Mr. PIKE. Will the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Bnooxs] allow me to say a word?
Mr. PIKE. I think the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. BROOKS] is under a misap rehension as to the State of Maine; for, if Ipunder stand the provisions of this bill, it does not elfect the vessels transferred by the shipowners of Maine, because almost all of those vessels were transferred to British owners. The British registry law requires that there shall be a British ownership in order to obtain a British register. IfIunderstand it, the bill does not provide for that class of cases and if the gentleman will allow me still further, Iwill say that while there were many loyal and wellmeaning people who transferred ships during the war, the most of those who did so damned the flag that could not protect them. Iam opposed to allowing anylof them to come back.
Mr. BROOKS. That was the general feeling among the whole commerce of the country; and I have no doubt as many were soldns were licensed. If. therefore, there was any disloy alty in that, the disloyalty extended to all parts of the country. I do not rise to support or oppose the bill, for I do not clearly understand its revisions. I want to read it in print, and then will have some fixed opinions on the subject.
Mr. SPALDING. I hope the Gentfrom Massachusetts will consent to have the bill printed and laid before the House in proper form.
Mr. ELIOT. I ield now to the Gentfrom Maine. [Mr. worn]
Mr. WASHBBURNE, of Illinois. With the permission of the gentleman I will answer that question. The SecyTreasury has addressed a letter to the ComCommerce, in which he says that 800,000 tons of our shipping have been transferred for that purpose.
Mr. KASSON. May I then ask of either of the gentlemen this question? It is known that in the Danish war the commerce of the free cities of Germany soughta like protection. it is cus tomary in all wars that private property on the seas shall protect itsellpin the liest way it can where convoy is not furnished. Now, I wish to ask, what will be the effect of this upon the restoration of the amount of American shipping in foreign countries? and what will be the prac tical effect upon the commerce of the ocean now afloat if this is not adopted? It seems to be a practical question as to whether its adoption or rejection will best romote the prosperity of the commerce of the Ig U.S.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The amount of foreign tonnage is about 5 millions; 800,000 has been transferred.
Mr. LYNCH. I think the chairman of the ComCommerce is a little mistaken in his statement; or rather his statement would seem to convey a wrong impression. 800,000 tons of shipping I understand to be the whole amount that has been destroyed, sold, and transferred by these bogus transfers.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Oh, no; 800,000 has been transferred. The SecyTreasu recommends distinctly the passage of this rllirw. He believes that these men, alter having transferred their ship s in that way, and received the benefit of it, have no right to come back now and claim to come on the same footing with others.
Mr. LYNCH. I understand now from the Gentfrom Illinois that 800,000 tons have been transferred. But the gentleman will bear in mind that probably 3/4ths or 7 8ths of those transfers were bona A great many merchants found, when exchange was very high, that it was to their advantage to sell their shipping to foreigners. Io that no one objects. Only a small%age, perhaps; has passed under a foreign flag.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. In this connection, to show the extent of this thing and the means supposed to be necessary in or derto get it throng Congress, I will ask the Clerk to read the follmving g confidential circular which has been sent to me.
The Clerk read the circular, as follows: BOSTGN, 1V0vember 1, 1865. Sin: Having beenadvisedthatyou have the control of an Americanbuilt vessel. which has been transferred to a forci flag. we take this method of in forming you the we proposeto endeavor to procure the passageof an act of ongress restoring such v cs solsto the flag of the U.S., and authorizmg their registration asvesselsof the U. S. As the necessarypreliminaries wrll involve quite an expenditure of time and money. we desireto be secured against lam by those pecuniarily interested, and proposethat a small nmoiint (sa ten cents per ton as by presentrecister)bepaid in n vanceby eachparty de sirous of the passageofsuch an act. We have taken stepsto interest all parties in the U.S. having vesselsin the above condition, and think our facilities for securing the pussarcof this act aresuch aswill insurcsucccss. Mr. J. W. Iinnnnm. ship broker, No. 3 Commercial street, has the necessary aperfor signature and is authorized to receivethe a ove named subscription, to enable us to commenceunderstandingly; and if consideredfavorably by you. we respecllully suggest that you call upon him at your earliest convenience, as it is necessarythat immediateaction should be taken. Very respectfully, Ste" B" S S and ROS J. P. TUCKER. Late Surveyor Port of NewOrleans. P. S. For reasonswhich will beobviousto you. we request that you will regard this circular as confidential.
Mr. ELIOT. I desire now to call the previous question.
Mr. SPALDING. Will the gentleman give me 5 minutes?
Mr. ELIOT. I would inquire of the Speaker when the morning hour will expire.
The SPEAKER. The morning hour will exire 28 minutes after one oclock. Mr. ELIOT. I yield.
The SPEAKER. the gentleman has but one minute more to spea.
Mr. SPALDING. Iappeal to the ComCommerce to let this bill, which isof so much importance, be printed, and thata day be set apart when we can examine it and have a vote on it understandingly. That is all I ask.
Mr. PIKE. I ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts to yield to me for one moment. I want tosay a word or two.
Mr. ELIOT. I will yield 3 minutes to my friendfrom Maine.
Mr. PIKE. The Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. SPAIDING] has taken the remarkable position that American ships are by our registry laws largely protected in their business. I will ask him to tell me in what particular a ship of 1,000tonsin the port of NewYork has any advantage over foreign ships save on voyages to California and coastwise, which, as we know, are of no sort of consequence to ships of that magnitude. In no other particular has she any advantage in the rate of reights, ofinsurance, or in any conceivable particular there or in any foreign port on this globe. Now, then, no having a vantage whatever in these particulars, say to him this. that in. the Province of NewBrunswick, and NewBrunswick is but a dupli cate of Canada, ships can be built today for 40 dollars a ton thatcost in the U.S. in our currency $100 a ton. I have from an accurate shipbuilder a statement which I propose to exhibit to the House at the iropertime of the amount of duties paid in go d upon the materials that enter into the construction of vessels, and on a 750 ton ship built last year there was paid the sum of $5,000 in gold for duties on materials to go into the construction of that ship. Now, every gentleman who knows anything about the cost of the construction of a ship of that magnitude knows that that simpleitem is sufficient, if continued, to transfer shipbuilding from the State of Maine or any other State in this Union to the British Provinces, where shipbuilders cs ca e all such duties.
The SPEAKER. The gentlemans 3 minutes have ex)ired.
Mr. GARFIELD. will the Gentfrom Massachusetts yield to me for 5 minutes?
Mr. PIKE. 3 minutes is a very short time in which to discuss the shipping interests of the count.
Mr. ELIOHI. I must ask the previous question on the bill. If the House desires further discussion upon iIt, have no objection to their voting it down.
Mr. GARFIELD. I hope the House will vote down the previous nestion. The west desires to be heard upon “ question. 1866. 535
Mr. PIKE. American tonnage ought to be heard on it., Mr. ELIOT. There seems to be a general wish to have this subject go over until tomor row. I have no objection to its doing so, and I move that the bill be printed in the mean time. The motion to print was agreed to; and the further consideration of the bill was postponed until tomorrow. BASIS OF REPRESENTATION.
Mr. STEVENS. The JtComReconstruction, to which was recommitted JtResolution No. 51, proposing an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. in relation to the bums ofrepresentation, together with allpioposnions submitted in this House in relation to that subject, have directed me to report the JtResolution back, modified to read as follows: Resolvedb the Senate and HoRep of the U.S.A. in (bngressunembfed, 2/3rds of both I Housesconcurring.) That the following article he proposedto the Lggislaturesof the several States as an amendment to the constitution of the U.S., which, when ratified by 3/4ths of said Legislatures, shall be valid as part of said constitution. namelyg ARTICLE. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within thie Union according to their respectivanumbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed: Provided, That whenever the elective franchise shall be denied or abridged in any State on account of race or color, all personstherein of such raceor color shall be excluded om the basisof representation. I now move the previous question.
Mr. SCHENCE. I ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania to yield to me forafew moments to allow me to offer a substitute for his resolution.
Mr. STEVENS. I withdraw the demand for the previous question to enable the gentleman to other his propositiop, so that we may have a direct vote upon it.
Mr. SCHENCK. I offer the following as a substitute for the proposition reported by the Gentfrom Pennsylvania from the JtComReconstruction: ResolvedI: the Senate and HoRep of the U.S.A. in Congress assembled, (2/3rds of both Housesconcurriuu.)Thnt the following article be proposedto the Legislatures of the several Statesas an amendment to the constitution of the U.S., which. when ratified by 3/4ths of said Legislatures shall be valid as part of said constitution. namely: ABHCLB. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union according to the number of innle citizens of the U.S. over 21 years of agehaving thoqualifications requisitefor the elect ors of the mostnumerous branch of the State legislnture . The Congress. at their 1st sessionafter the ratification of this amendmentby the required number ol states. ehnll provide by law ferthe actual enu meintionof such voters: and such actualenumeration shall be separately made in a general censusof the population of all the Stateswit in ever subsequent term of ten years in such manneras the onizress may by law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceedone for every 125,000 of actual population. but each State shall have at least one Representative.
Mr. STEYENS. I now renew the demand for the previous question.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I desire to inquire of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania wherein the report which he now makes differs from the proposition which he formerly reported from the ComReconstruction.,
Mr. STEVENS. The committee, in obedienceto what they thought was a general feelin in this House, have struck outthe words “an direct taxes, ” so as to leave that subject for the future action of Congress, if it shall be deemed necessary, Without embarrassing the present proposition With it. Mr. ELDRIDGE. The other remains the same?
Mr. WRIGHT. In consideration of the gravity of this question, it being onewhich will affect the welfare of the nation, would there be any impropriety in having the report of the committee lai on the table for a short time, in order that it may be printed, so that members may know what they are called upon to decide?
Mr. STEVENS. As we have Blfefldi had a weeks debate upon this subject, and are is V preposition but. a single changei striking out the words I l “ and direct taxes, cannot see the propriety of detainin the House longer upon it.
Mr. HILE. Will the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvnas] allow me to other an amendment to the amendment of the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. Sensx exf]
Mr. STEVENS. I cannotyield for any more propositions.
Skip Skip The question was upon 2nding the demand for the previous question; and being taken, there werea cs 78, noes 49. So the previous question was 2nded. The main question was then erdered.
Mr. STEVlfiNS. I will yield to the Gentfrom Ohio (g
Mr. SCHENCK] 5 minutes of my time, as he desires to make some eXplanation of his amendment.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srnvnns] to grant me, 5 minutes.
Mr. STEVENS. I yield to the gentleman that much of my time.
Mr. SMIT I would ask the gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srnvnxs] to permit to be read the paperwhich has called forth his remarks, so that we may understand to what he alludes when he speaks of the President undertaking to dictate to Congress. M
Mr. STEVENS. I have no objection to having it read, except that it will take more time than its importance warrants.
Mr. STEVENS. I am rather glad the Gentfrom Kentucky [Mr. SMITH] called for the reading of that paper, because it shows that the President and I agree exactly, on one point at least; for he leaves ent the word “ male” in condemnation of the Gentfrom Ohio, Mr. SCHENCL] I am very glad he called for the reading of the paper.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I would like to ask a question of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, Mr. Srnvnxs.
Mr. INGERSOLL, would like to ask the gentleman by what authority does he claim that the paperjust read expresses the views of the President?
Mr. STEVENS. I think I have good reasons for saying that it emanated from the president.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Has the gentleman any objection to stating what those reasons are?
Mr. RAYMOND. May I ask the gentlemans indulence for one moment?
Mr. STEVENS. Wait until after the vote has been taken.
Mr. RAYMOND. There will be no time then; I prefer it now. It is simply for papersonal explanation.
Mr. RAYMOND. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman in his cling remar s has misappreheuded and miss ated both my words and my meaning. I take it for granted the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, and every other gentleman of this House, can distinguish between courage as an element of character, and the cause in which that courage has been shown; and I am sure there is no man upon this floor who will not say that the courage, the persistent determination, shown by the rebels in their resistance to the Government, if shown in a good cause would have been worthy of all admiration an respect. I was speaking of that courage as a quality of character, not of the cause in which it was shown; and whatimeant to say and what I trust I shall not be accused of blas phemy for soingissimply this: that that cour age, if it ha been shown under a common flag, in a common cause with us, to sustain the flag and glory of this great country, would have done honor to the American name. I have no hesitation in expressing for it my admiration in that sense and to that extent. As to building monuments to the rebel dead and singing peans in their praise, I have only to say that the whole of it is a figment of the gentlemans very prolificimagination. I neither said nor intimated anything which could bear any such construction.
Mr. STEVENS. Let me, in reply to the Gentle“man, read from his speech: The giganticcontestis at anend. The courageand devotion on either sidewhich madeit so terrible and solong. no longcrowc adivided duty. but havebecome the common property of the American name. the priceless possession of the American Republic through all time to come. The dead of the contending hosts slccpbencath the soil of a comnion country. undertheir common1]. Their hostilities are hushed and they are the den of the nation forevermorc. The victor may well unit in the victory hehas achieved. Let it be our task asit will be our highest glory. to make the vanquished and their osterity to the latest Generation rejoice in their do eat.”
The SPEAKER. The gentlemanshour has now eXpired. Cries of “Question! Questionl "]
Mr. WRIGHT moved that the further consideration of the subject be postponed until the 1st Monday in December next.
Skip Skip The SPEAKER stated the motion was not in order as the main question had been ordered to be now put. The question recurred on Mr. Scunuex 5 substitute. Mr. SCHENCK demanded the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the negativeyeas 29, nays 131, not voting 23; So the substitute was rejected. During the vote, Mr. JOHNSON stated thathis colleague Mr. GLOSSBRENNBR, was detained from the House by illness. The vote was then announced as above recorded. the jOIDt resolution, as modified by the JtCommee, was then ordered to be engrossed for a 3rd reading; and being engrosse, itwas accordingly read the 3rd time. Mr. STEVEN demanded the previous question on the adoption of the JtResolution. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. LeBloND. I demand the yeas and no s on the passage of the point resolution.
The SPEAKER. The C air thinks the question should be taken by yeas&nays, as it requires a 2/3rd vote under the Constitution, and the Chair would not like to decide on its own count whether there were 2/3rds voting in the affirmative or not.
Mr. JOHNSON. I call for the reading of the point resolution.
The Clerk read the JtResolution. The question was then taken on agreeing to the jtResolution as modified by the committee; and it was decided in the allirmativeyeas 120, nays 46, not voting 16;
The SPEAKER. 2/3rds having voted in the affirmative, I declare the JtResolution to have been Mr. LONGYadEoptRed, during the rollcall, stated that his colleague, Mr. Dawes, was absent on leave.
Mr. CONKLING. (I move that the House reconsider the vote bywhich the JtResolution was adopted, and to lay that motion on the table. Agreed to. HOLDING AN EVENING SESSION.
Mr. STEVENS. May I ask now unanimous consent to take a recess and have an evening session? Last evening there was a failure. Some gentlemen were ready and others were not.
Mr. BROOKS. With the understanding that no business be done?
Mr. STEVENS. Certainly; to have discussion only on the Presidents message. No objection being made, it was so ordered. museums BUREAU. The House then resumed the consideration of the special order, being Senate bill No.60, to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens bureau, with certain amendments reported in the nature of a substitute from the select committee on the Freedmens Bureau, Mr. DAWSOH being entitled to the floor.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message was received from the Senate, by,
Mr. MCDONALD, its Chief Clerk, announcing that the Senate had passed a JtResolution (S.No.25) tendering the thanks of Congress to Vice Admiral David G. Farragut, and to the officers, petty olficcrs, seamen, and marines under his command, for gallantry and good conduct in the action in Mobile bay on the 5th August, 1864; in which he was directed toask the concurrence of the House. PILOTS IN GOVERNMENT EMPLOY.
Mr. KERR. Mr. Speaker, I hope the Gentfrom Minnesota [Mr. DoxxuLLr] will give me the floor a few moments before be commences his remarks on the pending bill.
Mr. DONNELLY. If it does not come out of my time I will do so with pleasure.
Mr. BROOKS. I rise to a question of privilege. I ask that the papers now in possession of the Clerk relating to the contested case of Dodge cs. Brooks be ordered to be printed.
The SPEAKER. The committee has power to order them printed. They will be taken from the files of the Clerk and referred to the ComElections. CLEMENT REEVES.
Mr. NICHOLSON, by unanimous consent, submitted the followmg resolution 5 which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the SecyWar he, and is hereby, instr3ietedto communicate to this House any information ip his possessionrelative to the seizure of a certain piece o land on the Delaware river. near Delaware City. Newesst a count, in thestate of Del aware the property of Crement eevos and the crection thereon of fortifications: whether the same is still hold and whether the said Clement Reeveshas received any and what compensationforsuch seizure and occupation. HOLDING AN EVENING SESSION.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I move to reconsider the vote by which the House ordered an evening session to be held tonight.
The SPEAKER. The Chair may be permitted to say that such a reconsideration could hardly be regarded as keeping good faith to the House, and to those members who have left the Hall with the express understandiu that there will be an evening session. The hair is. in formed that there are several gentlemen who desire to speak tonight.
Mr. WILIAMS. hlyunderstanding is different from that expressed by the Chair, and therefore it was that I submitted the motion to reconsider.
Mr. HUBBELL, of Ohio. As the Chair has remarked that it would hardly be keeping good faith toward members for the House now to reconsider the order for an evening session, Ide sire to make a suggestion on the question of good faith. The House orders an evening session; yet when the evening comes there is nobody ere but the pay esanda few gentlemen generally those who gesire to speak. N ow, l would like to ask the Chair if that is kceing good faith on the part of members toward those who may have consented to occupy the evening rather than the day time for their own speaking.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Hosanna] obtained t ie floor on Saturday eat, but declined to speak then. The Chair has positive information that the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY] and the Gentfrom In iana, [Mr. STILLWELIq] desire to speak this evening and the Chair will, at the risk of the censure of the House, decide that the House having by unanimous consentordered that there shall gbe an evening session, for debate only upon the Presidents annual messa e, when the House shall be ready to udjourn this afternoon it must be with the view o having a session tonight at half past 7 oclock.
Mr. BRO KS. It is of high importance that members of the House should be educated to the point of remainin here until the close of the days session. o passed a law here the other day when only 6 members were present and I think the best way is to educatemembers up to their duty of remaining here, and thereby keeping good faith to the House and the couriy.
Mr. ELIOT. Is there a quorum now present?
The SPEAKER. There is not and the Chair would hold that the motionto reconsider would fail from the want of a quorum.
Mr. HUBBELL, of Ohio. The Chair observed a moment ago that the Gentfrom Ohio myself obtained the floor on Saturday last. but declined to speak at that time. I did obtain the floor, but it was late in the days session; and at the renest of members I gave way to a motion to a ourn. It was not that I declined to speak, for was willing to go on; but I yielded the floor at the renest of others. It was no fault of mine thatl did not speak then. Iam willing to eld the floor toni lit to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. ransom]
The SPEAKER. That gentleman is not now present. The Chair was informed by the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY] that he would certainl be heret is evening and be ready to speak. he Chair only desires to carry out the order of the House. The motion to reconsider the order of the House foran evening session was not pressed to a vote. TAX ON RAILROAD COUPONS.
Mr. KERR, by unanimous consent, submitted the followingpreamble and resolution; which were read, considered, and agreed to: Whereas the internalrevenuelaw as it is now construed. requires all railroad companiesto pay to the Governmenta revenuetax of 5 orecnt. onalleou onsdue from said companiesto e holders of the ir onds, whether the companies are able to pay the bondsthemselvesor not: and whereas it is manifestly unjust to require the payment of such tax when the companiesare unable to pay the coupons themselves: Therefore. gamma. That the ComWays and Mcan: be instructed to consider the proprietyof sochangi ng the law as to make such tax payable only when. the conons themselves are paid bysuchcompanies to the ho! ersof thesame; and to reportby bill or otherwise. W. G. RAYMOND and others.
Mr. WINDOM, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the relief of W. G. Raymond, and the heirs of J. D. Turner. deceased; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComClaims and then, on motion of Mr. POMEROY, (at 4 oclock and 25 minutes. m.) the House took a recess until 7 an a half oclock p. m. EVENING SESSION. The House reassembled at half past 7 oclock. m., (Mr. Girlsxsu. occupying the chair as Speaker protemper o) and resumed as in ComWhole on the state of the Union the consideration of the Presidents annual message. AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION.
Mr. HUBBELL, of Ohio, obtained the floor and then, on motion of Mr. KELLEY, (at 15 minutes after ten oclock p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Tuuasnn, February 1, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
Mr. WADE, from the ComTerritor, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.32) to prevent the absence of territorial officers from their official duties, reported it without amendment. He also, from thesame committee, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.113) in relation to public highways, reported it without amendm ent.
Mr. POMEROY. The ComPubLands, to whom was referred a memorial of a committee appointed at a meeting of the National Normal School Association, held at Harrisbiir. August15, 1865, prayin fora grant of public and s to establish iiorma schools in each of the States, have had the same under consideration, and deeming legislation on the subject inexpedient, ask to be discharged from the further consideration of the subject. The report was agreed to. COLUMBIA and WILLAMETTE RIVERS.
Mr. NESMITH submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Revoltmi, That the ComCommerce be directed to inquire into the expedicnc of making an appropriation for the improveincntot the navigation of the columbia and Willamette rivers, and report by bill or other wuie. CONSTITUTIONal GUARANTEES.
Mr. BROWN submitted the followmg resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Ilewlvwl. That the JtComReconstruction be directed to inquire into the expediency of amending the constitution of the U.S. so as to declare with greater certainty the power of congress to enforce and determine by appropriate legisationall the Guarantees contained in that Instrument, and more especially. 1st, that which recites the people, without distinguishing them by color or race as thosewho are to choose Representatives: 2nd, that which assures the citizens of cach State all privileges and immunitie sofcitizens in thesevernlStates;3rd, that which enjoins upon the U.S. the guarantcc to everyState in the union of a RFG. JURISDICTION OF U.S. COURTS.
