrawn.
Mr. HARRIS There are a few amendments which I desire to make. In the 15th section, at the end of line one, after the word “appeal, ” I move to insert the words “upon the questions of law and fact arisin upon the record, ” so as to read: “an appea upon the questions of law and fact arising uponthe record. may be taken.” The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HOWE. I wish to ask the Senator if he designs to give a right of appeal to the Government as well as to the defendant.
Mr. HARRIS. I have no objection to that. Perhaps that would be the effect of this section.
Mr. HOWE. That Isuppose to be the effect as it stands.
Mr. HARRIS. That is the case in my own State. I move to amend the same section by strikmgontin the 8th line the word “ 90 ” and inserting “ 30.” I think 90 days is too long a time within which to allow an appeal to be taken.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish to understand that amendment, as I have not the bill before me.
Mr. HARRIS. The committee had agreed upon 90 days as the time within which an appeal might be taken from the district court to the court of appeals, both in civil and in criminal cases: but since the report was made my attention has been called to the subject from several different quarters, and especially by judges who are familiar with the practice, and they urge that 90 days is too long, especially as these courts of appeals are to be hel. but once a year. To allow 90 days, within which an appeal could be taken, and then to have a year perhaps before the appeal could be heard, would cause great delay. The law now is that an appeal from a district court to a circuit court must be taken within ten days, and no inconvenience has resulted from that. Now, if we allow 30 days, I suppose it is long enough. I hope it will be made 30 days instead of 90.
Mr. HENDRICKS. This time was considered by the committee, and 90 days was thought to be about right. This is the appeal from the district court to the court of appeals. It is not like the appeal from the district court to the circuit court, which is an appeal on all the facts of the case. Then it is to be tried right over again, in the same building and there are no records to make out. I wish to call the attention of the Senfrom NewYork to the difference between this appeal and the one with which he compares it. An appeal from the district to the circuit court is an appeal of the whole case, which removes the entire record and all the papers. In thatcvent no preparation of the cause for appeal is necessary; the time of the attorney is not required in preparing, the case for appeal to any considerable extent; but in an appeal from the court of trial to the court of law, the record has to be prepared, and in the midst of trials attorneys have not time to do it. I ask the Senfrom NewYork, what is the time allowed for an appeal or a writ of error to the SCOTUS? This is analogous to that.
Mr. HENDRICKS. This takes the place of an a peal to the Supreme Court; an in stead o a year I do not recollect the time, but I dare say the Senator is correct this bill proposes 90 days. I think 90 days is a short enough time to allow attorneys to prepare their cases for an appeal; the record has to be seen to, and oftentimes it is a very important matter. While a court is in session attorneys cannot give very much attention to the prepa ration of the record for the appeal. I think 90 days is fully short enough.
Mr. HARRIS. My answer to the suggestion of the Senfrom Indiana is, that the ten days now allowed run from the time the record is made up, from the time final judgment is entered; so that the bill of exceptions must be settled, and before the time for up eal commences to run the record is to be made up, the judgment perfected, and then the party has ten days additional to appeal. I propose to make it in this case 30 days. It seems to meit is ample. I have the opinion of judges of experience to that effect. I hope the amendment will prevail.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not think judges have any experience on this particular question. This is an appeal within 30 days after the entry of the judgment; and the judment is rendered immediately after the ver ict is entered. Then you prepare your case for the appellate court. the reparation of causes for court of error must e after the rendition of the judgment. In the midst of trials, an at torney cannot do that who has much business on hand. I do not think 30 days is long enough, butl shall not make a contest about it. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HARRIS. I desire to make the same amendment relative to appeals in civil cases in section 11, line 8, by striking out the word “ 90 ” and an istituting “ 30.” The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HOWARD. I wish to call the attention of the Senfrom NewYork to the subject of these appeals more particularly. In the 11thsection an appeal may be taken from any final judgment or decree of any district court within the circuit when the amount claimed or the value of the procrty in controversy exceeds $500, ” the ; an that an appeal may also be taken from the final judgment of a district court in any criminal action to the proper court of appeals within 90 days after the entry of such judgment. I do not know that I wholly understand the bill. Iask therefore for an explanation. lfI understand it, an appeal from an inferior to a superior court opens the whole case and places it in the superior court upon the vsamebasis that it was in the inferior court before the judgment. In case there is a trial by jury in the district court of a civil case, an action for damages, and a final judgment is rendered upon the verdict and that case is appealed, is the case to be retried by a jury in t lecourt of appeals; and in acriminal case is the appeal that is taken to the court of appeals to open the whole case and require a retrial for the offense as charged? I understand such would be the effect of a simple appeal. I do not discover in the billany provision in details specifying in what viay this appeal may be carried out and made effectual. I may be wrong about it. If the honorable Senator would have the goodness to explain, I should be very much gratified.
Mr. HARRIS. I think I can answer the inquiry to the satisfaction of the Senfrom Michigan. The 11thsection provides that the review shall be had upon the questions of law and fact arisin upon the record, so that if exceptions are taken upon the trial the bill of exceptions is made, that is incorporated in the record, and when it goes up on appeal the appellate court will examine that record, and if it finds error in the record will reverse the judgment. There will be no jury trial there, no new facts presented, no testimony taken. The review is had. upon the questions of law and fact arising upon the record.
Mr. HOWARD. Suppose there is no bill of excetions.
Mr. ARRIS. Then there will be nothing to review.
Mr. HOWARD. But you have appealed it all. You have taken your case from the infe prior to the superior court on appeal.
Mr. HARRIS. I need not remind the Senfrom Michigan, who is an experienced lawyer, how often cases are taken up where there is really no question to review and the judment is affirmed as a matter of course.
Mr. HOWARD. That depends on the mode in which the case is taken up. If the case is taken up on a bare appeal I understand the law to be that that appeal opens the whole case for a retrial.
Mr. HARRIS. No, sir, not at all. The court of appeals, in the examination of the case, is confined to the questions that appear on the record, and if there is no bill of exceptions, of course there are no questions arising; there is nothing but the bare record of the trial.
Mr. HOWARD. Does the bill then provide for the taking of a bill of exceptions exceptby imlication? Mr. HARRIS. No, sir. The judges have a right to prescribe rules under this bill. The common law practice is to take a bill ofexceptions; there will be no trouble about that, I up rehend.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. ANTHONYin the chair.) The question is on concurring in the amendments made as in ComWhole. If no Senator desires to except any particular amendment for a separate vote, the question wilI be put on all the amendments together. The amendments were concurred in.
Mr. HOWE. I move to amend/the bill in the 8th section by inserting after the word “court, ” in the 9th line, the words “but no district judge shall sit in the court of appeals on the trial of any cause which shall have been determined by him in the district court.”
Mr. SUMNER. That is absolutel new. I take it that in no country in the worl has that rule ever been recognized.
Mr. FESSENDEN I will say to the senatoithat we tried it in Maine for awhile and then abandoned it.
Mr. SUMNER. I knew that nothing of that kind had ever got fairly establishe in the jurisprudence of an country.
Mr. HARRIS. n NewYork we had it at one time and abandoned it.
Mr. SUMNER. I take it the experience of the world is that the court above does need the knowledge and practical acquaintance with the cause which the judge below has acquired in its trial.
Mr. HARRIS. In the Supreme Court it is no unusual thing for the judge to write the opinion of the court reviewing his own decision.
Mr. SUMNER. I hope the amendment will not be adopted.
The PRESIDING OFFICER.The question is on the amendment of the Senfrom Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. Is the object of the amendment to prevent the judge sitting in the court below from sittin in the court in bane?
Mr. HARRIS. The practical inconvenience that would result from the adoption of this rule would be, that in some cases it would be impossible to hold a court. There is a circuit court now in the U.S. where there are 4 district judges, 2 of whom are. as I am informed, scarcely able to perform the duties of their districts, and there are but 2 active judges in the circuit. Now, if you disqualify one of those judges, you will be unable to get a quorum of the judges to hold a court at all, and the result would be, practically, that the appeals from these 2 judges who are perform in most of the business in the circuitwould go undieard; it would be impossible to get along. There is no provision in the hill, and there cannot be one made, by which another court can be constituted; and inasmuc as you cannot get a quorum of the judges who are qualified to sit in review of the cases tried by these 2 judges, who try nearly all the cases in the cir cuit, the cases will go unheard. That will be the practical effect of the adoption of such an amendment in certain circuits, and I have in my mind a circuit in which that will be the imme diate practical effect. It will hardl do to insert such a provision aplicable to sue a case.
Mr. CLARK. Nd every case some judge would be disqualified by below eluded.
The PRESIDIN OFFICER., The question is upon the amendment of the Senfrom Wisconsin.
Mr. HOWE. I should like to have the yeas&nays on that amendment. The yeas&nays were ordered. The Secretary proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. HENDRICKS (when his name was called) said: I scarcely know how to vote on this question. We have had no exerience upon it in my State at all, and I liar ly know how to vote; but in cases of doubt I vote in the negative. I therefore vote “ nay." The result was aniiounced yeas 11, nnys 21; ABSENT 16. So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. HOWARD. I wish to offer an amendment to the bill to which I think there will be no objection. It is in section 9, line 5, a“fter the word “justice” to insert the words, such clerk shall not be of kin to such presiding judge within the 4th degree of consanguinity;” so that it will read: It shall also have a clerk, to be appointed by and removable at the pleasureof the residincjusticc: such clerk shall not beof kin to sheI presidingjudze within the 4th degreeof consanguinity. I am stating nothing new to gentlemen who have practiced in the Federal courts and in other courts when I say that the appointment of near relations of the judge generally has the effect to cast some sort of suspicion upon the judge himself, and therefore to impair his in fluence. For instance, in the Federal courts, as we are all aware, it becomes necessary for the judge to certify the accounts which the clerk makes out against the Government, and the eer tificate of the judge is received as a sufficient voucher at the Dept for the allowance of the account in most cases. It is, in many instances, a source of great complaint. I could individualize some cases of the kind, but I do not choose to do so at the present time. certainly I think the public interest will be consulted by the adoption of this amendment. I think it will relieve the presiding judges from an unfair imputation which uncandid suitors are too apt to lay upon them.
Mr. HARRIS. I ask for the yeas&nays upon the amendment. The yeas&nays were ordered.
Mr. HOWARD. It is sn posed by some that the 4th degree is a litt e too remote. I will ask, therefore, common consent to change my amendment from the 4th degree to the 3rd degree.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ycas&nays having been ordered, the amendment can only be changed by unanimous consent. The Chair hears no objection, and it will be so modified.
Mr. HENDERSON. Let me so gest to the Senfrom Michigan thatif he will strike out the words “presiding justice, " in the 5th line of the 9th section, and substitute the word “court, ” he will perhaps accomplish all he desires. The clause now reads: It shall also have a clerk. to be appointed by and removable at the pleasureof the presidingjustioc. The Senator desires to prevent the presidin justice from appointing a relation as clerk. suggest to him, would it not be better to strike out the words “presiding justice” and insert the word “court, ” so as to let the clerk be appointed, as he is now, by the court? I intended to offer that amendment. Several Ssssrons. The presiding justice is the court.
Mr. HENDERSON. Senators are mistaken. This is the court of appeals, not the district court.
Mr. HOWARD. I feelinclined to take away from the presiding judge altogether the power of appointing a relative as clerk.
Mr. HENDERSON. Is it in order to offer that to the amendment nowpending? If it is, I offer it as an amendment to the amendment of the Senfrom Michigan.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. In the opinion of the Chair, such an amendment would not be in order to the pending amendment. It does not a Iply to it in any way.
Mr. HOWARD. It has no application to my amendment that I can erceive.
Mr. VANWINKLE. should like to ask the Senfrom Michigan whether he thinks there is more objection to a son than a son in law; or, in other words, whether a relation by marriage on ht not to be excluded as well as I one by bloo.
Mr. HOWARD. I should apprehend less danger in the case of a relation by marriage than by consanguinity. However, if Senators think they ought to be included also, the amendment might be amended by adding “ or atlinity.”
Mr. JOHNSON. I shall vote against the proposition, 1st, because it is a reflection upon the judiciary, and, 2ndly, because I can very well imagine that there are cases in which the judge would find some relative within the de recs designated in the amendment more fit to discharge the duties of the office than anyone else. Igknow there have been complaints, expressions more in way of surprise than anything else, that the judges of the courts of the U.S. have up pointed their relatives to these clerkships; but Ilncver heard it intimated in any instance that the clerk so appointed did not turn out to beagood one. If you are about to apply that general rule, because it prescribes a principle, you had better make it uniform, and you should apply it to the Executive Depts. It has been a constant practice there; the present SecyState has his son as his asst, and agood many of the Secretaries prefer having theirrelatives, beeause the offices are matters of trust entirely, and personal trust. You send ministers abroad, and at the instance of the minister himself, his son is very often selected as his secretary of legation.
Mr. JOHNSON. It is not supposed to be wrong by them. They think it is right in its results. The minister has entire confidence in his OWnson. It is wrong ifthe son is incompetent; but supposing him to be competent, as the relation is a confidential relation, is it not better that he should have his son stand in that situation? If those of us here that are chairmen of committees want clerks, what is there to prevent our appointing our sons or our nephews, if we desire a clerk in whom we have personal confidence? It has been done very o ten, and no mise hief has resulted from it that I have ever heard of. On the contrary, the chairman has got on more satisfactorily with that power than perhaps he would without it. But what pessible bad influence can the fact of their being related have upon the judge or upon the clerk? The clerk has no judgment to pronounce. He is a mere ministerial officer. I do not see that it will affect in any way the judgment of the judge himself, assuming that the judge is an honest man. Ofeourse we have a right to assume that he is an honest man; and if he is an honest man he cannot be influenced by anything his son might say to him.
Skip Skip The question being taken by yeas&nays, resulted lyeas 9, nays 19; ABSENT 20. So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. HENDERSON. I do not desire to retract this matter any further, but I should like very much to have the amendment that I have suggested adopted; and I move in the 5th line of the nint section to strike out the words “ residing justice” and to insert the word “cerk;” so that it will read: It shall also have a clerk. to be appointed by and removable at the pleasureof the court. The clerk, I think, ought to be an officer selected by the whole court. He is an officer of the court. There will be 5 or 6 of these judges, and the residing judge might select a man who would O very obnoxious, indeed, to the remainder of the judges, and I can see no reason for changing the law as it now is.
Mr. HARRIS. M objection to this amendment is this: each district judge now has the appointment of a clerk to the district court. The clerks of the present circuit courts are appointed by the judge of the Supreme Court assigned to the circuit. The effect of this amendment will be to legislate out of office those clerks of the circuits. There is no reason in the world why the judge of the Supreme Court assigned to a circuit should not continue that clerk in office as the clerk of this court that is to be created. This provision of the bill is giving to each judge of these circuits on equal amount of patronage. Ever district judge appoints the clerk of his district court. Yow, I am in favor of allowing the judge as signed to the circuit from the Supreme Court to appoint the clerk of the court of appeals. That will give each judge the appointment of one clerk, and its elfect will be, practically, to continue in Office the clerk of the circuit as the clerk of the court of appeals. I think it is a fair and just and equal distribution of pat ronage. I hope, therefore, that the amendment will not prevail. The amendment was rejected.
Mr. FESSENDEN. 0n the passage of the bill I should like to have the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted years 23, nays 6. ABSENT So the bill was passed. HOUSE BILL REFERRED. The bill (H.R.No. 453) for the relief of Cornelius B. Gold, late acting paymaster U.S. Navy, was read twrce by its title, and referred to the ComNavAffrs.
Mr. WADE. I more that the Senate do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wenrssnar, April 4, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Bows res. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.,
The SPEAKER. The 1st business in order is the call ofcommittees for reports, continuing the call of the ComAffrs. QUINCY HILL, U.S. NAVY.
Mr. DARLING, from the ComNavAffrs, made an adverse report upon the petition of Quincy Hill, late acting asst paymaster of the U.S. Navy, asking an appropriation of $313 34, to cover a charge of that amount in his account with the 4th Auditor of the Treasury; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. CORNELIUS B. GOLD, U.S. NAVY.
Mr. DARLING, from the ComNavAffrs, reported a bill for the relief of Cornelius B. Gold, late acting asst paymaster of the U.S. Navy; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill authorizes and directs the properaccounting Officers of the Government, in the settlement of the accounts of Cornelius B. Gold, late acting asst paymaster of the U.S. Navy, to allow a credit of $510 0.)for clothing abstracted from a store room under charge of said Gold while on duty in Mobile ba, in the spring and summer of 1865. The question was 11.ion ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a 3rd time.
Mr. ROSS. I think this bill should be referred to the ComClaims.
Mr. DARLING. I ask that the report accompanying the bill be read. The report was read.
Mr. ROSS. I hope the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Dmmxo] will allow this bill to be referred to the ComClaims.
Mr. DARLING. I do not see any propriety at all in such a reference. The claim was recommended by the properauthorities of the Navy Dept, and it has been examined and apmind by the ComNavAffrs.This case is one which cannot be reached in any other way than by action of Congress. These officers of the Navy are very peculiarly situated, and they are entirely subject to the 4th Auditor of the Treasury in the settlement of their accounts. The money and property placed intheir keeping are charged to them, an they must accountfor them either by property returned or by means of propervouchers. This property is subject to all the contingencies of war. This officer had charge of a number of vessels, neither of which had the capacity to contain the goods placed in his charge, and he was obliged to put. them in a building on shore. where they were kept under lock and key. In the discharge of his duty the officer was obliged to leave the shore and go upon the several ves se ls there, and while absent these goods were abstracted. This case having commended itself to the favor of the Dept, and having been considered by the ComNavAffrs, who recommend it to the favorable action of Congress, I think this bill should pass. I call the previousquestion on this bill. It
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Will the Gentfrom NewYork withdraw the call or the previous question for a moment?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The amount involved in this case is not very large. But we are establishing a principle which will involve, if carried out, the appropriation of a very large amount. I think With my colleague, [Mr. 11055] that this is a bill which should be examined by the ComClaims.
Mr. DARLING. I am very willing to admit that there should be a general law authorizing the SecyNavy, or the properofficer of the Government, to act on all these cases. But there is no such law now, and before one can be passed some of these men may die and their accounts pass unsettled to their estates.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I should be very unwilling to have a general law passed to cover all these claims, for it would be an invitation to carelessness on the part of these paymasters. ow, in the 1st place, there has not been satisfactory evidence to me of the loss of this clothing, and in the 2nd place, if such loss has been completely established, it is a question how far this officer should be relieved from this charge. I hope the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. DARLING] wiIl allow me to offer an amendment to this bill before he calls the previous question. With his permission I will move to amend the bill by adding the following: Promderl. Thntno credit shall be allowed until the properofficer of the Governmentshall besatisfiedof the alleged lossof the clothing herein referred to.
Mr. DARLING. I have no objection to that amendment, for the evidence is full upon that int. poMr. TAYLOR. I would like to ask my colleague [Mr. DARLING] if the report of the board of examiners who inquired into the circumstances of the loss of this clothing is among the papers in this case.
Mr. DARL NG. Yes, air; a board of survey was Ordered, and their report is on file with the other papers.
Mr. TAYLOr. Do they exonerate this officer from blame?
Mr. DARLING. Yes, sir, expressly; and the Dept exonerates him.
Mr. TAYLOR. such a report as that is g)enerally deemed a sufficient voucher by the Dept.
Mr. DARLING. All the testimony is there. The report of the committee simply sets forth the evidence presented to them and the regprt of the committee has just been read.
Mr. TAYLOR. Would it be out of order to ask that the report of the board of examiners be read? TheSPEAKER. The gentlemanse olleague desires that the report of the board of examiners shall be read.
Mr. DARLING. I have no objection to that.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Iwill mod ify my amendment so as to read as follows: Provided. Thatno credit shall be allowed until the pyrofpuellr aontldicccorsmopf lethteepGroovoef ronfmtheonltosshsaolfl thbee cslaottihsfiniegd herein referred to.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be en, grossed and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the3rd time and passed. Mr. DARLING mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. REAR ADMIRAL PAULDING.
Mr. PHELPS reported from the ComNavAffrs a ill for the relief of Hiram Paulding, rear admiral of the U.S. Nav; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill, which was read in. extenso, provides that the properaccounting officers of the Treasury be directed to audit the accounts of Hiram Paulding, while a captain in the U.S. Navy, covering his expenditures in the enter tainment of the foreign officers and people who visited the friate StLawrence under his command at Sout ampton, not exceeding the sum of $963 92, and also his expenditures in entertaining the officers of the Government of Bremerhaven and Stockholm, in the years 1848, 1849, and 1850, not exceeding the sum of $2, 690.
Mr. ROSS. This same bill was up yester daly, and it was decided to be an appropriation bi l.
The SPEAKER. This bill is different from that which was before the House yesterday. This simply directs the properaccounting officers to audit the accounts. It makes no approriation. h
Mr. ROSS. If credit is given this officer upon his accounts, it is the same practicallyas an appro ration of money. The SlgEiAKER. An appropriation bill is one which by its own force appropriates money out of the Treasury. This does not.
Mr. ROSS. I think that this bill had better go to the ComClaims. All questions of this sort should be examined by that committee.
The SPEAKER. Does the Gentfrom Maryland [lhIfPHELPS] yield for a motion to refer the bi l to the ComClaims?
Mr. PHELPS. No, sir. This claim has been before Coneress 3 several times. It has been favorably reported by 3 different Naval Committees oft O Senate, has been twice passed by that body and has once been reported favorably by the ComForAffrs of this House. The claim is just, and should have been paid long since. Captain Paulding was sent upon this quasi diplomatic mission during the revolution in the north of Germany in 1848, and during the course of his cruise in those waters was visited by representatives of many foreign Powers. e was vis ited by the common council of the municipality of Southampton; he was visited by Representatives of Bremerhaven and Stockholm, all of whom he of course, in the discharge of I demand the previous his duty as an oflioer of this Government, was bound to receive and to entertain. It was not an ordinary cruise; it was a special diplomatic mission, undertaken in pursuance of instructions from the SecyNavy, giving Catain Paulding a latitude of discretion in reerence to such matters. This claim has been acted upon favorably so often that it seems to me it won d be an outrage upon this officer to refer this bill to the ComClaims or delay its passage in any manner.
Mr. SPALDING. Iain not well informed on this subject; but I really desire to know whether it has been the practice for our commanders of naval vesse s to make entertainments abroad on board their ships and then appeal to Congress afterward to pay the expense. If that is the practice, I suppose we must follow it on this occasion. But, sir, I do not like the precedent; and if it be a precedent which we arc. about to establish, I cannot give it my anction. I know very well that these officers fill places of high trust, and ought to be well paid so that they can incur occasion ally these extra expenses. But I do not know that Congress should be called upon to ay for every dinner the catain of a war ship c ooses to give to the nobility in every ort of Europe. Hence, unless the gentlemen who now compose the ComNavAffrs can satisfy me we are following a legitimate practice of congress, I must be constrained to vote against this bill.
Mr. PHELPS. Mr. Speaker, the precedents are compiled in the report of the ComNavAffrs of the Senate submit ted by Mr. Fish in the 34thCongress. These Are the precedents: naval appropriation act of February 20, 1833, section 5, allowance to Master Commandant John D. Sloat, $1, 360; civil and diplomatic appropriation act of March 2, 1883, allowance to Captain Daniel Turner of $1, 182 78, and to Captain George W. Sto rer, $500; act of July 7, 1838, for the relief of Captain Daniel T. Patterson, allowing him $3, 391, and act of June 17, 1844, for the relief of Captain Charles W. Morgan, allowing him $4, 200. Then we have the well known case of Commodore Perry, of 1855, whose expenses in entertaining the Japanese authorities were did by the GOvernment and the mission of ICiliptziiinPauldin was similar to that of commodore Perry. The precedents are amply supported, and the justice of the claim is obvious to all who will consider that it cannot be expected of officers of the Navy, oorly paid as it is admitted they are, to pay these expenses out of their own private purses.
Skip Skip Mr. WASHB RN E, of Illinois. I ask that the bill be again read. The bill was again read. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I ho that the demand for the previous question will not be 2nded. The House divided; and there were ayes 34, noes 60; no quorum voting. Mr. PHELPS demanded tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. PHELPS and Ross were appointed. The House again divided; and the tellers reported ayes 26, noes not counted. of the previous question was not 2nded. Mr. ROSS moved that the bill be laid upon the table. The motion was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill was laid upon the table; upon the table. Agreed to. TREASURER OF THE U.S. On motion of
Mr. MORRILL, by unanimous consent, Senate bill No. 168, to acilitate the settlement of the accounts of the Treasurer of the U.S., and to secure certain moneys to the people of the U.S or to persons to whom they are due and who are entitled to receive the same, was taken from the Speakers table, and referred to the ComWays&Means.
Mr. GRISWOLD, from the ComNavAffrs, reported back Senate bill No. 80, for the relief of B. Bittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron, with the recommendation that it do pass. The bill authorizes the proor accounting officers of the Treasury, in the settlement of the accounts of J. B. Rittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron, to release imfrom all accountability for the amount of $13,?09, public money, stolen from him on the evening of October 30, 1865, while on duty at Panama, or such portion thereof he may or shall fail to recover.
Mr. GRISWOLD. Mr. Speaker, I desire, in explanation of that bill, to say that the petitioner was assigned to duty at Panama as fleet paymaster, and occu ied an office paid for by the Government. whilein the discharge of his duty there some 13,000 dollars, or thereabouts, was stolen from his safe. Every effort was made upon his part to ferret out the thief and to have the money restored. The thief was subsequently arrested and convicted, and a large portion of the money was recov ered. this bill was passed by the Senate and only provides that this paymaster shall not be held responsible for the loss incurred. There is no doubt of its proriety.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of IlhnOis. I should like to have the report read.