Mr. POLAND submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: flewlvrd, Thtll. the ComJudiciary be dircctedto inquire as to the expediency and constitutionality of extending the jurisdiction of the courts of the U.S. over all suits brouaht ainst person or acts done iinder the authority orin aid of the military forcesof the U.S., and alsoof all suiteI broueht against any person for any act done underthe authority or in aid of the socalled confederate States, and report by bill or otherwise. APPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATION.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I ask permission of the Senate to say a word by way of giving information to the body which I think it may be advisable to give. I was obliged to leave the Senate yesterday at a somewhat early hour on account of the fact that I was iiite unwell. I understand that afterward aJtResolution was received from the hoRep and is now upon the table, proposing an amendment to the constitution a resolution reported from a JtCommee upon which the Senate has placed me. I am not in a condition to ask the Senate to proceed with it today, even if I deemed it advisable to press its consideration now. On reflection, that inasmuch as my friendfrom Illinois [Mr. Tavmwuj has under consideration an important bill with which he wishes to proceed, I have thought it advisable to defer it a day or 2, and to say to the Senate that if nothing occurs to render that course unwise I shall ask them to take up the JtResolution on Monday morning and proceed with its consideration. I be e that then the Senate will be willing to considerit and to continue its consideration until it shall be finally acted upon. It is properthat it should be taken up and acted upon soon, because many of the State Legislatures are now"in session, and if it is to pass, it is desirable to send it to them before many days shall have elapsed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. MCPHERSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed a bill (H.R. No.204) to regulate the registering of vessels; in which it requested the comcurrenceof the Senate. MILITARY TRIAL OF DAVIS and CLAY.
Mr. HOWARD. If there be nothing prewing before the Senate this morning, I move to take up the resolution that I submitted some time since in reference to the trial of JeffersonDavis. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the following resolution, submitted by Mr. HOWARD on the 16th of Jan nary: Whereas by the reeporotf the SecyWar to the President, dat January 4. instant, it appear! that JeffersonDavis. late presulent of the so calllxl confederate States is now held in custody. charged with the crimes of having incited the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, POTUS, and with the murder oTsoldiers of the U.s. held as prisoners of war during the rebellion, and other cruel and barbarouspractices. in violation of the rules and usagesof civilized warfare and whereas by the same report it a pears that C cment C. Clay is also hold in custody. c arzed irith complicity in said assas shienrast, ion and with organizing hands of irates. rob and murderersin Canada, to burn t ocities and ravage the commerceand coasts of the U.S. on the British frontier, in Violation of the same rule! and usages: Therefore. Renolced by the State. ( the hoRep ! concurring.) That it beres ccttull recommended to the President that said Jc orson 1 arm and Clement C. Clay be. without unnecessarydelay, tried by a miitary commissionupon said charges.
Mr. HOWARD. I offer an amendment to the resolution to come in at its close: Or such other crimes in violation of the usage: of war as may be preferred against them or others noting in concert with them.
The PRESIDENT protempore Those words will be added to the Senator 5 resolution. as it is his own resolution, and it is within his power to modify it.
The PRESIDENT prolempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business, which is Senate bill No. 61, which is now before the Senate.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I understand from the Senfrom Michigan that he will conclude his remarks in a few moments. I am willin, therefore, that that bill should be laid asi e informally until he concludes his remarks.
The PRESIDENT protom o. In comliance with the suggestion of the Senfrom filine is the bill belore the Senate will be laid aside informally, if there be no objection. It is laid aside.
The PRESIDENT protempore Senate bill No. 61 is now before the Senate.
Mr. HOWARD. If there be no ohicction I presume there will not beI should like to have a vote taken on this resolution.
Mr. SAULSBURY. I prefer that it sh0nld go over. I wish to make some remarks on the resolution.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I call for the order of the day. PROTECTION OF CITIL RIGHTS. The Senate, as in ComWhol resumed the consideration of the bill (S.No.6} to protect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rights, and furmsh the meaps of their vindication, the fiending question being on the amendment of. TRUMBULL, to insert after the word “that” in the 3rd hue of the 1st section the words: All persons born in the U.S. mandnm subject to an foreign Power, excludgng Indians vnot taxed. are hereby declared to he citizens of the U.S., without distinction of color, and ,
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. DOOLIT 11. 15in the chair.) The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senfrom Illinois, upon which the yeas&nays have been or dered. n
Mr. TRUMBULL. I ask for the reading of I the amendment.
Mr. HEND RSON. The Senfrom Minnesota and the Senfrom California yesterday made some objections to regarding as citizens of the U.S. Indians who owed no allegiance whatever to their tribes, who were not connected with the tribes. I should like very much to hear the reason of the objection. The State, as I understand, can exclude them from the ballotbox just as well after we declare them to be citizens of the U.S. as it could before. The State will not be compelled thereby to admit them to the ballotbox. Vhat objection can the Senators have to declaring Indians living in the country, although they may not be taxed, to be citizens of the U.S.?
Mr. RAMSEY. Our objection has been over i come by the modification of the amendment. The objection was addressed to the amendment as it then stood, but that amendment has now been modified.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I desire to say a single word on this subject by way ofreply to my friendfrom Missouri. From time immemorial, indeed in the constitution itself; this very distinction between Indians taxed and Indians not taxed has been a fundamental distinction. In the enumeration of the people of the U.S. who are made the basis of representation and taxation, Indians not taxed were expressly excluded.
Mr. HENDERSON. So were negroes excluded.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. 2/5ths were excluded and 3/5ths were counted; but that referred undoubtedly to Africans in a state of slavery.
Mr. HENDERSON. I am talking about citizenship. Slaves were not then citizens at all; now they are.
Mr. RAMSE. The Senfrom Missouriseems to base his position upon the mistaken theory that all Indians who are no longer connected with their tribes or under a tribal government are civilized Indians, living as farmers, or in some other way earning a livelihood in the white settlements. That is an entire mistake. Where that happens to be the case, they are probably civiliz Indians, holding property, and taxed in that way. But in aH the border States there are large numbers of wild savage Indians, as uncivilized and as untame as any on the plains, who have no tribal government, who are outlaws from their tribes and their nations. It certainly is not the intention of the Senator or theintention of the Senate to admit Indians of that class to citizenship. It has been the policy of the Government from its foundation not to consider them as citizens. There are large numbers of Indians who acknowledge no tribal government at all, who have no connection With any tribes, and who, unless some modification of this amendment is made. would be admitted to citizenship under it, which certainly cannot be the intention of the Senate or the Government.
Mr. JOHNSON. Considered virtually as foreigners.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Considered virtually as foreigners, as a description of persons connected with those tribes with whom we make treaties. That is what the phrase means. Whenever they are separated from those tribes, and come within the jurisdiction of the U.S. so as to be counted, they are citizens of the U.S. It is not intended as a property qualification. That is not the meaning of it. The Senator wants to know why. if an Indian cannot be a citizen without being taxed, should a white man or a negro be a citizen without being taxed. If the negro or white man belon edto a foreign Government he would not be a citizen; we do not iropose that he should be; and that is all thatt e words “ Indians not taxed, ” in that connection, mean.
Mr. HENDERSON. “Not taxed" by whom? By Federal authority or by State authority?
Mr. TRUMBULL. By an body. The term here is meant to embrace tlyiose persons who yet belong to the Indian tribes, foreign Governments. “Indians not taxed” is a term used to designate those Indians yet belonging to a foreign Government, and not counted as a part of our ieople.
Mr. HENDERSON. TheSenatorwould certainly accomplish that object by his original amendment, to insert the words “not owing allegiance to any tribe.” I barely throw out these suggestions for the consideration of the Senate. I certainly am offering no opposition to the amendment of the Senfrom Illinois, because I shall vote for the very broadest. prpposition on this subject. The Senfrom is consin answered me that if we declared these Indians to be citizens of the U.S. they would be permitted to make contracts, if I understood him properly, and that was the objection he had to it. Why, sir, I suppose that any State, even after we declared tie Indians to be citizens of the U.S., would have a perfect right, if it saw fit, if it thought they were savages or barbarians or anything of that character, to deny them the right to make contracts.
Mr. HENDERSON. I will ask the Senfrom Maryland, who seems to dissent from the proposition, if the mine r, born of white parents. 18 or 19 years of age, is not a citizen of the U.S.? Can he make a contract under State laws? Then will the Senator tell me why a State cannot deny to an Indian after he has been declared to be a citizen of the U.S. the right to make a contract?
Mr. GRIMES. Can a State deny to an Indian the right to contract or to sue when we make him a citizen by this bill with ullthe rights of a citizen under the constitution of the U.S. I
Mr. HENDERSON. I suppose he would take those rights in deference to the laws of the respective States. You must look to them. Our Government, as I understand it, is a complex piece of machinery. There are certain powers granted to the Federal Government, and those we can exercise here; all others are reserved to the States; and I do not understand that by declarin gn man to be a citizen of the U.S. we thereby take away the right of a State to declare whether he is competent to make a contract or not The lunatic is not authorized to make a contract by State law. certainly not by Federal law.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I should like to ask the Senator what rights, then. are conferred up on the Indian by declaring him to be a citizen in this bill.
Mr. HENDERSON. When I started the proposition here, I did not think it would involve me in the difficulty of explaining all the rights that belong to an American citizen, and certainly it would be a difficult matter for me to do it now, without having examined the subject. I ask the Senfrom Minnesota and these other Senators who are objecting to it, what rights would be granted by a declaration of this sort that would interfere with the authority of their respective States which they desire to retain? I do not. choose now to define and I frankly say to the Senfrom Oregon that I might commit some blunders if I were to undertake to define the rights of an American citizen. I do not ch00se to enter into that subject. I only ask the Senators to tell me what difficulties their respective States would have to meet in prescribing such rules and regulations for the government of that population as they might see (it. I have not heard a single word on their part to indicate to me that there is any objection to it. I refer the original amendment as offered by the Senfrom Illinois, that all persons born on the soil of the U.S shall be citizens except those who owe allegiance to some foreign Power at the time, or are connected with tribes of Indians. I think that that is the properrule; I can see no objection to it; but I do not wish to throw an thing in the we of the bill.
Mr. LANE, of I ansns. The reposition as it now stands before the Senate oes not reach the object that I intended, and as I perceive that it will embarrass the bill in its present shape, especially in the HoRep, I suggest to the Senfrom Illinois whether it would not be better to strike out that revision in reference to the Indians not taxed. t does not reach the object that I desire to reach. The Indians holding their lands in severnlty by allotment are not taxed. Those are the Indians that I desire to reach; and I repose, at the an gestion of the chairman of the committee and the Senfrom Massachusetts, to introduce a separate bill giving to those Indians holding their lands in severa ty by allotment in Kansas the power to sell their timber and their lands. I am extremely anxious to have this bill passed, and passed as soon as possible. I suggest, there be whether it would not be better to strike out that portionof the amendment.
Mr. HENDERSON. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. HENDERSON. I ask him if he is not in favor of now making all the negroes in the southern States citizens of the U.S.?
Mr. HENDERSON. He is now objectin to making the Indians citizens on the groun that the Government of the U.S. is taking care of them. Let me ask the Senator if we have not just passed a bill enlarving the powers of the Freedmens Bureau and adeclaring those negroes incompetent to make contracts, and putting their contracts under the superintendence of the agents of the freedmens Bureau, whom we have sent down into the southern States, or will send down there under that bill, to superintend their contracts? Have we not also provided that the SecyWar shall issue provisions, subsistence, c othing. km, for the use of those negroes? Have we not put all their contracts on er the supervision of this Freedmens Bureau? If the objection of the Senator on that score is good as against the Indians, it is certainly good as against the negroes and the poor whites of the southern States who are reduced to poverty today.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I am simply describin the condition of these Indians. I understan the honorable Senator to be in favor of making a distinction between one class of Indians an another class of Indians in the U.S. He does not pretend to say that con58ought to declare all the wild and save e In ians of the U.S. citizens of the I U.S., but he proposes to make a distinction between one class of Indians and another class of Indians by declaring that those under tribal authority shall not be citizens and those that are not under tribal authority shall be citizens. I insist that the proposed amendment is more convenient and more certain than the law advocated by the Senator. 1,000s of theseIndians in the State that I have the honor to represent are collected upon reservations; they are not subject to tribal authority; their tribes are broken up and destroyed; they consist of the fragments and remnaqts of tribes gathered together upon these reservations; but they are no more competent or qualified to vote than they Were when they existed as original tribes.
Mr. HENDERSON. We do not make them voters.
Mr. WILLIAMS. They are to be made citizens, and I say they are no more qualified to become citizens than when they existed as original tribes. I do not exactly understand whatI the Senator means when he insists that Congress shall make them citizens and does not claim that any right attaches to that character.
Mr. HENDERSON. Will the Senator permit me to ask him, if citizenship be conferred upon the Indian, what right wi i be conferred that he objects to The Indian, like the negro, was born upon our soil, and I say let him be declared a citizen also, unless some right will be thereby conferred upon him that will conflict with the general interests of the States. Will the Senator tell me what interest will be conflicted with what power of the State to take care of the Indians will be denied by this legislation? I am seeking light on this subject, and ammnnttmn to any Indians. if the Senator can answer that question satisfactorily, I shall withdraw all objection to the amendment as it stands.
Mr. HENDERSON. I desire to ask the Senator if the law of Oregon now does not forbid the selling of intoxicating liquors to mine rs under 21 years of age, under a penalty?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I think not. There is no such law in that State to my knowledge.
Mr. HENDERSON. It is the law in my State, and crhaps in almost every State in the Union, and ) the power to pass such a law has never been denied to the States.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mine rs, the sons of white men, are not savage Indians. Liquor may perhaps be sold with safety to the sons of whthe men, while to sell a quart of liquor to an Indian may imperil the lives of the people in a whole neighborhood; but there is no such law as that in the State of Oregon. I insist, Mr. President, that if this proposed amendment is to be adopted by the Senate, it is in the best form in which it can be pu. but this time, and that the distinction which is made in it is the most convenient and certain one that can be adopted. The object is not to make taxation a criterion or a test of citizenship; but, although it is not absolutel certain; and may operate with hardship, perups, in individual cases, it is the most certain way of defining the distinction between wild, savagc, and untamed Indians, and those who associate with white people, own property, and exercise the privileges that generally attend a citizen in the community. I do not see that anything is to be gained by changing the amendment in that respect, an Ihope, if it be adopted at all, it will be adopted in its present shape.
The PRESIDING FFICElt, (Mr. DooLrr run] The question before the Senate is on the adoption of the amendment of the Senfrom Illinois, [Mr. Tacuncu.] upon which the yeas and an s have been ordere.
Mr. JOHNSON. I snggest to the honorable chairman of the committeecertainly not with a view to defeat his proposition, but with a view of making it to me more acceptable whether it is not advisable to strike out the latter part of the amendment. The amendment as it stands is that all persons born in the U.S., and not so ject to a foreign Power, shall, by virtue of birth, be citizens. To that I am wiling to consent; and that comprehends all persons, without any reference to race or color, who may be so born. That being so, why is it “necessary to add to the amendment the words without distinction of color?" I think it very advisable that all questions of that sort, all questions involving the rights which may be supposed to exist in one race and not to exist in the other, should be done away with as soon as possible; and the strikin out of the words to which I have alluded, the utter words of the amendment, will leave the amendment just as operative as it will be if the words are retained. I should he e the honorable member and the Senate wou d have no objection to striking out those words. If the Chair will permit me, I will ask to have the amendment read.
The Secretary read the amendment, to insert after the word “that, ” in the 3rd line of the 1st section, the words: All personsborn in the U.S., and not subject to an foreign Power, excluding Indians not taxed. are ereby declared to be citizens of the U.S. without distinction of color, and V
Mr. JOHNSON. Strike out the latter words, “without distinction of color, ” and it would. be very clear that everybody born in the U.S. would be a citizen, and, unless it be true and I, certainly, am not the person to admit that it is true for a momentthat a black man is not a person, all black persons born in the U.S., who are not subject to any foreign Power, would become citizens by virtue o bIrth a
Mr. TRUMBULL. I agree with the object which the Senfrom may land has in view, and, in in opinion, it won d not make any difference if those words, “without distinction of color, ” were stricken out; but it is desirable to make the bill specific and to have no misunderstandin about it. It is contended and gravely argue here in the Senate that this is a white mans Government, made by white men, and for white men, and that the negro is not included in the Government. The DeclarIndep declares that “all men are created equal.” I suppose that means the colored man as much as the white man.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I have no objection to that course.
Mr. JOHNSON. The Senfrom Illinois certainly. does not understand me as opposed to his amendment.
Mr. HENDRICKS. While I dissent entirely from the construction which the Senfrom Illinois puts upon the DeclarIndep, I was leased with one suggestion that he made, and that was that in delining the right of citizenship thereshould be no room fordou t. The question that is before this congress, and that must now o to the country, ist at which was started by the Senfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. SUMxsn] whether all persons living in this country are to be equal hclore the law without distinction of color. Thatis the question which he raised, and which we have now arrived at. I am perfectly content that that question shall go to the country. If the people agree to the proposition, I am content; i it is satisfactory to the white men of this country to admit into the political community Indians and other colored people, I shall no longer object; but I am gratified that the Senfrom Illinois makes it in plain words, so that the issue shall be distinctly before the people.
Mr. HENDERSON. I ask if it is in order to amend the amendment.
Mr. HENDERSON. Then I move to amend the amendment by striking out the words “not taxed” and inserting the words “not subject to tribal authority.”
Mr. TRUMBULL. That is the way it was efore.
Mr. HENDERSON. I would rather have it in that way; but I am not particular about it. I ask that the amendment may be read as I propose to amend it. The Summer. In the 3rd line of the amendment it is proposed to strike out the words “not taxed” and to insert “not subject to tribal authority, ” so that the amendment by will read: All personsborn in the U.S and not subeetto any foreign Power. exeludinu Indians not subject to tribal authoritv. are hereby declared to be citizens of the U.S.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I suggest to the Senfrom Missouri, ifhe wishes make that amendm ent, to insert those words right after the word to their doing so.” Power, ” so that it will read, “not subjeet to an foreign Power or tribal authority.
Mr. HENDERSON. I accept the modification. I think that is the best ace to insert it.
Mr. JOHNSON. That is tooriginal proposition.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Yes, sir, we have got back to it now.
Mr. HENDERSON. It is ageneral principle, and I prefer it in that form. I thin while we are meeting this question we might as well meet it fairl and entirely. I cannot see any reason, nor have Iheard a particle of reason given in the speeches that have been made, why this proposition should not be adopted.
Mr. RAMSEY. The Senfrom Missourihas been told several times that there are in the border States large bodies of Indians not subject to tribal authority who are as wild and as untamed as an that roam over the plains. Would he make t iem citizens?
Mr. HENDERSON. I understand that perfectly well; but will the Senator tell me how this declaration, that they are citizens of the U.S., will interfere with thelegislation of the State of Minnesota? "
Mr. RAMSEY. The Senfrom Oregon has already explained that matter. There are many differencesjn State laws between these Indians and white men, and certainl you do not desire to confer on all these In ians the rights of citizenship; and yet you do that by this legislation.
Mr. HENDERSON. The Senfrom Oregon stated that if we declared them to be citizens of the U.S., the State of Oregon perhaps could not forbid thesale of whisky to them, that the keeper of the dramshe would be compelled to selll whisky to them, the same as to other individuals. Whv, sir, there is a law on the statutebook, I think, of every State in the Union, unless it be Oregon alone, that prohibits tavernkeepers and dramshop keepers from selling li uor to mine rs. Are they not citizens of the U.S.? I think so, unquestionably; and wh cannot the Legislature of Minnesota or of reon forbid the selling of whisky to Indians after the passage of this law? Certainly there can be no objection I think while we are declaring a general principle, we onght to meet the question boldly and fairly. there are but few (Indians as I understand not subject to tribal authority in these different States, and surely it will not put the States or the people of the respective States where they are to teinconven iences that Senators suppose. The declaration of citizenship does not confer any right the exercise ofwhich on their part cannot be restrained by a State legislature so asto protect the General peace an welfare of the States. Iam sure of that.
Mr. TRUMBULL. As there is so much difficulty about this matter, and as it seems impossible to satisfy all gentleinen as to this phraseology, I think we adbetter stand by the constitutional phrase “excluding Indians not taxed. ”. That means Indians not counted as a part of our population. It is not a property qualilicution at all. The people will not so unerstand it, and we do not so understand it. I hope the amendment suggested by the Senfrom Missouriwill not be adopted. Let us vote upon the proposition as we have it. I think it is in the best form in which we can place it.
Mr. HENDERSON. One word in reply. It used to be supposed that this Government was made exclusively for the white man, and it was so decided. We are decidin today that it was made for the white man and 5le black man. but that the red man shall have no interest in it.
Mr. TRUMBULL. We are not deciding any such thing.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I assure the Senfrom Missouri that as far as the State of Kansas is concerned, he is proposing to make citizens of the very lowest c pass of Indians. the vagrant Indians “who have separated themselves from their tribal authority.
Mr. HENDERSON. What harm will that o? 1866.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I think it is unjust to the better class of Indians.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment to the amendment. The amendment to the amendment was rejected.
Skip Skip The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question recurs upon the amendment of the Senfrom Illinois, upon which the yeas&nays have been ordered. The question being taken by yeas&nays, resultedyous 31, nays 10.ABSENT 9. So the amendment was agreed to. Subsequently (during the course of Mr. DAvrss remarks, and bydiis permission) the following explanations were made:
Mr. SHERMAN. I ask the indulgence of the Senate to allow me to record my vote on the amendmen"; of the Senfrom Illinois. I was called out of the Chamber before the roll was called, and Iask the liberty of beingal lmved to record my name on the amendment. I vote “ay.”
The PRESIDING OFFICFR. By unanimous consent, perhaps the Senfrom Ohio will beerniitted to record his vote.
Mr. CLARK. I do not think it can be done even by unanimous consent.
Mr. SHERMAN. Iain informed by several Senators that this has not been allowed in the Senate even by unanimous consent. I desire to say, therefore, that if I had been in my seat I would have voted “a a”
ThePltESIDlNG OFFICER. Iunderstand the rule is positively against it; that unanimous consent will not allow a vote to be recorded after the result has been announced.
Mr. CONNESS. Being absent temporarily I wish to make the same statement made by the Senfrom Ohio, that I would have voted for the amendment if I had been present.
Mr. HOWE. If this is atinie for defining our positions, I think I ought to take occasion tIo say that I would have voted the same way if had been resent.
Mr. CLARK. I never said any such thing, nor didI intimate any such thing.
Mr. DAVlS. The honorable Senator said. he had heard of the transfer of. but one negro in the State of NewlHampshire.
Mr. CLARK. I said that I had found in the course of my practice one bill of sale; and it was the only bill of sale I ever did see. But if the Senator will look at the census of 1790, I think he will find that we had between 3 and 400 slaves.
Mr. DAVIS. In 1820 you did not report any slaves at all, but in 1830 you reported 3, so that you had been in the slave trade at least to the extent of 3 slaves. [Laughter]
Mr. CLARK. The Senator will pardon me. Some of those people who held slaves down in the southern country wandered into our country bringing 3 slaves with them. I think in 1840somebody brought one. We felt very much aggrieved by it, and hope they will not bring any more.
Mr. DAVIS. Oh, how holy, how immaculate! If NewHampshire had just possessed the cot ton climate and cotton soil, how many slaves would she have had?