Mr. GRISWOLD. There is no report exccp; that made in the Senate.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. If I recollect this occasioned a great deal of discussion in the Senate.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I hope the gentleman will permit the ordinary prowso to be put in this bill; and I wish he would yield me the floor one moment to speak on the subJect.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. This is a different case, I wish the House to understand, from those which we have heretofore acted upon. ThOse that we have acted upon have been cases where the money has been absolutely lost, db for instance, that of the Brother Jonathan. Here the allegation is that the money has been stolen; and if I recollect right, looking over the proceedings of the Senate, this bill was very thoroughly discussed; and great doubts were expressed by the most careful Senators as to the propriety of assin it and I recollect that a case was a verte to where a paymaster in NewOrleans stole the money himself, and r l themcharged it upon anegro, who, under threats, I believe. confessed that he stole it, and was sentenced by a military tribunal to imprisonment for 20 years. The fact was ascertained ufterwar that the negro had confessed to a crime that he did not commit. That is one of the dangers connected with the passage ofabill of this kind, legislating for the relief of parties in this way; and hence I am opposed to the whole system; and I ask the gentleman, before he calls the previous question, to permit the same amendment to be made that has been at into the previous bills.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. That no credit should be given until the properaccounting officers of the Government are fully satisfied in regard to the larceny.
Mr. GRISWOLD. I have not the slightest objection to that.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I will then move to amend by adding the following proviso: Provided, That no part of said moneyshall be allowed to the said Rittenhouse until the properaccountingofficersof the Governmentaresatisfiedupon full and completcevidenceof the larceny of the money alleged to have beenstolen.
Mr. GRISW OLD. I desire to state 2 or 3 facts in connection with this case in order that there may be no misapprehension on the part of the House. As I stated before, this paymaster occupied an office of the Government. In that office was an iron safe, within which was deposited this gold in a box. His asst was a boy in the naval service. On one occasion it became necessary to send the boy to another room, or to some other place, with a bunch of keys. The boy, while going out with the keys, having been previously instructed by a man named Bradley, took a small peice of writing paper, wetted it with his tongue, and took the impression of the key of the safe. This enabled the man to make a key out of a piece of iron. Then the boy, who had been bribed for the purpose, commit ted the robbery. Bradley was immediately arrested, and a portion of the money was found secreted in his House. Every possible measure was taken by the petitioner in regard to the security of the money. The safe was not a properone, and he applied to commercial houses in Panama to procure another, either in exchange or by purchase. He had previously lost from the same safe $600, the loss of which he himself submitted to rather than make an application for reimbursement. This is one 0? those cases where every possible degree of caution and vigilance was taken by him, and he is therefore not responsible for the loss.
Mr. ROSS. Would it not be better to let this case go to the ComClaims? I think we had better have it investigated.
Mr. GRISWOLD. I will say to the gentleman that while I believe in all possible vi ilance in regard to these matters, I do not e lieve that the congress of the U.S. is going to withhold the meed of justice that any commercial man in the land would readily allow. Nor do I believe in that sort of econ omy which withholds from a man who comes to Congress with such a claim the reimbursement which is equitably and lawfully due. I think there are duties incumbent upon the American Congress that every member should recognize, and I appeal to this House not to send to the ComClaims or any other vague and indefinite tribunal a petition that comes here with such force.
Mr. ROSS. I did notwish to be understood by the gentleman or by the House that I was opposed to paying claims of this character where they are clearlymade out by properand legitimate proof; but the Committee Of Claims is the committee organized by this House for the purpOse of investigating claims of this character. It does not properly appertain to the business of the ComNavAffrs. I am therefore in favor of letting the claim go like others to be investigated by the proper committee of this House.
Mr. GRISWOLD. I desire to inform the gentleman that this otheer had a court martial investigation of the case, and the findings of the court and the whole examination are here in this report.
Mr. ROSS. I have no doubt that a great many mistakes are made in the passave of bills of this sort and that we pay money that is not due. It is frequently the case that the man has stolen the money himself and then pretended that some one else did it, and we should investigate such cases with great care.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Fonxsr, its Secretary, informed the House that the Senate hadfiassed bills of the following titles, in which he was directed to ask the concurrence of the House, namely: An act (S.No.167) to incor orate the Womens Hospital Association of the DistCol; An act (S.No.185) to preserve evidence of marriages in the DistCol; An act (S.No.177) to incorporate the National Safe Deposit Company of Washington, in the DistCol; An act (S.No.158) to facilitate the settlement of the accounts of the Treasurer of the U.S., and to secure certain moneys to the people of the U.S., or to persons to whom they are due and who are entitled to receive the same; An act (S.No.48) to prescribe the mode of settling the accounts of the clerk of the supreme court of the DistCol; An act (S.No.218) exempting the property of debtors in the DistCol from le, attachment, or sale on execution; Kn act (S.No.90) enlargin the powers of the levy court of the county of Washington, in the DistCol; and An act (S.No.61) to incorporate the Poto mac Navigation and Transportation Company of the DistCol. J. n. RITTENIXOUSE Again.
Mr. GRISWOLD. I call the previous question on the bill and amendment. The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered. The 1st question was upon the following amendment of Mr. Wssnsuazm, of Illinois: Provided. That no part of said money shall be allowed said Rittenhousountil the properaccounting officers of the Government are satisfied upon full and complete evidenceof the larceny of the money alleged to have beenstolen.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was then read the 3rd time. The question was upon the passage of the bill. Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio, called for the yeas&nays on the passage of the bill. The yeas and nsys were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative yeas 68, nays 40, not voting 75; So the bill was passed. Mr. THAYER mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. The SPEAKER. The morning hour has now expired.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT. A message in writing from the POTUS, by Colonel WILLIAM G. Moose, his Secretary, was received by the House. Also, a message informing the House that he had this day approved and signed a JtResolution (H.R. o. 96 in relation to the pupeic lands pertaining tot e armory at Spring fie. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.
Mr. TROWBRIDGE, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that they had examined and found truly enrolled Senate bill No. 94, entitled “An act to amend the act entitled An act for the relief of seamen and others borne on the books of vessels wrecked or lost in the naval service, approved July 4, 1864, and for other purposes;” when the Speaker signed the same. MISSOURI LAND GRANT RAILROAD. On motion of
Mr. HOGAN, by unanimous consent, Senate bill No. 37, makings. grant of land in alternate sections to aid in the construction and extension of the Iron Mountain railroad from Pilot Knob, in the State of missouri, to Helena, in Arkansas, was taken from the Speiikerstable and reada 1st and 2nd time.
Mr. HOGAN. I move that the bill be referred to the ComPubLands.
Mr. PRICE. I object to that reference. I call attention to the followmg rule of the House: “There shall be appointed at the commencement ofeach Congressa ComPacRailroad. to consist of 9 members. It shall bethe duty of the said committeetotake into considerationullsuch petitions and matters or things relative to railroads or telegraphlines between the Mississippivalley and the Pacific coast as shall bepresentedor shall come in questionand be referredtothemby the House, and to report their opinion thereon together with such propositions relative thereto as to them shall seem expedient." The point make is, that under that rule all matters relating to railroads between the valley of the Mississippi and the Pacific coast shall go to the ComPacificRR.
Mr. PRICE. I am satisfied. I only wanted the question settled.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Iowa withdraws his objection, and the bill, if there be no further objection, will be referred to the ComPubLands.
Skip Skip There was no objection; and the motion to refer the bill to the comPublic Lands was agreed to. Mr. HOGAN mtRtv the bill was referred; on the table. Agreed to. COLLECTION DISTRICT OF PORT HURON, ETC.
Mr. TROWBRIDGE. I ask the House to grant unanimous consent to have reported from the ComCommerce a bill in which mg constituents are ver much interested, and which should be passe immediately. It is lates to the division ofucustoms district on the eastern side of the State of Michigan. The division is reeomended by the collector of customs and also by all the officers in the Treasury Dept who have anything to do with the subject. There was no objection; and
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, by unanimous consent, reported back from the ComCommerce, with amendments, the bill (S.No.199) to establish the collection district of Port Huron, in the district of Michigan, and to extend the district of Puget Sound. The bill, which was read in criemso, provides that a new collection district, to be called the district of Port Huron, be established in the State of Michigan, which shall embrace the mouth and entire shore of the Saint Clair river, and the counties of Saint Clair, Lapeer, Tus cola, and Saginaw, and all the territory and waters of the State of Michigan lying north of said counties and east of the principal me ridian; and a collector shall be appointed, to reside at Port Huron, which shal e the sole ort of entry for said district; and said colector shall reeeivethe same coin ensation provided for the collectors of Pem ina, Chicago, and certain other ports, by the 2nd section of the act to regulate the foreign coasting trade on the northern, northeastern, and northwestern frontiers of the U.S., and for other purposes, approved June 17, 1864. e bill further provides that all the territory and waters of the State of Michigan lying west of the said principal meridian, and not included in the district of Michilimackinae, are hereby made a separate district, to be called the district of Michigan, for which a collector, with the some compensation as provided for the collector of port Huron, shall be apointed, to reside at Grand Haven, which shal be the sole port of entry for said district of Michigan. The 2nd section provides that the collection district of Puget ound be extended so as to embrace all the territory and waters east of said district to the head waters of the Missis sippi river.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I am directed by the ComCommerce to offer the following amendment, which is in accordance with the recommendation of the Treasury Dept: After the enacting clause of the 2ndsectionin seitthe followmg: That the Territories of Montana and Idaho be. rind the same are hereby. made a new collection district to be called the district of Montana and Idaho; and that it collector, with the same salary asis above provided for cacti collectorof Port Huron and Michigan, lhall be appointed to reside at the port oi entry in I1 said ths irii i. which shall be designated by the SecyTreasury. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I am also directed by the committee to move another amendment, which is desired by the Treasury Dept.
The Clerk read. as follows: Add as a newsection: Abife: That the collection distriet of Ponohse ot.in the State of.lains, shall horo after hecalled the district of (Justin.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to a 3rd reading; and it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to amend the title so that it will read: “An act to establish the collection district of Port Huron, the collection district of )Iiclii an, the collection district of Montana and Ida o, and to change the name of the collection district of Peiiobse ot." The title as amended was adopted. REORGANIZATION OF THE ARMY.
Mr. LAFLIN, by unanimous consent. from the ComPrintg, reported the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved.That 2000 extra peopicsof House bill No. 351.to reorganizeand establishthe Army of the U.S. with certain amendments thereto. be printed for the useof the House in pamphletform.
Mr. LAFLIN mtRtv the resolution was adopted; upon the table. Agreed to. NEWYORK CONTESTED ELECTION. The House then proceeded to the consideration of the regular order of business after the morning hour, being the following resolutions reporte from the ComElections: Resolved, That Hon. James Brooks is not entitled to n.seat in this House as a Representative in the 39th Congress from the 8th district in Resolved, That William E. Dodgo isputitled to a seatin this House as a.Representativein the 39th Congressfrom the 8th district in NewYork.
Mr. MARSHALL. How much time have I left of my hour?
Mr. MARSHALL. I hope, as the time of the chairman of the committee was extended, mine will also be extended before I commence.
Mr. DAWES. I hope the time of the Gentleman will be extended. By nnauimous consent the time was extended to another hour.
MR.DAWES. Will the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. MARSHALL] repeat what he was saying? I did not fully understand him.
Mr. MARSHALL. Iwas speakingin regard to Andrew Brady, the clerk of the 15th district, being a self constituted clerk. I say that is a mistake; he was accepted and recognized by the inspectors, and Mr. Hall stated that he understood that he was appointed after his brother, who had been 1st appointed, declined to act.
Mr. DAWES.R. Andrew Brady was not sworn, I believe.
Mr. MARSHALL. There is a conflict of testimony in regard to whether or not he was sworn.
Mr. BROOKS. This is the testimony on pa“ge 220 of the large book: “ uion and Mr. Andrew Brady did serve? alfllwl. Yes. “Question.Did he servewith the consent of the inspAemctwoersro.fYreesg, issitrr.y”?
Mr. DAWES. Daniel Brad says he was appointed and sworn; that An rew Brad was appointed to take his place, and Mr. Hal says that Andrew Brad was never sworn.
Mr. MARSHA L. I do not propose to dwell upon that point. I am calling attention to the mistake of the chairman of the commit tee in calling Andrew Brady a self constituted clerk.
Mr. DAWES. Perhaps it was not strictly proper to call him a self constituted clerk.
Mr. DAWES. Will the gentleman tell me whether there is any other 15th district in the whole congressional district? is
Mr. MARSHALL. There are 3 wards in the district.
Mr. DAWES. Is there any other 15th district 2
Mr. MARSHALL. I do not know. It is not a matter that has been submitted to me for determination.
Mr. DAWES. But that is a highly important oint. 1
Mr. MARSHALL. Well, what is the fact about it?
Mr. DAWES. I will state the fact that that is the only 15th district in the whole congressional district.
Mr. MARSHALL. I do not know how this is ascertained. I am not aware that we have any evidence on the subject but, admitting it to be true, that might be an answer before a town meeting, but it is no answer to pleadings in court; it is no answer to the law of Congress, which requires that the contestant shalls ceilically state the grounds upon which he malice his contest. Whether there are 15 or more districts in the other wards in that congressional district it is not for me to say. I know that in some wards in the city the number of districts run up as high as 20 or more. How do we know from the plead, ings that the “ 15th district, ” where no ward is named, might not refer to some other congressional distrietin the city of N NewYork? There is no such specification as the law requires the sitting member had no notice of the precise ground of contest and therefore I in sist that legally we cannot properly go into this investigation. But I will not dwell upon that. I know that these technicalities do not have much weight here, althou hI think that here, as elsewhere, a party should be informed by the pleadings upon what his adversary relies. There is another objection in regard to this district to which I wish to call the attention of the chairman of the ComElections. He has, both in his speech and in his report, laid great stress upon the fact that the ins ect ors or registrars, were not residents of that, election district. I call his attention to the fact that in the pleadings there is no charge no specification, that they were not residents of the istriet. Even if the ward had been mentioned there is no allegation whatever in regard to this may ter.
Mr. DAWES. I will so to the Gentfrom Illinois that I think can answer that; but there are a good man other things in his argument that would 1i O to answer, and I prefer to take them all together.
Mr. MARSHALL. I would like to hear the gentlemans answer now, if he has one.
Mr. DAWES. Of course I hold that there is an answer, and I will endeavor to show it.
Mr. MARSHALL. I never know until to day that my friend was such a complete You kee us he is. He has not answere directly a single question put to him today.
Mr. lJAWES. I submit that that is not exactly candid. If the gentleman will recur to any interrogatory that either he or the sit ting member put to me during my argument that I did not answer, I will do it now.
Mr. MARSHALL. You may have answered, but you traveled a long way round to get at it.
Mr. DAWES. The difference between my friend and in self is, that I take my own time to answer. The gentleman insisted on putting his interrogatories and prescribing the time in which I should answer them. I will treat him as he treats me, with entire candor. I will answer his interrogatory when I come to reply to his a ument.
Mr. MARSHALL. This is a point that is very important. I have not been able to find any specification that.the registrars were not residents of the election district; and I want the gentleman to show me where there is any such specification. I think it but fair that he should do so.
Mr. DAIVES. If the gentleman insists upon it that I shall answer him now, I will state that there is a distinct allegation, and it is copied into the report, that there were illegalities that worked to the injury of the contestant.
Mr. MARSHALL. Does the gentleman call that a definite specification?
Mr. DAWES. That was one of the illegal ities.
Mr. MARSHALL. Then why make any other specifications?
Mr. DAWES. The gentleman inquired if there was any specification, and I gave him the specification.
Mr. MARSHALL. Then I am to understand that that is the specification that these registrars were not residents of the election district?
Mr. DAWES. Under that specification you can show any legality.
Mr. MARSHALL. I hold that that is no specification at all. It is no compliance with the law of Congress, and it amounts to nothing. If it covers this ground, why does it not cover every ground? and why require a contestant to say anything except that there were “illegalities” and “irregularities?” If it embraces that, it embraces everything. Sir, this is the most transparent trifling with the law of Congress. That is no specification whatever. It sets forth nothing as to what the contestant intended to prove or rely u on. [Here Mr. MARSHALL, having but 5 minutes of his time left, gave way to a motion to adjourn.] April 4, 1866. The same subject being again under consideration, the time of Mr. MsIsaALL was extendedby unanimouse onsent.
Mr. MARSHALL continued: mr. Speaker: The honorable Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. D.iwss, ] in his or gument yesterday, and I believe also in his report, says that there is fraud proven in making the registry in the 15th district of the 18th ward; and I ask the attention of the House to what I shall say on this point. As the gentleman alleges, there was fraud in making n that register. I ask him who perpetrated that fraud, and where is the evidence of it?
Mr. DAWES. The gentleman at several interro atories yesterday, and I to d him that I would endeavor to answer him when I came to close the debate, a right accorded to me under the rules. I do not propose at the present time to respond to these interrogatories. They are part of the case and I hope to be able to satisfy the House, if I have not already done so.
At the close he moved to amend the resolutions reported by the majority by striking out all after the wor “ resolved” and inserting as follows: That William E. Dodge is not entitled to a seat in the House as a Representative in the 39th Congress from the 8th district in NewYork. The question was stated on agreeing to the amendment just offered.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, there is a BIDtltH number of members present at this time, an
Mr. MORRILL. There is evidently not a quorum present and I move a call of the House.
The SPEAKER protempore, (Mr. Tnow anions in the chair.) The Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. BROOKS] has the floor.
Mr. DAI ES. I suppose nobody expected a vote to be taken atthis time, and many members are at the other end of the Capitol. to the motion of the
The SPEAKER protenfimre. Does the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. BlOOIS] yield Gentfrom Vermont, [Mr. MountthI]
Mr. BROOKS. I do not consider that I had the floor when the gentleman made the motion. The motion for a call of the House was agreed to. So a call of the House was ordered, the roll was called, and the following members failed to answer to their names: Messrs. Alley, Amos, and person. Barker. Blaine, Blow. Brandegee. Bromwell. Buckland, Cliiinlcr. Render W. Clarke, Sidne Clarke. Cobb, Conkling. Culloni.Cuirer, IJcfrees, elano.Deming. Donut ily. Duuiont, Ecklcy. Goodflear. Grider, Henderson. Hig hy, Htllcllkl$!.CIlCSiQI. Hubbard. DUHINLSHubbard, John ll.llubb:1rd, ingcrsoll. Johnson. Jones. Kas scounll.oKiicgrlri. Kltulriukccrndall Littlmm. Lynch. Marvin. Mc Miller, Moorhcud. Moulton. New ell.NiblaclnOrth. lomero. Stiirr. Strouse, Thornton. Burt Van Horn. Warner, Villianis and I goodbritlgo.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to discuss with further proceedings under the cal of the House. The motion was agreed to, and further proceedings were accordingly dispensed With.
Mr. GARFIELD. I offer an amendment to the resolutions reported by the majority of the committee, by striking out allafter the word “resolvedH and inserting in lieu thereof the following: That the testimony taken asto Hon. JamcsBrooks. be recouimittedto the ComElections. with instructions to report especially the facts as to the custom under the Iowa of New lork of appointing inspectorsof the registry of clect ons not from the particular election districts in which they reside; also, the facts respecting the verification by Brooks of the votesfor Brooks in the 15th district, with power to sendfor persons and papers and power to reiustitutojudicial rocxaminationin said district.
Mr. SPALDING. If that substitute be not adopted, I intend to offer the followmg as a substitute: Strike out all after the word “resolved, ” and insert: That neither thesitting member.James Brooks. nor the contestant.William E. Dodge. has been elected to the 39th Congressin conformitywith the laws regulating electionsin the State of NewYork. as a Representative from the 8th congressional district in said State. Resolved, That a vacanc exists in the place of representative from the cig th district in the State of NewYork and that the matter be referred to the aperocporedr inaguthoritiesto fill the same by new elections to law.
Mr. SCHENCK. I would inquire whether there are not 2 resolutions )ening now, one declaring Mr. Brooks entitle to the seat, and the other declaring Mr. Dodge entitled to it; and if both are voted down, whether the object of my colleague Mr. GARFIELD] will not be accom lislied wi out any special resolution on the subject.
Mr. DAWES. If both are voted down the sitting member remains in his seat.
Mr. SCHENCK. If we vote that Mr. Brooks is not entitled to the seatand negative the other resolution that Mr. Dodgeis entitled to the seat, it leaves a vacancy. So that there is no necessity of a proposition like that submitted by my colleague.
Mr. DAWES. I desire to understand my friendfrom Ohio, liMr. GAIN 1811).] Is it the purpose of his resolution to require the ComElections to harmonize these 2 reports?
Mr. SCOFIEI.D. Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment?
Mr. SCOFIELD. The committee examined the evidence with which the parties furnished them. Now, does the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. GARFIELD] desire that the committee shall go to NewYork, undertake for themselves a personal investigation, and thus make up a case; or docsliemcan thatthe committee shall act as do all other committees not authorized to call witnesses before them? The committee act upon the evidence brought before them by the parties or their counsel, or sent to them by the llouse, and they present such a report as they believe the evidence war rants. If the gentleman wants to send the committee to NewYork to trace out the men who were concerned in this fraudulent election, let him so state. If the gentleman has any evidence to send to that committee, let him irodiice it, and show wherein the committee have neglected any duty that the House has assigned them.
Mr. GARFIEIQD. I can save the gentleman some apprehension by saying that I do not reflect at all upon the action of the committee. nor do I wish them sent on a roving commission. I in common with the other members of the House may be in fault in not having given the committee sufficient material to work with.
Mr. SCOFIELD. censurihg the committee. what the gentlemans proposition is. It is out side of any duty ever assigned to that committee or any other except an investigating committee. I want to ask him whether he means that we hallgo to NewYerk or call NewYork witnesses before us; or, sir, shall the committee, as it has always done, act on the case the parties have chesen to present to the House and the House has referred to us.
Mr. GARFIELD. I will answer the gentleman. What I mcan is precisely this: as a member of the House, before I vote to unseat or retain aperson here, I desire to know what the fraud was, so far as it can be ascertained, for which it is proposed to throw out the district. I propose that the parties contesting here shall have an opportunity to present evidence on that point, and that the committee shall have power to send for persons and papers, if necessary, for us to find that before we take final action in the case. Iwant the contestants here to have an Opportunity to find that out. I will only detain the House for a moment longer. I do not believe. sir, in the present state of the case. as reported by the committee I have no doubt they have used all the facts they had before them I say that I do not believe they have had sufficient facts to meet the issue in this case. I was about tomention another thing when interrupted. One side insists that a district means an election precinct, and the other in sists it means an assembly district. If it means an assembly district, then I should say the registry board was legally made. If it means an election district, then I think it was illegal. Before voting I should like to know whether the custom prevails in the city of NewYork to appoint registers within the election district or from anywhere in the assembly district.
Mr. DAWES. I am searching for information, and I would like to know from the Gentfrom Ohio in what art of the report he finds the statements to which he refers.
Mr. GARFIELD. The majority report, on page 4, speaks of the inspectors of the election as not residing within the district. Now, the sitting member declares that it was so generally throughout. the city of NewYork. He so de clared in the debate yesterday, and he further declared that he had affidavits from other wards of the city that such was the usual practice, that members were chosen to boards of inspectors from the assembly district in which they voted, and were not necessarily confined to the election district. Now, upon what ground this is claimed by the other side I do not know, and His precisely for that reason that I want this committee to inquire as to the practice and custom in NewYork in reference to that point. The settlement of that point will determine whether this was legal or not, and as the chairman of the committee deems itofpriine importance, it will of course decide the case.
Mr. UPSON. I call the gentlemans attention to the fact that there is no such proof whatever, and that it is all untrue. On the contrary, so far as that matter is concerned, if anything of that kind was done, it was done without the knowledge of Mr. Dodge.
Mr. UPSON. When was that money paid? Was?it not 2 or 3 weeks after the election
Mr. FABNSWORTH. The money was paid by Mr. Dodge after the election; but it was paid to Mr. Barr before the election.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. It was paid by the agents of Mr. Dodge, and Mr. Dodge reim bursed them after the election precisely the $2,000 which they paid to Barr before the election. If I am incorrect in this I shall be very glad fto know it, but that is the way I read the rec.
Mr. DAWES. That was after the election was all over. Mr. Dodge states in his testimony what his suspicion was, that is all. He had no knowledge of anything before the elec pion]. I hope my friend will state the matter am y.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. That is precise] what I have read from the depositions of both these gentlemen.
Mr. DAWES. Then I think you are alittle inexcusable for making the statement you have made.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. The statement I made was that the agents and friends of Mr. Dodge paid $2,000 to Mr. Barr before the election.
Mr. DAWES. What makes you think they were Mr. Dodges agents?
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Because Mr. Dodge did back the money after the election; that is pretty good proof that they were his agents. These gentlemen whopaid Mr. Barr thismoney were not Ilnrr men, they were Dodge men, and they certainly were not running Mr. Barr to defeat Mr. Dodge. They were running him to take away a part of Mr. Brookss vote. I onlymention this fact to show that the testimony proves that while Brooks was not using money to carry the election, Dodge was using money. This may be all well enough in NewYork, but it would not do out in our rural districts in Illinois where the candidates are poor and have not the money to pay.
Mr. GRINNELL. I desire to ask the Gentleman if he has not learned, in his political experience, in close districts where Democrats run, that they can always conceal their money operations, while our friends are entirely open and above board. [Laughter] I desire to state that when I have run for Congress I have found men outside of my State called upon to contribute money, and “Democratic” money; and money has been contributed outsideof my State, in Chicago and elsewhere, to beat me. They tried to conceal it. butwhen thieves fall out the truth comes to light.
Mr. FAItNSWORTH. I have no donbtthat the Gentfrom Iowa, being largely in the wool business, has himself occasionall been sheared. [Laughter] It is not extraor inary, as he fleeces so many, that he should himself he fieeced.
Mr. GRINNELL. Idid not make any complaint of being fieeced. I always adopt an honest policy, and generally carry my point. I am sorry to hear the gentleman talking against our friends, and in favor of the honesty of the Democrats in carrying on elections. Now, I lived for 4 years in the city of NewYork, and in this ver district of the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. Brooks] and I have some little knowledge of what goes on there at election times.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Was it the practice when the gentleman lived in that district to make bargains of this sort on Sundays?
Mr. GltINNELL. I never heard ofbargains being made on Sundays; I have heard some good praying on Sundays in behalf of our can didates.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. It seems that this bargain made with
Mr. Barr was made on Sun I day;I have forgotten whether it was made in church or in a Sunday school or in a private house.
Mr. GRINNELL. If the gentleman means to imply that the contestant in this case, or those who supported him, ever made any bar gain on Sunday, all I have to say is that I do not so understand it. This contestant is as far above suspicion as the stars in the heavens are above the earth.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. The contestant was not present; he was away, no doubt attending church; very likely he was. But his friends, who were not so pious, were making bargains in his behalf, and paying $2,000 over to another man; and Dodge paid this money back to them afterward.
Mr. GRINNELL. Let me ask the gentleman, if he lived in a close district, would he not consider it a mot fortunate circumstance in his behalf if he could induce halfa dozen opponents to run instead ofone. I know I won d have no objection to it. MEMBER. By buying them?
Mr. GRINNELL. A Democrat can be bought any time for $2,000 in my country. [Laughter]
Mr. SCOFIELD. I wish to inquire of the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Fanxswosru] if he thinks it was true in t isocase, that fit men could not be found in the district, and therefore they went out of the district to get these remarkably fit men?
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Perhaps so; though I do not think it appears from the testimony in this case that these men were remarkably fit or unfit men. It appears from the testimony that all 3 of the registffs were not present all the time and I put it to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania himself [Mr. Seo FIELD] to say whether it is not rare to find a case where the whole board of registers assemble and remain together during the entire sit ting of the board. Is notthe registration done by one and another and another of the board? Is there any law in the State of NewYork which requires that each elector shall appear personally before the board of registry? I do not so understand it. If it is so, I should like to be informed of the fact.
Mr. SCOFIELD. He may appear by properevidence, or his name may be taken from the old register by the board. But. in either case there is judicial action by the board upon regis tering the name.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. The law requires thatatranse ritshall be made of the names upon the pollook of the last election; that all those names shall be transcribed bodily upon the new register.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. They appearasvoters upon the last poll books; and the resumption is that every man who voted at telast election was a legal voter and the law requires that their names shall be transferred bodily to the new register. Others are added to make up the registry, as they are reported to the registers; but no law requires that every qualified voter in the districtshall present himselfpersonally before the board in order to be registered. In no State, so far as I know, does the registry law require that. Why, sir, I never went before a register to be registered. I doubt whether any member upon this floor ever presented himselfpersonal y to the board of registers of his town or his precinct or his ward to be registered. Those who are well known voters, those who are vouched for as voters by persons well known, those, in fine, who present any sufficient primafacie evidence that they are voters within the district, are registered by the register. If the registers are guilty of a fraud, they may be punished. But the fact that they may have put down the name of a man who is nota legal voter does not, in my opinion, vitiate the election. The fact thatthe registers are not all present during the entire session of the board of reistry does not vitiate the election. The fact that the clerk of the board is not sworn does not vitiate the election. I understand that the law of NewYork only provides for the appointment of a clerk when in the opinion of the board of registers one is needed.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I desire to inform the gentleman that nobody has alleged, and nobody, I suppose, will allege, that anything of that kind vitiates the election. But the gentleman will permit me to ask him whether, in his opinion, none of those facts, nor all of them combined, vitiate the reistry; because the committee allege that such facts do vitiate the registry. The election is one thing and the restry is quite another.
Mr. FA NSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, the registers, as I understand, sit as a judicial board to decide who are and who are not voters and qualified to be registered. They adjudicate upon that question. Now, sir, answering the gentlemans inquiry in brief, I say that the facts I have enumerated do not, all combined, vitiate the election.
Mr. SCOFIELD. That is just what I have said, and just what the committee maintainthat those facts do not vitiate the election, that they have no effect upon the election. But the committee hold that such facts do vitiate the registry so as to destroy its legal effect as evidence that certain men are voters. The election maybe legally held, and every man who isalega voter, and has the properevidence of the fact, may vote, notwithstanding the registry may be vitiated.
Mr. GRINNELL. I would like to ask the gentleman a question.
Mr. GRINNELL. I would like to know whether the gentleman is now arguing on the presumption that in every district of the cit of NewYork the drinking establishments of the lowest kind is prebngaged on the part of the Democracy on every election.
Mr. SHELLABARGER obtained the floor. DIRECT TAXES IN SOUTHERN STATES.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous cohsent, laid before the House the following message from the POTUS: To the HoRep: I transmit a communication from the SecyTreasury, dated 22d ultimo, together with a letter addressed to him by the Governor of Alabama, asking that the State of Alabama may be allowed to assume and pay in State bonds the direct taxes nowduc from that State to the U.S.; or that delay of payment may be authorized until the State can by the sale of its bonds or by taxation make provision for the liquidation of its indebtedness. I concur in the opinioz of the SecyTreasury that it is desirable that the State ofAlabama and the other southern States should be allowed to assume and pay their proportion of the direct taxes now due, and therefore recommend the necessary legislation by Congress. AndrewJohnson. WASHINGTON, D. 0., April 3, 1866.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move that the message and accompanying documents be printed and referred to the ComWays&Means. The motion was agreed to. HOLDING as EVENING session.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move that the evening session for today be dispensed with. The motion was agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE from THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Former, its Secretary. informed the House that the Senate had passed a JtResolution (S.No.58) respecting the burial of soldiers who died in the military service of the U.S. during the rebellion, in which he was directed to ask the concurrence of the House.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. On motion of Mr. NIBLACK, leave of ab sence for 2 weeks was granted to his colleague, Mr. Kean. KANSAS LAND GRANT RAILROAD.
Mr. LOAN. Will the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SllELLABARGIll] yield to me for a few moments?
Mr. LOAN. I am instructed by the ComPacificRR to report back Senate bill No. 144, for agrantoflandsiiithe State of Kansas to aid in the construction of the northern Kansas railroad and telegraph, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. I move that the same be printed and recommitted to the ComPacificRR.
Skip Skip The motion was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill and substitute were recommitted; upon the table. Agreed to. CONTESTED ELECTION CASE Again. Mr. SHELLABARGER resumed the floor; but yielded to Mr. DAVIS, who moved that the House adjourn.
Mr. DAWES. If it is the desire of my colleague on the ComElections [Mr. Snr amsnanosn] not to proceed with his remarks this afternoon, I will not object to the motion to adjourn. Otherwise I should desire to proceed with the consideration of this case, at least until the previous question shall have been 2nded and the main question ordered.
Mr. DAVIS. I made the motion to adjourn with the consent of the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. SHELLABARGEK;] otherwise I would not have submitted it. The motion was agreed to; and (at 4 oclock p. m.) the House aaedeojorduirnnv:zly
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Tuunsnnv, April 5, 1866. Prayer by Rev. A. D. GILLETTE, of Washington. he Journal of yesterday was read and approved. CREDENTIALS.
Mr. POLAND presented the credentials of Hon. Gsonoiz F. inurnns, appointed a Sea ator by the Governor of the State of Vermont to fill the vacancy occasioned by the death of Hon. Solomon Foot, until the next meeting of the Legislature. The credentials were read, and the oaths rescribed by law having been administered to Mr. Ennuxns, he took iis seat in the Senate.
Mr. SUMNER, from the ComForRel, to whom was referred the petition of James G. Clarke, praying for com; pensation for services and expenses as acting charge daifaires at. Brussels, submitted a report accompanied by n bill (S.No.248) for the relief of James G. Clarke. The bill was read and passed to a 2nd reading, and the report was ordered to be printed. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred aJtResolution (H.R.No. 52) to provide for the expenses attending the exhibition of the products of industry of the U.S. at the Exposition at Paris in 1867, reported it with an amendment.
Mr. HENDRICKS, from the ComNavAffrs, to whom was referred a memorial of Commodore T. Turner, U.S. Navy, praying for a distributive share of the prize money of the proceeds of the steamers Aries, Cherokee, and StJohn, taken by vessels of the blockading squadron 011 Charleston, commanded by him, and sent to Boston for adjudication, submitted a report accom anied by a bill (S.No.251) for t a relief of commodore Thomas Turner. The bill was read and passed to a 2nd reading, and the report was ordered to be printed.
Mr. POMERO, from the ComPubLands, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.219) granting certain lands to the State of Michigan to aid in the construction of a ship canal to connect the waters of Lake Superior with the lake known as Lac LaBelle, in said State, reported it with an amendment.
Mr. POMEROY. The same committee, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.224) to aid in the construction of a southern branch of the Union Pacific railroad and telegraph, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes, have directed me to report it back and to ask that the committee be discharged from its further consideration, and that it be referred to the ComPacificRR, because there is alfeadya grant of public lands for this line, all that the ComPubLands could give them. The report was agreed to. BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. WILLIAMS asked, and by unanimous consent obtained. leave to introduce a bill (S.No.250) for the discontinuance in certain cases of land offices, and authorizing modifications in the limits of land districts; which was read twice by its title, referred to the ComPubLands, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. SHERMAN. I ask leave to introduce a bill, of which no previous notice has been given, to incorporate the National Telegraph Company. I have had some doubt am to what committee this bill ought to be referred, whether to the postoffice Committee or the ComDistCol, but I resume the comDistCol is the proper committee. No objection being made, leave was granted to introduce the bill (S.No.249) to incorprate the National Telegraph Company, an it was read twice by its title.
Mr. BROWN. To what committee is the bill to go?
Mr. SHERMAN. I supposed at 1st the postoffice Committee would be the proper committee.
Mr. BROWN. Where is the telegraph line to run to?
Mr. SHERMAN. On the Postal routes of the U.S.
Mr. BROWN. Then it ought to go to the postoffice Committee., Mr. SHERMAN. I am perfectly willing to have it referred to that committee. The bill was referred to the ComPostOffices.
Mr. SHERMAN subsequently said: At the suggestion of other Senators, as the bill I in troi need a few moments at o is rather peculiar in its character, and yet of great importance, I will submit a motion that it be referred to a special committee of 5, to be appointed by the Chair. It does not really relate to the postal service, nor is it exactly a bill relating to a company in the District of Colum bin. The purpose of the bill is to organize a company to immediately commence the construction oftelegraph lines in the U.S. on the postal routes of the U.S. The only connection that it has with the postoffice Dept is that it is to be a medium of communication, and provides that these tel egraph lines shall be constructed on the ostal routes. I think that the subject is of such pressing importance that it would justify the appointment of a select committee of 5. I 1 have no special desire myself to be on the committee, but at the same time I think the subject on ht to be promptly acted upon, and Iwill may of that motion.
Mr. BROWN. I will simply say that I am inclined to think the motion of the Senfrom Ohio is the better motion in the premises than the reference Iproposed.
The PRESIDENT protempore. The order of the Senate referring the bill to the ComPostOffices will be considered as reconsidered, and it is now moved that the bill be referred to aspecial committee to consist of 5 members to be appointed by the Chair. The motion was agreed to. SARAH FITZCIBBON.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. Yesterday morning I reported back from the ComPensions a bill which has already passed the senate and the House, and which is now simply pending on an amendment made by the HoRep. I now move to take up that bill. Senate bill NO. 82, granting a pension to Sarah Fitzgibbon, simply for the purpose of concurring in the amendment of the House. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the amendment of the HoRep to the bill, which was to add the following proviso: Provided. That in the event of the marriage or death of the said Sarah Fitzgibbon. the pensionll lowed by this act shall be continued to the children of the late Major Thomas C. Fitzzibb So that the bill will read: That the SecyInterior be, and hehereby is, authorized and directed to place the name of Sn. rah Fitzzibbon. Widowof Thomase. Pituibbon. late major of the 14th Michigan volunteer infan try. upon the pensionrolls. at 2fivodollars permonth from t to 1stday of May, 18t s5u.b ect to the limitations and restrictions now imposed vexisting pension laws: Provided, That in the ovent of the marriage or death of the said Sarah Fitzgihhon the pension allowed by this act shall be continued to the children of the late Major Thomas C. Fitzzibhon.
Mr. GRIMES. What are the limitations of extstin laws there referred to?
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. The limitation is, ordinarily, that if she marries the pension ceases.
Mr. GRIMES. I will inquire of the chair man of the ComPensions why there is a deviation from the uniform rule in this case?.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. The uniform rule is precisely carried out in this pension law. If this were a case allowed by the Pension commissioner the pension would 0, at the death of the party, to the children under 16 years of age; but it is necessary for us to pass a special law to carry out that rule in this case.
Mr. HOWARD. I will ask the Senfrom Indiana whether he has examined the amendment made by the HoRep, and whether it is in conformity with the General pension law?
Mr. HOWARD. be concurred in. The amendment was concurred in. DEALS and DIXON.
Mr. ANTHONY. I ask the Senate to take up the JtResolution reported the day before yesterday by the Senfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Cownn, from the ComFinance, authorizing the treasury to settle the accounts of Beals dt Dixon, according to their contract. The Senfrom NewHampshire [Mr. CLARK] objected to its consideration on the day it was reported, but I understand he has no objection to its being considered now. I move that it be taken up. The motion was agreed to; and the jtResolution (S.R.No. 56) authorizing the SecyTreasury to adjust the claim of Beals g Dixon against t. O U.S. was read a 2nd time, and considered as in Committee of 0!] Yes, sir, exactly. I hope, then, that it will the Whole. The JtResolution was reported to the senatew utameadment, orderedto beengroased for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. J. B. itirrizsiiouss. The Senate iroceeded to consider the amendment of the HoRep to the bill (S.No.80) for the relief of J. B, Ritten house, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron. The amendment was to add at the end of the bill the following proviso: Proeitlrrl That no part of said money shall be allowed said Itittcuhouse until the proper accounting officersof the Governmentaresatisfied upon full and complete evidence of the larceny of the money alleged to have been stolen.
Mr. NYE. Is it proper to move now that the Senate concur in the amendment?
The PRESIDENT prolempore. That is a proor motion for the Chair to entertain.
Mr. NYE. I make that motion, that the Senate concur in the amendment made by the HoRep. The motion was agreed to. COLLECTION DISTRICTS. The Senate proceeded to consider the amendments of the HoRep to the bill (S.No.199) to establish the collection district of Port Huron and the collection district of Michigan, and to extend the district of Puget Sound. The amendments of the HoRep were as follows: Strike out all after the enactingclause of the sec end section and insert the following: That the Territories of Montana and Idaho he and the same are hereby, made ii new collection distric to be called the district of Montana and Idaho. an that a collector, with the samesalargas is above pro vided for eachof the collectors of ort Huron and Michigan, shall be appointedto resideat the port of entry in said distric which shall be designatedby the SecyTreasury. Add the following as an dltional section: Sec. 3. Abife: That the collection district of Penobse oLin the State of Maine, shall hereafter be called the district of Castine. Amend the title of the bill so as to read: “An act to establish the collection district of Port Huron, the collection district of miohigan, the collection district of Montana and Idaho and to change the name of the collection district of Penobseot."
Mr. CONNESS. I move that the bill and the amendments be referred to the ComCommerce. The motion was agreed to. DEFENSE of DAKOTA TERRITORY. On motion of
Mr. WILSON, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (H.R.No. 420) to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territory. It directs the SecyWar to issue, 11 on the requisition of the Governor of Dakota erritory, such amount of ordnance and ordnance stores as may be necessary to arm the inhabitants of the Territory who may organize for defense against hostile Indians, not exceeding 1000 standof small arnisand 100,000 rounds of ammunition, to be charged against the quota due, or to become due, to the Territory under the laws for arming and equipping the militia.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. PETER and person.
Mr. CRESWELL. I move to take up for consideration Senate bill No. 79. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (S.No.79)for the benefit of Peter and person, the pending question being on ordering the bill to be engrossed for a 3rd reading.
The Secretary read it, as follows: Be hemmed, That the SecyTreasury be and he is hereby. authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwiseap roflriated. to Peter and persons 1.1. beingin full for ac pension.at the rate of 6 dollars permonth. from thoday he received his wounds to the day his pension commenced.under award of ComrPension. that is to say. from November 7. to July 13, 1863. 1847.
Mr. CLARK. I do not think that bill Ought to pass without further inquiry. It will be remembered that some time ago this bill was before the Senate, and the question came up whether this man was not assin here under 2 names, asking of the comPensions an award under the name of Peter and person and of the ComClaims an award under the name of C. F. Johnson. I findu on inquiry that thereis but one man. He is be ore the ComPensions as anderson and before the ComClaims as Johnson. The thing should be explained in some way before Congress makes any appropriation for him.
Mr. CRESWELL. I think that matter is suse eptible of an easy explanation. When this 5 bill was up for the consideration of the Senate, some 2 or 3 weeks ago, some gentleman on the other side of the House stated that difficulty, and desired that the bill might lie over until it should be inquired into. On inquiry I find that this same man, whose real name is Johnson, enlisted many years ago in the Navy of the U.S. under the assumed name of anderson. Enlisting in that way is a common thing. He makes an application for his, back pension in that name, for the reason that his pension issued to him in the name of An derson; but I am assured, from the in uirics that I have made and the information have been able to gather, that there has been no intention, no disposition, and no d in on the part of this man to perpetrate any rand or to apear here in any also character. I think his sufferings and his conduct are a sufficient guarantee against that. The only reason he assigns for maing the application to the Pension Committee in the name of Peter anderson is, as I have stated, because his name was entered on the lists of the Navy as Peter anderson. He appears before that committee and asks that the back pension to him shall be paid in the same way. He presents letters from respectable parties identifying him be ond all mistake, and I think exempting him from any suspicion of fraud or unfairness.
Mr. CLARK. There may have been cases of that kind where a man has enlisted under an assumed name and has been entitled to a pension, but I think this is not the usual way in which mistakes of that kind are corrected; but that he should be permitted to take the pension which belongs to the man under the assumed name, it not appearing to the Dept that another man claims it. I think if the Senator is satisfied on that point he had better alter his bill so as to make it take that direction.
Mr. CRESWELL. The gentleman could readily meet that ditheulty by saying “to C. F. Johnson.” [“Let it hellfi According to the wishes of my friend, I move that the bill he over until tomorrow. The motion was agreed to. JOHN W. CAMPBELL. On motion of
Mr. WILLIAMS, the bill (H.R.No. 215) for the benefit of John W. Camp bell, was considered as in ComWhole. It proposes to require the properaccounting officers of the Treasury Dept to allow John w. Campbell, late quartermaster 7th Kentucky cavalry, on settlement of his accounts, a credit of $4, 770, money expended by him for the use of the regiment, the vouchers and accounts for which were destroyed and lost by falling into the hands of the enemy at Cyn thiana, July 17, Big Hill, August 23, and Rich mond, Kentucky, August 30, 1862, respect ively, if. on examinin the evidence, the QuarterMGen shall deem him justly entitled to this credit.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. PACIFIC RAILROAD.
Mr. HOWARD. I move to take up Senate bill No. 109. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.109) to rese ind the order of the President designating the Sioux City and Pacific Railroad Company to construct the branch of the Union Pacific railroad from Sioux City.
Mr. GRIMES. I suggest to the Senfrom Michi n that he permit this bill to lie over for a few days. Iwas not aware that any such reporthad been made from this committee and I am astonished thatit has been. I should like an opportunity to examineinto the reasons why they iave been impelled by their sense of duty to submit any such report as this. It takes me entirely unawnrcs.
Mr. HOWARD. The bill which is now before the Senate has been before the ComPacificRR for have considerable portion of this session, and They have had numerous meetings upon it. They have exended very much time and attention on the Iiill, far more than they usually do on such bills. It has been a subject of attention at their meetings since the commencement of the session, and after the most full and careful de liberation they have come to the conclusion to recommend the passage of the bill now before the Senate; but as the Senfrom Iowa de sires time to look into the subject, and is taken somewhat by surprise by the report of the bill, I certainly have no objection to its lying over in order to meethis convenience. I give notice, however, that I shall call it up at an early day.
Mr. GRIMES. Is there any report accompaning it?
Mr. HOWARD. No printed report. I sug st that it lie over.
The PRESIDENT protempers. The further consideration of the bill will be postponed by common consent. BOUNTIES to COLORED SOLDIERS.
Mr. WILSON. I move to take up Senate JtResolution No. 51, respecting bounties to colored soldiers. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the JtResolution, which provides that the omission on the musterrolls of the words“ free on or before April 19, 1861, ” shall not deprive any colored soldier of the beauty to which he is entitled, and which is now or may hereafter be withheld by reason of such omission; but the resolution is not to be so construed as to entitle soldiers who were not free at the date specified to receive bounty.
Mr. WILSON. Imove to add the following as an additional section: and be“further remlrerl, That in determinin who is or was the wife. widow or heirs of any colored soldier. evidencethat he and the woman claimed to be his wife or widow have cohabited togetheror assoncipatd as husband and wife, or evidencethat a form or ceremonyof marriage has been enteredinto or cele tborgaetethdebry them, and that the parties thereafter lived or associatedor colinhited as husband and wife, and so continued to live, cohabit or associate at the time of the enlistment shall be deemed sufficient proof of such marriage for the purpose of seeuring any arrearsof pay. pension or other allowances duo an colored soldier at the time of his death: and the children born of any such mnrria eor connection shall be deemed and taken to be tie children embracedwithin the provisionsof this act, whether such marriage or connection shall or shall not have been dissolved at the time of the enlistment of the father.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I think that had better be explained a little. We cannot tell much about it from the more reading. Perha 5, however, a bill of this sort requires no exp a nation in this body.
Mr. WILSON. I did not hear the remark of the Senator.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I believe there is no report accompanying this resolution. We certainly ought to know something about it. It is impossible to tell its scope and effect from merely hearing it read.
Mr. WILSON. The resolution simply proposes to correct errors; it alters no principle. [here are a great number of colored persons who entered the service, having alwa 3 been free citizens of the Senators State an of my State and of other States, but who on the enrollment were not enrolled as having been free before the 19th ofApril, 1861. Several such persons have been wounded in the service and are now without arms or legs. This resolution simply provides that that error shall not work against them, that other testimony than the mere enrollment may be taken to show that they were free at that time. It does not, however, alter the principle of the existing law, for. it gives no bounty to aperson who was not freebetore the 19th of April, 1861. The object of the additional amendment which I have proposed is to remedya difficulty which is now experienced in settling balances due to colored soldiers who have died in the service. There is a difficulty in determining who are their heirs, and who is entitled to receive any part of their bounty or back pay. This amendment puts it on the same ground that congress adopted in making free the wives and children of colored soldiers; it acccpts the facts. The thing can work no wrong to anybody, but will do justice. I hope, certainly, there will be no opposition to it.
The PRESIDENTpro tempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the dut of the Chair to call up the special order, which is Senate bill No. 61.
Mr. WILSON. If the Senfrom Maryland, who is entitled to the floor on that bill, will yield it for 3 or 4 minutes, I think we may pass this resolution.
The President profempore. The resolution before the Senate will he proceeded with by common consent. The question is on the amendment proposed by the Senfrom Mas aachusetts. The amendment was agreed to. The JtResolution was reported to the senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. The resolution was orderengross for a 3rd reading, and was read the 3rd time, and passed. On motion of
Mr. WILSON, its title was amended so as to read: “A JtResolution respecting bounties to colored soldiers, and the pensions, honnties, and allow ances to their heirs.”
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLorn, its Chief Clerk, announced that the HoRep had agreed to the report of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 2 Houses on the bill (H.R.No. 86) making additional appropriations, and to supply deficiencies in the approprialions for sun ry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending the 30th of June, 1866, and for other purposes. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the bill of the Senate (S.No.117) for the relief of F. A. Patterson, late captain of the 3rd Virginia cavalry. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the following bill and JtResolution, in which it renested the concurrence of the Senate: bill (H.R.No. 456) to extend the benefits of section 4 of an act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the year ending June 80, 1866; and A JtResolution (H.R.No. 105) giving construction to the law in relation to bounties payable to soldiers discharged for wounds. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the bill S.No. 105) to grant the right of way to the ase ade Railroad Company through a Military reserve in Washington Territory, with an amendment, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED. The message further announced that the Speaker of the HoRep had signed the following enrolled ills; which were thereupon signed by the President protempore: A bill (S.No.80) for the reliefzbf J. B. Rit tenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squad ron; and A bill (S.No.82) tin a pension to Sarah Fitzgibbon. mu 8 p CIVIL RIGHTS BILL VETO MESSAGE. The Senate resumed the reconsideration of the bill (S.No.61) to protect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rig its and to furnish the means of their vindication, which had been returned by the POTUS with his objections.
Mr. JOHNSON. Then it would be constitutional whether they were in or out?
Mr. TRUMBULL. Undoubtedly, in my opinion.
Mr. NYE. Will the Senator allow mi: to ask him a question? In the same speech I would like to ask the Senator if he did not advocate boldly and in the most imerative and affirmative manner the right of the States to secede.
Mr. JOHNSON. Nothing like it. If my friend will improve his reading he will find directly the reverse. The only public man who has been very prominent who advocated the right of secession was the late lamented President Lincoln, in aseech that he made in 1848.
Mr. NYE. Mr. Stephens did. I know he did.
Mr. JOHNSON. I am not speaking of Mr. Ste hens. [Lau hter.] It
Mr. NYE. It ought you were speaking of the eloquence of Stephens.