Mr. CLARK. I cannot say. We do not claim that we are any better than other people. We never had so many slaves as others and we got rid of them earlier.
Mr. DAVIS. I think you are very well offif you are not shown to be a great deal worse than other people. [Laughter]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senfrom Kentucky yield?
Mr. JOHNSON. It is rather late in the day, and my friendfrom Kentucky will take some time yet to conclude his remarks. I prepose, With his consent, that the bill now be passed over for today, and that the vote be taken tomorrow at 2 oclock, if that is the pleasure of the Senate.
Mr. SAULSBURY. I desire to be heard for a short time before the vote is taken.
Mr. JOHNSON. I did not know before that my friendfrom Delaware proposed to so any 1 thing upon this bill. Let us the fix 3 o clock. tomorrow as the hour for taking the vote; I am sure there will be no objection on the part of the chairman of the committee to make this arrangement.
Mr. DAVIS. I am wound up; I am obliged to run down. [Laughter]
Mr. TRUMBULL. I shell for myself make no objection to taking the vote at 2 or 3 oclock tomorrow. If it is understood Genorally in the Senate that there is not a disosition to protract the debate longer than say t ree oclock tomorrow, I am perfectly willing to adjourn now.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Do Iunder stand the Senfrom Maryland as moving an adjoirnment?.
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes sir, with that understanding, thnt the vote shall betaken tiemorrow at 3 oclock.
Mr. HENDRICKS. With the consent of the Senfrom Maryland, I will state thatthat is entirely satisfacto to me, with this further understanding, thati amendments be proposed a reasonable time shall be allowed for their explanation. It is possible the Senfrom Kentucky will not occupy until 3 oclock. I desire to propose one amendment to the bill. The Senfrom Oregon [Mr. Winusiss] tells me that he wishes to propose an amendment. I have no desire to engage in any general discussion of the bill, but simply to address my self to the amendment I shall propose.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I would say that of course in fixing the hour at 3 oclock I should not expect, so far as I am concernedI can speak only for myselfto prevent the offering ofuny amendment and the making of any statement in reference to it.
Mr. TRUMBULL. crha s we had better have it understood, as amendments are likely to be offered, that after 3 oclock any amendment may be offered and any amendment may be exilaiued. What I mean is to have it unerstoo that we can get a vote tomorrow without protracting the session unnecessarily. With that understanding I am willing that we shall now adjourn until tomorrow, and then at sometime after the Senfrom Kentucky shall have concluded his remarks we may act on such amendments as may be offered.
Mr. DAVIS. I submit to the pleasure of the Senate.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not know what the Senfrom Illinois means by allowing astatement or explanation of an amendment. The amendment which I shall propose I shall wish to present in some decent shape to the Senate. I o not want any misunderstanding on this point. I do not wish to discuss the bill Generally, except for the purpose of illustrating the amendment I shall propose. That amendment will be to strike out the last section of the bill. The Senfrom Oregon wishes to propose an apiendment, and of course, I presume, to exain it. p
Mr. TRUMBULL. I think there will be no difficulty on that point. With the understanding that all general debate on the bill shall close at 3 oc oek tomorrow, I have no objection to an adjournment.
Mr. JOHNSON. I renew the motion to adoum. he motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tuunsusr, February 1, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borsrox. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. CONKLING. V I rise to a privileged question. My colleague, Mr. Hvnnran, has been called away by the serious illness of a near relative. I ask leave of absence for him for a week. There being no objection, the leave was granted. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.R. CONKlllNG. I ask leave to make a brief statement. No objection was made.
Mr. CONKLING. I ask for the reading of the statement which I sendto the Clerks desk. It is in the Albany Argus of January 25.
The Clerk read as follows: “Tun Cosxuso Psoviso. NewYork, which now abridzes sutIrnaeon account of color, would lose 2 or 3 Representativesin the eventofits refusalto remove the existing restriction. "Troy Whig. "It is probably a recommendation with the Representative of N NewYork. of the vindictive and coer cive school to which Mr. Cosxnrxo belongs, that the measure he proposes punishes and in a measuredisfranchises his tats. In the original formation of the constitution NewYork surrendered a great deal of her position and consentedto an equality of represontation with smaller and loss no ulous States. The power shehas given toothers haslieen unacner ously used against her: and instead of reudjusting the measureof wresontation on the basisof equality he brings forwa a contrivsnee to aggravatethe in justice at the expenseof his own State.
Mr. CONR. t. osscheme ii of the censusof Deriew. showshow little pride in their ownStatethenew ightpoliticinns have and in the great struggleof polities andof sectional greed and rapacity how false they irove to their State. An attorney who so disgracest c rights of his clients, under some delusion of fanaticism or fancied revelation of the higher law, would be justly regardedwith contempt.”
Skip Skip Mr. TROWBRIDGL. I desire to state that I was confined to in room all yesterday by a sick headache. Ifl adbeen present, I should have voted for the constitutional amendment reported by the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [. AI SrnVENSj Mr. BOYER. I desire simply to say that my colleague, Mr. Ascoxs, was taken scriously ill on Monda last, and is now confined to lllS bed. This act will explain his absence from the Hall during the last few days. NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI lllVllll.
Mr. DONNELLY, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to improve the navigation of the Mississippi river to tIhe cities of StAnthony and Minneapolis, in the State of Minnesota; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Should not that bill properly go to the ComCommerce?
The SPEAKER. The Chair is informed by the Clerk that the bill has relation to public lands. COMMITTEE ON HINES and MINING.
Mr. HIGBY. Iask unanimous consent to offer the following resolution: Resolved, That the Committee on Mines and Minin beailowed to havea clerk, whoshall receivethe nsua compensationfixed by the House for clerks of committees. I will only say that that committee has now so much business on itshands that it cannot get along without a clerk.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illine rs. the resolution. QUARANTINE IN NEWYORK.
Mr. WARD, by unanimous consent, presented concurrent resolutions of the Legislature of the State of NewYork, relative to quar antine in the port of NewYork; which were I object to referred to the ComNavAffrs, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. ELIOT. I demand the regular order of business.
Mr. BOYER. I ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts to withdraw that call for a moment till I can make a statement in the nature, of a personal explanation.
Mr. MORRILL reported, from the Commit tm of Ways&Means, a bill to amend an act entitled “ An act to provide Ways&Means for the support of the Government, ” aproved March 3, 1865; and moved that the bill be printed and be made the special order for consideration by the House on Thursday, the 8th instant, after the rnornin hour. The motion was agree to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I desire to I withdraw the call for that I i ask the chairman of the ComWays&Means [Mr. Momnulat what time he proposes to have action 11 on tcloan bill.
Mr. MORRILE. Just as soon as the business of the House will permit. TAX ON WHISKY.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire alsoto ask aquestion. I see that the internalrevenue commission have recommended a reduction of one dollar pergallon in the tax upon whisk. Unless it be known to the country whethert at recommendation meets the approbation of Congress, many million dollars of revenue may be lost during the next few months, because many mann DOIUJQYSwill suspend operations until the question shall be settled. I desire to suggest to the chairman of the ComWays&Means, that unless the committee intend to adopt, in that particular, the recommendation of the commission, a JtResolution declaring that Congress will not reduce that tax ought to be introduced and passed. Unless something of this kind be done, great confusion will be experienced in the country, and the Government will lose a very large amount of revenue.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois and do strov the interest of western farmers. Mr MORRILL. In response to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [ll Mr. SmVENS, Iwill say that the ComWays and cans have not yet taken up the report of the commission. It has not yet been printed by the Public Printer. On this matter, if an orinal question, I may say thstthe Committee of ays and Means would have come to the same conclusion as the revenue commissioners; but the duty having been established, I take the libe to say, if they do come to that conclusion, it will be with very great reluctance.
Mr. WENTWORTH. Is the question before the House on which the gentlemen from Pennsylvania made a remark? Mr. SpeakER. The question before the House is the bill reported from the committee.
Mr. WENTWORTH. I want the same privilege our leaders have. [Laughter]
The SPEAKER. If there be no objection the gentleman will be heard. There was no objection.
Mr. WENTWORTH. In reference to introducing resolutions calling for expression of merelers of this House on that subject, I would advise members 1st to see for themselves. We have ordered an extra number of that report together with the bill accompanyin it; and I an apose each member would at least c entitled to have a copy upon his desk. Then, when each member shall have read that report and bill he will be prepared to judge whether it will affect him or his constituents; that is unless we have, what is too often done in this House, men rise in their place and call for the previous question, and ask their friends to sustain them because they happened to submit the resolution. On this occasion I call on members to read the report and bill for themselves before the question shall be sprung on them. The bill was read a 1st and 2nd time, ordered to be printed, and made the special or der for Thurs ay next after the morning hour. EXCUSED FROM COMMITTEE SERVICE.
Mr. DRlGGS. I riseto aprivileged question. I am now on 3 important committees, and I find it impossible to attend to the duties of them all. ask to be excused from further service on the ComInvalidPens.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman has the right to be excused, being on 2 other committees. BASIS OF REPRESENTATION.
Mr. DRIGGS. While I am up I will attend to another matter. I understand under the new rule a member is not allowed to ask unanimous consent to record his vote unless he were present when the vote was taken.
Mr. DRIGGS. I was absent yesterday when i the vote was taken on the constitutional amendment in reference to the basis of representation, engaged in business connected with the public land;, by order of the House. I regret was not present; if I had been, I would have voted in the uflirmative.
Mr. NEWELL also stated he was unavoid ably absent; and, if present, would have voted in the affirmative. LAWS OF NEWMEXICO.
Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas, by unanimous consent, submitted the followmg resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the ComJudiciary bein structed to examine the laws of the Territorial assembly of the Territory of NewMexico) and make inquiry into the nature of certain acts concerning free negroesand the relations of master and servant; and report by bill or other mse. srsAKsiis TABLE.
Mr. RICE,of massachusetts, by unanimous consent, moved to take from the Speakers table Senate bill No. 94, to amend an act entitled “An act for the relief of seamen and others borne upon the books of vessels wrecked or lost in the naval service, ” approved July 4, 1864, and for other purposes; and Senate point resolution No. 25, tendering the thanks of on gress to Vice Admiral David G. Farragut, and the officers, petty officers, seamen, and marines under his command, for their gallantry and good conduct in action in Mobile bay on the 5th of August, 1864; and that they be referred to the ComNavAffrs. The motion was agreed to. BRIDGESDESTROYED DURING THE WAR.
Mr. LATHAM by unanimous consent, submitted JtResolution of the Legislature of WestVirginia concerning the repair of bridges, &e., destroyed by the Union armies as a means of safety during the rebellion; which was or dered to be printed, and referred to the committee of Claims. TRANSFER FROM VIRGINIA to WESTVIRGINIA.
Mr. LATHAM also presented JtResolution of the Legislature oi2 WestVirginia, asking for speed action in consenting to the transfer. of Berkefey and Jefferson counties from Virginia to WestVirginia; which was ordered to e printed, and referred to the ComJudiciary. h RAILROADS IN wnsr VIRGINIA. "n
Mr. LATHAM also presented a JtResolution of the same Legislature, asking for the passage of the bill entitled “A bill granting and s to the State of WestVirginia to aid in the construction of certain rai roads; which was referred to the ComRds&canals, and ordered to be printed. HEQPITAL BUILDINGS IN WESTVIRGINIA.
Mr. LATHAM. I also ask unanimous consent to submit for action at this time a point resolution donating certain property of the JU.S. to boards of c ucation of certain township s of Taylor county, WestVirginia.
Mr. ASHBURNE, of Illinois. Let the resolution be read.
The Clerk read the JtResolution. It provides that the buildings and lumber of the U.S. at Grafton, Webster, and New Creek, WestVirginia, latel used for hospitals and for quarterniaster an commissary purposes, be donated to the boards of education of those townships.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I will not object to that resolution oing to the ComMilAdairs, but do object to its pas e now. 5“The JtResolution was accordingly read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComMilAffrs. PENSIONS
Mr. FERRY, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill supp einental to the several acts relating to pensions: which was read a 1st and 2nd time, ordered to be printed, and referred tothie ComInvalidPensions.JtResolutionS.
Mr. RAYMOND. I ask that certain joint, resolutions of the Legislature of the State of NewYork, which were presented yesterday, be considered as presented today in open House, and that they e ordered to be printed. Noobjection being made, it was so ordered. LIGHHOUSE BOARD.
Mr. KASSON. I ask unanimous consent to present the following resolution: Resolved, That the ComNavAffrs inquire into and report upon the expediency of dissensing With the LighthouseBoard, and DIMIDI the uties thereof in chargeof a bureauof the Navy Dept.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I object to that resolution going to the ComNavAffrs. Let it go to the ComCommerce.
Mr. KASSON. I prefer that it should go to the Naval Committee.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. It belongs to the ComCommerce. If the gentleman will so modify iIt will not object.
Mr. KASSON. Very well. The resolution was accordingly referred to the ComCommerce.
Mr. ELIOT called for the special order. RAILROAD PARES and FREIGHTS.
Mr. BIDWELL. I ask unanimous consent to report back a resolution from the ComAg and have it referred to the ComWays&Means.
Mr. ELIOT. I will yield a moment for that puipor. seB. IDWELL. The author of the resolution, on my right, [Mr. HARDING, of Illinois] wants to have a word to say on the resolution, and I desire it to be so placed that he can have that Mro. ppoArRtuNnSityW. ORTH. Let us hear the resolution read.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the ComAg be instructed to inquiieinto the expediency of so grad uating taxation for revenue upon "fares and rates" charged by railroad companies and others for the transportation of passengers and treights over the highways of commerce, thatwhile necessary revenue sahgarilcl ubletudrearlived relief may incidentally result to the another intercsts of the country from the high, oppressiveim positionsthat arenowerushing those interests, espeoially in the West; and whether. by the judicions and lawful exerciseof the power of Congressto rujse revenue and to regulate trade and commerceamongtheStates, relief may not be alforded to the farmers and consumcisof the country from the exorbitant exaetionsof combined monopolies.
Mr. BIDWELL. I observe that there are 2 questions involved in this resolution. One is the raising of revenue, the other, and a very important one, that of the constitutionality of the measure. It will be seen, therefore, why the ComAg thought proper to refer it back before going so far as to ela orate a measure on the subject. I hope that an opportunity may be allowed for the author of tge resolution to be heard.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Will my colleague allow me a moment?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. My colleague has spoken and spoken trnl of the railroad combinations and monopoliesin the North west which are destroying all the productive interests of the people of our State. His constituents will thank him for his good words.
The SPEAKER. A proposition to discharge the ComAg from the further consideration of the resolution.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I accord in the remarks of my colleague in relation to the obstructions of the railroads.
Mr. ELIOT. I must now demand the regular order of business. The ComAg was then discharged from the further consideration of the resolution, and it was referred to the ComWays&Means. NATIONAL MILITARY and NAVAL ASYLUM.
Mr. SCHENCK. At the last congress a law was passed chartering a military an naval asylum for invalid soldiers and sailors. It was found impossible, from the great number of corporators named in the bill, after 3 or 4 attempts made, to get to ether a uorum of them so as to organlze an establish poration under the law. The Senate has passed a bill, (S.No.54) which is now upon the Speakers table, amending the charter in such way as to enable them to go on and elect a board of directors. It becomes important that they should be enabled to do so, that they may obtain the title to property which will probably be offered to the corporation. I there ore ask that the bill may be taken from the Speakers table and referred to the ComMilAf are. No objection being made, the bill (S.No.54) to amend an act entltled “ An act to incorporate a national military and naval asylum for the relief of the totally disabled officers and men of the volunteer forces of the U.S., ” was taken from the Speakers table, read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComMilAffrs. REGISTRY of VESSELS.
Mr. ELIOT called for the special order. The House accordingly resumed the consideration of House bill No. 204, to regulate further the registering of vessels. The bill was read at length. It provides that no ship or vessel which has been recorded or registered as an American vessel pursuant to law, and which shall have been icensed or otherwise authorized to sail under a foreign flag or the protection of a foreign Government during the existence of the rebellion, shall be deemed or registered as an American vessel, the cori or shall have the rights and privileges of American vessels, except under an act of Congress authorizing such registry. The question was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a 3rd time.
Skip Skip Mr. ELIOT. I demand the previous question. The House divided; and there wereayes 65 noes 56. Mr. GARFIELD called for tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. ELIOT and Emma were appointed. The House again divided; and the tellers reported that there wereayes 71, noes 60. So the previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; which was upon ordering the billto be engrossed and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. The question was upon the passage of the blll. Mr. SPALDING called for the yeas and maphse. yeas and na 5 were ordered.
Mr. GARFIEL. I desire to say a few words upon this bill before a vote is taken upon its sage.
Mr. SPALDING. Is it in order to offer an amendment now?
The SPEAKER. Not after the engrossment of the bill.
Mr. SPALDING. Will my colleague [Mr. GARFIELD] ield me a few moments of his time before e takes his seat?
Mr. LYNCH. Will the gentleman alldw me to interrupt him a moment?
Mr. LYNCH. What I did say was this: that it would be very impolitic for any Government to encourage the desertion of its citizens with their property durillg a period of war, those citizens identifying their interests for the time being with the interests of the enemy. My remarks had no reference whatever to “ skippers.” I did say, and Ine w repeat, that every man who during the war put his vessel undera foreign fla identified his interests with those of the foreigners who were assisting in the destruction ot our commerce; and if we encour age such desertion, and pav a premium upon it, some of our citizens will always desert us with their property in time of war. I hold that we should not give encouragement to conduct of this sort.
Mr. GARFIELD. Mr. Speaker, if in time of war I own a piece of property which I cannot kccp safely in this country, and the keeping of which will ruin me pecuniarily, I ask whether the Congress of my country should prohibit me from selling that property tofor cigners, or if I have sold it, prohibit me from repurcllasing it and usin it cre in my country where I 1st acquire that property. If I sell to a Canadian or any other oreigner an engine which I own, and which I have used perha 5 to operate a sawmill on the Ohio, is it right that I should be pprohibited from repurchasing that en ne by and by, and using it in this country? fiow, slr, this bill proposes that, whenever an American vessel shall have been sold to a foreigner, or even revistered to sail under a foreign flag, such vesse shall never be permitted to ree nter our service without special authority from Congress.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire to ask the gentleman whether this bill is to operate upon bond fide sales, or only upon such as are simulated.
Mr. GARFIELD. It covers, I understand, all sales, bonafida as well as simulated.
Mr. ELIOT. If the gentleman will yield to me for a moment, I think I can show that he gipapprehcnds entirely the provisions of this 1.
Mr. ELIOT. This bill does not refer to sales of vessels at all, neither sham sales nor bona fide sales. It only covers a class of cases where American shipowners have obtained for their vessels the protection of foreign PoWers, have procured permits or licenses from foreign Governments, t as waiving the benefit of their own do for the sake of securing the protection of forelgn Powers. The bill provide. that" in such cases the vessel shall no longer be deemed an American vessel, unless the party interested can satisfy Congress that the vessel ought to be nted an American register.
Mr. GARFIELD. Mr. Speaker, the case as the gentleman states it is ad the worse for his cause. He says that the bill does not a lyto a case where a vessel was sold, alienate, to a foreigner, but merely to cases where vessels were registered to sail underaforeign flag which could protect them. What the owners in the latter cases did is not nearly so bad as the act of those who alienatedltheir vessels to foreign ers. I say that the owner of a vessel. if our flag cannot protect it ought to be entitled to register his vessel under a flag that can protect it; and when we are a in able to protect Iit, am in favor, if not for is sake, at least for the sake of the merchant service, of allowing his vessel to come back and sail under our flag, and thus increasing our tonnage. I maintain that this question is a matter of tonna e, and not of men. I am in favor of the amendment suggested by my colleague, [Mr. SPALDING] that all these cases he referred to the SecyTreasury, who may look into the questlon of the loyalty of the owner, and that, if he be a loyal man, the SecyTreasu shall be authorized to rercglster his vessel. would be the last man to grantan favor to a rebel; bntI would grant favors to the en can merchant service. Twould increas our tonnage. Some gentlemen here propose to wait for the increase of our tonnage until the ship builders of Maine and NewHampshire and other States on the Atlantic seaboar can build as vessels. The Gentfrom Maine [Mr. PIKE] has said that in Nova Scotia vessels can be built at a cost of 40 dollars to the ten, while in Maine their construction costs $100 to the ton. Therefore, it is ur ed, we cannot compete with foreign shipbail ers. Now, I do not propose to give the men in the Atlantic cities 60 dollars on the hundred more, when we can get, without payin out our money all over the country, increase service for the country by simply reregistering the vessels which we could not protect.
Mr. PIKE. Will the gentleman allow me to interru thim?
Mr. PIKE. Will the gentleman tell me what difference it makes to the shipperin NewYork whether he imports his goods in British bottoms or in American bottoms? What difference is there in insurance? and will he tell me further, whether it is not a fact that of the goods imported more than 75%. does not come in British bottoms?
Mr. GARFIELD. I will answer the gentleman with one general fact, namely, that for some reason deemed goodby the owners efthose vessels which have been registered under foreign flags they desire to come back. That is proved. If it is for the advantage of the ship s to come back for business they will come bac.
Mr. PIKE. The gentleman sgiaks not of shipbuilders but of merchants. e an s that. merehantswouldforthwith haveto payen need prices for vessels. I ask him whether he cannot employ British ships on precisely the same terms to import his goods as American ships? Let him answer that question.
Mr. GARFIELD. Mr. Speaker, we are talking now of ship pin, and not of the interests of merchants in NewYork. We are talkin ofour general power to export and import goo s; and now when it has proved thata part of our ton age has gone during the war, we are asked to keep it out in order that the shipbuilders of this country may have the job of filling the vacuum. propose we shal fill that vacuum by the most expeditious method in our power. I call this House to witness that at telast session I declared, as I declare now, myself forever opposed to all monopolies, whether of railroads, s ipbuilders, oro any other association which proposestocripple the commerce, whether amen the States or upon the high seas, of the Hope he of the U.S. I look on this as one of those monopolies, and Iam surprised my able and distinished friendfrom 11 nois, [Ma Wasusuaxsjufrom the Galena district, should vote in any other way than against this measure, he being so strong an antimonopoly man as he has so often avowed himself to be on this floor. I do not care what political company it puts me in;I do not care who associates with me; I shall associate with every man who uts his foot down upon these monopolies, as declare this to be. I now yield to m colleague, E
Mr. SPALDING] as I promised to o; but I wi I hold the floor to ca l the previous question, as I have promised the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] to do.
Mr. SPALDING. I do not want to be interrupted at this moment by my friendfrom hIaine. I would say to him that I understand that he, as a shipowner, would prefer an American reg ister to an English one for his ship.