Mr. JOHNSON. Not at all. I had not Stephens in my mind. perhaps my friend has been to visit him within the ast day or two; he has ot him into his head. I have not been to visit im. I was speaking of the POTUS, and I have yet to learn that Mr. Stephens is POTUS
Mr. NYE. He was VEEP of the coufederacv.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I do net design making any extended remarks, but I am not quite sure that I understood correctly the positions as sumed by the Senfrom Maryland in the opening part of his speech. I was somewhat interrupted at the time, but Iif.understood him correctly he laid down the position that now, since the abolition of slavery, and when there are none but free persons in the U.S., they are not all by virtue of their birth citizens of the U.S. I understand him to assume the position that even now, since the abolition of slavery, it does not follow that persons born in the U.S., and born free, are citizens of the U.S., and consequently that it is not competent for Congress by law to make them citizens. Did I understand the Senator correctl?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. maintain the doctrine of Judge Curtis.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I am very much obliged to the honorable member for his compliment; but it is singular, in my estimation, how a gentleman with a mind as clear as his, with a pers icaeity that is a little surprising, could have ful en into the error of supposing that there is any inconsistency between the doctrine contained in the speech to which he has adverted and the one which I have maintained today. What I said then I say now that as for as the U.S. are concerned all persons born within the limits of the U.S. are to be considered as citizens, and that without reference to the color or the race; that after the abolition of slavery the negro would stand precisely in the condition of the white man. lint the honorable member can hardly fail. I think certainly he cannot when I call his attention to it to perceive that that has nothing to do with the question now before the Senate. His bill makes them citizens of the U.S. because of birth, and gives to them certain rights within the States.
Mr. FESSENDN. Were not your remarks made on this very question in this bill?
Mr. JOHNSON. 0 on another bill. “That I maintain is this, (and I have never doubted it, because I entertained the some opinion when I made those remarks that I entertain now) that citizenship of the U.S. in consequence of birth does not make the party a citizen of the State in which he is born unless the constitution and laws of the State recognize him as a citizen. Now, what does this bill propose? All born within the U.S. are to be considered citizens of the U.S., and as such shall have in ever State all the 4 rights that belong to anybody else in the State as far as the particular subjects stated in the bill are concerned. Now, did so pose, and I shall continue to suppose, it to be c ear unless I am met with the almost paramount authority of the chairman of the ComJudiciary, that citizenship by way of birth conferred on the party as far as he and the U.S. were concerned, is not a citizenship which entitles him to the privilege of citizenship within the State where ie is born; if it be true, and I submit that it is true beyond all doubt, that over the question of State citizenship the authority of the State government is supreme. Now, the honorable member is confounding the status of a citizen of the U.S. an the status ofo citizen of the U.S. who as such is ii citizen of the State of his residence. Maintaining as I do that there is no authority to make anybody a citizen of the U.S. so as to convert him thereby into a citizen of a State, there isno authority in the Constitution for this particular bill, which says that because he is a citizen of the U.S. he is to be considered a citizen of any State in which he may be at any time with reference to the rights conferred by this bill.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Will my colleague allow me to so a word in reply to the Senfrom Marylou, before he proceeds?
Mr. YATES. I shall occupy but a few moments. I remember very wel that the Senfrom Maryland offered an amendment to the Freedmens Bureau bill to this effect: to strike out the words “without distinction of color." The Freedmens Bureau bill applied legislation by Congress to the freedmen in the States and to the condition of the freedmen in the States. It was legislation that affected the freedmen in the rebellious States. If I remember aright the Senfrom Maryland moved to strike out the words “ without distinction of color” in one section of that bill, and for that motion he gave this reason: because under the Constitution of the U.S. as amended abolishing slavery in all the States and Territories of the U.S., the freedmen occupied precisely the same position with any other citizen of the U.S. in any State or Territory. I understood him as taking the broad position, which I have maintained, and which Republican Senators have maintained, and which I think the country maintains, that under the Constitution asamended the freedman occupies precisely the same position as any man born in any State or Territory of the U.S.: and that was the object, if I under stood the Senfrom Maryland, of his moving to amend the Freedmens Bureau bill by striking out the words “ without distinction of color.7 I recognize the authority of the decisions quoted by the Senfrom Maryland before the adoption of the amendment to the Constitution. The States had the power over the question of slavery in the States before the amendment to the Constitution; but by the amendment to the Constitution, in which the States have concurred, the freedrnan becomes a free man, entitled to the same rights and privileges as any other citizen of the U.S.
Mr. COWAN. Mr. President, I very much desire that we may have an understanding with those who advocate the passage of this bill by which we shall fix the hour when the vote may be taken. It is well known to the Senate that there are gentlemen who propose to vote against the bill whoge health is in a very delicate conditionand common humanity would dictate that they be allowed to come here at such a convenient hour as may be fixed by the Senate, in order that they may cast their votes. I should like to have some understanding with gentlemen on the other side, and that they should fix the hour most agreeable to themselves, so that it shall not be put into the night, in order that we may accommodate these invalid brothers of ours. I will move, if it be in order, that the vote be taken at 5 oclock, if that will he satisfactory. I understood the chairman of the ComJudiciary to state that he would. ress the vote tonight if the Senate sustained him. We do not propose to makeany factions opposition to the vote; and we are willing that it shall be taken at 5 oclock, or at half past 4 oclock, if desirable. We do not wish to prolon the debate or waste words, as it is supposed t at.everybody by this time has made n his mind on the subject. I move, then, that the vote be taken upon the bill at 5 oclock.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I am ready to proceed to the vote at once, if nobody wishes to debate it further. This is a.very important question, and I do not wish to tie up the hands of the different parties in regard to the taking of the vote. I do not know that all the friends of this measure are here; and I think that upon a measure of this kind we should afford a reasonable opportunity to everybody to discuss it; and when the discussion is over we should proceed to take a vote. I am not authorize to speak for the Senate, so far as I am concerned, to say whether they would agree to take the vote at any particular hour or not. The senator makes that motion. The Senate can do what they please in regard to it. It is a thing that I Jicizor cw to be done since I have been inber of the“body.
Mr. COWAN. I called upon the honorable he ComJudiciary to know whether he would agree that the vote should be taken in the morning. He declined, properly I have no doubt, and said that he would press the vote to night, that it was his duty so to do, if the Senate sustained him. I have made this motion for the arpose of accommodating 2 gentlemen who are well known to be sick, very seriously sick, even unto death, and who are to be here, and will be here, I trust, almost by a miracle. But it is said the vote is to be taken now, and that if the voteisto be taken now, the honorable chairman is ready. We are not ready, and we are not obliged to him for that courtesy. We can debate the bill, at least until we get those gentlemen here. If there is no disposition on the part of the majority, even if it should not be the constitutional 2/3rds majority, to deal fairly and as becomes the humanity and the civilization of the age, then I have nothing further to say. We are not here to solicit favors; we scorn them quite as much as we would seeking to obtain a vantages. But from the well known facts of the case I had supposed gentlemen would consent to fix an hour for takin the vote. There is no telling when anyone of us me be in the same situation that the Senfrom Connecticut [Mr. DIXON] and the Senntpr from NewJersey HMr. WRIGHT] now find themselves in and real yIdid not suppose that any conceivable objection could be made to the hour that I named. If the motion is out of order, I shall withdraw it. If it is in order, I insist that the vote be taken upon it.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. I do not agree with my friendfrom Pennsylvania; I do not think the motion in order. There is an ancient law of the Senate that all Senators may be heard in advancing their own opinions and conclusions upon all questions ependingin the senate Chamber. I do not wish to see that law impinged upon. It belongs to the dignity of this body. I should like to see Senators on the other side consent by courtesy to such an arrangement;I would concur in it although it might prevent me from doing what I maychoose to o, to say something upon this question. I would waive all such considerations for the purpose of bringing the matter to a vote and having it finally concluded, consistent with the possible health of the Senators who are at present absent, and who have to come in for that especial occasion. If the y are forced to come hereat the sound of the bell, without any formal warning, I shall regard it as an outrage upon humanity. I know there are men on the opposite side who are capable of these things, nit I think that is not the sentiment or the spirit of the party on the opposite side. I be e that by the courtesy of the Senate, on hot sides of the Chamber, it maybe conceded and agreed that the vote may be taken at 4,or half past 4 oclock, tomorrow. I do not approve of the motion as made, because that may es a rule of the Senate, as against the courtesy of the Senate, which should be the only governing rule. As against any such rule, would have the right to rise in my place, and, accordingto the law of the Senate, discuss the question at my will, and I might violate the courtesy as it was violated here the other day, on a similar occasion, by the Senfrom Massachusetts. But I hope the courtesy of the Senate will admit of a eneml understanding that the vote may be taken at 4 oclock tomorrow.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. HARRIS in the chair.) The Chair, though not familiar with questions of this sort, is of the opinion that this motion is not in order. A motion to postpone the bill to a day certain might be entertained; buta motion to take the vote at a particular hour is not in order.
Mr. COWAN. I proposed itasan amicablearrangement, and pI supposed it would be agreed to.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. I trust the chairman of the committee will consent to take the vote at half past 4 oclock tomorrow.
Mr. HOWARD. Will the Senfrom Pennsylvania allow me to make a suggestion?
Mr. HOWARD. In case a magistrate acting as a judge assumes a jurisdiction which is not conferred upon him by the law, and thus proceeds as a wrong deer, without any legal right or authority, and commits a felony or a miss demeanor under the pretext of exercisin his jurisdiction, is he not guilty of a crime which is justly to be indicted and punished?
Mr. SlfBWAItT. Will the Senator allow me to ask him aquestion?
Mr. SlEWAItl. Would he not have, under State laws, a right to a writ of habeascorpus without any act of Congress; has he not that right now?
Mr. COWAN. I think so; I have always thought so.
Mr. STEWART. If he has that right, and had that right at the passage of the constitutional amendment, what was contemplated by the phrase giving Congress power to pass approprinte legislation, if not to give him something that he did not have before?
Mr. HENDRICKS. If the Senfrom Kentucky will yield to me, I propose to senators that we agree upon some our tomorrow for taking the vote. I will say that the son of the Senfrom NewJersey, [Mr. Wing n r] who is attending upon him, has dropped a note to the Senfrom Delaware [Mr. RIDDLE] that he will come out this evening to vote, but that it is so late in the evening that he ought not to come. On that state of facts, I suggest that we agree upon an hour tomorrow for the vote.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I do not know that I heard the Senator. What is the proposition?
Mr. HENDRICKS. The proposition is that we agree upon an hour tomorrow for taking the votes, sa 2 or 3 oclock.
Mr. HENDRICKS. The difficulty is this: ni the Senfrom Delaware sent to ascertain the condition of the Senfrom NewJersey; his son, who is waiting upon him, replies that he is now asleep, that he will come out any time we notify him, but. that he ought not to come out so late in the evening. There is no desire, I will say, on the part of Senators on this side of the House to postpone this bill for any purpose except just to get the vote. We do not desire any protracted debate, but we are not in a condition to have avote to night without asking a Senator to come out who ought not to come out; and I hate to ask it of him. I am sure the majority would hate to ask him that would not ask it. of any Senator.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I will suggest 4 oclock tomorrow, or even earlier ifSenators prefer it, 3 oclock. There will be no question about taking the vote at that time. I do not propose by this suggestion to stop debate now, but simply that we now have an understanding so that we shall not think of asking a Senator to come out at night whose health would be endangered by it.
Mr. GUTHltlE. I would suggest to senators that every principle of courtesy to a Gentleman who is sick, every principle of humanity, and every principle of respect to the Senate of the U.S., makes it properthat we should fix some hour to ine rrow that is agree able to the gentlemen who are urgin this measureat which the vote may be tnen. It is usual in deliberative bodies, or atleast in such bodies as I have been accustomed to, when a vote of this kind is to be taken, in which all feel great interest, to fix an hour so that every opportunity may be given to each side to bring up their men. It may very often happen that we want indulence ourselves. The presDENT prolempore. Will the Senator suspend his remarks. The disturbance on the floor makes it entirely impossible for the public business to proceed. The Chair must appeal to Senators to preserve order. [Applausa] The Senfrom Kentucky will proceed.
Mr. GUTHRIE. I have said nearly every thing that I wanted to say. I should regret if the Senate should refuse to fix an hour I should deeply regret it, because I think itwould be an evidence of a want of courtesy.
Mr. TRUMBULL. lf the Senfrom Kentucky will allow me, I will say that I think the Senate will agree on this side of it to take a voteto night at half past 5 oclock.
Mr. GUTHRIE. But we have now ascertained that we cannot get these gentlemen in by that time.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It was proposed awhile ago on the other side to fix that hour. Now, if it is to be the same thing tomorrow, when the named hour comes, that you cannot get them here, what are we to do? An hour or 2 ago, it was iroposed to take the vote at 5 o clock or hallI ast 5.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I will say for myself and if there is any Senator on this side who dissents from it of course he will speak that if they are not able to come up at the hour fixed tomorrow, there will be no delay asked upon their account.
Mr. GUTHRIE. None On this side of the House.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I myself am willing to have the time fixed for voting under these circumstances at some hour tomorrow; I hope our friends will agree to it.
Mr. HENDRICKS. Whatever hour you fix. I would rather say 4 oclock, as the Senfrom California [Mr. MCDOUGALL] wishes to make some remarks.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I shall not myself object to fixing it at 4 oclock tomorrow.
The President protempura. Order will be observed in the galleries, or they will be cleared.
The PItESIDENT pro(ampere. Is the senate ready for the question?,
The President protempore. The question is. Shall the bill pass, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding?
Mr. HENDRICKS. I renew the appeal to Senators that we agree to take this vote at 4 oclock tomorrow.
Mr. BROWN, and others. so far as we are concerned.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I believe the chairman does not object to that arrangement. We do not want to discuss the matter further tonight, and, with the understanding that we shall take the vote at that hour, I propose to move an adjournment; but before I make that motion I will state that the understanding on our side is that a vote takes place at 4 oclock tomorrow whether the sick Senators are able to be here or not.
Mr. CONNESS. I objectto this attempt to fix a time by understanding for taking the vote, at which time Senators are to be brought in here to vote upon a single proposition, when they can perform no other public duty. I object to it. It cannot be done.
Mr. TRUMBULI. I am satisfied that no good is to grow out of a struggle here to night.
Mr. CONNESS. That is entirely another question.
Mr. TRUMBULL. There are some of our friends who will not agree to fixing an hour tomorrow, and my judgment is, the Senate had better adjourn, and I think we shall get a vote We are agreed tomorrow. I trust there will be no factions opgoesviteioranl. Ssxsrons. None at all.
Mr. TRUMBULL. We will try to get a vote.
Mr. JOHNSON. You can certainly get a vote tomorrow.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I think we had better do that. That is my judgment, and Ihope our friends will acquiese e in that course.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I move that the Senate do now adjourn.
Mr. WADE. I call for the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered.
Mr. ANTHONY. Although this motion is not debatable, I Wish to state that I understand that the Senator who has the bill in charge thinks the Senate had better adjourn; I shall vote in accordance with what I understand to be his wishes.
Mr. SUMNER. I hope the Senator will make a declaration of his desire.
The President protempore. Debate is not in order unless the motion to adjourn is withdrawn. The call will proceed. The Question being taken by yeas&nays, resulteyeas 33, nays 12; ABSENT 4. So the motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. THURSDAY, April 5, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Bovxrox. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. SURVEY and sALE or MINERAL LANDS.
Mr. JULIAN. I ask unanimous consent to report a bill from the ComPubLands in order that it may be made a special order for the last Tuesday and Wednesday of this month. The title of the bill is House bill No. 322, to provide for the survey and sale of the lands of the U.S. containin" gold, silver, and other valuable minerals, or the assaying and coining of such minerals, and for other purposes.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I object. There are bills before the ComCommerce just as important as this, and which I would like to have made special orders. But if the House is going to make special orders in this way I do not know what is to become of the regular business. I demand the regular order. REPORTS OI" COMMITTEES.
The SPEAKER. The 1st business in order is the call of committees for reports, beginning with the Committee on the Mi itia. No reports were presented from the committee on the Militia.
The SPEAKER. In accordance with the arrangement made between the ComMilAffrs and the ComNavAffrs, reports from the ComMilAffrs are next in order.
Mr. SCHENCK obtained the floor. RAILROAD and TELEGRAPH LINE.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. The Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] yields to me, and I ask unanimous consent to introduce for ref erence a bill to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from Great Salt Lake City to the Colorado river, and to secure to the Government of the U.S. the use of the same for postal, military, and other puioses. ere being no objection, the bill was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. McINDOE, by unanimous consent, asked leave of absence for Mr. SLOAN for one week. Leave was granted. CAPTAIN JOHN W. PARTRIDGE. On motionof mr. SCHENCK, the ComMilAffrs was discharged from the further consideration of the petition of Captain John W. Partridge, company F, 24th Massachusetts volunteers, and the same was referred to the ComClaims. LIEUTENANT JAMES THOMPSON. On motion of
Mr. SCHENCK, the ComMilAffrs was discharged from the further consideration of the petition of Lien tenant James Thompson, 24thMassachusetts volunteers, praying reimbursement for clothin, &c., lost, and the same was referred to the ComClaims. JOHN C. MAGILL. On motion of
Mr. SCHENCK, the ComMilAffrs was discharged from the further consideration of the etition and accompanyin papers of John C. agill, asking payment or horses furnished to the U.S. Army, and the same was referred to the ComClaims. PAY OF THE ARMY.
Mr. SCHENCK. A very serious blunder has been made by the printer in printin House bill No. 450 in regard to the pay of the Army. In the 5th section the printed bill reads: That all officersof the Army of the U.S shall be entitled to receive the pay that may be due. fire. The words “and soldiers" should be insert 1dafter the word “ officers.” As this error is so serious and material, I ask that the bill may be rerinted.
The SPEAKER. it will be so ordered. There was no objection. ESTABLISHMENT OI" MILITARY POSTS.
Mr. SCHENCK. I am instructed by the ComMilAffrs to submit a report upon the memorial of the Minnesota Legislature for the establishment of military posts. I ask that the report be read.
The Clerk read the report. It states that, in the o inion of the committee full authority is alrea y vested in the War Deptto If there be no objection, establish military posts at such points as the military authorities may deem advisable. The committee. therefore, see no occasion for legislation on the subject on the part of Congress, and ask that they be discharged from the further consideration of the memorial, and that the some he laid on the table. The ComMilAffrs was discharged from the further consideration of the memorial, which was laid on the table. ORGANIZATION OF THE ARMY.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, moved that it be discharged from the further consideration of sundry resolutions and etitions having relation to the organization of the Army and different subjects connected there with, the matter having been embraced in the Army bill, and that they be laid upon the table. Agreed to. NATIONAL GUARD or NewYork.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, moved that it be discharged from the further consideration of the report of a committee appointed by a military association relative to the National Guard of the State of NewYork as affected by action of Congress and that it be referred to the Committee on the Militia. The motion was agreed to. increaSE OF PAY TO NAVAL OFFICERS.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, moved that it be discharged from the further consideration of resolutions of the Legislature of the State of NewYork indorsing resolutions of the Chamber of Commerce asking an increase of pay to officers of the Navy, and that they be referred to the ComNavAdairs. The motion was agreed to. ARMY VOLUNTEER NURSES.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, moved that that committee be dischared from the further consideration of House iill No. 411, to secure pay (under certain to Army volunteer nurses, and ctihrcautmitstabnecleasi; upon the table. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, reported back a petition on the same subject, and moved that it be laid upon the table. The motion was agreed to., DAMAGE TO CHURCHES, ETC.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, moved that that committee be discharged from the further consideration of petition of citizens of Upshnr county, WestVirginia, for compensation for damages done to churches,be., by the Union armies, and that it be laid upon the table. The motion was agreed to. DONATION 0! PUBLIC BUILDINGS. ETC.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, moved that that committee be discharged from the further consideration of papers, &c., rela ting to resolutions before Congress tllflt buildings, sheds, and lumber of the U.S. at Grafton and at New Creek, WestVirginia, lately used for hospital purposes maybe dona ted to boards of education, kc, an that they be laid upon the table. The motion was agreed to. REIMBURSEMENT or U.S. sowisns.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, reported back the memorial of the Legislature of the State of Minnesota. asking that soldiers be reimbursed for losses of money taken by rebels in the late war, and moved that it be referred to the ComClaims. The motion was agreed to. BARNEY CAIN.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, reported adversely on Senate bill No. 53, for the relief of Barney Cain; and the same was laid upon the table. MILITARY POSTS.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the same committee, reported back the followin resolution, with the recommendation that it O pass: Resolved.That the ComAppropriat be instructed to In inquire into the proprietyo miikin appropriation to complete the work inaugurate by lliiuor General Thomas, commanding military division of: the Tennessee and other officers commanding divisions and Depts throughout the iUnntcitreridngbtates contemplqting the noble work of disand gathering in national cemeteries the brave soldiers who nvo their lives for the salvation of the Union: and that the committeebe empowered tohend tor persons and papers, and report at nny time by bill or otherwise. The resolution was adopted. CYRUS LELAND.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the ComMilAffrs, to which was referred the memorial of Cyrus Leland, late 1st lieuten nnt in the 30th Kansas volunteers, praying for relief from liability in consequence of loss ofimportant opera in battle, by which he was unable to sett O his accounts, reported adversely on the some. The report was ordered to be printed, and leave was granted to the petitioner to withdraw the papers in the case on leaving copies. JOHN COOPER. On motion of
Mr. SCHENCK, the Committee on hlilitn the ammo of John Cooper, and others, praying or therepeal of that portion of the internalrevenuc liiw inning gross receipts of turnpike companies, was discharged from the further consideration of the some; and it was referred to the ComWays and Menu; liciitennut General npportions to me my Affairs, to which was referred JOHN J. WALSH. On motion of
Mr. SCHENCK, the ComMilAffrs was discharged from the further consierntion of the etition of John J. Welsh; and the same was aid on the table, and the report ordered to be printed. B. BIBO.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the ComMilAffrs, to which was referred the petition of B. Bibo, and others, prayin for the relief of said Bibo, who lost his arm during the war, asked to be discharged from the further considerntion of the some, and reported the following resolution; which was agreed to: Resolved That the petition of B. Bibo, and others, he referred to the ComWays&Means with instructions tojnquire into the expediency and propriety of such legislation as will authorize the issuing officense s to peddleand trade without chargeto such persons as were wounded or disabledwhile serving as soldiers in the Army of the U.S. in the war for the suppressionof the rebellion, and that said committeereport by bill or otherwise. CASCADE RAILROAD.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the ComMilAffrs, reported back Senate bill No. 105, to grant a.right of way to the Case ade railroad through a military reserve in Washington Territory, with an amendment, to add the following proviso: Provided, That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to give said companies the right to occupy for any purpose whatever more then 60 feet in width on the line of said road at any point or points wherethe the space or passbetweenriver and bluff or mountain is so narrow asnot to ndmit of the construction of another parallel railroad or turnpike canal, or other public work for transportation of freight or pnssengcrs.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was then read a 3rd time and passed. Mr. SCHENCK mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Former, its Secretory, informed the House that the Senate had passed an act (S.No.103) to reorganize the judiciary of the U.S. Also, that the Senate had agreed to the report of the committee of conference on the deficiency bill. I". A. PATTERSON.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the ComMilAffrs, reported back Senate bill No.117, for the relief of F. A. Patterson, late captian of the 3rd Virginia. cuvnlry, with o recommendation that it pass. The Senate to rt was read.
Mr. DAVIS. ask that the bill be reported. The bill was accordingly read. It directs payment to Captain Patterson from November, 1862, the date of his commission from the governor of Virginia, to the date of the muster out of his regiment.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was read the 3rd time.
Mr. DAVIS. I understand that there are many cases of a similar character to this, and it seems to me that there should be some General not which would cover all these cases. I have myself received ii number of communications on the subject, and I have understood that the committee has had a general bil) covering these cases under consideration. I wouldingfiuire of the chairman of“ the ComMilAffrs if such is not the fact.
Mr. SCHENCK. There is a general bill eov ering such cases; but this case is alittle peculiar in its character. This bill has passed the Senate, and the committee recommend its passage by the House.
The SPEAKER. The Cheiris of the opinion thot a general bill on this subject has passed the House and is now pending in the Senate.
Mr. SCHENCK. I believe such ii bill was reported by my colleague, [Mr. Bisouud and passed.
The SPEAKER. That bill is still pending in the Senate; it has not passed.
Mr. SCHENCK. This bill has passed the Senate and there is no objection to it.
Skip Skip The bill was passed. Mr. SCHENCK mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. EXTRA PAY TO VOLUNTEER OFFICERS.
Mr. SCHENCK, from the ComMilAffrs, to which a JtResolution, an act, and a petition were severally referred, relating to the 3 monthsL pay provided for officers who resigned at the close of the war, reported a bill to extend the benefits of section 4 of an act making appropriations for the support of the Arm for the year ending Ju] ne 30, 1866, approved arch 3, 1865; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill provides that section 4 of an not entitled “ An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the year ending June 30, 1866, ” shall be so construed as to entitle to the 3 months” pay properprovided for therein all officers of volunteers below lhei anlr of brigadier general who were in the service continuously, either as enlisted men or commissioned officers, at least 2 cars prior to the 19th day of April, 1865, and y whose resig nations were iresented and accepted, or who were inustere out at their own request or otherwise honorably discharged from the service nfter that day.
Mr. KASSON. I wish to inquire of the chairman of the ComMilAffrs [Mr. Sensx ex] whether he intends to confine the revisions of this bill to officers who did not cave the Army till the 19th of April or thereafter. If that is the intention, I fear that the language of the bill will not accom pllSll that en. apprehend that the bill is liable to misconstruction in this particular, and that its benefits will be claimed) by those who voluntarily resigned before the cessation of hostilities. I desire that the phraseology may be made a little more specific.
Mr. SCHENCK. I am under the impression that the language of the bill is not ambig uous. Let the bill be again read: The bill was read.
Mr. KASSON. Now, Mr. Speaker, it will be observed that the language of the bill does not necessarily imply that those who are to receive the benefits of the bill shall have been in the service on the 18th day of April, 1865. The benefits of the bill are extended to “ those who were in service continuously, either as enlisted men or commissioned officers, at least 2 years prior to the 19th day of April, 1865, and whose resignations were presented and accepted, or who were mustered out at their own request, or otherwise honorably discharged from service after that date."
Mr. FAKNSWORTH. I think that the bill is not ambiguous in the particular suggested by the Gentfrom Iowa, Mr. lV.sso.V] as it provides, I believe, for giving this 3 months pay proper to officers who were mus tured out alber the 19th of April. But, Mr. Speaker, I will state my objection to this bill. The law of last year provided that all officers below the rank of brigadier general, who were in service when the law was passed, and who should continue in service til the close of the war, should receive 3 months ay groperupon being mustered out. That law did not limit this 3 mouths pay proper to those officers who had been in the service 2 years continuously, but it provided for giving the 3 months pay proper to all who were in service when the law passed and should continue in service till the close of the war. Now, sir, I think that we ought to pass a law construing that provision so as to give this pay to all covered by that provision who were in service up to the 19th day of April, 1865. Ofli cers and men in the Army, concurring with almost everybody who exercised common sense, regarded their obligations as fulfilled when the recl army capitulated and surrendered. according to the understanding of Congress itself, the end of the war arrived when there was no longer a rebel arm to be battled with. Sir, in contemplation of law, as well as in fact, the war was over the next day after the rebels had capitulated; just as much so as when the other day the President issued his reclamation de claring the war to be ended. f this is not so, I would like some gentleman to tell me when the war ceased.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. The Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. FARNSWORTH] is mistakenif he means to say the war, in ls l contemplation, ceased when the last rebe army surren dered. Flagrant war, in fact, then ceased. But the war, in le 1contemplation, could not cease until so dec arsd by the properpolitical Dept, or Depts, of the (revernment. This principle is perfectly well settled in the books on international law and by the Supreme Court. The Attorne General, in his letter or January 4, declared that “a state of war” still continued. Mr. Seward, in effect, declared the same thing in NewYork in his speech there on the 22d of Februa.
Mr. FARNSWOTUIH. If we must wait for the “properpolitical Dept, or Depts, to declare the war ended, then the war might be continued, in contemplation of law, till doomsday, in consequence of a failure to make the declaration. hold that the war was over, in contemplationof common sense when there was no longer an armednorganized body resisting the Union forces.
Mr. LOOK. I desire to remind my colleague [Mr. Fsasswonru that the proclamation of the President oes not state that the war is over or the rebellion ended in all the States of this Union. The state of Texas is not included at all in that reclamation.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. i ell, the President declares that all citizens are disposed to be loyaly
Mr. STEVENS. The proclamation states that ten 11 ths of the war have ceased, and that one 11thremains.
Mr. KASSON. I move to amend by inserting after the word “were” the words “after that date 3” so that it will read: and whose resignationswere after that date presentedand accepted. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I move to strike out the words “ who were in the service 2 years” and substitute for them “ who were in the service at the time of the passage of the said law, the 3d of March, 1865.
Mr. SCHENCK. If I understand it, the gentlemans criticism is, that while interpreting this law to cure what is thought to be a wrong construction given at the War Dept, we do injustice to a class of officers not admitted to the benefits of that law, because we require them to have been continuously 2 years in the service, and he proposes toamend by striking out that feature, so that it shall apply to all those who were in the service at the time of the passage of the law, which we are resenting this eclaratory law to construe; that is, the 3d of March, 1865. I have no objection to that amendment bein made. It extends the provisions of the hi 1. It is perhaps just to put them it on the same footin.
Mr. WASHBURN, of fndiana. The construction of the War Dept, Mr. Speaker reaches 2 other classes of officers as we as those who resigned. It referred to those who were mustered out on account of phys ical disability, and those who were mustered out by the expiration of their term of service. It reaches Officers who may have been wounded in battle and been mustered out on account of disability.
Mr. SCHENCK. The committee have added the words “ or otherwise honorably discharged, ” so that all persons honorably discharged come within the construction of the law. l
Mr. WASHBURN, of Indiana. The Gentleman does notnnderstand me. I am in favor of the bill as it is now, and am only urging reasons for passing it. The 2nd class included are those mus tered out on the expiration of their term of service. This includes all the veterans who reenlisted in 1868, and who served 4 years. Their time expired and they were mustered out. They were not asked whether they wanted to go out or not, but were mustered out, and the War Dept says they shall not have the 3 months extra pay. We have in this bill these 3 classes provided for: those who resigned after the c ose of the war, those who were mustered out on account of wounds, and those officers of vet eran regiments that were obliged to go out after the close of the war by expiration of term of service.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered. The amendment of Mr. Fansswonrn was agreed to. The bill was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and iassed. Mr. SCHhNCK moved to reconsiderthe I demand the previous vote by which the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. BOUNTIES TO WOUNDED SOLDIERS.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nde and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the JtResolution was orderengross and read a 3rd time: and bein engrossed. it was accordingly read the3rd time and passud. Mr. SCHENCK mtRtv the JtResolution was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. DEFICIENCY BILL.
Mr. P. SPALDING. E. B. WASHHUHNE Mam menon the part of lu:House.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not know that there is anything in this report which will give rise to controvers.
Mr. DAVIS. Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment?
Mr. STEVENS. I will yield to the gentleman for the purpose of asking a question.
Mr. DAV S. There was one provision in this bill which the Senate struck out, and upon which I understand the House committee have receded.
Mr. DAVIS. It is in regard to the payment of $2, 500 to Charles B. Stuart.
Mr. STEVENS. Yes. the Hone has receded from that. The House werein favor of paying that claim. The Senate thought it ought to go to the ComClaims. They would not. say that it was unjust, but they wished it investigated.
Mr. DAVIS. This obligation was incurred under authority of a resolution of this House, which authorized the President to appoint this engineer for the purpose of making a survey of the Niagara ship canal and submitting that survey with his report to this House. The service was performed by the officer appointed by the President by authority of that resolution. He made his report, and that report was accepted by the House. We have had the bone fit of all the information contained in that report, and the committee now having charge of the subject have the benefit of it in their delib erations upon the bill pending for the construction of the Niagara ship canal. Now, I submit that it is bad faith. so far as this House is concerned, to say that.wewill send this man, whose employment we authorized, to the Committee of Cluims to get his compensation. For one, I hold that we are in honor bound to stand to the pledge we made, because we did pledge him compensation for the services he rendered. Inasmuch as we have had the benefit of Mr. Stuarts report and survey and I may say here that it is one worthy of great consideration and confidence I think we should be willing to pay him for it.
Mr. STEVENS. I thought so, and so did the committee on the part Of the House, but inasmuch as the apOintment was made not strictly according to law because it was made under a mere resolution of this House the Senate did not think they were bound by it. Although they would not say that he ought not. to be paid, they thought the appropriation was not properhere. I once examined this report, and I think it a very able one. I think tie engineer showed great ability.nnd that he ought to be paid. The only difficulty is that the Senate thought the claim ought to go to the ComClaims and the managers on the part of the House did not feel justilied in standin out. I still think Mr. Stuart ought to be pai, and I hope he will be eventuall.
Mr. Thayer. I observe that the proviso which was adopted by the House in reerenec to the portrait allery upon notes of the U.S. has unifergone modification which restricts it to the plates which shall be hereafter engraved. I suppose the object of the modification is to amid the great expense which would be incurred in abandoning the plates already engraved. Idesire to ask my colleague 1 [Mr. STEVENS] if that was the object of the l modification.
Mr. STEVENS. If there had been but one plate engraved. we should probably have agreed to the proviso as it passe the House, and got a new one: but the engraving of all these plates cost about 60,000 dollars; and it was, found that the engraving of new lates would stop work for about 3 mont s and cost some 560,000 more. It was, therefore, thought better to let the matter run on until the present plates wear out, and in the mean time others can be prepared to meet the views of my colleague.
Mr. THAYER. I desire to say that I think the action of the committee to have been entirely proper and justifiable under the circumstances; and my only object in calling attention to the subject wasin order thatthe country might understand the reason for the modification made by the committee.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the report of the committee of conference was agreed to. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv the report of the committee of conference was agreed to; upon the table. Agreed to. HIRA M PAULDING.
Mr. SCHENCK, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the relief of Hiram Paul ding, rear admiral U.S. Nav; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, an referred to the ComNavAffrs. ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT LINCOLN, ETC.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I ask unanimous consent to submit the following reamble and resolutions for consideration at this time: Whereas the POTUS did. on the 3d day of May. in the year 18. by proclamation declare and make known that it did then appear from evidence In the bureau of Military Justice that the atrocious murder of the late President. Abraham Lincoln and the attempted assassination of Hon. william H; Seward. SecyState, were incited. concerted and procured by and between JeffersonDavis, lateof Richmond. Virginia and Jacob Thomson. Clement C. Clay, Beverly ucker. George. Sanders. william (. Cleury and other rebels and traitors againstthe (iovernmentoftho U.S.: and whereas the said JeffersonDavis. in the same month of May. wasarrestedhy the military forcesof the U.S., and has since been held in the custody/Jthereof under the authority of the POTUS: Therefore. Be it Resolved, that the ComJudiciary be instructed to inquire whether there is probable cause to believe that any of the personsnamed in said proclamation are guilty. as is in said proclamation alleged and if so. whether any legislation is necessary in order to bring such personsto a speedy and impartial trial: and that said committee have power to send for personsand papers. Arid be it furlter resolved.That said committee be in like manner empoweredto inquire whether there is probable causeto believe that said persons, or any or them, are guilty of treason against the U.S and whether any legislation is necessary in order to bring such personsto n. speedy and impartial trial in the district wheresucherime may have been committed.
Mr. ANCONA. Iobject. TEMPORARY DUTIES 0N IMPORTS.
Mr. MOORHEAD. I ask unanimous consent to introduce aJtResolution to increase temporarily the duties on imports, which I ask to have referred to the ComManufactures. I
Mr. ALLISON. I think the JtResolution should he referred to the ComWays&Means.
Mr. MOOItHEAD. I think the ComManufactures is the appropriate committee.
Mr. ROSS. I object to the introduction of the JtResolution. NEV YORK CONTESTS!) ELECTION. The House then resumed the consideration of the regular order of business after the morning hour, being the following resolutions reported from the ComElections: lfeaylverl; That Hon. James Brooks is not entitled 39th theison Houses farosma Representative triinctthine r Njizeolged. That William E. Dodge is entitled to a this House manRe Representativein the Thirt Congress from the oipghthdistrict in NewYork. The following amendment had been moved by Mr. MARSHALL: Strike out allafter the word “ resolved, "and insert in lieu thereof the following: That William E. Dodge is not entitled to a seatin the House as a Representative in the 39th ) Congress from the 8th district in NewYork. I The pending question was upon the motion of
Mr. GARFIELD to substitute for the amendment of Mr. hIARSHAl.L the following: That the testimony taken as to Hon. James Brooks be recommittedtot O ComElections. with instructions to report especially the facts as to the custom, under the laws of NewYork. of appointing inspectorsof the registry of electionsnot fromthepar tieular election districts in which they reside: also. the facts rospectipg the verification by Brooks of the votes for Brooksin the 15th district. with power to se pd for personsand papers and power to reinstitutoiudicial reexamination in said district.
Mr. BOOKS. I suppose the from Ohio [Mr. SHELLABARGER] desires to state the law correctly. With his permission I will ask him 2 questions: 1st, does not the election law of the State of NewYork give to the ins ectors the power to override the registry an to receive the vote of a man not regis tered, if it is sworn in by the person offering to vote, a householder of the district vouching for him? 2nd, if a person is registered, cannot his vote be rejected by the inspectors of election? In other words. do not tbeiuspect ors of election have the power in those cases to override what the gentleman terms the ju dicial decision of the board of registry?
Mr. MARSHALL. Idesire to call the at tention of the gentleman to the fact that the case of Coffroth vs. Koontz cannot possibly be considered as authority in this case. In that case neither had the certificate of election; neither party was the sitting member. The only question was, which party had the primafacie case, so that the seat could be filled and a contest inaugurated.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. If the announcement of that proposition made it so, then of course I should be subduedon that point.
Mr. MARSHALL. The gentleman certainly will not den that that was the question.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. The House has as vivid a recollection of that matter as either the gentleman or myself can have.
Mr. MARSHALL. Was either gentleman actually in the seat?
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I will state the case again. The House referred to us, as the ComElections, the question as to who prime acic that was the term used in the order of the House who primafacie was entitled to the seat. The committee went to work to find out where that primafacic title was; and the majority of the committee found that it was in Mr. Coffroth. How did they find that to be so? By finding that the safeguards provided by the election law had been omitte, by failiu to certify the votes or failing to swear the o ers, or both. They found that the emission of that evidence of correctness left the flima aciecase in Mr. Coffroth, and compelled Mr. coats to prove that he was rightfully elected, and that Mr. Cotfroth was not.
Mr. MARSHALL. If the gentleman will permit me, I will submit to the House that there is no possible analogy between the 2 cases.
Mr. SPALDING. I wish to ask my colleague a question, as he is a member of the ComElections. How does he cure the irregularities in the 13th district of the 20 1st ward, where all the officers left the polls and retired to a liquor shop, and were gone some half an hour, leaving the votes without our Protector?
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I am lad rny collca uc has called my attention to 5121if;act. I will leave the main presentation of it to the chairman of the committee. The fact is this: that there was no adjournment or postponement within the meaning of the law. If they all went, and there is a difference in the testimony on that point, it was only for 20 minutes to get some refreshments. I would not, as a member of the committee, think that it was either a postponement or an adjournment within the meaning of the statute and 2nd, if I am mistaken in that, the weight of testimony is that before going to supperthe canvass of the congressional vote had been completed. That is in the testimony of Mr. Fox.
Mr. PAINE. I yield 5 minutes to the Gentfrom Ohio.
The Clerk read, as follows: Resolved, That the testimony taken as to Hon.IamosBrooks be recommitted to the ComElections, with instructions to report cspecially: The facts as to the custom, under the laws of NewYork, of appointing inspectamof theregistry of elections not residing in the particular election district l in which they act. Also, that the contestant and sitting member be permitted to make proof of the castingof legalvotes in the 15th district of the 18 thward: and thatthocomniitteebeauthorizedto prescribe the time and manner of taking the necessarytestimony.
Mr. GARFIELD. Just let. me say that I have left it with the committee. to prescribe the time and manner of taking this testimony, and they can require the parties to produce all their testimony inten days or 2 weeks. This is notaproposition for an indefinite postponement or or delay.
The SPEAKER. The power of amendment is now exhausted; there is an amendment to the amendment pendin.
Mr. PAINE. I understand that. Unless the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Gsnrrsnn] accc tgs my resolutions, I know I must wait. he Clerk read Mr. Parnss resolutions as follows: Resolved.That the invalidity of the rester of the 15th district of the 18 thwe of the city of NewYork would not of itselfiustify the rejection of the official roturns of the canvassersofthat dist rich Ilewlved. That thise aseberecommittedto the ComElections to resortypon supplementary proof to be made as rovied in the next resolution. val, That sit or party be authorised to take supplementary testimony respecting the election in the 15th district of the 18 wnrd only before the 10thday of May next. complying with the stututor regulations applicable to the case: Im mdegTl. at 5diiys notice of any proposedexamination of witnesses shall be sufficient.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state to the Gentfrom Wisconsin that the 1st resolution would not be in order now; but the other 2 resolutions proposing to recommit the whole matter to the ommittee of Elections would be in order now.
Mr. PAINE. The Speaker has failed to understand.me. I merely gave notice that at thelplropertime I would offerthese resolutions. e SPEAKER. The Chair supposed the gentleman desired to offer them now, if he could do so under the rules.
Mr. PAINE. N o, sir, I desire to offer these resolutions together. thffhe SPEAKER. That is not in order at is time.
Mr. PAINE. Let me explain why I am imwilling to offer the last 2 resolutions unless accompanied by the 1st. I am unwilling that the case shall go to the committee incuinbered by a dispute about the propriety of making the invalidity of the register of the 15th district a ground for the rejection of the returns of the canvassers in that district. Unless, therefore, these 3 resolutions can go together I do not desire to offer them.
Mr. GARFIELD. As those resolutions express in almost every particular what I desired to express in my resolution, and as these are drawn by a member of the ComElections and are doubtless in better shape than mine is, I will accept them in place of mine.
Mr. BROOKS. It is now the 6th of April. Between now and the 10th of May is a very short time in which to repoll a district as large as the one in question. the question was upon the resolution submitted y Mr. Pure, and accepted by Mr. GARFIEID in lieu of his own.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. My colleague entirely misapprehended me.
Mr. SPALDING. If I have made any mistake, I will yield to the gentleman with pleasure for an exlamition.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I do not mean to say whether the gentleman misapprehended my manner; but he has misunderstood what I said. I said that, as I understood the matter, what Occurred was not an adjournment or postponement within the meaning of the laws of NewYork. I further said that the weight of the testimony showed that, even if an adjournment within the meaning of the law did occur it did not take place until after the canvass had been completed. I said, moreover, that I would not go into that question more fully, because, so far as it had not been discussed, it As would be discussed by the able chairman of the committee, and I did not desire that the House should be wearied by listening to the argument twice. Let me add, with the permission of my colleague, that so little importance was attached to that question in the discussions before the committee that so far as I recollect, it was not orally argued by anyone.
Mr. DAWES. Itake the floor to call the previous question, but I will yield the floor to the sitting member if he desires to be heard.
Mr. GARFIELD. Allow me to say that I understood my resolution, as modified h the Gentfrom Wisconsin, [Mr. PAIXE, IWEIS so drawn as to confine the investigation to the 15th district of the 18th ward. I see it is not so stated definitely, and I want that added.
Mr. PAINE. such was my object, and I will modify it accordingly. EVENING SESSION DISPENSED WITH.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that the session for this evening be dispensed with. The motion was agreed to. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.
Mr. TROWBRIDGE, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that they had examined and found truly enrolled Senate bill No.80, for the relief of J. B. Rittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron, when the Speaker signed the same. NEWYORK CONTESTED ELECTION Again.
Mr. NIBLACK. Will the Gentfrom NewYork give way for a motion to adjourn?
Mr. BROOKS. I will yield for that put so. poMr.
Mr. DAWES. I hope we shall close up this matter to night.
Mr. BROOKS. I shall not be able to finish what I have to say this evening.
Mr. DAWES. I hope the gentleman will complete his speech, and then, if the House will isten to me for a few minutes, we will close up the talk on this case, and be ready to take the vote in the mornin.
The Clerk read, as follows: City and countyof IYew York, so: Bartlett Donuhuo, JohiIMcAulitfe, James G. Sin clair and John OShaughiiesse. of said county.being duly sworn. depeseand say.t at for the months of October and November, 1864t, heywereupmintedb the board of supervisorsof the county0 cw Yor as registrarsof election, and acted in such capacity for the Novemberelectionnfsaid earin the following districts of the 20 j 1st wari, namely: 12th district, 14th district. 8th district, 12th district and 14 thdistrict and deplonents do further depose and say, eachfor himself, that theywere not at that time residentsof such election distnct. but.residedin electiondiiitrictii in said ward other than the districts in which they acted in the capacityof registrarsof election. JAMES (1.SINCLAIR. No. 120East Thipy lburth 01ml. JOHN McAULH hE. J. ltiii Eur! 1.i:1 I1 Fst{retlelt. OSHAUGHNlSSEY, 5273rd avenue. B. DONUHUE, 6246th avenue. Les 1 Sworn beforeme this Bth day of March. 1866. [L a] ELBBIT A. WOODNWotAaRrD y. Public. Stnlvof NewYork, city and county qfNewYork, so: I William C. Conner, clerk of the city and county of NewYork, and also clerk of the supremecourt for the said city and count, bein ii court of record. do hereby certify that E l rit A. Voodwurd.before whom the annexed deposition wast aken. was.at the time of taking the same, a notary public of NewYork.dwcllin5in said city and county, duly appointed and spam an authorized to administer oaths to be used in an court in said State and for general purposes; an. that his signaturetheretois genuine, as I verily believe. In testimonywhereofI have hereuntqsetmy hand. [L a 1caonudnatyffi, t exheed 29 thtch day of March 4 1866 ourt and W. C. 00hNER. Clerk.
Mr. BROOKS. I also call attention to the 2nd district of the 18th ward, and I ask the attention of the House to the enormous vote given in this district: for Dodge, 462; for I Brooks, 199. I ask that the following affidavit, which I send to the Clerks desk, be read.
The Clerk read, as follows: Oily and courtlyof NewYork, or: Eugene Durnin, cfsaid city and county.beingduly sworn.dopose sand says that he was appointed a re gistrarof oleetiou for the Novemberelectiuuol 1864by the board of su Hl" l$0olf8the county of how York for the 2nd district of the 18th ward in said city and county, and acted in said capacity for said November electionfor the year 1864 and deponent further saysthat he wasnot at that time, the months of November or October, 1864.aresi dent pfsaid 2nd district in the 18th wardof the city of how York, but was then and is now u resident and voterin the 10th district of said 18th ward in said city and ccunhtv of NewYork. tNIN, 188East TIUIMZI FUIL Street, NewYork (My. Swornto before me this 25th dav of March, 1&66. [L s] Notary PubElhic BoItfftTheAC.oWunOtOyaDtWheAmRDYo. rk. Interlined before being swornto. ELBRIT A. WONOotDaWryARD. Public. State of NewYork, cityof NewYork, u. I. William O. Connor, clerk of the city and county of NewYork and also clerk of thosuprcinecourt for the said city and county. bein a court of record.do hereby certify that Elbrit A. goodw. beforcwhom the annexed depositionwas taken was at the time odfwetallkiningg the same.a notary pubic of NewYork. in said city and county.duly appointedand sworn and authorized to administeroat s to be used in an court in said State, and for generalpurposes; abnld that.his signature theretois genuine.asI verily by IOVO In testimony whereof Ib avehereuntqset myhand, caonudnatyfl, itxhced 25th tchdsaeyaol foMf athrcehs, a1i8d6c6o.urt and W. C. CONNER. mark.
The SPEAKER. The gentlemans time has expired.
Mr. DAWES. I move that the time of the gentleman be extended. No objection was made.
Mr. BROOKS. New, I am not lawyer enough, and I thank God I am not, to understand the arguments of some of the gentlemen who have alleged that no place for the election was desi nated by law. do not understand such tee nical arguments, nor how they can influence the election. It is said that this election was illegal, because the place for holdingr the election was not designate, yetit is proved that early in the month of september, the common council, the lower branc of the city legislature, decignated the place of James Thomson as the place for holding the polls. But or some cause that action was not concurred in by the board of alder men until the 8d day of Nyovember. [Here Mr. Bnooxs yielded the floor for a motion to adjourn] FRIDAY, April 6, 1866. The same subject being again under consideration,
Mr. DAWES. Iwill say that it is not my purpose to interrupt the gentleman during his ar ment.
Mr. BROOKS. I beg the gentleman to interru tine.
Mr. DAWES. But. ifI fail to notice his interrogatory in what I shall say in conclusion, then I ask him to call my attention to it.
Mr. BROOKS. I am sorry not to have a re ly now,
Mr. DAWES. It is very ovidentthat neither the gentleman himself nor myself can arena 9.preper line of argument if we do it in this we.
Mr. BROOKS. This is the only way to get the facts to the direct attention of the House.
Mr. DAWES. I do not mean to omit to notice any fair interrogatory the gentleman puts to me.
The SPEAKER. he gentlemans 2nd hour has expired.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I hepe the gentleman will be allowed to proceed, as he says he is nearly done.,
Mr. GRINNELL. How long does the Gentfrom NewYork want?
Mr. DAWES. It is for the House to as whether the gentlemanstimeshallbeextende.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I move that the gentlemans time hall be extended 20 minutes. There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly.
Without concluding his speech, he yielded to Mr. HALE, who said: If the gentleman does not desire to complete his argument this after noon, I will ask imto give way to a motion to adjourn.
Mr. BROOKS. I will yield for that purpose.
Mr. HALE. I now mom: that the House adjourn.
Mr. DAWES. Before the vote is taken, allow me to suggest to my friendfrom NewYork [Mr. BROOKS] that he continue his argument until half past 4,unless he is about to enter upon a new branch of his argument.
Mr. BROOKS. I am just approaching a new branch of the subject.
Mr. wILSON, of Iowa. Will the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. HALE] withdraw the motion to adjourn or a few moments, that some Senate bills on the Speakers table may be taken up and referiedto the ComJudiciary, which will meet tomorrow morning? It will take but a few moments.
Mr. HALE. I will withdraw the motion for that purpose. SUPREME COURT, DISTCOL. On motion of
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, senate bill No. 184, to define more clearly the jurisdiction and powers of the supreme court of the DistCol, and for other purposes, was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. On motion of
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, senate bill No. 43, to prescribe the mode of set thng the accounts of the clerk of the supreme court of the DistCol, was taken from the Speakers table. read a 1st and seci and time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. SUPREME COURT REPORTS. On motion of
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, senate bill No. 186, ainendatory of an act to provide for the reports of the decisions of the SCOTUS, was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. REOROANIZATION OF THE JUDICIARY. On motion of
Mr. wILSON, of Iowa. senlate bill No. 103, to reorganize the judiciary (of the U.S., was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. REAR ADMIRAL HIRAH PAULDING. On motion of
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, Senate JtResolution No. 53, authorizing l Rear A miral Hiram Iaulding to accept a dec 3oration from the King of Italy, was takenfrom (the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd ( time, and referred to the ComNavAffrs. HYDROGRAPHIC OFFICE, NAVY DEPT. On motion of
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, Senate bill No. 174, to establish a hydrographic other: in the Navy DeptZ was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComNavAffrs.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Fonrnr, its Secretary, announced that the Senate had passed JtResolutions of the following titles, in which the concurrence of the House was requested: Jtresolution (S.R.No. 66) authorizing the SecyTreasury to adjust the claim of Beals & Dixon against the U.S.;.ndJtResolution (S.R.No. 51) respecting bounties to colored soldiers, and the pensions, bountics, and allowances to their heirs. Italso announced that the Senate had passed, without amendment, House bills of the following titles: " An act (H.R.No. 420) to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territory; and An act (H.R.No. 215) for the benefit of John W. Gamble. It also announced that the Senate had concurred in amendments of the House to Senat bills of the following titles: An act. (S.No.80) for the relief of J. B. Rittenhonse, fleet paymuster of the Pacific squadron; and An act (S.No.80) granting a pension to Sarah Fitzgibbon. FRAUDS OF CLAIM AGENTS.