Mr. PIKE. I merely wanted to ask a question for information.
The SPEAKER. The gentlemans 5 minutes have exired.
Mr. GARFIELD. I will allow him one minute further.
Mr. SPALDING. I was only about to say that the amendment which I did contemplate offering, and one which I may yet put in the shape of a bill if this is voted down, was to leave this whole subject to the discretion of the SecyTreasury. By m contemplated bill I intended to provide that a lvessels owned wholly by citizens and residents of the U.S shall be entitled to American registers, under such restrictions and limitations as the SecyTreasury shall see fit to impose. ow, if that does not open the door sufficiently for pains and penlaties, then I do not know what would. Itink that would be the wisest and most advisable course for us to pursue in legislating upon thisysubject, if we legislate at all. But if we pass this bill we are ruling out of our. commercial marine ships that are neccs to the country, and never more so than at this time.
Mr. GARFIELD. I now yield the floor for ten minutes to the Gentfrom Maine, [Mr. Brawn.
Mr. GARFIELD. I now yield to the Gentfrom Maine [Mr. PIKE] for 5 minutes.
Mr. GARFIELD. I will now yield the floor to the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Barns for 5 minutes.
Mr. ANKS. I have but a word or 2 to say on this question. I have listened attentively to the orments of gentlemen upon this bill, and if I ought they were applicable to the subject embraced in the bill, I might be disposed to vote against it. But I believe the purpose of the b1 1, and the general subject discussed by gentlemen who are opposed to it, are entirely different. This bill does not propose final legislation. It is provisional; it is temporary; an I think it is entirely just. It says, in substance, that the man who has deserted his country and its tie in the hour of its danger and peril; who has by is desertion forsworn his name as an American; who has escaped the burdens imposed upon his countrymen, and who has avoided the perils that have environed his count in time of war, shall not resume its high privileges now without the authority of law. That is all that the bill declares. The Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. SPALDING] on the other side of the House and the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. GARFIELD] on this side of the House, if they wish these deserters to avail themselves of the privileges of American citizens, are at liberty at any time to introduce a bill prescribing the conditions upon which they shall reain those privileges. at them do it. Let em define in a legislative act upon what ground and under what circumstances a man who, in the time ofhis countrys danger, has shown himself to be an enemy of that country, shall come back and claim its privileges upon the return of eaee. Mr. THAYER. I ask the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Gmrrstn] to yield to me for a few moments.
Mr.THAYER. Mr. Speaker, the subject before the House is one of so much magnitude that I trust the House will not allow its patriot ism to run away with its common sense. It is a subject which should be looked at through a somewhat cooler medium than that of the passions to which appeals are made in connection with it. I was a little surprised, sir, at a question put by the Gentfrom Maine, ihdr. Pita2] when he asked what difference it made whether the merchants of this country transported their merchandise in British, French, o: American s n)S.
Mr. PIKE. What difference in the amount 1 they pay? That was my question. l
Mr. THAYER. If the gentleman confineshisinguiry to a difference in tcamount offreights, I o not know that it makes any difference.
Mr. PIKE. That was the extent of my in quiz?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Will the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. GARFIELD] now yield to me
Mr. GARFIELD. I yield to the gentleman for 5 minutes.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Thntshows the reasons which our be so justly urged in favor of what the gent eman calls ii “monopoly.” I am Opposed to all monopolies; and I am opposed to rebels, secessionisis. copperheads, or even socalled “ loyal men, ” who deserted the star spangledbanner in time of war and sought shelter under the cross of StGeorge. As the made their bed, so let them sleep.
Mr. GARFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I have only 2 things to say before I call for the previous question and close the debate. The distinguished Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. B. XKSStlld this was a proposition to exclude men who had deserted our flag. declare the gentleman has not met the point. It is not a law against men; it is a law against tonnage and not men. He may make all the legislation he pleases against letting a disloyal class come back, and I will vote with him. et him make that discrimination. He says we propose to change the policy of the Government. My answer is in one word. It is the gentleman himself who is proposing to change the policy of the Government, as the SecyTreasury is every day allowing these vessels to be reregistered. The ComCommerce propose to change the law so that he may not allow them to be registered. They propose in this change of the law to keep these vessels out of our merchant marine. We are simply opposing a change of the law in favor of a The Gentfrom Maine [Mr. Bums] says if we make free trade on this subject let us make free trade in all. He will not deter me from mylpurpose by shaking that red rug before me. do not care what name he calls it; Iknow it is not free trade; I onlyknow that what he proposes is to discriminate as to all other property and in favor of the property of the ship ui ders. If he will apply the same lawtopiop erty in ships that he applies to property in all that we own in the great West, t on he will find that he cannot maintain his law. All I ask is that the same law shall be applied to both. I call the previous question.
Skip Skip The call for the previous question was 2nded, and the main question was ordered. The question was then taken on the passage of the bill, on which the yeas&nays had been ordered, and there wereyeas 99, nays 52, not voting 81; So the bill was passed. Mr. ELIOT.mtRtv the bill was passed, on the table. Agreed to. During the rollcall, Mr. PATTERSON stated that his colleague. Mr. MARSTON, was detained at his room by sickness. CONTESTED SEAT.
Mr. RAYMOND. Mr. Speaker, 3 niotioll was adopted last evening by the House refor ring to the ComElections certain papers in the possession of the Clerk relating to the contested sent in the 8th district of NewYork. I now desire to submit a motion to reconsider that vote.
Mr. BROOKS. I moved to reconsider the votedlast evening, I believe, and it was not on tere.
The SPEAKER. The Chair is under the impresson that the motion was not made. Mr. BROOKS. I wish the Gentfrom NewYork would state his reasons for making the motion.
Mr. RAYMOND. I would like to ask the privilege, when the (A estion comes up, for the contestant to be hear. It is according to usage, I believe.
Mr. BROOKS. the gentleman has in stopping the publication of these papers. I am unable to see it.
Mr. RAh MOND. The object is to have the question fairly considered, as it was not when the vote was taken. I have no feeling in the matter. I think it is in accordance with usage.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Buooris] can arrange as to the time when he will call this up. The special order is now before us.
Mr. RAYMOND. The matter may lie over for one, 2, or 3 days. as will suit the convenience of the sitting member.
Mr. BROOKS. I am very much surprised at the motinn of my collea. Iam not only surprised, but I am amaze. Icannot understand it.
The SPEAKER. The House is now engaged in the consideration of the special orderthe Freedmens Bureauon which the Gentfrom Minnesota [ML Dosxunnv] has the floor. RAILROAD LAND GRANTS.
Mr. PRICE. I ask the Gentfrom minnesota to yield to me for the purpose of taking from the Speakers table Senate bill No. 83, and referring it to the ComPacificRR. The bill was then taken npit being an act to extend the time for completin certain land grants to the railroads in the States thereinmentionedread a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComPacificRR. CONTESTED SEATAGAIN.
Mr. DAWES. Mr. Speaker. how did that come up? I was trying to get the floor, when I understood it to be assigned to the Gentfrom Minnesota [Mr. Dommnmr] on the special order. The Speaker. The Gentfrom Minnesota yielded the floor to the Gentfrom own.
Mr. DAWES. I presume it is allriht; but will the Gentfrom Minnesota Mr. Dos KELLY] yield me the floor a moment in relation to the matter that has just gone by?
Mr. DAWES. A motion has been made by the Gentfrom NewYork Mr. Rlivuoxni to reconsider the vote of the House by which certain papers were referred to the ComElections. I do not know the merits of the case, nor do I desire to interfere in the matter; but he suggested that he desired the motion should lie over for a few days. It is upon that point I wish to be heard. I think, whatever may be the merits of the matter of reference in regard to the right or wrong of which I have no information the House ought to indulge the sitting member and the contestant for afew moments before disposing of the question; and if this question is to be put over for several days, it will interrupt the hearing of the case before the committee, and very much derango the business which is crowding that committee, so that they have no time to spare. I do not know what object I suppose there may be good reasons. I have heard suggestions made of the reasons why the matter should be brought before the House; but I do not know why it could not be disposed of now, if the Gentfrom Minnesota will allow the special order to be postponed for a few moments, so as to let the ComElections know whether they are to delay the hearing of the case for the printing of a very large mass of matter. That is all I desire to say.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that if the Gentfrom Minnesota yields, the House can takeup this matter as a question of privilege; but a motion to reconsider can only he called up as a privileged motion when there is no other business before the House. It can be called up tomorrow morning after the reading of the Journal. before any other business comes before the House.
Mr. DAWES. I do not propose to enterinto a discussion of the matter at a l. I only desire the House to understand that this proceeding may very much interfere with the business be fo rethe ComElections.
Mr. RAYMOND. I desire to say that my only object in making this motion was to obtain from the House, if possible, an opportunit tbr the contestant to be heard, whether hear today or tomorrow is a matter of entire indifference to me. I suppose that end can be reached whenever the sitting member and the contestant are prepared to present whatever the desire on the subject.
Mr. DAWES. I submit to the Gentfrom NewYork that the matter had better be disposed of now if the special order can. be delayed.
Mr. DONXELLY. I must decline to yield further.. The House then resumed the consideration of the special order, being Senate bill No.60, to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens bureau, with certain amendments reported in the nature of a substitute from the select committee on the hreedmens Bureau.
Mr. DONNELLY. I ask the Clerk to read an amendment which I offer to the bill.
The Clerk read the amendment, as follows: After the word "school, ” in line 7, sectionsix, inscrt the following: and the Commissioner may provide a common school education to all refugeesand freedmenwho shall apply therefor.
Mr. ELIOT. Will the Gentfrom minnesota yield to me for a moment to make a statement?
Mr. ELIOT. It is my intention to call the previous question on the pending motion tomorrow at 3 oclock. I say this for the purpose of giving notice to gentlemen on both sides of the House that Ipropose then to bring the discussion to a close.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire to know if the gentleman intends to call the previous question without affording an opportunit for amendm ent? I have one or 2 amendments which I deem very important, and I am anxious to offer them be ore the previous question is called.
Mr. ELIOT. Ireally cannot answer the question of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SrnVENS] now, except so far as tosa that I shall be glad to have gentlemen o or their amendments and have them read at such time as it shall be hin the rules of the House for them to do so. but I cannot at this time agree to have an amendments to the bill made.
The SPEAKER. The rule allows verylim ited power of amendment. The only amendment in order now is an amendment to the amendment of the Gentfrom Minnesota, or an amendment to the original bill.
Mr. BANKS. I will read the amendment I desire to offer when the proper time comes. I shall move, if I am permitted to do so, to amend the 7th section of this bill by in I desire also to offer an serting after the word “includingH the words “the constitutional right to bear arms;” so that it will read, “including the constitutional right to bear arms, the right to make and enforce contracts to sue, ” c.
Mr. STEVENS. I suppose it will be in order, if the previous question is not called, to offer a substitute, notwrthstanding the pending amendment.
Mr. BROOKS. I object to this whole order of proceeding.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct in his point of order. This discussion is not exlanatory of the pending measure.
Mr. BROOKS. As a free white man, I desire at least an equal chance with the black man to be heard.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I desire to ask the gentleman if, notwithstanding all that ignorance, he wants to add to it by allowing the colored population to vote.
Mr. donnelLY. In answer to that I will say that I have offered an amendment which provides that it shall be the riucipal duty of the Freedmens Bureau to educate that negro population and so fit them eventually for the right of suffrage and the amendment at. the same time leaves the door open for white refugees. So that while I am stating an evil I am proposing a reined.
Mr. RQUSSEAU. Is the gentleman in favor of allowm the nght of suffrage to the colored people in the soutern States at this time?
Mr. DONNELLY. When that question comes up for action I shall be prepared to exprass an Opinion. In the mean time l will say that Iam prepared to follow the ooiirse indicated by the distinguished Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvuss in his remarks on yesterday, that we must 1st prepare and fit the people of the South for the right of suffrage by the edulcation of the mind of the South. i Now, having answered the question of the gentleman in reference to that portion of our population that throughout the war s mpathized with the cause of the Union, I willy ask him a question. Is he prepared to extend the right of suffrage to that portion of the population that constantly fought against the nion and sought to destroy it, and who, as I have shown by these statistics, are, the great bulk of them, equally ignorant with the blacks? I would like an answer from the gentleman.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I was engaged in conversation when the gentleman asked his question. Will he reund it again?
Mr. DONNELLY. I have answered the gentleman in regard to giving the right of voting to the black population who sustained the cause of the Union with their sympathy, with material aid, and to the number of nearly 200,000 by arms, but who, I admit, are ignorant. I now ask the gentleman if he is willing that the equally ignorant white population of the Son who were oppose to the Union shall be invested at once with the right of sulfur e?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I am in favor of allowing those to vote who have been engaged in the rebellion against the Government, provided they have been pardoned by the Executive and are now for the Government.
Mr. DONNELLY. I would ask the gentleman, as aquestion of principle, whether an executive pardon is able to change the minds and hearts of men 7 Whether a rebel with a pardon in his ocket is not just as rank a rebel as before e received it?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I would ask the gentleman whether he has ever done anything more than make speeches to at down the recllion?
Mr. DONNELLY. Iwill answer that question by saying that when this great civilWar was in its full strength, and the great political issue was whether this Union should be maintained by the reelection of Abraham Lincoln to the presidential chair, I did yeoman service to secure that result; which, more than an thing else, more than armies or battles, ten edto crush out the rebellion, by proving distinctly to the South that the cause ot the South was forever hopeless. I hold that the man who fought copperheads is entitled to as much credit as the man who fought rebels.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I desire to ask the gentleman whether he sustains the policy of Abra ham Lincoln and AndrewJohnson.
Mr. DONNELLY. I do adhere to the policy of Abraham Lincoln, as I understand it, and of AndrewJohnson as I approve it.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. How much of AndrewJohnsons olic does the gentleman approve?
Mr. DONNELLY. So much as ten s to the preservation of the Union and the maintenance of the liberty and equal rights of every man liv in under the shadow of our fla.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I ask, the gentleman whether he does not approve of AndrewJohnsons policy so far as the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SrsVENS] approves of it.
Mr. D NNELLY. I approve of AndrewJohnsons policy as enunciated in his speech at Nashville, in which he told the black men that if they had no other Moses he would be their Moses. [Applause] I ask the gentleman whether he approves that portion of AndrewJohnsons olic.
Mr. RO SSEYAU. If any man wants to be 11M. oses in behalf of the colored race, I am in favor of his assuming that character.
Mr. DONNELLY. I will ask whether the gentleman wants AndrewJohnson to be such a Moses I
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Certainly, when it is necessary. Will that gratify the gentleman?
Mr. KELLEY. I move that the time of the Gentfrom Minnesota be extended so as to enable him to conclude his remarks. No objection was made.
Mr. DONNELLY. I thank the House for the courtesy it has extended to me. Mr. Speaker, it is as plain to my mind as the sun at noonday, that we must make all the citizens of the country equal before the law; that we must break down all walls of caste; that we must offer equal opportunities to all men. Injustice is the mother of revolutions. In no case has rebellion raised its head in the midst of equal laws; for what more can a man ask than equality? Butl challenge the historian to point to a single community where unjust laws have not sooner or later given birth to revolutions; to the ctlbrts of one class to perpetuate and of the other to resist injustice.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him one question? He has just said that rebellion or revolution never takes place where equal laws exist. What does he think of the late rebellion in that view of the matter?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I wish to ask the gentleman whether he favored negro suffrage and voted for it at the last election in his State.
Mr. MOORHEAD. I ask the Gentfrom Ohio to field to me for a moment.
Mr. GARE ELD. I cannot refuse the renest of the future Governor of the State of Pennsylvania. [Laughter] MANUFACTURES of PITTSBURG.
Mr. MOORHEAD. I ask unanimous consent to lay before the House a letter from the Board of Trade of Pittsburg. correcting an error which has been made in an official statement of the SecyInterior in reference to the manufactures of that city. I will not ask that the paperhe read, as it might detain the House too long. but I desire that it shall be reprinted, and also that it be published in the obe.
Mr. STEVENS. If the Gentfrom Ohio [ML GARFIELD] will permit me, I will ask him a question. Some of the angels undertook to dethrone the Almighty, but they could not do it and they were turned out of heaven because they were unable to break its laws. Are those devilish angels in or out of heaven? [Laughter]
Mr. GARFIELD. I thank the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [ML STEVENS] or his interruption. The angels that kept not their 1st estate! What was theirfate? Itwas the Almigh who O sued the shining gates of heaven an hurled) them down to eternal ruin. They did not go without His permission and help and if these States are out of the Union it must be because the sovereign people of the Republic hurled them out; because they pleased to let them go. I am lad the gentleman interrupted me; it happily il ustrutes my position. I will not discuss what we might do with Ala bama, but simplywhat was Alabama herself able to do, an what she was not able to do toward breakin up this Union. 2 years ago, when] ha the honor for the 1st time to address this House, the same question that is now before us was under discussion. I maintained then, as i hold today, that the rebel States are not. in any legitimate sense of the words, out of the Union. I then declared, as I declare now, that by their own not of treason and rebellion they had forfeited all their rights in the Union, but they had released themselves from none of their obligations. It rests with the people of the Republic to enforce the performance of these obligations, and, so soon as the national safety will permit, restore them to their rights. I I agree with my distinguished colleague, [Mr. BINGHAM] that for Federal purposes the rebel States are in the Union, but if the exression be allowable they are out of the Union or State and municipal purposes.
Mr. BINGHAM. I beg to correct the gentleman. 1 never used the expression that they were “ States out of the Union, ” but that, by reason of their rebellion, they had ceased to be States, for municipal purposes, in the Union.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I move that my colleague [Mr. GARFIELD] be allowed time to conclude his remarks. No objection was made.
Mr. STEVENS. Does not that decision refer to the question of criminality; that the are enemies in every sense except that of sing criminals?
Mr. LeBloND. The Gentfrom Indiana ields to me to move that the House do now a ourn.
Mr. LIOT. Mr. Speaker. I will state that I have given noticeto the House I shall ask for a vote on the pending bill tomorrow at 3 oclock. Several gentlemen desire to be heard on it. I want to say now there has been one speech made on that side of the House, and one speech made on this side. since the bill has been under debate, both of which were out of order, and that I shall feel itincumbent on me to take a point of order on other gentlemen on the one si e or the other who do not confine themselves to a fair debate on the measure. I was not able to do it during the remarks of my friendfrom Ohio, [Mr. GABFIELD] because I had consented that the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. DAWSON] should take a wide range. I feel it to be my duty to say now that the bill should be debated. As I have said, I desire that the vote shall be taken tomorrow at 3 oclock. If the gentleman wants to debate it, I shall be glad to hear him; but I hope the House will not adjourn. Let those who wish to debate the bill have an opportunity to be heard.
Mr. STEVENS. Let us take a recess until half past 7 this evening. Several Msiinaas. For what purpose?
Mr. STEVENS. For the purpose of debate alone.
Mr. THAYER. I object, unless gentlemen shall promise to conform to the rules of the House.
Mr. KERR. I do not want to go on this evenin
Mr. LeBloND. I ask that my motion to adiournshall be put to the House. Mr. STEVENS. I ask the gentleman to withdraw the motion, so as to permit me to make another suggestion that the House shall have an evening session for debate on the presidents message alone.
Mr. KERR. Iwithdraw my objection if the debate tonight is to be confined to the presidents message.
Mr. LEB OND moved that the House do now adjourn. The motion was disagreed to. IMPROVEMENT or run omo RIVER.
Mr. TRIMBLE. I ask the Gentfrom Indiana to yield to me for a moment.
Mr. TRIMBLE. I as the unanimous consent of the House to present a communication from Colonel Tal. P. Shaffnei in reference to widenin and deepening the Ohio river at the Grand hain. There was no objection, and the paperwas received and referred to the ComCommerce.
Mr. TRIMBLE moved that the House do now adjourn. The motion was disagreed to. Fannpiinss BUREAUAGAIN.
Mr. ELIOT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to apoint of order. The bill under consideration is a special order, and the Gentfrom Indiana from the beginning of his speech shows he is about to discuss general questions, interestingto us all, of reconstruction and the condition of the rebel States. I have just given notice, whether the remarks came from one side or the other of the House, I should feel myself compelled to make the point of order. There are gentlemen who want to debate this bill who have had no opportunity today. I make the point of order that the gentlemans remarks are not in order. the SPEAKER protempors, Mr. Dawns in the chair.) The is not able to sustain the point of order, as he has not heard enough of the remarks of the Gentfrom Indiana. The gentleman, however, must confine his re marks to the bill before the House.
Mr. KERR. I a ree with the Gentfrom Massachusetts that it is in fact somewhat difficult to keep within the precise limits of that necessary discussion which should characterize the debates of this House; but here is a bill demanding at our hands action, which from its very nature goesinto the States lately in rebellion, und can go there only on the ground taken by those who advocate this measure, that by reason of the rebellion they have the right to go there with this administration of government, dictated and controlled by Congress and yet they say, that in the discussion of this kind of measures we shall not take this wide range, of the true relations between the States and the Union. Now, I do not want to take as wide a range as the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. GARFIELD] has taken, but I do want a liberal limit within which to exress m ideas and I say here, that this shall be conned to the discussion and elucidation of the bill before us.
Mr. RICE, of Maine. I rise to a point of Order.
The SPEAKER protempore. There is one point of order alrea y made and pending; therefore the Chair does not entertain the pointat this time. The point pending is raised y the Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. ELIOT] that the argument of the Gentfrom Indiana was not applicable tot c billbefore the House, and the lflil is listening to the suggestion which the Gentfrom Indiana is making in order to satisfy the Chair that his remarks are ertincnt. l Mr. HIGBY. I ask the Gentfrom Indiana to have way to a motion to adjourn.
The SPEAKER protempera. oes the Gentfrom Indiana give way?
Mr. HIGBY. I now move to adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and thereupon (at 4 oclock and 50 minutes) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Fawn, February 2, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
Mr. MORGAN, from the ComCommerce, to whom was referred the bill (S.No.39) to amend the acts relating to officers employed in the examination of imported mer chandise in the district of NewYork, reported it with amendments.
Mr. ANTHONY, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the petition of F. A. Lewis, praying for compensation for negroes, horses, sheep, hogs, corn, &c., alleged to have been lost to him in consequence of the legislation of Congress and by acts of soldiers of the U.S., and for indemnification against loss by certain acts of the socalled confederate States, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. LANE, of Indians, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred the petition of William C. anderson, jr., praying for a settlement of his fathers accounts as pension agent at StLouis, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, and that it be referred to the ComClaims; which was agreed to.
Mr. HOWE. The ComClaims, to whom was referred a JtResolution (S.R. No. 12) to refer the claim of Gustavus A. Balzerto the Court of Claims, have directed me to report it back adversely; and I move its inde nits postponement. The motion was agreed to. CHARLES I". anderson.
Mr. BROWN. I am instructed by the ComPubBldg and Grounds, to whom was referred the bil H.R.No. 143) for the relief of Charles F. An person, to report it back without amendment and recommend its passage, and I ask for the present consideration of the bill.
The PRESIDENT proiemporc. It requires the unanimous consent of the Senate to consider the bill on the day on which it is reported.
Mr. BROWN. Iwill explain the bill in a moment. This is a bill to 00mpensate Mr. An derson for his services as an architect, which passed the Senate at the last session and went to the House and was taken up and passed there, but, by some oversight, it was not handed to the President for his signature. It also passed the Senate at 2 preceding sessions. This is precisely the same bill, and I presume there will be no objection to it. I therefore ask that it be put on its passa at once. There being no objection, the Senate, as in ComWhole, rocceded to consider the bill, which directs the SecyTreasury to pay to Charles F. anderson, arch itect, the sum of $7, 500, in full, fortimc, labor, and expense in preparing plans and drawings for the Capitol extension.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas, asked, and by anon. imous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.122) for the relief of John T. Jones an Ottowa Indian, for depredations committed on his property by white persons in Kansas Territory; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComIndAffrs.
Mr. NESMITH asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.123) granting lands 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; 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.124) to incor orato the Washington Canal Company, in the DistCol, and for other purposes; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Commitee 0n the DistCol.
Mr. CONNESS asked, and by unammonl consent obtained, save to introduce a bill (S.No.126) granting did in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the town of Folsom to the town of Placsrville in the State of California; and a bill (S.No.126) grantin lands to aid in the construction of a railro and telegraph line from the city of Placerville, in the State of California, to the most feasible point of intersectiouwith the Pacific railroad, in the State of Nevada; which were severally read twice by their titles, referred to the comPubLands, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. SUMNER asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave tointroduce a JtResolution (S.R. No. 28) carrying out the guarantee of a RFG in the constitution of the U.S., and enforcing the constitutional amendment for the prohibition of slavery; which was read twice y its title.
Mr. JOHNSON. I ask that the resolution be read at length.
The Secretary read it, as follows: Whereas it is provided in the constitution that the U.S. ii all guaranty to every State in the Union a RFG: and where as by reasonof the failure of certain States to maintainGovernment: which Congress can recognize. it has become the duty of the U.S. standing in the place of guarantor. where the principal has made it lapse. to secure to such States. according to the requirement of the guarantee. governments republican inform: and where iis, further, it is provided in a recent constitutional amendment. that Congress may “ enforce" the prohibition of slavery by " appropriate legislation.” and it is important to this end that all relics of slavery should beremoved. including all distiuction of rights on account of color: iiow. therefore. to carry out this guarantee of all RFG and to enforce the prohibition of slavery Be it resolved by the –Senata end HoRep of the U.S.A. in congress assembled, That in all States lately declared to e in rebellion there shall be no olilgnre by, aristocracy caste, or menopoly invested with peculiar privileges or powers, and thercshiill beno denial ofrights. civilor political, on account of color or nice; but all persons shall be equal before the law. whether in thooourtroom or at the ballotbox send this statute, madein iursuance of the constitution shall be the supreme law of the land mnythmgrn the constitution or laws of uny such State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Mr. SUMNER. I move that this JtResolution be printed and lie on the table for the present. give notice that I shall move it at the proper time as a counter proposition to the resolution proposing a constitutional amendment. The JtResolution was ordered to lie on the table and be printed. EXHIBITION OF MINERAL SPECIMENS.
Mr. NYE asked, and by unanimous consent obtained leave to introduce a JtResolution (s. Mr. No. 27) for the exhibition of specimens of gold and silver and other minerals, the product of the U.S.; which was read twice by its title.
Mr. NYE. I ask for the present consideration of the JtResolution. There being no objection, the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the JtResolution. As it is deemed desirable that a collection of specimens of the gold and silver and other minerals of the U.S. should be made, and space provided for their exhibition and examination, in order that the citizens of the U.S and other persons may obtain some adequate idea of the abounding and undeveloped wealth of the various portions of the public domain, and as the Patent Office, where are collected the models illustrating the inventive genius and productive industryof the people, and samples of the products of agriculture, is also deemed the proper place for an exhibition showin the mineral wealth of the country; the resolution, therefore, authorizes and requires the SecyInte nor to set apart in the Patent Office building such space as may be spared for the purpose, for the arrangement and exhibition, in cases specially provided and under his direction. of such specimens of gold and silver and other minerals, the product of mining skill and industry in the U.S., as may be contributed for the purpose by its citizens; which specimens are to be considered as deposits, to be duly receipted for, and to remain the property of the depositors and subject to their order. "he JtResolution was reported to the Senate without amendment; orderengross for a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. HOUSE BILL REFEREE). The bill (H.R.No. 204) to regulate the registering of vessels, was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComCommerce. LAND LOCATIONS IN MISSOURI.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I would inquire of the Senfrom NewYork if the proviso to the last section ought not to exten to the 1st. It occurs to me that under the 1st section of the bill there might be adverse r hts; I do not know that there are any, but i there should be, ought they not to be protected in the same way as they are against the title that is acquired under the 2nd section.
Mr. HARRIS. I understand that the 1st section of the bill applies to locations actually madeof course, tderefore, there can be no adverse rights locations made under laud warrants granted under the net of 1815; but there is a doubt as to the validity of these locations under a decision of the Supreme Court which holds that no warrant, where the survey was not made within the time limited for the location, is valid. It is merely to validate locations which were supposed to have been well made before. It is, therefore, only to confirm the titles to locations actually made, but where no survey had been made in time. I have a letter from the ComrGLO approving of the bill.
Mr. TITUMBULL. I will not persistin moving an amendment to the bill. I only wished to cal the attention of the Senate to it. o“bserve that the 1st section of the bill reads, That all locations of lands in the State of missouri, purporting to have been made by virtue of certificates issued under the act of Congress, ” 8. 50., shall be confirmed. There evidentl Y is some dispute about this, or else there could be no occasion for the act. I am well aware that such is the case in rerd to old confirmation claims. We have h a good many of them in the State of Illinois. There isa ease now ending in the SCOTUS where a party claims land under a grant prior to 1800. That same land has been entere and patented by parties within a few years. That question is now being tested as to which of the parties is entitled to the land, in consequence, as is nlle ed. of a defect in the original grant, which, o course, would take the land if it were perfect. Now, here it seems there is some question about these locations. I um not advised with regard to these particular lands and only desire to call the attention of the Schator to the exception which I see is confined merely to the last section. It would do no hurt by possibility to say that “nothing in this act shall in any manner interfere with other claims.” I am not sufficiently advised on the question to insist on it, but I an gest to the Senator that it is possible it might do injustice without a proviso.
Mr. HARRIS. I am in favor of some such provision as that, although I have no idea that it can a ply to the 1st section. The trouble in relation to it is making out a perfect chain of title in the present occupants, holders, and claimants of these lands, inasmuch as the supreme Court have held that their location is not valid. I have no objection to amending the bill in the way suggested by the Senfrom Illinois.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It can do no harm, and I think it a safer way of legislation. If it meets the views of the Senfrom NewYork I move to amend the proviso by strikin out the word “ section” an inserting the wor “act, ” sons to make it apply to the whole act. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The word “section” occurs twice in the proviso .
The PRESIDE protempore. Wherever it occurs in the proviso the word “ act” will be substituted for it.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross for a 3rd reading, was read the 3rd time, and passed. SALE OF STAMPS and ENVELOPES. On the motion of
Mr. DIXON, the Senate, as in ComWhole, resumed the consideration of the bill (S. No.71) relative to the sale of posts stain s and stamped envel opes on credit, t is pening question being on the amendment rerted by Mr. DIXON from the ComPostOffices, to strike out all of the bill after the enactin clause, and toinsert the following in lieu thereo: That the PostMGenl, and he is hereby, authorized. whenever in his opinion the public service shall requiro, until the 30!. day of June, 1568t, o deposit postage stamps and stamped envelopes With such persons as he uiu select. for sale. The persons with whom stamps an stamped envelopes are sodo posited shall engageto sell and circulate the same under the instructions of the PostMGen, and shall direct bownitdhine snuecoh rsmumoraesstuhrectIfiocss, tcmonnsdtictiro Generol the faithful keeping of the stain and stamped on volo esso ntrusted to them. on for the payment to the postoffice Dept, in such manner as directed by the PostMGenl, of the moneys arising from the sale thereof. SEC. 2 and be “ Abife: That the PostMGenl mayallow to such depts.. under the provisions of this act, a commission not exccediu 5%. on all sales of stamps and stamp envelopes by them made and the Auditor of the Treasur for the postofficeDept shall audit and sett c all such accounts. such eisons shall be deemed receivers and custodians o public money. They shall not sell stamps or stamped envelopes on credit. but shaIl sell them invariably for comor U.S. Iroasury notes and at a price not exceeding the plrieo of such stampsand stamped envelopes as prow edby law. They shall be subJect to all he gins. penalties, fines and forfeiture: pow provided law in oasesof receiversand custodians of public moue and of postmasters and other persons to whom thus aofstamps and stamped envelopes is intrusted.
Mr. SUMNER. I should like to have an explanation of the amendment.
Mr. SUMNER. I do not mean to oppose the passage of this bill, but I think we ought to take advantage of this opportunity to give a warning again to the proper officers of Government that the must obey the laws of Congress. The bill as it was originally introduced by my friendfrom Connecticut was to enable the PostMGenl to get around the test oath. That was its object. It was so exposed by my friendfrom Nevada, [Mr. NYE. I do not know that it is much changed by the amendment that is now under consideration.
Mr. DIXON. I think the Senfrom Massachusetts will be liap y to hear that heis mistaken with regard to the practice of the PostMGenl on this subject. The PostMGenl informed me, in the presence of the honorable Senfrom Neva a, that he had never, knowingly, appointed any man to the office of postmaster who could not take the test oath, and )was not a loyal man. Now, with regard to another intimation of the Senator, he states that men should, or might, in certain cases be imported to fillthese offices.
Mr. SUMNER. President Johnson says that.
Mr. NYE. I am not quite willing to be left in exactly the position in which I am placed by being told by the Senfrom Connecticut and my honorable friendfrom California that there has been no change in the bill, and yet that I am satisfied with it as it is, when I opposed it so strenuously the other day. If their construction of the bill is. trne, I desire still to o ose it; but, sir, I do not think it is true. gghat satisfied me with the bill was, that they struck out the words “selling upon credit. I am willing that the PostMGenl shall be responsible for these stamps, and deposit them where he leases; he must account to the Government or them; but I was entirely unwilling that he should open the Dept as a Dept of mere and ise and for selling stain s upon credit. If that makes no difference in the bill, I am unable to comprehend what my friends would call a difference.
Mr. DIXON. If the Senator will allow me, I will state that the PostMGenl did consider that this amendment made an important difference in the bill, and he told me that he intended to have it drawn in this shape at 1st, but by mistake it was drawn up by a clerk in the form in which it was original y presented here, which was objectionable to him. I merely intended to say that Idid not see that the amendment altered the bill in its legal effect.
Mr. CONNESS. Iwill notundertake to add anything to what has been said on this subject as the time for voting has arrived, ifthe bill is to be voted upon this morning, and I hope we may get a vote. If the Senfrom Nevada is satisfied with the change, I am sure I am. I know there is a change in the language.
Mr. NYE. If my friend is satisfied with it, I am. If he is satisfied with his version that there is no change, I am satisfied with my own, that there is a most material one; and so was the PostMGenl.
The PRESIDENT protem ore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of esterda.
Mr. DIXVON. I be e that by general consent the vote will be lowed to be taken upon this bill.
Mr. COWAN. I hope that will be done. I understand there is no serious objection to the ssage of the bill, and I desire its passage figmuse I think it is necessary to the properworkin of the dept.
Mr. RUMBU L. I must insist on the or der of the day this morning, because we have an hour fixed for voting upon it, and if we lose part of the time now it will interfere with that arrangement.
Mr. DIXON. The Senator must see that the bill can be passed now immediately.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Senators are constantly rising speak upon it.
Mr. DIEION. There will be no further debate.
Mr. TRUMBULL. If the vote can be taken at once without further debate, I will not object.
Mr. CONNESS. I move that the order of the day be laid over informally until a vote can be taken n on this bill.
The PR SIDENT protem re. It will be laid aside informally if there e no objection. None bein made, Senate bill No. 71 is still before the Senate, and the question is on the amendment reported from the ComPostOffices. The amendment was agreed to.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a 3rd reading, was read the3rd time, and passed.
Mr. DIXON. I move to amend the title of the bill by strikin out the words “on credit, ” so that it will rea: “A bill relative to the sale of iostage stain s and stamped envelopes.”
the PRESID NTprotemporc. Thatainendment will be made, and that will stand as the title of the bill, if there be no objection.
Mr. NYE. It seems to me, to make the title consonant with the bill, it should read: “A bill to authorize the PostMGenl to deosit postage stamps and stamped envelopes or so e.”
The PRESIDENT protempore The title of the bill will be so amended.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE A messa e from the HoRep, by MCPHEBSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had agreed to the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R.No. 61) to establish certain post roads, with an amendment in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. PROTECTIONOF CIVIL RIGHTS.
The PRESIDENT protempore The unfinished business of yesterday is now before the Senate as in ComWhole, being the bill (SrNo. 61) to protect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rights, and furnish the meansof their vindication; upon which the Senfrom Kentucky [Mr. DAVIS] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I ask the Senfrom Kcntuck to give way to allow me
Mr. DOOLITTLE. It Will not take so long as the objection. I merely desire to obtain leave to withdraw from the files some papers.
The PRESIDENT protem ore. the Senfrom Kentucky is entitled to the floor. Does he yield 2
Mr. DAVIS. If the honorable Senfrom Illinois will not take it out of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON. Will the honorable Senfrom Kcntuck allow me to make a motion?
Mr. DAVIS. f this time is not charged against the bill, if I receive credit for it, I am Willing to give wa.
Mr. JOHNSON. It will take but amoment to act on the motion I desire to make.
Mr. DAVIS. With the general understanding that we shall have what time is lost by these preliminary proceedings, I am ready to give way.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I object to any interference with the bill under consideration.
The PRESIDENT protempore The Chair would respectfully ask the Senfrom Kentucky if he yields the floor to the Senfrom Wisconsin.
Mr. DAVIS. Under the orable Senfrom Illinois in to do so.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. Will the honorable Senfrom Kentucky
The PRESIDENVT protem ore. The Senfrom Kentucky has the oor and declines to eld. It is his rerotive to hold the floor.
Mr. DOOLITT E. appeal to the Senfrom Kentucky
Mr. DAVIS. I yield the floor for the pub pose the Senfrom Wisconsin desires.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I desire to state to the honorable Senfrom Kentucky that I did not seek the floor for any purpose of interfering with his remarks, but merely to ask leave to withdraw from the files certain papers and refer them to a committee.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. If this explanation is not satisfactory
Mr. DAVIS. It is perfectl so to me, but whether it is to the Senfrom Illinois is another question. [Laughter]
Mr. TEUMBULL. It is not satisfactory to me. We have a morning hour for all this morning business, and it interrupts the progress of business, delays our proceedings, to come in at these irregular times with business beloaging to the morning hour. If the Senfrom Wisconsin will state that there is any importance whatever in withdrawing the pairs today instead of the next morning hour, shall withdraw any objection.
The PRESIDENT protempore The Senfrom Wisconsin asks leave to have an order entered to have certain papers withdrawn. It requires the common consent of the Senate to entertain that motion, there being another matter before the Senate. Does the Chair under protest of the hon do not feel will 1866. 595 m, stand the Senfrom Illinois to object to the motion being entertained?
The PRESIDENT protempore he Senfrom Kentucky will proceed with his remarks.
Mr. DAVIS. I am very sorry that the obduracy of my friendfrom Illinois will not permit me to exercise my usual courtesy toward the honorable Senfrom Wisconsin and the honorable Senfrom Maryland. It would afford me great pleasure to do so. The honorable Senfrom Illinois stated yesterday but he was brought to that position very late in the debate that the object of this bill was essential to perform the office of a declaratory law; that this bill was merely intended to declare some principles of the constitution. I propose to test the sincerity of the honorable Senator by offering an amendment which I send to the Chair and ask to have read, and upon it I have some remarks to make. I offer it. as a substitute for the whole bill.
The Secretary read the amendment, which was to strike out all after the enacting clause of the bill and insert the following: The citizens of each State shall be entitled to a] o privileges and immunitios of citizens in the sev ul es. Abife: That a person or p persons who shall subject or cause to be subjected a citizen of any of the U.S. to the deprivation of an privilege or immupity in any other State t9 which such citizen is entitled under the constitution and laws of the U.S. such person or person shall be liable to be sued for damages by the party injured and shall also be deemed to be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on couViptio thereo shal l be punished by line not exceeding 1.000, Or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or oth, in the discretion of the jury.
Mr. JOHNSON. The honorable Senator misunderstood me. I said that but for the decision in the Dred Scott case I should have held so.
Mr. JOHNSON. It was not only claimed, but the Supreme Court in the decision of the Dred Scott case necessarily conceded that if there had been at any time, now or when the constitution was adopted, anAfrican who came to the U.S. in a different capacity from a slave, or who was the descendant of one who did come otherwise than as a slave, he would be a citizen.
Mr. DAVIS. Will my honorable friend point out to me the distinction and the constitutional rule that makes a distinction between a free negro and a slave negro?
Mr. JOHNSON. I give you what the court sai.
Mr. DAVIS. I did not say that there was no precedent for it. I said expressly yesterday that in my opinion the precedents were inadvertently passed, and that at any rate they were outside of the power of Congress.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator chooses to regard everything to be outside of the power of Congress by denouncing it as such. As I said, his speech is made up of these denunciations, piling up adjectives, and denouncing as outrage ous. a byll which contains but one. single principyle, and that to establish equality in the civil rights of citiZens of the country, and inreading3 from decisions to controvert a point which no ody had made before the Senate. He also brings up again the question of marriage between whites and negroes. He is trou bled aboutamalgamation, and becomes excited and vehement in talking about it. I should have supposed that at his time of life he would feel protected against it without an laW to put him in the enitentiary if he slioul commit it. [Laughterl lf Sir, we need no law of the kind where there is no disposition for this amalgamation. I apprehend that if the States prefer to pass laws on that subjectand I have an swered that question 2 or 3 times
Mr. DAVIS. Why did your own State pass such a law?
Mr. TRUMBULL. Does not the Senfrom Kentucky know that we have a great many Kentuckians in Illinois? [Laughter.] A great many of his people settled nearly the whole of the lower part of my State, and as they came over from under such a law and had to be restrained at home, we were afraid to risk them when they got into Illinois. [Laughter.] But, sir, now that Egypt is redeemed do not think there will be any necessity for continuing that act in my State. [Laughter] Now, sir, the hour having arrived when we agreed to vote upon this bill, without taking up further time, I trust the Senate will take action upon it.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not understand that the hour has arrived when the Senate agreed to take a vote on this bill. The understandin was that the general debate upon the bill should close at 3 oclock, and then amendments should be offered and discussed, and the vote taken at 4 o clock. Pursuant to that understandin, I propose as an amendment to strike out the sat section of the bill, which I will ask the Secrets to report to the Senate.
Mr. TRU. BULL. The Senator is nite right in his understandin. I will state to im, however, tltft we are stil in ComWhole, and the committees amendments have not been acted upon. The Senator can propose his amendment at any time, but it would be more regular perhaps to pass upon the amendments that have been made in the committee 1st.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I will 1st discuss this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Hows in the chair.) The Chair is informed that all the amendments of the committee have been agreed to in ComWhale, and the question now is upon the amendment offered by the Senfrom Kentucky, to strike out the whole of the bill after the enacting clause and to insert a substitute.
Mr. HENDRICKS. What I wish to say is upon the amendment that I propose, and the connection of this section with i the rest of the bill. I understand that the Senfrom Kentucky [Mr. Guruais] wishes to submit some observations on the bill generally, and of course Q the Senate will desire to hear him, and I yield the floor for that purpose.”
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senfrom Kentucky allow the Chair to in! nire if the amendment moved by the Senator rem Indiana is withdrawn?
Mr. HENDRICKS. I do not withdraw the amendment. I wish to submit some remarks upon it after the Senfrom Kentucky shall have concluded.
Mr. WILSON. Mr. President, the hour fixed for takin the vote has arrived, but I desire to occupy the time of the Senate for a few moments to notice a remark that fell from the Senfrom Kentucky, [Mr. GUTHRIE.] The senator tells us that the emancipated men onght to have their civil rights, that the black codes fell with slavery; but the Senator forgets that at least 6 of the reorganized States in their new Legislatures have passed laws wholly in compatible with the freedom of these freedmen; and so atrocious are the provisions of these laws, and so persistent] are they carried into effect by the local authorritics, that General Thomas in Mississippi, General Swayne in alabama, GenlSickles in SCarolina, and General Terry in Virginia have issued positive orders forbidding the execution of the black laws that have just been passed. GenlSickles has just issued an order in SCarolina of 23 sections, more full, perfect, and complete in their revisions than have ever been issued by any official in the country, for the security of the rights of the freedmen. On the 12th day of January last, GenlGrant, unquestionably with the approbation of the POTUS, issued this order to all the commanders of our armies in the rebel States
Mr. SAULSBURY. Will my friendfrom Massachusetts allow me to ask him a question 2
Mr. SAULSBURY. Will the Senator state whathe considers the authority of General Terry to make such an order within the State of Virginia? Where does he get the authority to make such an order as that?