Mr. BUNDY, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution: Wherepstherearecertain persons locatedin the city of Washington. who style ticmselves claim azents. professingto have special facilities for the collection of soldiersclaimsagainstthoGovernment of the U.S.: and whereassuch person aas such a ents have in their possession and under their control a urge nourimn bvearostfcsnl amimsoslbmeloonnegyinsgmthosicchlmdiucsrstpuansdsstahirlooursg, hcothve him 3ofsuch claim agents or attorneys: nndwhereas certain of those agents arccollqctedandappropriated to their private use. Moneys arising from such claims and refuse to ny the some to the righttul owners thereof: and w crcus there is no law provrding for the adequate punishment of such dishonestagentsor attorneys: Therefore, Resolved, That the comJudiciary be instructed to report a bill whichwill more effectually protect thesoldiers and sailors in securiuir the payment of all moneys which may comeinto the bunch.of such agentsor attorneys, by providing that all do faultmir agentsor attorne s shall be declared guilty of embezzlement and sba l be punished in the some manner as is or may be provided for the punishment of embezzlementor grand larceny.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I ask the consent of the House to say a word or 2 for the purpose of giving notice to the soldiers throughout the country of a fraud which is being perpetrated upon them by these claim agents.
The SPEAKER. The Chair hears no objection, and the gentleman will proceed.
Mr. FARN WORTH. I have recently received numerous letters from soldiers in Illinois, who inform me that claim agents in Washington are sending them circulars promising them fabulous amounts in the shape of bounty and land warrants. I have received letters from soldiers asking me to procure their land warrants for them, inqpirin whether I could not get them for less 1. an tie sum for which these claim agents offer to procure them. These agents are sending circulars all over the country. representing that the soldiers are entitled to bounties and land warrants, in anticipation of some law of Congress granting land warrants and c qualizing bounties. These agents inbrm the soldiers that they are entitled to large sums as bounty and to land warrants for 160 acres of land, and ask them to sendftheir diseharges and other documentary proo. Now, sir, I desire to give notice to the country and I hope that the reporter of the Asso ciated Press will publish it in his report, that it may extend to every part of the country, that these claim agents in the city of Washington, as a class there may be exceptions are a set of infernal rase als and cheats, utterly unworthy to be trusted.
The SPEAKER. As this subject has been referred to, the Chair, if the House will indulge him, desires to make a single remark. A claim agent, named George E. Lemon, called upon the occupant of the chair, askin authority to refer to him in the prosecution of his business, which permission was positively refused. Circulars were, however, sent over the country, using the name of the Speaker of the House as a referee for this agent; and the Chair is every day engaged in answering letters of inquiry from soldiers and others, and in formingt em that he never gave any authority for the use of his name i that manner.
Mr. GRIXNELL. I sire to say that this same individual has used my name in the same way without authority, and I have also received these letters of inquiry. 1 have no knowlede of the person whatever.
Mr. MORRILL. One of my constituents has inquired of me whether there is any such person as the individual who has been named. have not, on inquiry, been able to find any such person, but I have found his name recorde in the Pension Bureau as a licensed claim agent. The resolution was agreed to. DISTCOL BILLS. On motion of
Mr. INGERSOLL, the following Senate bills were taken from the Speakers table, severally read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComDistCol: An act (S.No.167) to incor orato the Womens Hospital Association of e DistCol; An set (S.No.185) to preserve evidence of marriages in the DistCol; An act (S.No.177) to incorporate the National Safe Deposit Company of Washington, in the DistCol; An act (S.No.158) to facilitate the settlement of the accounts of the Treasurer of the U.S., and to secure certain moneys to the people of the U.S or to persons to whom they are due and who are entitled to receive the same; An act (S.No.43) to prescribe the mode of settling the accounts of the clerk of the supreme court of the DistCol; An act (S.No.218) exempting the property of debtors in the DistCol Tron levy, attachment, or sale on execution; An act (S.No.90) enlarging the powers of the levy court of the county of Washington, in the DistCol; and An act (S.No.51) to incorporate the Poto mac Navigation and Transportation Company of the DistCol.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. On motion of Mr. HOTCHKISS, leave of absence was granted to Mr. HUBBARD, of NewYork. ouunon FOR LIBERIA. On motion of
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I desire to state, if the amendment suggested he adopted, the proviso Wlll then read as the law does at present. The SecyNavy is now authorized to discontinue that bridge.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to strike out “an thorized ” and insert “required.”
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I move to amend section 6 by adding at the end the wvords “if approved by the SecyNavy.” I am not aware that he has been consulted on this subject. The section will then read: That the offiec of asstin Bureau of Ordnance be and the same 1."hereby.abolished.if approved by the SecyNavy.
Mr. STEYENS. I have no objection to that.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The question recurred on concurring in the amendments of the Senate as amended, and they were concurred in. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv the House acted on the amendments of the Senate: on the table. Agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. I now move that a committee of conference be appointed on the part of the House. The motion was agreed to.
Skip Skip LEAVE or ABSENCE. Mr. DRIGGS asked and obtained leave of absence for Mr. Janus for ten days and then, on motion of
Mr. HALE, (at 4 oclock and 40 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Fawn, April 6, 1866. Prayer by Rev. A. D. GILLETTE, D. D., of Washington. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. COMMITTEE SERVICE.
The President protempore. In compliance with the order of the Senate directing the Chair tofill the vacancies in the out ittee on Pensions, the Chair announces the ap intment of Mr. Emsosns and Mr. SAULSBURY.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I have been requested by the arties interested to ask that the petition of pecran StVrain, for himself and the heirs of Ignacio Vigil, praying for the confirmation of a private lantfclaim in NewMexico be withdrawn from the files of the Senate and referred to the ComPrivLandClms.
Mr. CONNESS. I should like to know what that is.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. It is a etition in relation to a private land claim in NewMexico. I do not know personally what it is, but a Gentleman handed me the opera and requested me to have them referred to the ComPrivLandClms.
Mr. GRIMES. Has there been any adverse report?
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I think not. If there (liias been I do not ask that the papers be with raw. will be made if there e no objection. On motion of
Mr. DAVIS, it was Ordered, That Maria L. Saunders hitvo leave to withdraw her petition and other papersfrom the files of the Senate. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.
Mr. VANWINKLE, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.No. 363) supplementary to the several acts relating to pensions, reported it with amendments. He also, from the some committee. to whom was referred a hill (S.No.239) for the classification and raduation of invalid pensions, asked to be ise harged from its further consideration; which was agreed to.
Mr. HENDERSON, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the memorial of Thomas Laurent. prayin for the payment of a balance alleged to be as him on account of money seized from him by General Scott in Mexico in 1847, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed. He also, from the some committee, to whom was referred the memorial of Catain H. Clay Wood, of the 11thregiment {iU.S. infantry, praying compensation for property lost by the evacuation of Fort. Cobb, exas, under Post Order No. 87, issued for the evacuation of that post in 1861, submitted an adverse report; I which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. YATES. from the ComDistCol, to whom was referred a n
The PRESIDENT protemporc. That order memorial of women of Fulton county, Illinois, remonstrating against licenses being granted to drinking saloons, gaming houses, kc, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, and that it be referred to the ComFinance; which was agreed to. Mr. KlRKWOOD, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred the petition of Sarah E. Wilson, praying for a pension, reported a hill (S.No.252) granting a pension to Mrs. Sarah E. Wilson. The bill was read and passed to a 2nd reading, and the report was ordered to be printed.
Mr. CLARK, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the petition of James Crutchett, praying for compensation for the occupation and use of his property in Washington city, by the Government, for military iurposes, reported a JtResolution (S.
Mr. o. 60) referrin the petition and other papers in the case of ames Crutchett to the Court of Claims; which was read, and passed to a 2nd readin.
Mr. WILLEgY, from the ComDistCol, to whom was recommitted the hill (S.No.190) to incorporate the DistCol Canal and Sewerage Company, reported it with amendments. PRINTING OF A BILL. On motion of
Mr. POMEROY, it was coOnrsdtreurcetdio.TnhoaftththeeKabnillsa(sS.anNdo.N2co1s2h)tooVaaildleyinrathile road.connecting the greatlakes, Iowa. Missouri and Kansas.with Texas and the Gulf of Mexico and to smeicliutareryto. pthoestGalo, vaenrdnmotehnetr tphuerpuosseeos.fbtehperinstaemd.cfor BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. POMEROY asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.268) to incorporate the 1st Congregational Society of Washington; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComDistCol.
Mr. FESSENDEN asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introducea bill (S.No.254) to amend an act entitled “An act to provide a national currenc secured by a ledge of U.S. hon s and to provide for the circulation and redemption thereof;” which was read twice by its title.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I move that it be referred to the ComFinance and ordered to be printed.
Mr. GRIM S. I should like to hear it read at.length.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I beg the Senator not to ask to have it read. It will he referred and printed and then he can see what it is. It is rather long.
The PRESIDENT protempera. The order to print will be may e, and the bill will be referred to the ComFinance. HOUSE BI LLS REFERRED. The following bill and JtResolution from the HoRep were severally read twice by their titles and referred to the ComMilAffrs : A bill (H.R.No. 456) to extend the benefits of section 4 ofan not making appropriations for the support of the Army for the year ending June 30, 1866; and A JtResolution (H.R.No. 105) giving construction to the law in relation to bounties payable to soldiers discharged for wounds. CASE ADE RAILROAD. The Senate proceeded to consider the amendment of the HoRep to the bill S.No. 13)to rant the right of way to the ose ade Railroad Companyt irough a mi] itary reserve in Washington Territory. The amendment was to add at the end of the bill the following proviso: Provided. That nothing in this act shall be so can stmed as to give said companythe right to occupy for any purpose whatever ine ro than 60 feet in width on the lineof said road. at any point or ointl wherethe space or pass between the ilver an blulTor mountain is so narrow as not to admit of the construction of another fiariillcl railroad. turnpike road. pnnitl. (r other pub O work tor transportation of freight orqasse ugcrs.
Mr. NESMITH. I move that the Senate concur in that amendment. The motion was agreed to. REPRESENTATION OF SOUTHERN STATES.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas, asked, and by unan imous consent obtained leave to introduce a JtResolution (S.R.No. 59) providing for admitting Sens&Reps from the States lately in insurrection into the congress of the U.S.; which was read twice by its title.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. As this JtResolution is framed on the theory that has been followed by the POTUS in the polic pursued by him for reconstructing the States ately in insurrection, I should be glad to have it read at length.
The Secretary read the resolution, which proposes that Sens&Reps roni either of the States lately in insurrection shall be admitted into Congress whenever it shall satisfactorily a pear that such State has, in accordance with the advice of the POTUS, passed laws annulling its ordinance of secession, ratif in the amendment of the Constitution of the IlU.S. abolishing slavery, repudiating all rebel debts, recognizing the debts of the U.S., and extending the elective franchise to all male persons of color residin in the State over 21 years of age who can read the constitution of the U.S. in the English language and write their names, and also to all made persons of color oflike age and residence who own real estate valued at not less than 250, and pay taxes thereon. The resolution is accompanied by a proviso declaring that such Sens&Reps shall possess all the qualifications required by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
Mr. BROWN. I should like to inquire of the Senfrom Kansas whether he has any assurance that the POTUS is of the same opinion now as he was when he uttered those sentiments.
The President protempore. That order will be entered, if there be no objection.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him if his remarks of yester ay arepublished I I do not find them in the Globe. Are they published?
Mr. WADE. I do not know anything about them; I do not look into the Globe; and I am not very apt to take back anything I have said, either.
Mr. WADE. Now, sir how stands this matter? The POTUS did at an early period profess to be the pro; tector, the friend), the oses of these men to lead them from bondage to liberty. How has be redeemed that pledge? He has from all appearances become theirinveterate and relent less foe, making violent WM upon any member of Congress who dares raise his voice or give his vote in favor of any measure having for its object the amelioration of the condition of these oor people. Talk to me about the President being their friend! When did it ever hap )en before that a great measure of relief to an "ering humanity on as broad a scale as this was met by the stern veto of the POTUS, and without being able when he undertakes O make his obstruction to our measures todsignate a single clause of the I Constitiifiat he pretends has been violated. My Lord Coke used to say that fraud lurketh in generalities. Look through that message, and in not a single place can he put his finger upon anything that looks like aviolation of the Constitution of the U.S. There is nothing in the bill that looked as if it had for its object anything exec t the means of affording some little relief to these poor people, these friends of ours, whom we are under the highest obligations that can devolve upon mortal man to see defended against their mortal enemies. How has the President redeemed his pledges?
Mr. WADE. Certain y; ask me any question.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. terdny used this language: “The issuethe President has madewith Congress, the quarrel he has picked with Congressfrom the very commencement.is nothing moreor lessthan on the questionof recognizing an permitting rebelsto occupy their old places on thistloorufor the utter deitrppltion of the Governmentin myJudgment and c 10. The Senator yes I ask the Senfrom Ohio to point to a single expression, either oral or written, in which the POTUS has advised, advocated, or urged the admission of other than truly loyal men upon the floor of either branch of Congress.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I ask that question, sir.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Had not the Senfrom Massachusetts denounced him as having sent into this Senate “ a white washing message?” Had not the leader of the HoRep declared that if he had lived in curl times in England he would have been hanged as a traitor, before that speech Was made?
The President pro{em re. The morning hour having expired, it. geocomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday.
Mr. WADE. I do not intend to go on very long. but if the Senate are anxious to go on with anything else I will suspend my remarks.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I was about to suggest that we go on with the business regularly before the Senate.
Mr. HENDRICKS. Will the Senator allow me to interrupt him?
Mr. HENDRICKS. I say that the charge which he now makes against Mr. Voorhees is not sustained by any record, and I give it now a square denial.
Thc PRESIDENT protempore. The Chair will again state that it is the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday, which is the message of the President returning to the Senate the bill of the Senate No. 61, and the question is, Shall the bill pass. the objections of the President notwithstanding? In the absence of any motion to postpone that, it is the duty of the Chair to bring it before the Senate.
Mr. wADE. I am nearly through. Several Sssarons. You can go on on that question.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I think we had better proceed with the order of the da.
Mr. wADE. My friends thin I had better discontinue my remarks. I have but little more to say, but perhaps Ican say it at any other timejustas well. Let the bill be taken up.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM rnn HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. Lmvn, its Chief Clerk, announced, that the HoRep had passed he hill (S.No.115) for the relief of Jane W. Nethawny. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed a bill (S. ! No. 181) for the relief of Emma J. Hall, with an amendment, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. NAVAL APPROPRIATION BILL. The message further announced that the HoRep had agreed to some and disagree to other amendments of the Sonate to the bill (H.R.No. 122) making appropriations for the naval service for the ycar ending 30th June, 1867 and had agreed mother amendments of the Senate to the said bill with amendments, asked a conference on the disagreeing votes of the 2 Houses on the said hill, on had apointed Mr. N. P. BANKS, of Massachusetts, Mr. Jens F. F.Wnnswourir. of Illinois, and Mr. CHARLES E. Pneus, of Maryland, managers at the same on its part. ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED. The message further announced that the signed the followingenrolled hills; which were thereupon si ued by The President protemporc: A bill (IE Mr. v0. 86) making additional appropriations, and to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for sundry civil expense s of the Government for the fiscal year oning the 30th ofJnne. 1866, and for other PURPOSES; A bill (H. It. No. 215) for the benelit of John W. Campbell; and A bill (H. H. No. 420) to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territory. APPROVAL or mus.
Skip Skip A message from the POTUS, by Mr. Moons. his Secretar, announced that the POTUS had approved and signed, on the 5th instant, the following acts mu JtResolution: An act (S.No.107) to provide fora term of the district court for the strict of Minnesota to be held at the city of Wine na, in said district; An act (S.No.165) more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain crimes against the U.S.; An act (S.No.216) to provide for the transfer of the custody of the library of the Smith sonian Institution to the Library of Congress; and A JtResolution (8.R. No. 2) for the restomtion ofCommanders William Reynolds and Mclancton B. Woolsey, U.S. Navy, to the active list from the reserved list and that on the (lib instant the President had approved and signed an act (S.No.94 ) to amend the act entitled “An act for the relief of sea men, and others, borne on the books of vessels wrecked or lost in the naval service, " approved July 4, 1864, and for other purposes. CIVIL RIGHTS BILL VETO MESSAGE.
The President protempore. The bill (S.No.61) to protect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rights, and to furnish the means of their vindication, is now before the Senate; and the question is, Shall the bill pass, the objections of the POTUS to the contrary notwithstanding?
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Steps were taken to reorganize the State government in Arkansas while Congress was in session and before the presidential election of 1864. The congress of the U.S. saw those ste s being taken, saw the State being organize; the people of the U.S. saw them; and congress acquiese ed in the steps taken in 3 of the States the same proceedings which were pursued subsequently by the present POTUS in the other States. 7
Mr. WADE. Let me ask the Senator one question. Does he claim that while a State is under martial law, when the habeascorpus is suspended there and kept in suspension by the troops of the Federal Government, while war still exists, it can properly form a constitution?
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I answer, the constitution of the U.S. guaranties to each State a RFG.
Mr. WADE. The Senator says congress acquiese ed in that. I say it did not. I heir electoral votes were thrown out of the Presidential count because they had no right. to be recognized as States.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Congress acqui ese ed in those steps of organization because Congress failed to supply a plan for their organization.
Mr. WADE. Again I wish to correct the Senator right there, because he makes so many statements
Mr. WADE. Did Congress fail to furnish a plan? No, sir, it passed a plan, and in my judgment a very good one, but the President put an end to it.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. In that plan the Senfrom Ohio stultified himself, in my judgment. L will show you how. You.[addressing Mr. wADE] have been advocating here the right of suffrage to the colored man, you and our colleagues; and yet you voted solemnly in that bill to disfranchise every colored man in the insurrcctionary States; and let me say to you that the proudest recollection upon my mind to dav is that I advised Mr. Lincoln to withhold his signature to that bill because it disfranchised the loyal men in those States. That clause of the Constitution that guaranties to every State a RFG is, in my Opinion. as bindingupon the executive as upon the legislative branch of the Government and the legislative branch failing to furnish that RFG, it was the duty of Mr. Lincoln to institute steps for organizing State governments. It was good policfi too, to reorganize State governments in the rear of our armies; butl reeat that this President had nothing else to o. The Congress of the U.S. tacitly, at least, and the people of the U.S. directed him to complete the work that Mr. Lincoln had begun. Mr. President, Iask the Clerk to read the 5 points in the JtResolution I have presented. You say that you and those you Represent are standing between the country and anarchy. Idesire to have these read, an then I desire to ask the Senfrom Ohio whether if that plan of the POTUS is adopted by Congress and approved by him, we do not secure to the whole country peace and quiet, and avoid anarchy.
Mr. WADE. I thought the Senator said he did not know whether the President would adopt it or not.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I do not now say; but I ask, if he does, will not that be the effect. I ask the Clerk to read my proposition.
The Secretary read the resolution, as follows: Resolwd. th., That Sens&Reps from either of the Stateslately in insurrection shall be admitted to Congresswhenever it shall satisfac torily appear that such State has, in accordancewith the advice of the POTUS paased laws annulling its ordinance of secession. ratifyin the amendment to the Constitution of the U.S.Mates abolishing slavery, repudiating all rebel debts. recognizing the debts of the U.S., and extending the elective franchise to all male persons of color residing in said State over 20 one cars of agewho can read the Constitution of the U.S. in the Enszlish language and write their names, and also, to all male persons ofcoloroflikoage and residencewhoown too estate valued at not lessthan 8:50 and pay taxes thereon: Provided. That such Sens&Reps shall possessall the qualifications required by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
Mr. HOWARD. I understood the Senfrom Kansas to remark in the course of his observations that he found some warrant for the resolution which he has submitted to the Senate in some writing or document emanatin from the POTUS desire to say, with the permission of the Senfrom Kansas, that I accept, so far as it goes, with a great deal of leasurc, the principles contained in this resolution. My recollection is that it is almost a verbal recital of a letter from the POTUS, dated in August, 1865, to Governor Sharkey, of Mississippi. I was very much pleased at that time with the views taken by the President in that letter of instruction to Governor sharkcy, and if the Senfrom Kansas hap pens to have about him the letter to whiehI refer, I shall for one feel extremely obliged to him if he Will read it, or cause it to be read, to th e Senate.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. that letter. I have it here.
Mr. HOWARD. I amvery much obliged to the Senator.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. The 1st 4 points made in the JtResolution have been pressed on every single insurrectionary State. I have here the letter of the President to Governor Sharkey, which I ask the Clerk to read.
The Secretary read the following letter: Executive MANSION, WASHINGTON.D. C., August 15.1865. Governor WILLIAM L. Snnxsr. Jackson, Miuiuippi: I am (ratified to seethat you have or anised our convention without difficulty. I liupot at. without delay. your coriventionwill amendyour State constitution abolishingllavery, and denying to all future Legislatures the power to legislatethat there is property in man: also. that they will adopt the amendment to the Constitution of the U.S. abolishin slavery. franc ise to all persons ofcolor who can read the Constitution of the U.S. in English and write their name and to all personsof color who own real estate valued at not less than 8230 and pay taxes thereon. you would completelydisarm the adversary and set an exampletheother Stateswill follow. This you can do with perfect safety: and on thus place the southern States. in reference to free persons of color. upon the same basis with the free States. I hope and trust your convention will do this; and as a.consequence the radicals, who are wild upon negro franchise. will be completelyfoiled in their attcm its t9 keep the southern States from renewing their relations to the Union by not accepting their Sens&Reps. AndrewJohnson. President U.S.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Now, I risk the Senfrom Ohio, if this ioint resolution is passed, is approved by the resident, and accepted by the States, are we not secured from anarchy 1
Mr. VADE. It would be perfectly idle for me to answer any hypothetica casesthat might be put. I could put 100 that would satisfy me well enou h. I have no doubt that some plan maybe eVised whereby the country may e save from anarchy, but the President has, furnished us none.
Mr. LANE, ofKansas. But, Mr. President, I have shown that this is the reconstruction policy of the POTUS
Mr. wADE. But I understand the Senator does not know what the POTUS will do with it.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I said that he had pressed it upon the different disloyal States, that he has committed himself to it in the letter to Governor Sharkey, and has again and again and again publicly stated that no Senator or Representative should be admitted from the disloyal States except those loyal to the core. Now, sir, the POTUS has suggested a plan that will restore this Union.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. In this JtResolution. He has suggested a lan that will in my judgment preserve the e publican party intact. All that we have to 0, all that the Congress of the U.S. has to do is to oin with him, their own President, hand to fiend, shoulder to shoulder, and again restore this country to peace, prosperity, wealth, and did nity. Mr. President, I should like to ask the senate of the U.S. why it is Congress, differingmth the President in his reconstruction policy as to the other States, has not adopted a plan for the reconstruction of the State of Texas. That State was ready during this sessmn to be reconstructed on the congressional lan. Why was it not furnished?
Mr. TRUMBULL. I should like to make an inquiry, if the Senfrom Kansas will allow me I propose to read If you could extend the elective, been POTUS he would
Mr. TRUMBULL. It is somewhat important in this connection. the President of the proposition which he has submitted upon his letter to Governor Sharkey. That is the basis upon which he relies for sup, posing that the President would approve the 1 measure which he now introduces. I should like to inquire of the Senfrom Kansas if he has any stronger assurance of that, than was given by the annual message to Congress by the POTUS when he said that he was in favor of seeurin all persons equal rights, and that under the merican system every man was entitled to protection in his life, liberty, and property. He has vetoed a bill securing those rights, which is now under consideration; and I wantto know, said so, but whether he is a man to be relied upon I do not know. if there is any better assurance that he will approve of what he said in the sharkey letter, than there was as to his approval of what he said in his annual message to the 2 Houses of congress.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I have made it a rule throu li life never to question the motives of men. I entertain the opinion that I expressed a moment ago to the Senfrom Ohio, that if the Senfrom Illinois had have been compelled to veto the civil rights bill, not for the reason given by the Senfrom Illinois, not because it secured equal rights to all that portion of the bill I favoredbut for other reasons, which I do not now propose to detain the Senate with discussing.
Mr.TRUMBULL. Will the Senator allow me to ask him if he himself did not vote for and support the civil rights bill?
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I did, in all its phases, and only yesterday I was willingto waive my objections to the bill if a plan could be adopted to quiet this country, restore these States, and preserve the Republican party intact, and to crniit it to become a law in connection with other propositions to accomplish this great object.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senfrom Kansas will permit me to ask, then, if his support of a measure in the Senate of the U.S. depends on a bargain to get some other measure supported. Is that what he means to say to the Senate? I understand him to say now that he voted for the civil rights bill in all its stages a bill which he says the President was bound to veto; that he was for;it that he would have voted for it yesterday, but he wants a bargain about something else before he will do it. Do I understand him aright, that he wants some other assurance?