Mr. COWAN. I had not intended sir, to say a word further in this discussion, and I on] rise now to enter my solemn protest against an my solemn dissent from the doctrines advanced by the honorable Senfrom Indiana; and I do so rather from the very high regard I have for him as a man, and the hQ respect I have for him as a lawyer and a jurist. adwhat he said fallen from most other men, I should have contented myself by keeping my seat; but that doctrine coming from him, I feel called upon, and I cannot resist the call, to enter my protest and my dissent. Sir, I will never agree that the military power of this country shall be substituted for the writ of error or the certiorari. To do so is to substitute a military despotism instead of a civil Government. hatis the reposition as under stood by both the honorable Senators from Indiana, who have commingled in this debate? There is no doubt, and there can be no dispute about it. It is simpl this: by the amendment to the constitution it is said that the slave codes of the several States have been abolished. Grant it. Nobody ever disputed or denied it, because when there ceases to be slaves there ceases to be a slave code; when the subject matter is destroyed upon which the law was to operate, the law itself ceases to be. But this is not a bill simply for the abolition of slave codes. hisiaa bill for the abolition of all laws in the States which create distinctions between black men and white ones. This is a bill which run eals
Mr. MCDOUGALL. Mr. President, I can notconsent that this bill shall receive the forms of law and content myself with simply recording my vote against it; and I rise now to say that against this and all like legislation I desire to enter the protest of my opinion; and I do so both upon the round of questions of constitutional law, and also upon those of sound policy. I agree with the Senfrom Kentucky, [Mr. GUTBRIE] as to the true interpretation of the constitution as affecting this bill; and also as to his views with regard to the pol icy of the ree stablishment of harmony throughout the Union and I agree with my friendfrom Indiana, [Mr. LIENDBIUKS] upont ic question of policy raised by him also with the Senfrom Pennsylvania, [LIL COWAN] They have fully exressed my views in more at words and iith closer logic than is within the grasp of my intellectual powers. Iain content with what they have said and will not undertake merely rise to remark that with them I think this and similar legislation is fraught with infinite mischief both as infringing cIearly upon the constitution and also upon the rules of sound governmental policv.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator says, as I understand him, that nobody has denied that. The 2nd section of this bill provides for the punishment of those who do deny it. Has the Senfrom Pennsylvania any objection to that
Mr. COWAN. Not when it is done in the right way.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Not when it is done through the courts? All the rest of the bill provides for doing it through the courts, in no other way. It is a court bill; it is to be executed through the courts, and in no other way. But does the Senator mean to say it is a Military bill because the military may be called in in aid of the execution of the law through the courts? Does the Senfrom PennsyvaniaI should like his attention, and that of the Senfrom Indiana, toodeny the authority to call in the military in aid of the execution of the law through the courts?
Mr. HENDRICKS. If the Senator will allow me, I wish to ask him a question. The preventive power of the court is exercised by the writ of injunction. Now I want to know of the enatcgl what lhetlilis bill by conferring on e military teauthority to r vent a)ibmlationfioof thliasl twi. oIsuth, atin aidfffibifrt, and before ac e can come before a court? 8
Mr. TRUMBULL. I mean, Mr. President that the militia and the military may be called out whenever there is a combination of persons in any of the rebellious States so powerfulthat the marshals and civil officers in the ordinary course of judicial proceedings cannot execute thila] kiw. I mean that thtla militar may be on e upon, ” tEat time. mean that when ever there shall eacombination there to protect a man who has violated this law, and the marshal is driven off, he may call a file of soldiers to go with him and seize the individual who sets at defiance the process of the court.
Mr. HENDRICKS. The Senator does not in that combat any position that I assumed. I admitted that when the execution of process of the law was resisted by a combination of people, that insurrection, for the time bein, might be put down by the military power of the government. I said so. Now I reeat the question, what is meant in this bill by the preventive power of the military? B eforeaciiipe is committed, before a wroilgisdone T, the president, or any person whom he may apie point, may call in the military power of the overiiirient tgprelentaggime. How is that in in om courts of themuatry?
Mr. FESSENDEN. Read it. What is the subjectmatter of the act?
Mr. HENDERSON. It is on the subject of revenue.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It relates to the collection of the revenue, I believe; and it contains th“is section: That it shall be lawful for the POTUS, or such personashemuy empowerfor that purpose to empltox such part of the land or naval orccs of the bni States or of the militia. a! shall be necessary to prevent the violation and to enforce the dgeedexccuon of this act, and the act hereby amoii.”
Mr. FESSENDEN. That was passed under a good Democratic Administration.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Yes, sir, passed in 1838, and approved by Martin Van Buren
Mr. TRUMBULL. It did not horrify the country; it did not destroy all the liberties of the people; it did not consolidate all the powers of the constitution in the Federal Government; it did not overthrow all the courts, and it has existed now for nearly 30 years! What becomes of all this objection?
Mr. HOWARD and it did not take the place of a writ of error.
Mr. Trumbull. No, it did not take the place of a writ of error; the courts still exist. ow, is it not absurd, preosterous, and unjust to denounce this law as taing from the courts their jurisdiction? It does no such thing. It is in aid of the exercise of the powers of the courts; it isto clothe the courtswith authority to carry into execution the writs they issue, the judgments they give. That is all there is of it. It is no new provision, no unheardof thing. There is a precedent for it in the acts of congress verbatim, and the authority is exressly given in the constitution of the U.S. Now, sir, I cannot take time to reply in detail to every one of these objections as they are made. I am desirous to get avote on this bill; we exppeted to get a vote toda, before this hour. but I have felt compelle, when these questions are persistently urged upon the senate and these perversions of the bill are attempted to be impressed upon the country, to correct some oft em; and pif I do not correct others it is not because Isu ose they are not unfounded, but because at this hour of the day I think, with the corrections I have made the country itself will make the corrections of the other misstatements or misapprehensions of the bill.
Mr. SAULSBURY. It is not my pn ose to continue the debate, but I think I may ie pardoned for making a suggestion. When American liberty is to be subverted, when the whole character of our Federal existence is to be changed. when a RFG is to be changed into a consolidated des potism, I think we ouclit to have the Opportunity to think a little wflien we come to pass an act that is to convert this free RFG into an absolute despotism; we ought to retire to our chambers and deliberate. Therefore, sir, without any desire, without any intention to mingle in this debate, I apeal to the honorable gentleman who has this bill in charge not to ta of the vote tonight. Let us retire to our chambers, and, after the words the eloquent, warning words of the able and the distinguished Senfrom Kentucky, [Mr. Geri! nrn] who now is a link between the past and the presentlet us go home, and if the fatal (ice is to be done, let it be done tomorrow. I therefore move that the Senate do now adjourn. The motion was not agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Hows.) The question is on the amendment offered by the Senfrom Indiana, to strike out the 10th section of the bill.
Mr. HENDRICKS. On that amendment I ask for the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered; and being taken, resultedyeas 12, nays 34; ABSENT. 4. So the amendment was rejected. "
Mr. HENDRICKS. It is due to myself and to the Senfrom Illinois that I should say that the act from which he read was an act to prevent the organization and equipment of Military expeditions upon our shores against foreign Powers with which we are at peace. It was a military law. My statement was that no precedent ot a provision like that contained in the 10th section of this bill is to be found in any law regulating the civil rights of the people.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. he question recurs on the amendment offered by the Senfrom Kentucky, [Mr. Dans] The amendment was reccted.
Mr. SAULSBURY. move to amend the bill in the 2nd line of the 1st section by a“dding after the words “civil rights” the words exceptthe right to vote in the States.”
Mr. RUM ULL. I will only say in reference to that matter, that that is a political privilege, not a civil right. This bill relates to civil rights only and I do not want to bring u the question of negro suffrage in the bill. I hope the Senator will not persist in any such amendm ent.
Mr. NORTON. I move to amend section 7 by striking out all after the words “ U.S.” in line 25, as follows. The words to be stricken out are and in case of the escapeof the person for whose arrest such warrant or process was issued, shall more over forfeit and pay. by way of civil damages. to the party claiming to have been aggrieved by his not. the sum of $1,000t. o be recovere by action of debt in any of the courts aforesaid within whose jurisdiction the said offense may have been committed. This section 7 provides that any person who shall obstruet or hinder or prevent an officer or other person charged with the execution of process issued under the provisions of the act from making an arrest, or shall rescue, or attempt to rescue, a person so arrested under a warrant, or the officer permits him to escape, he shall be guilty of an offense, and if convicted be subject to a fine. This art which I propose shall be stricken out predicates of that offense a civil liability to the person who made the complaint, or to any person who maly feel aggrieve, and it being a public offense suppose any member of the public may consider himself aggrieved. It seems to me that it is certainly improper to predicate of a crime or the commission of a public offense a civil liability to be responded to in a civil action of debt. think for that reason so much of the section ought to be stricken out.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I think the bill is sulficiently efficient without this clause in it. I am not particular aboutit myself. It is, however reported by the committee, and I do not fee at liberty to consent to the amendment; but I have no objection to its being adopted. I think the bill would be perfect without it.
Skip Skip The amendment was agreed to. The billwas reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendments made as in ComWhole were concurred in. The bill was orderengross for a 3rd readin, and was read the 3rd time., Mr. HEN RICKS and Mr. WILSON called for the yeas&nays on the passage of the bill. The yeas&nays were ordere. The Secretary proceeded to call the roll, and Mr. ANTHONY responded to his name.
Mr. NORTON. Mr. President Several Sessrons. Too late.
The PRESIDENT protempore Debate is not in order the call of the roll having commenced, and a response having been made. Mr. MORRILL, (when Mr. oussous name was called.) The Senfrom Maryland was necessarily called away some time ago, and he desired mato say that if present he would vote against the passage of the bill. The call, was concluded with the followmg result: YEAS 33. NAYS 12. Absent 5. POST ROADS The amendments of the HoRep to the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R.No. 61) to establish certain post roads were referred to the ComPostOffices. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS.
The PRESIDENT protem are laid before the Senate a message from the POTUS, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 16th of January, calling for the correspondence which may have taken place between himself and any of the judges of the Supreme Court touching the holding of the civil courts of the U.S. in the insurrectionary States for the trial of crimes against the U.S.; which was, on motion of Mr. TiwimULL, ordered to be printed, and lie on the table. The President Protemporealso laid before the Senate a message from the POTUS communicatinc, in compliance with a resolution of the 80th of Janu ary, a communication of GenlSherman , relative to the condition of the States in his military Dept; which, on motion of Mr. TRUMBULL, was referred to the JtComReconstruction and ordered to be printed.
The PRESIDENT protempore also laid before the Senate the following message; which, on motion of Mr. SUMNER, was referred to the ComForRel, and ordered to be printed: To the Senafc and HoRep: Believing that the commercial interests of. our country would be promoted by a formal recognition of the independence of the Domin ican republic, while such a recognition would be in entire conformity with the settled policy of the U.S., I have, with that view, nominated to the Senate an officer of the same grade with the one now accredited to the republic of Hayti; and I recommend that an appropriation be made by Congress toward providing for his compensation. AndrewJohnson. Fnniwmr 2, 1866. ADJOURNMENT TO MONDAY.
Mr. FOOT. I move that when the Senate adjourn today, it be to meet on Monday next. he motion was agreed to. On motion of Mr. POMEROY, the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. FRIDAY, February 2, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. PACIFIC RAILROAD.
Mr. KASSON, by unanimous consent, of fered the followmg resolution 5 which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the ComPacRailroad inquire into and report. by bill or otherwise, 0n the expediencyof extendin an additional amount of Governmentaid to extcu the Iowa branchofsaid railroad to the capital of Iowa until the amountshall equalthat authorized in aid of the Kansas branch of the Union Pacific railroad. HARBORS 0N LAKE ERIE.
Mr. SPALDING, by unanimous consent introduced a bill to provide for the reair and Improvement of the harbors of Cleveland and Fairpoit, on. Lake Erie; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. SUITS AGAINST FEDERAL OFFICERS.
Mr. McKEE. I ask leave to introduce a bill to amend the indemnity act of the 3d of March, 1863, with an accompanying memorial of citizens of Kentucky.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I ask that the bill be reported.
The Clerk read the bill. It provides that in any civil or criminal prosecution commenced in any State against an officer, civil or military, for arrest during the existence of the rebellion, upon aflidavit of the defendant showing that die arrest was made in good faith and in pursuance of orders of a superior officer, the action may be removed to the Court of Claims.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I object to its consideration.
Mr. McKEE. Iwill then, bringit up on Mon day mornin when bills on leave are called for.
Mr. HUBTELL, of Iowa by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the payment of dam ages caused by the destruction of property of citizens of Iowa by certain Indian. "ercin named; which was read a 1st and seconu. ne, and referred to the ComIndAffrs. CONTESTEDELECTION CASE.
Mr. RAYMOND. I rise to a question of privilege. I made a motion yesterda, in the case of the contested election in NewYork city, to reconsider the vote by which certain papers were referred to the ComElections. As I said then, I did it simply to allow the claimant to be heard before the House. Some objection was made on the part of several members that it might delay the matter too long. I wish to inquire now whether it will meet the convenience of the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. BROOKS] to have the matter discussed, or whether he prefers to have it put off until another day.
Mr. BROOKS. I have been before the ComElections this morning for 2 hours, and have been addressing that committee, so that I feel physically unable to proceed with any discussion on the subject. It would suit me better to have it go over till Monday. Besides, let me remark that today there occurs, by order of the House, at 3 olclock, a vote on the Freedmens Bureau bill, and if discussion arises on that subject now it will occupy the attention of the ones up to that time; so that members from Kentucky and others who desire to speak will be quite unable to do so. I wish the House to decide for itself. I do not wish to shrink from any discussion; though, as I say, I am physically unable this morning to do justice to any subject that comes up for discussion.
Mr. ELIOT. I wish to say, in consequence of what took place yesterday, and of the fact that there are several gentlemen on this side of the House who desire to debate this bill, and in view of the fact that a question of privilege has been raised by the Gentfrom NewYork, I have agreed that the debate on the Freedmens Bureau bill might continue through today and tomorrow, and that after the morning hour on Monday I would demand the previous question and I wish to say, at the same time, that I desire that gentlemen who have the floor should debate that bill, and that I shall have to make a point of order if general debate is indulged in.
Mr. DAWES. In reference to thismatter of privilege, as I stated yesterday, I do notintend to participate in the debate upon the immediate question before the House, which is whether certain papers shall be referred to the committee and be printed. But I have this to say, that I do think it is the duty of the House to decide today whether that mass of testimon shallbe referred to the committee and be printe. I will, with the leave of the House, state the case, and state also whyI think it is due to the committee that they should decide it today. The case isthis: in the contested case of Dodge rs. Brooks, the testimony, as the committee supposed, was submitted to the House at the commencement of the session and referred to the committee with authority to cause to be printed such portions of it as in eir opinion it was proper to print, under a general order touching all the contested cases of elections. upon an examination of the papers in this case, whiich were referred to the committee, it was found that it contained only the testimony upon one side of the case. The committee on led upon the sitting member [Mr. BROOKS] for his testimony, and they have frequently called for it from that day to this. Within a few days past there has a peared in the Clerks office a arge package o papers addressed, not to the Clerk of the House
Mr. BROOKS. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] allow me?
Mr. DAWES. I am not arguing the merits of the case of the gentleman.
Mr. BROOKS. But the gentleman is in error in point of fact. I desire to say that upon the very 1st call or intimation made in the committee that it was my duty to transmit the testimony in the possessron of the Clerk of the House to the committee, I caused that transmission to be made by my own movement in the House; and that prior to that time no no tice was given to me by the committee of which I was informed.
Mr. DAWES. I am informed that the motion was made just before the recess, on day before yesterday. I have no opinion to express on the question whether the testimony was properly taken or not, or whether properly sent to the House, directed to the sitting member or not, for have not heard the sitting member on that point. I have this to say: that the cominittee took all the pains in their power to prevent just such a position ofaffaim as has occurred here today, namely, that they should go through 540 pages oiprinted matter on the part of the contestant, and then sit down one month after, when the testimony of the sitting nieinber can be printed, and wade through all t at. The committee took all the pains they could to inform the sitting member that such would be the result, unless seine pains were taken to have his testimony produced at the commencementot the session and sent to the printer with that of the contestant, and printed in the same book. It is the 1st case in my experience when the committee have been running round aller parties asking for their testimony. They have not been very successful in this case, and I hope the House will now say whether the committee shall stop their work and rest on their oars while a book of some 5. 6, or 700 pages shall be printed for their benefit. That is all I have to say. I have no desire to influence the House on the question whether this testimony shall be referr or not, but I desire to have the question decided today, because if the House ecides to have these papers printed, I hope the printer will work Sunday, if necessary, so that we may have this book printed by Monday morning.
Mr. RAYMOND. I had no object in calling up this motion except to enable the parties interested to be heard before the House, and that the House might come to a decision. I will now yield the floor to my colleague, [Mr. Buoousj
Mr. BROOKS. I do not want to take the floor by my colleagues courtesy. I claim it as a right.
Mr. RAYMOND. I surrender the floor unconditionally.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, nothing could so much surprise me, except the surprise Iliad yesterday from my colleague from NewYork, [ML RAYMONDQ as the remarks of the honor nble Gentfrom Massachusetts. If he, as a Representative of that State, desires to be rid of me at this early period of the session, he has taken a very summary step toward doing it exerting theinlluence of that committee of which by he is the organ to suppress the uhlication of all the testimony on my side, an if the House is to follow his lead, I may as well at this moment submitlo what has been the fate of others, take up my hat and retire and go home to my constituency, leaving a large portion of the city of NewYork unre presented as well as a large portion of our who o country.
Mr. DAWES. I failed to make myself understood if I made the gentleman understand that Iain anxious to have him leave this House, or that I exiressed an opinion one way or the other upont e merits of his case. I merely felt it. my duty to state to the House these circumstances as a reason why they should pass upon this question.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, the whole tone and tenor of the remarks of the honorable Gentfrom Massachusetts, whether he intended it or not, are of a character to prejudic. but least his side of the House against me as the sitting member, and to give the whole advantage of his position and his prejudice to the contestant. The honorable Gentfrom Massachusetts and he is a man of honor, wellentitled to the appellation of the honorable gentleman will not rise in his place and say that he has officially given a notice, officially by sign and signature, of any nce essitv of my presenting these papers until officially be notified me to appear before him, When, upon the very day after, I made the motion in the House. The clerk of the ComElections is connected with the pub lic ress as most of the clerks of committees in this House are, and as a brother pressman I have had lretquent conversations with him on this and on other subjects. But never, with my understanding, so help me God, was any official information given to me from the ComElections that 1 was under an imme diate order to pnsentthm papers to that committee, and on the very 1st intimation from the honorable Gentfrom Massachusetts I hurried to this House, and in no secret hour, at no evening session, but in the presence of the House, in its ordinary session, asked that these papers be referred to the ComElections, and printed and the 1st intimation that I ever had was from my honorable colleague [Mr. Runoxn] connected with me in the public press“El tu, Brute l”that there was an intention on the part of somebody to suppress the publication of my testimony in this case.
Mr. DAWES. Mr. Speaker, while the law in reference to testimony in cases of this kind retillllQS that it shall, for some wise purpose suppose that it may be safely keptbe sent imme intely to the Clerk, the gentleman jus tifies the withholding of this testimony from the House from last ilarch till last week by the statement that he has not had any written notice under my hand., klll
Mr. BROOKS. Or official notice of any in.
Mr. DAWES. Official notice, signed with my name as chairman of the ComElections for the 39th Congress. I suppose the gentleman considers that necessary. I have only to say. in answer to that
Mr. BROOKS. There has been no notice, written or unwritten, scripta, or nonscrita.
Mr. DAWES. One thing at a time. have only to say, Mr. Speaker, that the ComElections directed its clerk more than once before the holidays to go to the sitting member in this case and tell him that, if he expected his testimony to be printed by order of the committee, it must be produced at once, so that it might go to the printer along with the other testimony and be printed in the same book. The clerk of the committee came back to the committee and reported that he had so notified the sitting member more than once.
Mr. DAWES. Not under sealnot under the broad seal.
Mr. DAWES. I do not know but that the law requires the notice to be in writing; but I did not understand that the gentleman, in response to the verbal notice of the clerk of the committee, made any objection at that time to the fact that it was not in writing. I have this to say: that the law imposed upon him the duty to send the testimony here 9 months ago, not to keep it till this time. It was altogether a work of supercrogation on the part of the committee to say a word to him about it. But the committee apprehended thut just at the time when this case would be taken up we should experience just such a state of things as this; and in order to be ready, the committee requested him over and over again to bring forward these upers. Now, I have a question or 2 to ask t legentleman. 1st, where have these papers been since last March?
Mr. BROOKS. For the last ten or 15 days they have been in possession of the Clerk of the House, to whom was directed to deliver them by the law of the U.S. I have further to say that when he asks me with so much force where they have been since March last, he might with quite as much force ask the contestant where his papers have been since March last; for those papers did not turn up here till the 1st week in December, not even on the desk of the Clerk. But, Mr. Speaker, I complain more of the spirit, the citizen, the energy, the enthusiasm of the chairman of the ComElections, in a matter of this sort, and more of the spirit which my colleague [Mr. RAYMOND] manifests here, than I do of the charges which the gentleman makes against me; and in the course of my remarks I will show how vague, futile, and unjust all those charges are.
Mr. DAWES. I will ask the gentleman let him put. his answer on the reoOrd whether he has one word of complaint against me when sitting to hear any question of tact or point of law which he has ever presented touching his case?
Mr. BROOKS. Never, never; I will do the honorable gentleman the justice to say that I have the highest respect for him as a man and as a Representative ere; and therefore I am the more surprised and amazed that he exhibits so much feeling and earnestness (so it seems to me) to suppress the uhlication of my testimony without hearing from me one word whatsoever.
Mr. DAWES. Mr. Speaker, I have not had the slightest objection to the printing of this testimon. I took some pains, and all that I have sai to the House has been with the view of convincing the House that I did take some pains, to have that testimony before the committee early. My complaint is that the ComElections have been trifled with in their effort t9 get this testimony, not that I desire to shut the gentlemans mouth or close the door against one article of his testimony. But I have a little desire to defend the ComElections on this point, and no further. I have never, sir, forgotten to satisfy and urge the House to print the gentlemans testimony. I have come here, Mr. Speaker, to state that the gentleman has been guilty of lachcs; and that it has involved the ComElections in great trouble and great expenditure of their time; that that committee are somewhat worn and fatigued, and that it is with some difficulty a quorum can be got together at the hour of appointment to continue these hearin 5 and are we to be carried down into the cho era season without one particle of excuse given for this delay in the face of the law? That is all I have to say and if the gentleman imagines I have taken sides with the contestant in this case, I pra him to remember I have quite as much to do end my course on this side oi the House; and I must soon hope to be delivered from the position I am in, if I am to be fired into from both sides, and it is to be charged that I manifest ine rdinate zeal one way or the other in the hearing of these cases.
Mr. RAYMOND. I desire to relieve myself from the complaints my colleague makes of having shown an improper and discourteous spirit toward him in regard to this matter. I think I may fairly appeal to him, sir, to say it is not my habit in t, e press or out of the press to show discourtesy to anyone with whom I may be connected. In this matter my fault, if fault it is, grows out of what has more than once got me into trouble, a desire to be over courteous to both sides. I was not present when the motion was made by m colleague from NewYork, and was ado ite, referrm these opera to the Committee otlElectionswit an or or to print them; and the next day I was appealed to y the contestant to makes. motion for the reconsideration of that resolution, on the ground that it was passed without his being heard at all, and that he was desirous of being heard on that precise point. I declined for some little time, thinking some one more familiar with the case should make the motion; but finally, after his appeal to my courtesy, I made the motion. I disclaimed at the time to the sitting member an desire whatever to do him injustice, to reju ice his case, or put him to the slightest inconvenience; and when be comlainet in the House or out of the House, forget which, yesterday, that this motion would have the result to postpone the consideration of this matter in efiuitcly, I told him, so far as I was concerned, I would do all I could to bring this motion to a seedy hearing. It was for that purpose I calle the motion up this morning, the day after the motion was made. My 1st faultwas in being overcourteous to the contestant, if fault it was; my 2nd fault, if any, in being overcourteous to the sitting member. I desire by these words simply to relieve myself from any thought or purpose of being discouitcous to either. I simply want the matter fairly before the House.