Mr. LANE. of Kansas. I otfered no bar gain. I makc no bargains. But I feel the absorbing and overwhelming danger that is upon our country, and was willing to waive my objections to the bill, and permit it to pass. The wheels of these State governments are revolving; there is no power on earth to stop them.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Has that anything to do with this bill?
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Yes; much to do with it. I reret exceedingly that the Senfrom Ohio, who, [understand. has justese aped assassination, [laughter] should be troubled about the Administration organs threatening members of the Senate.
Mr. WADE. I caught that disease from the President. [Lau hter.]
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I am not the presidents keeper, and I cannot say how much he is troubled with fear of assassination; hutI do regret to hear that my beau ideal of a Senator, my beau ideal of a bold man, should have the nightmare for fear of assassination. Threats uttered by the organs of the Administration! I forget what insurers charge for insuring against railroad accidents; but I will take the insurance on the life of the Senfrom Ohio very low indeed against assassination.
Mr. CONNESS. Will the Senator permit me I understand the Sen, ator to say that lie relies upon the approval by Mr. LANE, of Kansas. to get through.
Mr. CONNESS. I only desire to say. if the Senator will permit it, that I would take the insurance upon the life of the President against the Senfrom Massachusetts at a much less rate. [Laughter]
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I regret that the Senfrom Ohio should in the Senate of the U.S. reiterate that newspaperslander that the POTUS had been tampering with Seovel, of NewJersey. He contradicts it himself, over his own signa ture, and another gentleman, whose name was connected with the rumor, contradicts it and after it is nailed to the counter as a falsehood, the Senfrom Ohio here circulates it from his seat. I
Mr. WADE. 2 witnesses say that Seovel I am very anxious
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. One of those very witnesses, I understand, denies the statement positively over his own signature.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. at it is said the President interfered with the Connecticut election. Let me say to the Republicans just one word on the subject of that election. One more victory like that, and I should think the Republican party would be unhorsed. It is but the 1st se ratch of the handwriting upon the wall. If you permit the Democratic party to take and occupy the platform of restoring these States to the Union, admitting these Sens&Reps to their places in Congress, I venture the assertion as a politi cian, that the HoRep will stand at the next Congress on the other side as much as it stands on our side this session. The people of this country will havethose States restored; they will have those loyal members in their places in Congress; and if they cannot do it through the Republican party, if they cannot do it through the Union party, they will do it even through the Democratic party. The Senator says these States have no constitutions. Oh, how short a memory he linsl Only a few days since I presented to the Senate of the U.S. the constitution of the State of Arkansas. There was a Govgrnor elected by the people without the intervention of the President; the constitution submitted to the people and ratified by them. Why do you keep Baxter and Snow from their places in this body? Why are the loyal Representatives from Arkansas ke t from their places in the other House? Ar ansas istoday as peaceful and as quiet as is Missourior Kentucky. 1 e Connecticut election! Mr. President, the POTUS made no objection to 100s of the employees of the Government attending that election from positions within this Administration.
Mr. CLARK. What had he to do with it? I want to know if it has come to this, that a man has got to ask the permission of the president to go home and vote. He permitted them to do itl
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. No, sir. I do not say that; but I say the President cheerfully, so far as I know, willingly
Mr. CLARK. The Senator said that the President permitted them to do it.
Mr. LANE. of Kansas. Sir, he made no objection. [Laughter.]
Mr. SAULSBURY. If the Senfrom Kansas will allow me I will state that an attempt was made by a menial of President Lincoln to prevent Democrats in my State from voting by militar interference and with the {EZFPOVii l of that resident. That menial was win M. Stanton.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I do not propose to be drawn into the defense of the 22d of Febru ary speech of the President. I regretthat speech. But I do say that he was provoked and with the some provocation I do not know that as President I would have referred to gentlemen as he did, but as a Senator or man, I would have struck, by speech, the gentlemen referred to by the POTUS His provocation was gross, coming from members of his own party who had aided in his election. He had a right to expect their support instead of their denunciation. In answer to the charge that the evidence as to the organization of these States was held back by the President, I refer the Senfrom Ohio to the letter of Mr. Seward, in which he explains satisfactorily the reason for that delay. I have it here before me: SUPPLEMENTARYurn our. Deranrurs r or STATE. Wasmxoros. D. (J., dian It1.1866. It now appears that the foregoing report was prepared in this otheron the Ldof January last by the Acting SecyState. William Hunter. The de lay of transmitting it wrmdue to the fact that it was held for revision by the undersigned. But neither the preparation of the report nor the iussaizeof the 1st resolution of the Senate became nown to the SecyState until they were brounht to his knowledgeafter the passage of the Senates 2nd resolution. Respectfully submitted. WILLIAM H. SEWARD.
The PRESIDENT. Mr. President, the Senfrom Ohio, having denounced the President yesterday as adictator and a despot, now arraigns him forhis treachery.” In what has he shown treachery? By vetoing bills which he felt it his duty to veto, and which would have given him impe rial power? By carrying out the reconstruction policy of Mr. Lincoln which was acquiese ed in by Congresn and indorsed by the people of the U.S.? Treachery in nothing. It is as hold a charge as that he desires to force into these Chambers disloyal Sens&Reps. Asa Republican, as one devoted to the interests of that party, as a lover of my country, desirous of its early restoration, I throw back the charge of dictatorship, despot ism, and treachery. When our President evidences either of these qualities, I will go as far as the farthest in denunciation of him. until he does prove unfaithful I will stand by him, defending him against all unjust attacks, and with the people of the U.S. will endeavor to strengthen his lirm in the discharge of the important duties devolving upon him.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. The history of that legislation was this: the bill came from the HoRep and went to the ComTerritor, and in that committee, on my motion, the word “white” was stricken out, and in that wayitwas reported to the Stem ate. I made a few remarks, saying that the bill in its original sha edisfmnchised tholoyal men; but the time or its consideration was short, and I remember that the Senfrom Ohio thought the bill would be lost, and it was settled by the Senate agreeing to the House bill. The committee, however, reported the amendment which I suggested.
Mr. WADE. I hope the Senator will now absolve me from all responsibility on that subject.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Not at all. I have never been in favor of universal suffrage.
Mr. WADE. But you voted with me through out.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. That is true; but I am not one of the men who are for universal suffrage. I am for a qualification.
Mr. SUMNER. May I interrupt my friend just there 7
Mr. SUMNER. I think the Senator is mistaken when he supposes that the Chief Justice gave his consent to any proposition which was not founded on universal) suffrage; and I think if he pushes his inquiry a little further, he will find that the 1st proposition submitted by President Lincoln and which had the approbation of the Chief Justice was founded substan tially on universal suffrage.
Mr. DOOLlTTLE. "he authority which I have for making the statementI do was the language of Mr. Lincoln, used in his speech 3 days before his assassination, in the city of Washington, in which he said that his plan of reconstruction was submitted to his Cabinet and approved by every member of it to quote his words. “every part and parcel of it.
Mr. SUMNER. But the Senator erha sis not aware that that very statement offresident Lincoln drew a letter from the Chief Justice, who was then holding court at Baltimore, which President Lincoln received on the morning before his death, in which the Chief Justice made the important cerrection to which I now call the attention of the Senator.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I have no objection, of course, that the honorable Senator should state that, if the Chief Ju] stice has made such a correction. I only state my authority, which is the speech of Mr. Lincoln on that occasion.
Mr. TRUMBULL. If the Senfrom Wisconsin has it by him, I hope he will read that part of the speech of the President to which he refers. I think he will find that there is a qualification wherein the President says that his Cabinet agreed with him, except that one member of the Cabinet wished him to strike out that part in which he stated that he had no right to determine when members should be admitted into Congress. I think if he will look into it, he will find that there is that exception, so that he is mistaken in so osin it was unanimous.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. My honorable friend will pardon me; I remember it distinctly. I have quoted the exact language of Mr. Lincoln in which he said that every part and parcel of that policy was submitted to the Cabinet and approved by eve member. If there has been any correction of that statement, as stated by the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts, it has failed to attract my notice. That, however, is not very material to the issue. This policy, I say, was entered upon at that time.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I happen to have before me an extract from the speech of Mr. Lincoln on that occasion, in which after stating what the Senfrom Wisconsin has related, that it was submitted to his Cabinet and approved by every one of them, he proceeded to say: “One of them suggested that I should then and in that connection a ply the emancipation proclamation to the thereto ore excited partsof Virginia and Louisiana; that I should drop the suggestion about apprenticeship for freed people and that I should omit the protest against my own power in round to the admissionof membersof Congress: but even be approved overy art and parcel of the plan which has since been employed or touched by the action of Louisiana." That was the input of it, and I never heard it disputed.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. All approved every part and parcel of the policy of reconstruction, and he says one member of the Cabinet desired him to emit a portion in relation to representatives in Congress. Now, what Mr. Lincoln said upon that subject as to rere. sentatives in Congress was precisely what in. Johnson has said. This draws mea little from the thread of my remarks, but I may as well make this statement now. It is precisely what Mr. Johnson has, as I understan him, in ever message and every speech always maintainc. Mr. Lincoln said in tevery plan he then proposed that each House was to be the judge of the admission of its own members. lhose words are contained in the proclamation; I know they are; my friend can examine it and see. Mr. Lincoln says that the reorganized State governments shall be recognized by the Executive Government, but in substance nothing herein contained shall be construed to affectt e right of Congress, each House for itself, to judge of the returns, elections, and qualifications of its members. That is the very language concerning which it is said that one of the Cabinet ministers desired to have it changed, but it remains.
Mr. TRUMBULL. He says hereas I quoted im
Mr. DOOLITTLE. This point is not very material to the one I am discussing, but I have no objection to be corrected.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The language I think is this but if the Senator has it he will read the very words.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I have not quoted the whole reclamation. The proclamation was issued ecember 8, 1863.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator has the speech; will he be good enough to read all that part wherein he speaks of the plan submitted?
Mr. DOOLITTLE. He says: "In the annual messageof 1863and accompanying proclamation I presented a plan of reconstruction. as the phrasegoes, which I promise d. if adopted by any State, should he accepts lo to and sustained by the executive Government of the nation."
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I have not got all the speech, but only another extract. Here is another extract: "This plan was in advance submitted to the then Cpliliriot and distinctly approved by every member 0lt Then in another part of the speech he says: “ Every part and parcelof the land which has since been employed or touched by the action of Louisiana.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I supposed the Senator had the whole speech.
Mr. TRUMBULL. In that speech the president said, also, that he distinctly repudiated I do not think he used that war t ie right to determine when or whether members should be admitted into Congress. This, I believe, is the language: “I always distinctly protested that the President claimed no right to say when or whether memberso! Congress should be admitted to seats.”
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator will allow me a word. I never heard anybody in either, House of Congress disute that each House; was to judge for itselfo the elections, returns, l and qualilications of its own members. It is l a universally admitted axiom by everybody; but I undertake to say further, that nobody. evei denied until recently that neither House had the right to determine whether a State organization existed o rnot. The Senfrom Wisconsin repeatedly voted that none of these States was entitled to vote for President or to have representation at all until congress, and not. each House, had decided whet or it was entitled to be represented. His vote is on the record over and over a ain; he voted for the resolution that electora votes should not be counted; he voted for approposition which was put on as an amendment in this body to what was known as the reconstruction bill, in which it; was directl allirmed that until alaw of congress should he passed, and a proclamation of the President should be issued in pursuance of that law of Congress, no State that had been in rebellion should be entitled to representation. It was his own vote, and that doctrine was never denied until very recently.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I have no doubt we all voted that during the rebellion they should not be represented.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I beg my friend to exeuse me; I cannot yield any further. This is an an incidental point entirely, and is not a question in the line of my argument. If I am to be interrupted continually I prefer to surrender lhe floor altogether.
Mr. HOWARD. I merely wish to correct whatI supposed to be a misapprehension on the part of the honorable Senator.
Mr. CONNESS. I wish to correct the senator on that point. I think the Senator is in error in stating that there was any agreement to vote on that occasion. There was no such agreement, according to my recollection.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. There was no agreement of those particular persons, for they would not agree.
Mr. CONNESS. There was no agreement of the Senate, as agreements are commonly made.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. There was a general understanding that on that night we would take up the question and take the vote. At. all events, we made a struggle on the question.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. The Senator will remember very well what the Senfrom Massachusetts [Mr. SUMNER] and others said on this floor, that they would talk out the session rather than permit us to come to a vote.
Mr. congress. If the Senator will pardon me, I only interrupted him that his statement might be correct. In the ordinary acceptation, when an agreement to vote is made, it is by public understanding in the Senate. There was no such understanding on the occasion alluded to.
Mr. HENDERSON. Will the Senfrom Wisconsin permit me to ask him a question right here?
Mr. DOOLITTLE. It is rather difficult for me to conclude my remarks with these interrutions.
Mr. HENDERSON. It is on this point. I suppose the line of the Senators remarks indicates that because Mr. Lincoln adopted a cer taiu policy in December, 1863, for tie restoration of State governments in the seceded States, therefore that policy must have been correct in the sprin of 1865, after the surrender of Lees armies. glow, it will be remembered that under the proclamation of Mr. Lincoln he required simply that a party to be entitled to vote in the seceded Slatesshould takean oath that he would not thereafter take u arms against the Gov. ernment of the U.S. Of course, no man would participate in the organization of the Government the reexcept a Union man, because all other men were in the confederate armies. That was in the midst of the war; the war was going on; it. was in December, 1863, near midway between the origin and conclusion of this great war through which we have just passed.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. My honorable friend evidently misa prehends the point at which I am arriving. He will see in a moment that all he is now so in has no application to it.
Mr. HNTERSON. The Senator is certainly arguing that because Mr. Lincoln adopted a certain policy at a certain time, therefore that policy was the true policy at a certain other time. If that is not the meaning of the argument, of course there is nothing in it. If he does not design to show that because a man was in favor of Mr. Lincolns policy he must certainly be in favor of Mr. Johnsons policy, then I cannot understand the drift of the argument. It surely means that, and nothing more. I ask him if he thinks because a policy was correct in 1863, that therefore the same policy was equally correct in the spring of 1865. It is unquestionably the fact that ifin 1865 the same oat was required, and Mr. Johnson required only the same oath, that the pm; we not hereafter take up arms, in order to entitle him to vote, if the majority of the people of the seceded States were satisfied that they would not take, up arms against the Government thereafter, they could very well come and take that oath and take the civil power idto their hands. There was no danger of that under Mr. Lincolns proposition, because of the time at which it was made, in the fall of 1863; but surely it was not appropriate to urge that plan afterward.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. If my honorable friend will be patient for a few moments, he will find out what I mean. I am here an earnest man, talking to earnest men; and the point at which I am arriving is this: certain men claim now, in the name of the Union party, to denounce those who still adhere to the policy adopted by Mr. Lincoln
Mr. EDMUNDS. Will the gentleman allow me to inquire the name of the writer of the letter he has just read?
Mr. YATES. I simply wish to say that the Union people of this country expect the republican Lnion Senators to march forward in the performance of their duty. Let us do it now and do it for the country.
The President protempore. The question is, Shall the bill pass the objections of the POTUS to the contrary notwithstanding? The question must be As many as are in favor o e passe e of the bill will say “ yea, ” those opposed will say “ nay, " as their names are called.
The Secretary proceeded to call the roll. Mr. MORGAN 5 vote in the affirmative was followed by applause in the galleries. The presDENT proiempore. Order will be preserved in the galleries. If there be any disturbance they will be cleared; and the door keepers will take in charge any persons who commit disturbance. The call will proceed. The Secretary concluded the call of the roll; and theresult wasas follows: The yeas being 33, and the nays 15, the bill has passed O Senate by the requisite constitutional ajority, notwithstanding the objection of the resident to the contrary. On motion by Mr. TRUMBULL, it was Ordered, That the Secretary communicate the bill (S.No.61) to protect all personsin the U.S. in their civil rights and furnish the means of their vindication, With the message of the President" turning the same to the Senate With his objection, and the roceodings of the Senate thereon, to the HoRep. mm or orrien.
The President protempore laid before the Senate the following message from the POTUS: To the Senate and HoRep: I herewith transmit communications from the SecyTreasury and the PostMGenl, suggestin a modification of the oath of office rescribe by the act of congress approved ul 2, 1862. I fully concur in their recommenation, and as the subject pertains to the otheient administration of the revenue and postal laws in the southern States, I earnestly commend it to the earliest consideration of Congress. AndrewJohnson. Wssuisorox Cirr, April 6, 1866. On motion of Mr. CLARK, the message was Ordered to lie on the table, and be printed. BRITISH VESSEL MAGICIENN.
The President protempore laid before the Senate a message from the POTUS, transmitting a report from the SecyState, with accompanying papers in relation to the claim on this Government of the owners of the British vessel Magicienii, and recommending an appropriation for the satisfaction of the claim pursuant to the award of the arbitrators; which was ordered to lie on the table, and be printed. v
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A. message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLOYD, its Chief Clerk, announced that the Houswf Representatives had passed the following bills, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: A bill (H.R.No. 25) for the relief of Thomas i disaster. This measure. so far as its own proHurley; A bill (H.R.No. 871) to grant a pension to Leonard StClair; A bill (H. It. No. 458) granting pension to Sarah E. Pickell; A bill (H.R.No. 459) granting pension to Anna E. Ward; A bill (H.R.No. 460) granting pension to Spencer Kellogg; A bill (H.R.No. 461) granting pension to Ann Sheehey; A bill (H.R.No. 462) granting pension to Mrs. Sally and rews; A bill (H.R.No. 463) for the reliefof James Foster; and A bill (H.R.No. 464) for the relief of John Gordon. These bills were severally read twice by their titles and referred to the ComPensions. EQUALIZATION or BOUNTIES.
Mr. WRIGHT presented resolutions of a mass meetin held at Bordentown, NewJersey, in favor of the equalization of soldiers boun ties; which were referred to the ComMilAffrs . NAVAL APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I move that the Senate insist upon its amendments disagreed to by the HoRep to the bill (If.Mr. No. 122) making appropriations for the naval service for the year aning the 80th of June, 1867, and disagree to the amendment of the House to other amendments of the Senate, and agree to the conference asked by the HoRep on the disagreeing votes of the 2 Houses. The motion was agreed to; and by unanimous consent, at the suggestion of Mr. FESSENDEN, The President protempore was authorized to appoint the committee of conference on thg part of the Senate. ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY.
Mr. SUMNER. I move that when the Senate adjourns to dny it be to meet on Monday next. The motion was agreed to. EMMA J. HALL. The amendment of the HoRep to the bill (S.No.181) for the relief of Emma J. Hall was referred to the ComPensions.
Mr. HARRIS. I move that the Senate adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Fnnmr, April 6, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. BANKRUPT LAW.
Mr. PAINE, by unanimous consent, submitted resolutions of the Chamber of commerce of the city of Milwaukee, in favor of a bankrupt law; which were read, and referred to the special committee on bankruptcy. DOCUMENTS FOR HOUSE REPORTED S.
Mr. PAINE, by unanimous consent, offered the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Remlved.That the ComPrintg be instructedto infiuire into and reart ufion the expedioncyof furmsnng to each of the House reporters for 2 copies of each printed hill and resolutionof the Senate and HoRep. I
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. call for the regular order of business.
The SPEAKER stated, as the regular Order of business, the calling of committees for reports of a private nature, commencing with the ComInvalidPens. PENSION orrrca.
Mr. PERHAM, from the ComInvalidPens, reported back House bill NO. 5 278, to amend the several acts relative to the It organization of the Pension Office, with a sub, stitute; which was ordered to be printed, and recommitted to the Committee on nvalid Pensions. ADVERSE REPORTS.
Skip Skip Mr. PERHAM, from the ComInvalidPens, submitted adverse reports on the following petitions and memorials which were laid on the table, and ordered to be printed: The petition of H. Hou h, of Susan T. Williamson, of James Wha ey, Alexander Mc Clan, and Charles Williams, of Mrs. Mary K. Hall, widow of Lieutenant Hall, of George P. Rensburg, ofHon. I. W. Powell, and others, citizens of Ohio, and of George Clark. SUSAN MEADOR. Mr. PERHAM, from the ComInvalidPens, submitted an adverse report on the bill for the relief of Susan Meador. SIMEON ALFRED. On motion of
Mr. PERHAM, the ComInvalidPens was discharged from the further consideration of the petition of Simeon Alfred, and 170 others, citizens of Dearborn county, Indiana, and the same was referred to the ComMilAffrs. JANE w. NETHAWAY. Mr. PERHAM, from the ComInvalidPens, reported back Senate bill No. 115, entitled “An act for the relief of Jane W. N cthaway.” The bill was read. It directs the payment of a pensron from the 29th of September, 1864, during her widowhood, at the rate allowed by law to the widow of a 1st lieutenant.
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to a 3rd reading, and was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. PERHAM mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. EMMA J. HALL.
Mr. PERHAM, from the ComInvalidPens, reported back Senate bill No. 181, for the relief of Emma Jane Hall, with an amendment to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following: That the SecyInterior he and he is hereby, authorized and directedto placethe nameof Emma Jane Hnll, widow of Perr Hnll, deceased. late chaplain of the 7nint Indiana volunteers.ou the pensionrolls at the rate now prescribed by law for otheers of his rank, and to he continued during her wrdowhood.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was then ordered to a 3rd reading, and was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. PERHA.1 mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. ADVERSE REPORTS.R. BENJAMIN, from the ComInvalidPens, made adverse reports on the petition of Alfred Merrill, of Wisconsin, and of John Hyatt, of Harpers Ferry, WestVirginia; which were severally laidupon the table, and ordered to be printed. THOMAS HUBLEY. Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky, reported back, with a recommendation that it do pass, a bill for the relief of Thomas Hurley.with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. The substitute directs the SecyInterior to place the name of Thomas Hurley, late a private in company K, 8th Tennessee cava ry, on the pension roll at the rate of 20 dollars a moat. The report of the committee was read. Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I move the previous question on the substitute. Mr. BOUTWELL. I would inquire whether the pension proposed here is the same that is allowed to persons who have been disabled to an equal extent in the regular service. Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. Yes, sir. The substitute was agreed to. The bill was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. HARDING, of Igbntncky, mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. WILLIAM BLAIR.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky, from the ComInvalidPens, made an adverse report on the petition of William Blair, praying for a pension; which was laid upon the tab e, and ordered to be printed. SARAH E. PICKELL. Mr. TAYLOR, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill grantin a pension to the widow of Colonel John ickell; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill directs the SecyInterior to place the name of Sarah E. Pickell. widow of Colonel John Pickell, 0n the roll of invalid pensioners, and pay the sum of 57 dollars permonth to her, or in the event of the marriage or death of the said widow, then to the children, subject to the restrictions of the pension laws.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would like to have the report read. It seems to me that this is an entirely new principle. The report was read.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. So far as the 1st portion of that bill is concerned I shall interpose no objection; but that portion of it which provides that the pension shall O to the children after the marriage or deal of the widow is incorporating a new principle and to which I shall object. In all the bills we have passed the pension has been limited to the widowhood.
Mr. TAYLOR. This bill is in conformity with the general pension law, and that provision is put in to prevent the necessity of the children coming to Congress and asking a special act. That is the reason of it, and it is in conformity with the general pension law. The ComrPension refuses to continue the pensions where they are granted by special act, and the object is to avoid the necessity of a separate application, if there are chfldren under 16 years of age.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Let the bill conform to what is the universal practice of the House.
Mr. MORRIS. If I understand the rule, in the event of the marriage of the widow, or her death, the pension goes to the mine r children, and ceases when they arrive at majority. I pnderstand that to be the rule. Certainly it IS equitable. This Government can affort to take care of the widows and orphans, until they arrive at majority, of those who laid down their lives for the country.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The Gentleman may be right. as to the general pension law. But what I sayis, that this bill introduces a new principle in our legislation. Heretofore, in every case where we have passed a special bill for the relief of a widow, we have confined it to her widowhood or natural life. Now, in this case, the party is not entitled to any pension under the general law; but it is proposed to go further in this than in any other case. Now, I am as patriotic a man as any, I think, and as willing to go as far as anyone. But I think this is a dangerous principle, and should not he adopted in this House.
Mr. TAYLOR. This bill comes within the spirit of the general pension law. It merely continues the pension. in case this widow dies or marries, to her children until the age of 16.
Mr. WASHT3 RNE, of Illinois. Iwill ask the Gentfrom Maine [Mr. PERHAM] iflie has ever known a special not passed providin that in case of the death or the marriage 0 the widow the pension should go to her mine r children?
Mr. PERHAM. I am not certain that that has ever been done; perhaps it has never been done. But this is also true: that when we failed to do that these mine r children upon the death of the widow have come back here and obtained pensions. If the pension had been granted by the Pension Bureau, then these children would have been entitled to the pension in case of the death or marriage of the mother and in this case we only ask that the same shall be established now.
Mr. HILL. The objection of the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Wssrrnuans] to this bill is that it introduces a new principle in our legislation. Now, if this be a newprinciple, let us adopt it; it seems to me to be high time that we should introduce a new principle and if it requires a revision of every bill upon this subject which we have passed, then in Gods name let us revise them, and introduce a new principle. Now, I confess to some surprise and a little mortification when I see gentlemen on this floor insisting upon a technical nibble to deprive these children of what would have been their clearle alright, if the death of the mother occurred under the circumstances embraced in the general Ipension law. I think it does not speak well or the character of this House to avoid giving this little pittance of compensation to these children, because it has the power to do so by a mere nibble. Therefore I insist that this principle should be incorporated not only into this bill, but into every bill of a simi lar nature that may hereafter be framed, and that, if necessary, former acts should be revised so as to conform to this principle. The principle is certainly correct; otherwise the principle upon which we have by general law granted pensions to mine r children is incorrect and should no louver be sanctioned.
Mr. TAYLOR (remanded the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered. The amendment of Mr. Wasunuass, of Illinois, was not agreed to, The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. TAYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. ANNA E. WARD.