Mr. GARFIELD. I ask the Gentfrom NewYork to give way while I move that a recess of ten minutes be taken to allow the Speaker to present to this House the commander of the army of the Potomac and the commander of the arm of the Cumberland, General George G. Mea e and General George H Thomas.
Mr. BROOKS. Nothingwill give me greater pleasure, and let the record of the fact go out with my speech to the country.
Mr. GARFIELDS motion was agreed to; and thereupon the House took a recess for ten minutes.
The SPEAKER, having conducted Generals Meade and Thomas to the Speakers desk amid great a)plause, said: Gentlemen of the HoRep, while time shall last and the Republic shall “paguliul the dem endure, none of us can ever fail to be grateful to the officers and soldiers who periled their lives for its preservation. lriieas the truest, and brave as the bravest, were Major General Meade, commander of the army of the Potomac, and Major General Thomas, commander of the army of the Cumberland, whomI have the pleasure, under your order to introduce to you today. [Great a plausc. Genera Meadesaid: Gentleme n of the hoRep, impressed as I am with the solemnity of this occasion, introduced to you in so complimentary and distinguished a manner as I have been by the S caker of your House, it is almost impossible [gr me to say in fitting terms how rateful Iiim myself, and how grate ful is my e iend and brother officer, General Thomas. If we may be permitted to construe the distinguishedlionoryou have conferred upon us into a mark of your approval of our course durinw the cat struggle which, by the blessing of god, has been so triumphaiitly and glorious] terminated, it will be to us ample reward for adthat we have done in our humble capacity. We shall ever hear it in grateful remembrance, and shall ever be most sincerely thankful. [Great applause, and loud calls for “ Thomas] General ThoMassaid: Gentlemen, it was not my intention to have said anything, trusting to General Meade to express our feelings; but since you have called upon me to say a few words, all I will say is that I join with him in every word he has uttered, and most heartily and sincerely thank you for this compliment. [Applause]
Mr. SPALDING called for 3 cheers for the 2 generals. In response to this call the members of the House and the spectators in the galleries joined in a round of enthusiastic applause. The 2 generals then came upon the floor and the members of the House were introduce to them by the Speaker. At the expiration of the recess the House resumed business] PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the House a report from the Superin tendent of the Coast Survey, transmitting a statement of the advantages of the Patuxent river for the establishment of a navyyard, in response to a resolution of the House of JanuarY, 17, 1866. Dir. PHELPS. I move that the report of the Superintendent of the Coast Survey be referred to the ComNavAffrs, and that it be printed. The motion was agreed to. CONTESTEDELECTION CASE AGAIN.
The Clerk read, as follows: Snuun ir. A. it. Mr Dunn Sin: Have just reccived a telegram calling me out of town. Get key from janitor upstairs. to take your testimony at? my desk. I as sent to any correction in the rest, not altering the sense, and authorize on to make it and forward the testimony. I shal be back Monday. p. m. Yours. W. W. PHELPS.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT. A message in writing was received from the POTUS, by Mr. W. G. Moons, his Private Secretary, who also in formed the House that the President had approved and signed a JtResolution of the following title:JtResolution (H.R.No. 53) authorizing the SecyWar to grant the use of aportion of a military reserve on StClair river, in the State of Michigan, for railroad purposes. CONTESTED ELECTION CASEAGAIN.
Mr. BROOKS. So, Mr. Speaker, you see the lawyers were working amicably together in December last and early in January, in the preparation of testimony to be submitted to this House.
Mr. DAWES. Iwantaclcar understanding of this matter. Am I to understand that in the latter part of last December and early in January the lawyers in this case were working over the testimony which the law required to be here last March?
Mr. BROOKS. Yes, sir; there is the record.
Mr. DAWES. Aurito understand that? I want to know.
Mr. BROOKS. If I knew what inference the gentleman derived from that knowledge I might have nothing more to say.
Mr. DAWES. only want to saythat when Congress passed the law of 1851 they thought they had contributed somewhat to the honesty of an investigation of this character by rt uiring that the testimony, as soon as it was ti en, should be reduced to writing, and in the presence of the parties sealed up and sent to the Clerk, so there should be no occasion for temptation after the testimony had been taken on either side. I suppose that was the reason. I want the ComElections to know they are to pass on a case made up in the city of New 1 ork during a few months past.
Mr. BROOKS. It was done by common consent of the arties. The testimony to be published, for resume it will be by the consent of the Repubiican majority of this House, will show that both the parties have agreed to it. There is not one point or iota of dispute as to the testimony. Mr. Dodges attorney has examined and assented to the testimony I have submitted; and my attornevs have examined and acquiesced and agree to the testimony which li Mr. Dodge has submitted. It was a matter of amity and consent between the attorneys; and there is the record which I read to this House. The insinuation of the honorable Gentfrom Massachusetts, that the parties have tampered with this testimony, I am surprised or rather should be surprised, ifI could have been surprised at anything which has taken place today in the discussion of this matter, to hear the gentleman make that remark.
Mr. DAWES. I do not want the gentleman to understand me to make an insinuation of that kind. I am simply desirous of understanding the whole facts. If the House refers to us such testimony, taken in that way, I will understand it to be instructions to us to take that testimony, notwithstanding the requirements of the statute.
Mr. CONKLING. The contestingmember, as I understand it, desires to occupy the floor, and technically he is entitled to it. I suggest, therefore, that my colleague will get from him what he desires on that subject.
Mr. JOHNSON. I desire to ask a single question of the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. Escorts] There seems to be an issue partly made up by the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] which is not fully met by the Gentfrom NewYork; and that is, thatinformation was given in some sort of official way to the sitting member of the fact that the ComElections required that his papers and testimony should be filed. I desire to inquire of the gentleman whether the clerk of the com, mittce, when he called on him, informed him that the ComElections had passed a resolution requiring him to file these papers, and whether the sitting member was notified that it was by authority?
Mr. BROOKS. Incver had anyinformation, as I understood it, officially or unofficially, in any form from the clerk ot the ComElections, that that committee desired my papers. In conversation with him at various times and at various places, he asked me where my papers were. explained to him in conversation the very same facts and the causes of the delay which I have submitted to the House here today, and how much I regretted it and I think at one time I suggested to him, if not to others. that I should feel it my duty, if the papers did not soon come, to appeal to the case and ask the SergeantatArms to be sent in pursuit of them. at I never had an intimation, officially or unofficially, certainly no paperwhatsoever, on that subject. Mr. DAWES. It is due to the ComElections that I should state that the understood, as a committee, that at least a ozeu times the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. BROOKS] had been notified. They understood it as distinctly as possible, and at no time has it come to the knowledge of the committee that the gentleman was not entirely ready to proceed with his hearing until such hearing adbeen proceeded with 2 days, and the 1st intimation the committee ever had from the Gentfrom NewYork, that I know of, that he was not entirely ready to begin and conclude the hearing, was when we took up the Globe yesterday and saw there that on the day before he had caused his papers to be referred to the committee. The committee did not know how it was. Just about a week ago we learned from the Clerk of the House that the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Baoous] had de osited with him a package of papers directe to the sitting member, with instructions to keep them there until they were called for. That is all the committee knew. I am certain in the statement I now make in reference to the notice by the committee to the sit tin member from the clerk.
Mr. BROOKS. Will the gentleman allow me to ask a question? I suppose I may ask it as I have been before the committee. I ask him if I have not made 2 points before the committee, namely: 1st, that the notice given me of a contest was not within the time reguired by law, and that until that point was ecided was not under the necessity of bringing my papers before the ComElections, because if the committee decided in my favor there would never be any need of printing or publishing the papers; and 2nd, that the contents of the notice were not given according to law? and In. It him if that argument is not now ending be ore the Committee of El actions. an if I have not contended, as according to law. I still contend, that so far as my action is concerned, it was not necessary for me to seek for the publication of these papers until the ComElections 1st ecided that the notice was given within the 30 days required by law, and that the contents of the papers were The papers Were in the Clerks possession, and the moment either of these points was decided against me it. was my duty to bring them before the committee, and not until then. That was the view I took of the case.
Mr. DAWES. If it is no breach of privilege for me to state what has transpired before the committee, I will simply state that the committee after having done through their clerk what Thave stated toward etting this case in readiness, notified the parhes to appear at a given time and be heard, without unyintimation from either party that they were not ready. The parties appeared before the committee without any intimation of the kind suggested by the Gentfrom NewYork to the committee or in their hearing, and the committee proceeded in the ordinary way to the hearing of the ease during one day. The next day the Gentfrom Idew York desired to interrupt that argument and to take the 2 points which he has now suggested, and the committee permitted him to take the 2 points. Then for the 1st time the gentleman sag, ested that he proposed to hear this case as may e up by the contestant 1st, and, if it became necessary for him, after that he proposed to have certain papers in the Clerks office submitted to the House and referred to the committee. The committee replied to that that they understood the parties were to make up their record before they commenced their hearing, and that if he was ready to go to the bearing, upon the case as made up, let. him say so; if not, to say so and show some reason why he was not.
Mr. BROOKS. Will the chairman of the ComElections answer this question: if the committee had decided the 1st point in my favor, would it have been necessary to publish my papers at all?
Mr. DAWES. Certainly not; but I submit that it was not for the Gentfrom NewYork to take that risk. It is the risk that every party in a court, takes if he relies upon a simple point and prefers not to prepare his case otherwise.
Mr. BROOKS. But I did not rely on a single point. I relied on another point before the committee, and I want the gentleman to answer this question: if the notice was not in accordance with law, would it be necessary then to print in papers?
Mr. A“ ES. Everybody understands that it would not be. Everybody understands that when a party is summoned into court he makes such preparation to meet the case as he thinks the ease demands, and if he has confidence enough in any particular point not to deem it necessary to m e up a record involving any other points, he goes to trial on that point.
Mr. HALE. lhe question which ask the chairman of the ComElections, for the information of the House, is this: what would be the probable extent of the delay to be caused by the printing of the evidence of the sitting member?
Mr. DAWES. I am unable to say, for I have never seen it. I have only heard from the sit ting member that it is very much more volumi nous than what we have already, which makes 541 ages.
Mr. FARNSWOR”H. I would like to know from the Gentfrom Massachusetts, for my own information and for that of the House, whether the law requires that the testimony in contested elections shall be presented to the House by an particular time.
Mr. DAWES. The law requires the parties "on both sides to cause the evidence to be reduced to writin when it is taken, and the law limits the time o taking testimony to 60 days. It must be taken within that time. That time ended in April last year. The law requires the testimony to be reduced towriting by the Officer taking it. in the presence of the parties then and there and within that time, an by him scaled up and directed to the Clerk of teHoRep, and sentto the Clerk, and by him presented to the House.
Mr. FARNSWOItTH. I understand this to be merely a question about printing.
Mr. BROOKS. There is nothing about print in! in the law.
Mr. DAWES. It is more than aquestion of printing as it is presented to the House. It is an instruction to the committee to receive and consider as taken conformably to law testimony which comes in under these circumstances, and thely cannot hel themselves.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. CosKuNG] asks that the contestant, Mr. Dodge, be allowed to address the House. Is there objection?
Mr. BROOKS. I shall not objectalthough the gentleman has certainly no legal or constitutional right to appear in the caseif it isuu derstood that I shall have an opportunity to rely to him.
Mr. CONKLING. Does my colleague say that the contestant has no right to be heard?
Mr. BROOKS. He has no such right under the rules and orders of the House at this period. He is not so much a member of the House and entitled to be heard here as are the members from Tennessee.
Mr. conKLING. Then I beg to remind my colleague that his lack of right to be heard must be owing entirely to a technical omission in the resolution. I think I am right in saying that the usage of the House is uniform that contestants are allowed to he heard when their cases are under consideration.
Mr. BROOKS. But the case is not under consideration. There is no recedentfor allowing a contestant to be hear at this stage. But do not understand me as objecting. I do not object, with the understanding that I shall have a right to rel v.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that he has examined the resolution, and it does not give the right to the contestant to speak upon the case. But the uniform usage of the House has been that whenever a contestedelection case is before the House, the majority of the k House can give the contestant a right to be eard.
Mr. GRINNELL. I move that the contestant in this case, Mr. William E. Dodge, be allowed to address the House at this time. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I move that the sitting member in this case be allowed to reply to the contestant.
The SPEAKER. The contestant is now entitled to the floor. After he shall have concluded his remarks, the motiOn of the gentleman will be in order.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. Is the contestant entitled to address the House without its unanimous consent?
The SPEAKER. He is; the Chair has just decided that he can do so by vote of the majority of this House. Before he proceeds with his remarks, the Chair will ask leave to lay before the House 2 messages from the POTUS DOMINICAN REPUBLIC.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the House the following message from the POTUS: To the Senate and HoRep: Believing that the commercia interestsof our country would be promoted by a formal recognition of the independence of the Dominican republic, while such arecognition would beiu entire conformity with the settled policy of the U.S., I have with that view nominated to the Sonata an officer of the same grade With the one now accredited to the republic of Hayu, and I recommend thatan appropriatipn be made by Congress toward providing for his compensation AndrewJohnson. WASHINGTON, January 80, 1866. ;
Mr. BANKS. I move that the message he referred to the ComAppropriat, and be printed. The motion was agreed to. IMPERIAL MEXICAN EXPRESS COMPANY.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, also laid before the House the following message from the POTUS: To the HoRep: In compliance with the resolution of the HoRep of the 10th ultimo, requesting information in regard to the organization in the city of NewYork of the Imperial Mexican Express Company, under agrant from the socalled Emperor of Mexico, I transmit a report from the SecyState and the papers by which it was aceom anied and RE JOHNSON. Wasnrsorou, February 1, 1866.
Mr. BANKS. I move that the message and accompanying papers be referred to the comForAffrs, and be printed. The motion was agreed to. CONTESTED ELECTION CASE AGAIN.
Mr. INGERSOLL. If it is in order, I would like to move that the sittin member in this case [Mr. BROOKS] shall be a lowed to reply to the remarks of the contestant.
The SPEAKER. The contestant is now entitled to the floor, and that motion is not now in order.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I desire to move that the Gentfrom NewYork, the sitting member, be allowed an opportunity to reply to the contestant.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom NewYork has the floor, no other gentleman claim in it.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I return my thanks to the Gentfrom Illinois for his kindness in endeavoring to give me an opportunity to address the House in reply to the contestant. I shall not ask the attention of the House for any length of time, because the contestant has given me very little to reply to. He commenced his remarks by saying that it was time that the wealth and influence of the people of NewYork should have representation upon the floor of this House. y honorable colleagues from NewYork, over the way, are hardly complimented by the remarks of the contestant, to say nothing of my honorable colleagues on this side of the House, when he complains that the wealth and influence of NewYork have not properrepresentation upon the floor of this House. My honorable colleague from NewYork, over the way, [Mr. RAYMOND] represents a very respectable amount of money and property, and, as you have often seen on the car of this House, is very well able to Represent it; and my colleague over the way. in the rear of the contestant, [Mr. Dani. iso] represents yet more money, more wealth, and more influence.
Mr. DODGE, (the contestant.) I was very careful to say “heretofore.” I did not speak of the Itcpresentatives now upon the floor. MLBltOOKS. How longheretoforc? When Mr. Cambreling and Julian Verplanck were here?
Mr. DODGE. That was many years ago, when I was a small boy.
Mr. BROOKS. and, myfriend. you have only got to be a very large boy to make such charges. [Laugliten] Sir, the contestant only illustrates the spirit in which this contest has been man aged throughout when he complains that my houorable colleague behind me, [Mr. CHAN i. sn] and my honorable colleagues heretofore, many of them men of eminent position and wealth and property, have not been properRepresentatives of NewYork on the our of this House and in order that there should be a properRepresentative here it is very necessary that I should be thrown out of my seat, and that he may be thrown in. The honorable gentleman mistakes the arena before which he is arguing this case. This is not the city of NewYork; it is the HoRep. This is not Wall street; not a stock board where stock speculation is going on all the while. It is a representative body of the industry, of the agriculture, of the labor, as well as of the property, of the country and 100,000 laborers are represented here where there is one man of property represented. There are enough members on the floor of this House to represent the wealth of NewYork, even if I was not here at all. There are enough from other portions of the country to take good care of that interest and when the contestarises one man of wealth and power will whip out all the representatives of the lobby that may be about teCapitol. The more Representatives of labor, industry, and agriculture there are the better. Let us hear no more of that species of argument.
Mr. CONKLING. If I do not interrupt my colleague [Mr. BROOKS] as he is replying fora purpose, I would like to call his attention to the particular question which strikes the minds of gentlemen in this part of the House, my own among others, as the real question here. If he has any objection I will not do it.
Mr. BROOKS. I have not the least objection.
Mr. CONKLING. The statute makes it obligatory upon contestant and sitting member alike to forward present l, I believe the word is “immediately, ” to the Clerk of the House the testimony which is taken; and by the Clerk of the House it is to be preserved, in theory of law, against all intermeddling and encroachment. Of course I do not mean to suggest new that there has been anything of that sort in this case. This is a matter of statute regulation. The gentleman will therefore appreciate, as part of the suggestion I make, that no notice is necessary by any committee to anyone, in theory of law and in practice. In fact every man, be be sitting member or be he contestant, is as much bound to take notice of that statute as he is bound to take notice of another law upon the statutebook. ow, looking to this as a precedent, I ask the gentleman to explain, if he will, by what proriety the House can direct the ComElections to do the very thin in this case which the statute says it shall not o, and to override the very consideration, for the sake of which alone the statute was enacted. How can this House properly establish for a precedent that the ComElections shall disregard a statute which says. virtually, that no evidence shall be before it for this purpose except that evidence which was, according to the statute, transmitted to the Clerk of the House, and by him kept? How can the House properly say that the committee shall take into consideration in determining this case the very evidence excluded, and not only exclude, but branded by the statute as improper evidence, illegal evidence, incompetent evidence to be before the committee at all? Now, if the gentleman will relieve this case from the difficult which presents itself in the view of establishing such a precedent us that, he will relieve me, and, I have no doubt, other gentlemen in regard to this question.
Mr. BROOKS. If there hasbeen an neglect or violation of the law in this case by either party it has been done by both parties. It is not pretended that the testimony of the contestuntgvus brought here until late in November or in December. The takingof the testimony was closed on both sides in April last; no testimony has been taken on either side since April last and the testimony of the contestant in this case was not presented to this House until the 1st week in December, and it was not brought to the Clerk of the House until some time in November.
Mr. BROOKS. I will proceed to answer the point of his inquiry.
Mr. CONKLING. Allow me right here to say that the argument of the gentleman does not touch the point I make, because the evidence on the other side not being here, we are not acting upon it. When it comes up no doubt we will consider that question. Now, regardless of what has been done on the other side, and pointing the inquiry to this evidence, I would like an answer.
Mr. DODGE, (the coritestant.) I Wish to make a suggestion. I said in my remarks that I should never have raised the nestion at all in this House in regard to the reach of the statute on the part of the gentleman if it had not been for the manner in which I have been delayed for 2 or 3 days in committee. I am willing now, so tar as I am concerned, out of courtesy to the gentlemanbut I forget, he does not want my courtesyI am Willing to withdraw any objections I have made before the House, if it is the desire of the committee, in order that these papers may be printed as rapidly as possible, and that the committee may at once proceed With the examination of this matter.
Mr. BROOKS. You might work the committee to death.
Mr. DODGE, (the contestant.) I do not want them worked to death.
Mr. BROOKS. I can work all day and all in lit, and endure as much as any man.
Mr. DODGE, (the contestant.) I would remark to the gentleman, before the committee has taken up any time in reference to wealth and other outside things, I would like to get at 1866., v615 this matter, if that is understood, and go right into the investigation of the question at issue.
Mr. BROOKS. The gentleman will soon learn that neither he nor I can control the proceedings of this House. If he should have the good fortune to be brought on the floor of this House tomorrow he will soon find that nothing will be done here until next June or July except to debate certain measures. It is not in the power of either of us to hurry the committee, c olera or no cholera. All of us know that we have got to sit here till July or August. Hence, not only the House, but the gentlemen on the committees, will enjoy themselves socially, as well as politically, spite of any hurrying we can inflict upon them. No influence caninduce them to hurry: neither his nor mine; and when he has been here a little longer he will find out that this is not NewYork city, but a very different sort of a place; and that whenever this body undertakes to hasten it hastens very slowly. So far as I am concerned, I am willing to act. But there are other cases pressing here. My friend on the left, [Mr. HARRIS] this disloyal gentleman is to be turned out of the House; and he ought to be, if he is a rebel. He is anxious fora hearing before the ComElections, and he cannot get it.
Mr. RAYMOND. Will the gentleman allow m e a question?
Mr. RAYMOND. I have already explained the motive which induced me to may 1: the motion to reconsider the vote already taken, and that was simply to have some exlanation of the causes of e ay. I understan the contestant now to say that he was entirely willing that this matter shall be drop edif the sitting member will assure him that e intends to go forward promptly and readily with the inves tiation of this matter.
Mr. BROOKS. I will go as fast as possible. what a pity it is that we have wasted the time of this country from a quarter just 12 to a quarter to 3 in debate upont is matter!
Mr. RAYMOND. I do not think this time has been wasted. We have arrived at some knowledge of the facts of the case, with which we had not the slightest acquaintance before. I think the time so farhas been well spent, and if the 2 contestants are nowagreed that time enough has been spent in the matter, I am quite willing to withdraw the motion.
Mr. BROOKS. I have something more to say, but I have nothing further now if that is the understanding. A l I want is to have the papers printed. The motion to reconsider was accordingly withdrawn.
The SPEAKER then proceeded to call the committees for reports of a private nature, befrinning with the ComElections. Mr. JOHNSON. I rise to a privileged motion. I move to reconsider the vote by which these papers have been referred, and to lay that motion on the table.
The SPEAKER. It is too late; it must be made on the same day or the day succeeding.
Mr. JOHNSON. Then there is no use in my motion at all. EMPLOYEE IN THE PRESIDENTS HOUSE.