Mr. TAYLOR reported, from the ComInvalidPens, a bill granting a pension to Anna E. Ward; which was read a rst and 2nd time. The bill, which was read in crime, provides for the payment of a pension at the rate of 8 dollars permont to Anna E. Ward, of the city of Washington, DistCol, widow of the late Joseph D. Ward, 2nd Kentucky volunteers, the pension to continue during her widowhood, an in the event of her marriage or death, to be paid to the mine r children of Joseph D. Ward, subject to the limitations and restrictions of the pension laws.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. TAYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. SPENCER KBLLOGG.
Mr. TAYLOR reported, from the ComInvalidPens, a bill grantin a pension to Spencer Kellogg; which was read a dist and 2nd time. The bill, which was read in exteaso, provides that the name of Spencer Kellogg, of Oswe O county, State of NewYork, he placed on e roll of invalid pensioners, and that there be said to his legally appointed guardian 20 dollars per month, until the said Spencer Kel logg shall have attained the a e of 16 years; the act to take effect from the 6th day of Sep tember, 1865. The report, which was read, states that Spencer ellogg, the father of the ward of Orville C. Brown, was 4th master of the U.S. gunboat Essex, and was captured by the enemy, while in the discharge of his duty on or abontAngpst 15, 1862, an was executed in Richmond, irginia, on the 25th of september, 1863, by the rebels, charged with being a spy; that the muster and pay rolls of the Essex were lost; that Congress, by JtResolution approved June 30, 1864, directed the name of ary Kellogg, widow of Spencer Kellogg, and mother of the ward of Orville C. Brown, to be placed upon the pension roll, with the pension incidentto the rank of her late husband that Mary Kellogg, widow of said Spencer Kellogg, died September 6. 1865, leaving a son and only child by said Siencer Kel ogg, deceased to wit, Spencer ellogg, wardo Orville C. l3rown, now about 3 years of age.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordin 1 read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. TAYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. MRS. ANN SHEEHEY.
Mr. TAYLOR reported, from the ComInvalidPens, a bill granting a pension to Mrs. Ann Sheehey; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill, which was read in exienso, provides for granting a pension of 8 dollars permonth to Ann Shoe ray. of Boston, Massachusetts, during her widowhood. It also provides that the properaccounting officers of the Treasury be authorized and directed to settle and adjust the accounts of John Sheehey, late arivate in company D, 28 h Massac usetts volunteers, and to pay to Ann Sheehey the amount that may be found to have been due said John Sheehey on the 3d of July, 1863, the date of his death; this act to take effect from and alter its passage. The report, which was read, states that Ann Sheehey, the step mother of John Sheehey, performed the duties of a mother toward him from 1850, when he was but 6 years old; that in 1857 his father died, leaving him entirely dependent upon his step mother for support; that about November 20, 1861, when llohn enlisted, his step mother had become feeble and dependentu on him for support and that he was killed 1. y a, 1868 whi e in the line of his dnt at the battle of Cettysburg.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to strike out the last words, that it shall take effect from and after the passage of this act, as it is mere snr lnsage.
Mr. TAYLOR. I have no objection to that.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The bill, as amended, was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. TAYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. MRS. SALLY and REWS.R. TAYLOR, from the same committee reported a bill granting a pension to Mrs. Sally and rews; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill directs the SecyInterior to place the name of Mrs. Sally and rews, of Buckstown, York county, Pennsylvania, widow of the late Eliah and rews, quarter gunner on board of the Levetta Adams, upon the list of invalid pensioners at the rate of 8 dollars a month during her widowhood, to take effect from and after the passage of the act. Mr. WASHBURTJE, of Illinois, moved that the words “from and after the passage of this act" be stricken out. The amendment was agreed to. Itappears from the report that Elijah and rews was quarter gunner on board of the Levetta Adams during the war of 1812, and that while in the line of his duty, he ruptured a blood vessel, producing hemorrhage and causing disability, from which he died on the 5th of April, 1820.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. to me that is going a long way back.
Skip Skip The bill, as amende, was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the thi time and passed. Mr. TA LOR mtRtv the JtResolution was passed; upon the table. Agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Foannr, its Secretary, informed the House that the Senate had concurred in the amendment of the House to Senate bill No. 105, to grant a right of way to the Case ade railroad through a military reserve in Washington Territory. LEONARD StClAIR. Mr. TAYLOR, from the same committee, reported back House bill No. 37, to grant a pension to Leonard StClair, with a recommendation that it do pass. The bill directs that the name of Leonard StClair be placed upon the pension list of the U.S. at the rate of 6 dollars permonth, from and after the passage of this act. Mr. TAYLOR moved to strike out the last words. The amendment was agreed to. It appears from the report that Leonard StClair was n. soldier in the war of 1812, and lost It seems his righi; arm by reason of exposure in the line of his duty; and that he is in indigent circumstances and has a large family to support. The bill, as amended, was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the3rd time and passed. Mr. TAYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED.
Mr. TROWBRIDGE, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that they had examined and found truly enrolled bills of the following titles; when the Speaker signed the same: An not (H.R.No. 86) making additional appropriations, and to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending the 30th of June, 1866, and for other purposes; An act (H.R.No. 420) to provide arms and ammunition for the defense of the inhabitants of Dakota Territor and An act (H.R.No. 15) for the benefit of John W. Campbell. JAMES FISHER.
Mr. TAYLOR, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill for the relief of James Fisher; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill directs that the name of James Fisher, late of the U.S. ship German town, he placed upon the pension list at the rate of 6 dollars permonth, from and after the passage of this act. fl. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved to strike out the last words, “from and after the passage of this act.”
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The bill, as amended, was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein" engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. TA LOR mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the to e. Agreed to. SARAH BONINGTON. On motion of
Mr. SAWYER, the ComInvalidPens was discharged from the further consideration of the petition of Sarah Bonington, and the same was referred to the ComClaims. MARTHA J. WILLEY.
Mr. STILWELL, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill for the relief of Martha J. Willey, widow of George W. Willc, late corporal in company F, 2nd NewHampshire volunteers. The bill grants a pension at the rate of 8 dollars permont from the 18th ofApril, 1865, to continue during her widowhood.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I call for the reading of the report.
Mr. STILWELL. There is no report. I can state the facts. Mr. Willey was in the service 3 years. He received a parole for 30 da s, having reenlisted as a veteran, and while at ome on that parole he was taken sick and died.
Mr. WASHBURNEz of Illinois. I have the same objection to this bill that I had to the bill introduced by the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. TAYLOR] do not like the provision in special cases that the pension shall go to the mine r children after the marriage or death of the widow. I think it is a wron principle, and that we ought to pass none of these bills unless we have a written report, and not only written, but printed, so that every member can see for himself. The gentlemans explanation may be very good for those who hear it, but there ought to be a printed report to upon the records of legislation. STILWELL. I withdraw the bill. HENRY COLEMAN. Mr. VANAERNAM, from the ComInvalidPens, reported adversely on the etition of Henry. Coleman, late seaman on board of the U.S. transport McClel lan, for a pension.
Mr. RAYMOND. I would like astatement in regard to that case, not with a view to immediate action. As I understand it, the case is simply this: this man came on board the transport, but was not mustered in as aregular soldier on duty. On board that transport. under command of an officer of the U.S. Army, while engaged in firing a gun as a salute, he was wounded. He has applied for a pension, and I believe the committee have made an adverse report, on the technical ground that he was not mustered into the service.
Mr. STEVENS. Did we not pass a general law on the subject covering these cases?
Mr. BENJAMIN. This man was hired, as eve other seaman is, by the party who char tere the vessel. He was in no way under the orders of the Government, if he was wounded in the manner stated, by firing a salute. He was a seaman employed by a private party on board of avessel chartered for the Government.
Mr. RAYMOND. 1 would like to ask whether in firin the gun he was not acting under orders of an o cer of the Army.
Mr. VANAERNAM. He was under the order of the captain who was in charge of the vessel. The transport McClellan was char tered by the Government. The crew were selected by the captain. This man lost his arm while obeyin the captain of the vessel who had charge of the transport.
Mr. RAYMOND. I suggest that the matter lay over.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I wish to make an inquiry. A number of cases have been sent to me of this character, where the person isin the civil employment of the Government of the U.S and is killed in the disenargeof duty under orders of the SecyWar. Now, I wish to know whether there has been any action taken in favor of giving to the families of such persons pensions, or whether they are rejected.
Mr. RAYMOND. I move that the bill be recommitted to the committee with instructions that the committee inquire in regard to the cases suggested by the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. SHELLABABGER] and make a report accordingly.
Mr. PERHAM. I will state that the committee have had that subject under consideration; that various petitions have been referred to them, and many propositions have been made in relation to granting pensions to those who have been in the civil service of the government and have been inurod, and to the widows of those who have ied, and the conclusion the committee have come to, for the present at least, is that it is not advisable to report in favor of providing for a general enactment for their relief. It has been very fully discussed.
Mr. VANAERNAM. I have no objection to its recommitment.
Skip Skip The question being taken on the motion to recommit, no quorum voted.
The SPEAKER ordered tellers; and appointed Messrs. RAYMOND and TAYLOR. The House divided; and the tellers reported a es 57, noes 85.
The SPEAKER. The Chair votes in the affirmative, making a quorum. So the report was recommitted to the comInvalidPens. ADVERSE REPORTS. On motion of
Mr. VANAERNAM, it was OryIrrcll, That the ComInvalidPens be discharged from the further consideration of the petitions of Mary Kirby Smith, ofJames Levier, and of GeorgeWilliams: and that the samebe laid upon the table. JOHN GORDON.
Mr. VANAERNAM, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill for the relief of John Gordon, accompanied by a report in writing thereon.
Skip Skip The bill was read a 1st and 2nd time. The report having been read, the bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time and passed. Mr. VANAERNAM mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. MARY C. HAMILTON.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania, from the ComInvalid Peiismns, reported back, with the recommendation that it O not pass, bill of the Senate No. 56, granting a eusion to Mary C. Hamilton; which was lai on the table.
Skip Skip NEWYORK CONTESTED ELECTION. The morning hour having exired, the House resumed the consideration of the regular order of business after the morning hour, bein the following resolutions reported from the comm ittce of Elections: Resolved, That Hon. James Brooks is not entitled to a seat in this llouso as a Representative in the 39th Congress from the 8th district in NewYork. Remrod, That William E. Dodge is entitled to a seatin this House as a Reprosentutivein the 39th Congress from the 8th district in NewYork. The following amendment had been moved by Mr. ltlsasiiALL: Strike out all after the word "roaolved, "and insert in lieu thercotthe following: That William E. Dodge is not entitled to a seatin the House as a Representative in the 39th Congressfrom the 8th district in NewYork. The pending question was a on the following resolutions, submitted by Mr. GARFIELDas a substitute for the amendment: Resolved, That the invalidity of the register of the 15th district of the 18th ward of the city of NewYork would not of itse lf justify the r ection of the official returns of the canvassers of that district. Resolved That this casebe recommittedto thocommittee of actions to report. upon supplementary proof to be made as provided in the next, resolution. Resolved, That either party he pnthonsed to supplementarytestimony respecting the election akaet the 15th district of the 18 thward only, beforethe 10thday of May next complying with the statutoiy reulations applicable to the case: vided. hat vedays notice of any proposedexami nation of witnesses s be sufficient.
The SPEAKER. The time of the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Baooss] having been extended yesterday for one hour, he is now entitled to the floor.
Mr. BROOKS then concluded the speech be commenced yesterday. [His speech will be found in the Appendix.] EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the Houses message from the POTUS, transmitting a report from the SecyState, with accompanying papers, relative to the claim on the Government of the owners of the British vessel Magicienn, and recommendin an appropriation for the satisfaction of the claim, pursuant to the award. of the arbitrators; which was referred to the ComAppropriat, and ordered to be printed.
The SPEAKER also laid before the House a message from the POTUS, transmitting communications from the SecyTreasury and the PostMGenl suggesting modifications of the oath of office prescribed by the not approved July 2, 1862; which was referred to the ComJudiciary, and ordered to be printed. NEWYORK CONTESTED – ELECTION CASE Again
Mr. GRINNELL. I ask the gentleman to yield me a few moments ofhis time.
Mr. DAWES. I am very anxious to close this debate, as I know every other member of the House must be.
Mr. GRINNELL. moments. I only desire a very few
Mr. DAWES. I will yield the gentleman 6 minutes of my time.
Skip Skip Mr. DAWES. Ine w demand the previous question. The previous question was 2nded and the main question ordered.
Mr. SCOFIELD. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts yield to me for a few moments?
Mr. DAWES. I should be very glad.to accommodate my friend on the committee, but really I think it due to the House that I should close this matter as soon as possible. I hope, therefore, in friend will excuse me.
Mr. SCOF IELD. I wished to say a few words, but I will not insist on it.
Mr. GRINNELL. Let me read one passsge fro“m the report: the committce entertainno doubt.therefore, that the majority of all the legal Votes ciistin the district were cast for Mr. Dodge and in this finding they have deducted from his poll every vote about which. in their Judgment. there was reasonable round for doubt. giving the sittin memberwho he ds the cortificato.the benefit of all the doubts that restedupon their minds after the most patient and eareful examination and deliberation." I am obliged to follow the committee in this case.
Mr. MARSHALL. Does the gentleman assert that there is no evidence that Mr. Dodge expended immense sums of money in this election I
Mr. DAWES. I say there is not a particle of evidence that a dollar of money was expended in an improperway.
Mr. MARSHALL. It is a matter of conjecture as to how it was expended. The evidence is that immense sums of money were exended, and I insist Mr. DAWES. I wish that to friend had heard the remarks which I made afew moments ago. I stated that the minority of the committee had been imposed upon in including in their report from tcbrief of the sitting member a table in which a number of the items are inserted twice over.
Mr. MARSHALL. I did not hear the entire statement of the gentleman; but I understood him ase harging that this whole statement about the expenditure of money is without foundation in the evidence. The gentleman certainly cannot undertake to sustain such a statement because it is in evidence that immense sums of money were expended by the contestant; and I think it is in evidence that a part of it was expended fraudulently, wrongfu ly, and disgracefully; and if the gentleman will permit me, I will state wherein.
Mr. DAWES. I do not know how long the tience of the House will endure; but I hold in my hand the testimony precisely as it was given; and instead of its roving what the Gentfrom Illinois [l
Mr. MARSHALL] claims in his report, and what is claimed by the sitting member, it proves the contrary, if it proves anything in the world. I refer the House to pages 34, 85, 36, 46, 47, and 48 of the testimon, where the witnesses of the sitting member himself deny oiiit blank his grand and leadin statement that Mr. Barr had been hired, with tie money of the centestant, to run for Congress against Mr. Brooks, or that they had expended one dollar of money with the knowl edge of the contestant, or had expended otherwise than in precisely the same way that money is spent by everybody in elections, in paying the expense of hiring carriages, procuring speakers, posting handbills, and in all the variety of methods in which money is usually and properly expended in elections.
Mr. DAWES. I decline to be further interragerd. MARSHALL. Ofcourse, if the gentleman will make these statements and will not permit corrections I must submit to it.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] declines to yield, and must proceed without interruption.
Mr. DAWES. Let me read from the testimony of the sitting members own witnessElliot C. Cowden: “ I can only give you the leading idea. The idea was that Mr. Brooks had stron hackersand was in the way of raisin a great deaf of money hementioned through whom. but I dont remembernow and that no amount ofrnoncy waswantedtocarry onMr. Brookss election; and on the other hand. his meanswere very small: and while he did not ask us for a dollar. we thought it politic to give him some money Mr. Cannon and myself and wedid it without saying a word to anyone to my knowledge. It may have got out; those things always dobut Mr. Do as was not consulted in regard to it; e know nothing about it to my knowledge." Mr. Speaker, one word more and I will proceed to what belongs to this case. I want to know for what purpose the sitting member has paraded the income of this contestant. For what purpose is it that he is continually refer ring to the abundance of the contestants wealth? Is it for the same purpose in reference to this tribunal as appears in the charge in the NewYork Express, that the contestant had succeeded in carryin his case through the committee by the force of his money?
Mr. BROOKS. Has the Gentfrom Massachusetts ever seen such a statement published in the NewYork Express?
Mr. BROOKS. Have you ever read such a statement in the NewYork Express?
Mr. DAWES. I want to know whether the object is the same, whether the insinuation is the same touching this House when he parades the money of the contestant, as that which was made in the NewYork Express that this case was put through by the force of the contestants money?
Mr. BROOKS. Did you ever read any such thin in the exress?
Mr. DAWES. I make this statement upon my own responsibility.
Mr. BROOKS. The gentleman cannot say he ever read any such thing there. Let me say I have never read anything like that in the express. I should deeply regret to have anything ike that in the Express. So far from believing the ComElections would be influenced by Mr. Dodges money, I do not believe all of his money would buy the poorest. man on it.
Mr. HALE. I desire to ask of the chairman of the ComElections [Mr. Dawns] if the committee state to this House as a rule of law, that the fact that the vote of the new 12th and 15th districts exceeded the vote in the old 12th district by 65 and a half% is of itself evidence of fraud in the election of 1864. The increase of the vote is precisely 65 and a half%.
Mr. DAWES. That is inst like the learned gentleman on the other side taking up one of these irregularities by itself, and insisting upon it that I say that renders the election ille al.
Mr. HALE. The gentleman cannot have understood my question; allow me to restate it. I simply asked whether the ComElections claim that fact of itself to be prel sumptive evidence of fraud. I make no proposition, but simply leave the question there.
Mr. HALE. The gentleman will permit me to ask him another question, simpl to throw light upon the case, as I have failedy to gather it from the report itself. I wish to inquire whether there was any evidence before the committee of any effort whatever to trace out and falsify the poll list as to the names and residence of the voters.
Mr. DAWES. It has been stated over and over again that the contestant employed for 6 weecksa man who had been a canvasser for the city directory, who on ht to be a capable and skillful man for such work, to go from house to house, testing this registry. The evidence of this man was not introduced. But an officer of the Catholic church in the neighborhood, a man who was supposed to have a peculiar knowledge of the district, and who was one of the board of election inspectors of the district, was examined; and this affidavit, which had been excluded as part of the testimony of the contestant, was put before him, and he was asked about each one of the persons named. I submit that that was. so far as his testimony was concerned, a verification of the list.
Mr. HALE. Did he testify to having made anv examination?
Mr. DAWES. Yes, sir; he was employed by the sitting member for the purpose of discreiting this list which was excluded by reason of the objection of the sitting member.
Mr. BROOKS and we had 4 days in which to do it.
Mr. DAWES. When this witness came upon the stand to discredit the list, be verified it to a certain extent. Then the sitting member called another witness, a German, to discredit this list. This witness pronounced 16 of the 1st 20 names to be bogus voters; and then the sitting member examined him no further as to that list. On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, there is no reply or explanation as to the fact that the vote of this district was doubled, and more than doubled. Now, Mr. Speaker, I think I have clearly explained the conclusions of the committee. I shall not attempt to reargue or enforce the legal positions so ably presented yesterday by my colleague upon the committee, [Mr. Sum, mantel la.] Nobod has attempted to refute those positions; an in truth they are unanswerable. The facts, as I have shown, corroborate those positions; and in view of the law and the facts, I submit that the committee are fully justified in the conclusion that the vote of that district was so largely fraudulent, was based upon illegalities so glaring contributing, in the language of Selden, directly to the frauds themselves that there is no precedent, and on ht never to be a precedent, for count in such vote. The committee are called upon today to state why they did not treat in the same way the vote of another district in which there was a majority for the contestant. Now, sir, I beg the} House tulisten while I state, in the hearing of the members of the committee, that one reason why we did not pass upon that question was that we were never asked)to do so.
Mr. BROOKS. The gentleman will permit me to state that I did, in my brief, call the attention of the committee to that point. On page 48 of the brief all the facts are set out in regard to that district; and it was the duty of the committee to look at the brief.
Mr. DAWES. Mr. Speaker, in further corroboration of what I have stated, I call attention to the 1st paragraph of the sitting members brief: "Itis admitted on both sides that in the 4 contested districts, namely, 21st ward. sev enth and 3rd districts and 18th ward.13th and 15th districts, 2 of the 3 registers there were Republicans; also, 2 of the 3 ins actorswere Republican: the oil clerks (two in eite pwere e unll divided in no itics; that is. the Republicans adt e registration of the voters before the election and the reception of the votes on the day of the election." I now ask the attention of the House to what the sitting member claims was a call Iupon the committee to pass upon this question. read from page 48, under the heading, “A Dodge district:” t“ gloomy 1stward, 13 thdistrict. The vote s 0"0: Dodge.394; Brooks.134; Barr. “The allegation is (15., 4.) that the canvassers were absent pending the canvass, “irregular and fraudu lent, and that thereby Dodge was madetorun higher than Lincoln. President. who hadonly 376votes. The vote for McClellan was185. (Sec official returns.)" [Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I move that by unanimous consent the time of the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] be extended. There was no objection. EVENING sussron Dismissal) WITH.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. With the consent of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, I move that the session of this evening be dispensed with. The motion was agreed to. ORDER or BUSINESS TOMORROW. Mr. MORRILL. With the permission of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, I move that the session of tomorrow be devoted exclusively to debate as in ComWhole on the state of the Union on the Presidents message. The motion was agreed to. ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED.
Mr. TROWBRIDGE, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that the committee : had examined and found truly enrolled bills of the following titles; which were thereupon signed by the Speaker: An act (S.No.105) to grant the right of way to the Case ade Railroad Company through a military reserve in Washington Territory; An act (S.No.115) for the reliefof Jane W. Nethaway; and An act (S.No.117) for the relief of F. A. Patterson, late captain in the 3rd Virginia cavalry. NEWYORK CONTESTED ELECTION Again.
Mr. GARFIELD.mallohreityg.entleman will allow me to say that he has only referred to one of the points which I made. I trust he will not say that because the 2 reports differed I wanted further investigation.
Mr. DAWES. I understand the gentleman to say distinctly that he cannot vote upon this question until these discrepancies between the report of the committee and the views of the minority are reconciled.
Mr. GARFIELD. discrepancies as to matters of fact.
Mr. MARSHALL. I wish to state, with the permission of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, the fact, which it seems to me the House ought to know, that there is a perfectly satisfactory reason why this evidence, oEemd by Mr. Brooks in the affidavits, was not mhmitted by witnesses to the propertribunal in NewYork, and that is that there was no specification made by the contestant that these inspec tors were not residents of the election district. The sitting member had no notice whatever before the evidence was taken that this was a point in the case, none whatever.
Mr. DAWES. I will now yield for a moment to the Gentfrom Vermont, [Mr. Woo BRIDGE. 1
Mr. WOODBRIDGE. I desire to ask the gentleman a question. I have been obliged to be absent for the last ten or 12 days, in Vermont, and, of course, I have not examined this question for myself, as I should otherwise have done, or read the 2 elaborate reports presented by the majority and minority of the committee. I have been informed, however, since I came back that the gentleman whose name appears 1st as signing the minority report.v by reason of illness was only present at 2 of the meetings of the committee, which continued during a period of 6 weeks, and that the other gentleman who signed the minority report was very seldom present. Sir, I have been somewhat accustomed to try cases before our courts involving questions both of law and of fact; and if any questions of fact are involved here in regard to which the appearance of the witnesses might govern in the Weight to be allowed to their testimony, I desire to ask the chairman of the ComElections whether the members of the committee who have signed this minority report have been in attendance so as to have heard the testimony given both for the contestant and the sitting member?
Mr. MARSHALL. Let me say to the Gentfrom Vermont, that the witnesses in election cases are not brought before the committee at all.
Mr. WOODBRIDGE. The testimony is taken in writing. I know, but have those members who signed the minority report been present for consultation at the meetings of the committee?
Mr. THAYER. on a point of order, and a properinquiry.
Mr. DAWES. I was going to say to the Gentfrom Vermont, that I cannot answer such a question. I do not wish to give any indication in regard to the action of the committee of the gentlemen who signed the minority report. I will make no statement about that. I think I may say, however, that the committee were suprised at the accuracy with which the minority were able to reproduce the language including the errors in the arithmetical computations of the argument before the committee of the sitting member.
Mr. MARSHALL. I did not l [Laughter] it of my friend that provoked that laugh. But I would like to make one remark, and that is, so far as my connection with the minority refport is concerned, I can state what my means of information were. The gentleman seems to Intimate that the minority had no information, and made up their report without knowing what they were doing. I can only state, without saying anything that occurred before the committee, that all the evidence that was before the committee is before every member of this House, who can look into the record, and see whether the facts stated by the minority of the committee are correctly stated or not.
Mr. BROOKS. What the gentleman says is not true.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Massachusetts declines to yieffi further, and must proceed without interruption.
Mr. DAWES. When it has been shown that the law required the board of registr to be residents and voters of the district; that the requirement of the law was not complied with in this district; that the registrars gave every opportunity to cheat, and that cheating was carried on extensively, the Gentfrom Ohio proposes that the case shall be sent back to the committee, so that they may report.any answer. whether in a great many other districts the some facts did not exist, as if that would be When the committee have de cided that the board of registry in that district was illegally constituted, and that a door was opened to fraud, the gentleman asks that we siall be directed to report the custom in the State of NewYork in reference to that matter. The custom in NewYork, I believe, is to cheat on all sides, though I do not know positively how that may be.
Mr. MARSHALL. I trust that I shall be allowed an opportunity to correct the statement which the gentleman has made in reference to what occurred before the committee. I shall not follow him in that statement unless by the permission of the House, as I know that the rules forbid it. The gentleman has not stated fairly all the facts in regard to the manner in which this matter came before the committee. If the Housewould grant its permission I would give another version of the fiicts, which, I think the gentleman would not deny, and which, I believe, would present the matter more fairly to the House.