Mr. SPALDING, from the ComAppropriat, reported back a bill to authorizethe President to appoint certain officers of his household, and fixing their salaries, and asked that it be referred to the ComWhole, to be made the special order for Tuesday next.
The SPEAKER. There are 3 or 4 special orders which antedate it.
Mr. SPALDING. I will run the risk. The order was aceordingly made.
Mr. ELIOT. I make o jection to any more special orders being made before the consideration of the Freedmens Bureau. I now move thalt1 the ordei of the morning hour be dispensed Wit.
The SPEAKER. That can only be done by unanimous consent.
Mr. ELIOT. I ask, then, nm a be disl pensed with, and that the House resume the a consideration of the Freedmens Bureau. the gentleman on the other side [Mr. KERR] has the floor, and I am desirous to have the debate continue and close.
Mr. HALE. I object. QUARANTINB IN NEWYORK.
Mr. RAYMOND, by unanimous consent, introduced abill to provide for the erection of warehouses in the ort of NewYork, for the reception of mere and ise arriving in vessels subject to quarantine by the laws of the State of NewYork; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce.
Mr. RAYMOND also, by unanimous consent, introduced a JtResolution authorizing and directing the Secretaries of War and the Navy to place hulks and vessels at the disposal of the commissioners of quarantine in NewYork; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I now demand the regular order of business.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I ask the gentleman to withdraw the demand to enable me to introduce a proposition to prevent the cholera coming to this cit.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I cannot withdraw it for any purpose.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Well, he will be the 1st man to take it. [Laughter]
Mr. WARD, from the ComClaims, reported back, with the recommendation that it do not pass, bill of the House No. 113, for, the benefit of Rev. John C. Jacobi; and the same was laid upon the table. SARAH WITT. On motion of Mr. WARD, the ComClaims was discharged from the further consideration of bill of the House No. 183, for the relief of Sarah Witt; and the same was referred to the ComInvalidPens. JOHN WHISTLER.
Mr. WARD, from the ComClaims, made an adverse report on the petition of John Whistler, and others, for compensation for destruction of property which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. NAVAL OFFICERS, and others.
Mr. WARD also. from the same committee, made an adverse reart on the petition of naval officers, masters of) merchant vessels, marine insurance companies, and others, asking for compensation; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. ADDIE THOMPSON.
Mr. SLOAN, from the ComClaims, made an adversereport on the petition of Addie Thompson, of Norwich, NewYork, asking for relief; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. NANCY M. WILSON.
Mr. SLOAN also, from the same committee, made an adverse report on the petition of Mrs. Nancy M. Wilson, late of the State of Missouri, asking compensation for property destroyedby the Union Army and y guer rillas during the late war; which waslaid on the table, and ordered to be printed. MURPHY V. JONES.
Mr. SLOAN also, from the same committee, made an adverse reportbn the petition of Mur phv V. Jones; which i was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. SAMUEL v. n. STRIDER.
Mr. SLOAN also, from the same committee, reported back, with the recommendation that it do not pass, bill of the House No. 110, for the relief of Samuel V. B. Strider, and the same was laid upon the table. J. DUDDING.
Mr. BLOAN also. from the same committee, made an adverse report on the petition of J. Dudding, for relief; which was aid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. FREDERICK SIXlllRDAN. Mr. SLOAN also, from the same committee, made an adverse report on the petition of Frederick Sheridan, praying compensation for inju ries received in t le Govenment service; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. rarnr exMsausna.
Mr. SLOAN also, from the same committee, made an adverse report on the petition of Pat rick Menumara; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. C. J. FIELD and C. F. CLAY.
Mr. SLOAN. I am also instructed by the ComClaims to make an adverse report on the claim of C. J. Field and C. F. Clay. will state that this casccomes within the resolution adopted by the House the other day on motion of the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. DELASO] The report was laid ordered to be printed. PIHINEAS T. FBAZEE.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts, from the some committee, made an adVerse report on the claim of Phineas l. Frazee; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. ORDER OF PROCEEDING TOMORBOW.
Mr. STEVENS. I understand it has been arranged to have tomorrow devoted to debate upon the Freedmens Bureau bill. A reatmauy members wish to know if any other “usiness is to be done tomorrow excepting debate.
Mr. ELIOT. I suppose that by a general understanding of the House the whole of tomorrow will be occupied in debating that hill, without. taking any vote on it or doing any other business.
The SPEAKER. The Chair willask whether it is intended to exclude the introduction by unanimous consent of resolutions or bills for reference merel.
Mr. WASHB RNE, of Illinois. I think we better have it understood that no business at all will be done tomorrow.
The SPEAKER. Unless some objection be made, it will be entered as the order of the House that no business be done tomorrow, but that the session shall be devoted exclui sively to debate upon the Freedmens Bureau bill as the special order. Noobjection was made. COMMODORE JOHN A. WINSLOW.
Mr. WrlSHBURN, of Massachusetts. I am instructed by the ComClaims to report back the memorial of Commodore John A. Winslow, for relief for property destroyed or appropriated by the Government during the rebellion, and ask that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of the same.
Mr. BANKS. I would like to ask my colleague [Mr. wasnnrnx] if there has been any hearing before the committee in that case. The reason I make the inquiry is that Commodore Winslow has informed me that some information upon this subject has been forwarded which I am sure the committee has not yet received. It is well known that Commodore Winslow commanded the frigate which destroyed the rebel pirate Alabama, and he should have an opportunity to be heard.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. The House has passed a resolution which covers this case, in the opinion of the committee, and therefore there is at one course to be pursued.
Mr. BANKS. If that is so I have nothing more to say., The motion of Mr. Wasnanmv, of Massachusetts, was then agreed to. ROBERT MORRIS.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts, also, from the ComClaims, made an adupon the table, and verse report upon the petition of Robert Morris; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. WILLIAM JOHN HARDING.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts, also, from the same committee, made an adverse report upon abillfH.R.No. 137) for the relief of William John Harding; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. DAVID ELLIOTT and GEORGE H. A. KUNST.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts, also, from the same committee, made an adverse report. 11. on the petition of David Elliott and George A. Kunst; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. HARRISON RINGGOLD.
Mr. WARD, from the same committee, made an adverse report upon the petition of Harrison Ringgold for compensation for property destroys; which was aid on the ta le, and ordered to be printed. LEGISLATIVE, ETC., APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. STEVENS, by unanimous consent, reported from the Committee on A propriations, abill making appropriations for e legislative, executive, and Judicial expenses of the Government, for the year ending June 30, 1867; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union, and made the special order for Monday, the 12th instant, after the morning hour and from day today until disposed of; and ordered to be printed. ruomas POSTER.
Mr. STEVENS also, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on A propriations, reported back the petition of ohn FOster, chief messenger in the 3rd Auditors office, Treasury dept, and moved that the same be referre to the ComClaims. The motion was agreed to. CHARLES H. TORREY.
Mr. NIBLACK, from the ComClaims, made an adverse report on the petition of Charles H. Torrey; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. Mr. L. I]. CLARKE.
Mr. NIBLACK also from the same cem mittee, reported back the petition of Mr. L. B. Clarke; and moved that the same be referred to the ComElections. The motion was agreed to. ABELARD QUTHRIE.
Mr. NIBLACK also, from the same committee, reported back a bill for the relief of Abelard uthrie; and moved that the same be referred to the ComElections. The motion was agreed to. HENRY HAYIS.
Mr. THORNTON, from the same committee, made an adverse report upon the memorial of Henry Hayes; which 1 was aid on the table, and ordered to be printed. HARRISON GILL.
Mr. THORNTON, from the same committee, made an adverse report upon the petition of Harrison Gill.
Mr. McKEE. I understood in committee that this case was not to be reported upon until we had had some further action upon it.
Mr. THORNTON. I know there was some conversation in committee, but my understanding was that u n the memorial and vouchers as presented, the committee had agreedto report adversely upon this claim.
Mr. McKEE. My understandin was that the report was not to be made for the present.
Mr. THORNTON. Very well; then I will withdraw it. The report was accordingly withdrawn. COLONEL Mr. E. BRYANT.
Mr. McKEE, from the ComClaims, reported a biil for the benefit of Colonel Mr. E. Bryant, late commissary of subsistence, &c.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Let the bill be read at length. The bill was read. It directs the properaccounting officer of the Treasu Dept to allow Colonel Mr. E. Bryant, rfhte commissary of subsistence, on a settlement of his accounts, a credit of$1, 484 13, the vouchers and accounts for which were lost or destroyed, falling into the hands of the enemy at Holiy Springs, mississippi, on the 20th of September, 1862, if on examining the evidence the Commissary General shall deem him justly entitled to the credit; but the same is not to be allowed without the Commissary General shall certify his approval thereof.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, called for the reading of the report, and it was read. It states that Colonel Bryant kept all his accounts correctly and had propervouchers for them; but that one voucher for $1, 088 63 was lost in the course of transmission to the proper Dept; that another voucher for $395 50 was destroyed, together with Colonel Bryants books and papers, at the ca ture of Holly Springs, Mississippi, on the 20tii of December, 1862; that by reason of this destruction of his books and papers Colonel Bryant could not make rpports coverin the deficits.
Mr. ASHBURN, of Illinois. As the bill provides that this credit shall not be allowed except a on examination by the Commissary General} shall not object to the passage of the bill, as I should otherwise do.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I desire to say, in connection with this bill, that there are many other cases of the same class, and it occurs to me that there should be some general law to cover such cases. There is a law, Feb ruary 7, 1863, which provides for the settlement of all claims of this ind where the rank of the officer is not higher than a captain. This case is excluded from the operation of that law. I have no objection whatever to the passage of this bill; but I take this Opportunity to suggest to the committee the propnety of preparing a general bill embracing all cases of this kind, so as to dispense with the necessit of legislating here upon each as arate case. he settlement of these claims, ike claims for commissary stores captured, should properly be intrusted to either the Commissary General or the SecyTreasury.
Mr. WASHBURITE, of Illinois. I differ with my friendfrom Pennsylvania as to the propriety of passin any general law to cover cases of this sort. I? there are any individual cases which are meritorious we have abundant time to pass upon them. I doubt whether ageneral law could be so framed as to embrace Only cases really meritorious.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I take issue with the Gentfrom Illinois. I think that bills of this character do not. generally receivean this House that degree of consideration to which often their merits entitle them. Cases of this sortare much more likekv to receive proper examination at the ban s of some appropriate executive officer, whose sworn duty it shall be to examine them carefully. In this way, too, the interests of the Treasury would be more effectually guarded than they frequently are in instances where special legislation is obtained to meet particular cases. I do not mean to intimate that the committee do not give these cases all the investigation in their power; but they have not the time which an executive officer of the Government, charged with the examination of such matters, would have. I am in favor of a gene ral law, under which some resonsible officer or officers of the Government 5 all be charged with the examination of cases of this description. I think that these losses should not be thrown upon the Government without the most careful consideration.
Mr. McKEId. With due deference to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, I think we need no general law on this subject. A general law, instead of relieving us from embarrassment, would only tend to create confusion. This is one of a class of cues which no general law can possibly reach, but which must be acted upon individual], according to their respective merits. The biil, in this case, provides that, before credit shall be given, satisfactory evidence must be presented to the Commissary General, so that the interests of the Treasury are properly guarded. The bill does not make any appropriation of money. cal the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. McKBE mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. JOHN W. CAMPBELL.
Mr. McKEE from the ComClaims, reported a bill for the benefit of John w. Camp be I; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill, which was read, directs the properaccounting Officers of the Treasury to allow John W. Campbell, late quartermaster of the 7th Kentucky cavalry, on the settlement of his accounts, $4, 770, money expended for the use of said regiment, the vouchers and accounts having been lost or destroyedby falling into the hands of the enemy at ynthiana, July 17 and August 23, and Richmond, Kentucky, August 30, 1862, respectively, if on examining the evidence the QuarterMGen shall deem him entitled to such credit.
Mr. McKEE. Mr. Speaker, I will say in regard to that bill that it is exactly of the na ture of the one just passed. The evidence is stron er, if possible, that this officer has done his whole dut, and that the papers and vouchers were lost y fallin into the hands of the enemy. There is int c petition a full statement of every dollar and eve cent which passed into his hands. I deman the previous question on the passage of the bill.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. ROLLINS mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. J.ingE HAMPTON.
Mr. ALLEY, from the comPostOffice, made an adverse report on the petition of J.inge Hampton, of Iowa; which was laid upon the table, and or dered to be printed. POST ROAD BILL.
Mr. ALLEY. I ask the unanimous consent of the House to take from the Speakers table the amendments of the Senate to House bill NO. 61, to establish certain post roads. There was no objection, and the amendments were taken u. The SPEAIiER stated that he had examined the amendments of the Senate, and that they contained nothing but for the establishment of post roads.
Mr. ALLEY. I am instructed by the comPostOffice to move that the amendments of the Senate be concurred in with sundry amendments.
The SPEAKER. If there be no objection, the reading of the amendments will be disensed with, as they are merel for the establishment of post roads asked or by members of Congress. The amendments of Mr. ALLEY were agreed to; and the amendments of the Senate, as amended, were concurred in.
Mr. ALLEY mtRtv the amendments were concurred in; an 1866. 617 upon the table. Agreed to. ADVERSE REPORTS.
Mr. WILSON, from the ComJudiciary, made the followin adverse reports; which were laid upon the tab e, and ordered to be printed: he memorial of Robert A. Hill for the relief of certain persons residing in the State of mississippi: The petition of Philip Frazer, district judge of the strict of Florida, for increase of salary; and The petition of A. G. Miller, for reimbursement of expenses incurred in aneffort to impeach him in the 38th Congress. HEIRS OF SHABBONA.
Mr. WINDOM, from the ComIndAffrs, made an adverse report on the petition of C. W. Marsh and others, for an annuity or some other relief for the heirs of Shabbona; which was laid on the table. BARNEY CAIN.
Mr. PERHAM, from the ComInvalidPens, reperted adversely on Senate bill No. 53, being an act for the relief of Bar ney Cain; which was laid on the table. WIDOWS, ETC., of DECEASED PRISONERS. On motion of
Mr. PERHAM. the ComInvalidPens was discharged from the consideration of the memorial of ydia J. Stull, praying that widows and orphans, km, of prisoners that died at andersonville and other rebel prisons be allowed the same commutation for rations us may be allowed to the surviving soldiers and officers discharged from said prisons; and the same was referred to the ComMilAffrs. JAMES FRIGATE.
Mr. PERHAM, from the same committee, reported adversely on the petition of James Friate, for an increase of his pension, or for a bee pension; which was laid on the table. CLOVER BROUGHTON and others.
Mr. PERHAM, from the same committee, made an adverse report on the petition of glover Broughton and 22 0t ers, residents of the town of Marlborough, Massachusetts, who served on board of a privateer in the war of 18812, praying for relie; which was laid on the ta e. DATE OF PENSIONS.
Mr. PERHAM, from the same committee, reported adversely on the petition of citizens of NewHampshire, praying that the pension law be so amended as to allow to soldiers pensions from the date of their discharge; which was laid on the table. CORDELIA MURRAY.
Mr. PERHAM, from the same committee, asked leave to report the following bill, and to have it considered at the present time: an act for the relief of Cordelia Murray, widow of George W. Murray. It provides for the payment to Cordelia Murray of the pension granted to George W. Murray by an act of Congress aprove December 20, 1864.
Skip Skip The bill was read a 1st and 2nd time, and orderengross for a 3rdrcading; and being engrossed, was read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. PERHAM mtRtv b the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. ROBERT HENNE.
Mr. PERHAM, from the same committee, asked leave to report a bill for the relief of Robert Henne, an to have it considered at the present time. The bill provides for an increase of pension to Robert enne, late of company I, 12th Missouri infantry, from 17 to 25 dollars permonth. It was read a 1st and 2nd time, and ordered to he engrossed for a 3rd. reading.
Mr. JOHNSON. I ask for the reading of the report.
Mr. JOHNSON. I am not disposed to make any opposition to the bill, but I suggest at this time that there is need of general legislation to provide for classes of this character, which are not now provided for. I took occasion some time ago, when the question of the appropriation ofine ncy for the payment of pensions was before the House, to state that there was a class of pensioners who were not provided for sufficiently in the general law. I e go so far as to say that aman who is disabled from earning his own livelihood by labor shall have full pay. There is another class of persons not provided for. You limit pensions to that class who have lost 2 arms and 2 eyes. Men may be disabled otherwise so as to be unable to help themselves. I know a case in which a soldier was shot through the body in the s ring of 1862. He is confined to his bed and is ependent on the charity ofhis neighbors for his support. The neighbors come in and wait on him night and day. Now, that class onght to be provrded for by some general law, an I submit that the ComInvalidPens ought to bring in a bill of that character. Because it is not every person that is so situated that he can get the ear of a member of congress, or get persons to draw up a petition and make his case known, so that conress, by special legislation, can reach his case. I have no objection to this bill, but I repeat that we ought to have a general law.
Mr. PRICE. I want to say to the House, in reference to this case, that I am personally acquainted with the applicant, and ii? there are any cases in the country in which additional pensions are renired, this is certainly one of those cases. 1 is man, with but one arm at the commencement of this rebellion, insisted persistently until he got himself into the service of his country. He followed the flag not only with his own regiment from Iowa, but when he could no longer retain a place there, he went into Missouriand joined a regiment there, and defended the flag until, in addition to the loss of an arm, he lost the use of the other arm, and was under the necessity of having a leg ampu Stated. such men, who rallied to the defense of their country under such circumstances, in the hour of her darkest peril, ought to be remembered by the friends of the nation when peace has once more dawned on the country.
Mr. PERHAM. Perhaps I ought to say, in reply to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, Jouxsou] that the ComInvalid iM)ern. sious have now under consideration various propositions for the amendment of the pension aws, among which is the one to which he has referred, and it will be considered and reported on in due time.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I am in favor of a General law on this subject, but I have no disosition to interfere with the passage of this bill. It does seem to me that the House will do it self great credit and the country great service by passing ageneral measure such as is suggested; but [do not desire to delay the passage of this bill, of which I am in favor.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein cordingly read the3rd time, and passed. Mr. PERHAM mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. CLARISSA BENSON and ELLEN HUGHES.
Mr. TAYLOR, from the ComInvalidPens, made an adverse report on the memorial of Clarissa Benson and Ellen Hughes; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to to be printed. WILLIAM G.ingRAHAM.
Mr. TAYLOR, from the same committee, made an adverse report on the petition of William G.ingraham, of Westfield, NewYork, asks engrossed, it was ac.ing for an increase of pension; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. JOHN ALFOHD.
Mr. TAYLOR, from the same committee, made an adverse report on the petition of John Alford, asking an increase of pension; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. CHARLES YOULY.
Mr. TAYLOR, from the same committee, reported a bill for the relief of Charles Youly; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill directs the SecyInterior to pay out of any fund which may hme been appropriated for the payment of pensions, to Charles Youly, of Dunkirk, Chatauque county, NewYork, late private in company D, 72nd regiment NewYorkvolunteers, the sum of $135 33 cents, being at the rate of 5 dollars permonth from the 25th day of November, 1862, to the 27th day of February, 1865. The report was read.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The amount of money involved in this case is very small, but it seems to me that this bill establishes a very vicious principle. It. changes the general law in regard to pensions, by allowing a party to come in and prove that he sent his papers, but that they did not reach the Pension office. The rule is that a party can only receive his pension from the time that his papers are 51. This bill takes claimants onto that rule, and leaves it open to pprties to prove in every case the time at which the papers were put in the postoffice. I am not unwillin to give this party $135 33}, the sum named in the bill, but I do object to the establishment of this principle, as it will lead to great abuse.
Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman is rightin art but not in whole. The present pension gaw gives a pension from the late of the discharge 1f the aplication is made within one year there after. his man Youly forwarded his a)plication within that time and it is proved by evidence satisfactory to the committee that through no negligence of his the application failed to reach the Pension Office in time. As soon as he learned that that was the case he renewed his aplication, but that was after the expiration o a year from the time of his discharge. It was the fault of the mail, or of the clerk of the Pension Oilice, who should have acknowl edged the receipt of it as provided by law. The man has used alL diligence in his power, and the committee do not consider that it was any fault of his and therefore we propose to allow him the small amount of 5 dollars a month from the time of his discharge to the filin of his application.
Skip Skip The bill was then ordered to he engrossed and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. The question was upon the passage of the bill, upon which the House divided; and there wereayes 70, noes not counted. So the bill was passed. Mr. TAYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. NAVY PENSIONS.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I ask unanimous consent to report back from the comInvalidPens House bill No. 82, allowing persons having lost one foot and one hand in the naval service of the U.S. the same pensions now allowed to persons having suffered the same loss in the military service, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, upon which I am directed by the committee to ask action at this time.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Let the substitute be read. The substitute was read. It provides that persons in the naval service of t to U.S., who have lost one foot and one hand in the line of their duty, shall be allowed the same nensions as is allowed by law to persons in the military service who have suffered similar losses; and also that the provisions of section 5 of the pension law of July 4, 1864, shall apply to persons in the naval service.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. The term “military” in the former law was construed not to include persons in the naval service of the U.S. The design of this substitute is to equalize the pension law.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. The ComNavAffrs have had referred to them a Senate bill which I think covers the same ground as this, and which the will report whenever an opportunity presents itself. f it is in order, I will report that bill from that committee at this time.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Do I understand the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ltren] to say that the Senate bill is precisely like the one reported from the ComInvalidPens?
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. It is not precisely the same, but it is intended to effect the 88 no object.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Then I would suggest to the Gentfrom Kentucky [Iv Mr. HARDING] that he accept the Senate bill as a substitute for his.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I will hear the bill read 1st. The Senate bill (No. 24) to amend section 5 of an act entitled “An act supplementary to an not entitled An act to grant pensions, approved July 4, 1864, ” was then read. t provides that the section referred to shall be amendedso as to allow persons in the Military or naval service of the U.S., who have lost both feet in the line of their duty, a pension of 20 dollars permonth; and those who, under like conditions, have lost both hands or both e es, a pension of 25 dollars permont.
Mr. BENJAMIN. That Senate bill does not cover the entire ground covered by the bill reported by the Gentfrom Kentucky, [Mr. Hsnmzvo. There is another law discriminating between those who have lost limbs in the military service, which does not aply topersons in the naval service. It is a law passed subsequently to the act of July 4, 1864, and provides for those who have lost one foot and one hand in the military service. The bill reported by the ComInvalidPens refers to that class of cases, extending pensions to the naval service.
Skip Skip The SPEAKER. The morning hour is just about. to expire. If this discussion continues the bill will o over. Mr. HARing, of Kentucky. I call the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; which was upon a reeing to the substitute reported by the committee. The substitute was agreed to. The bill as amended was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein engrossed, it was accordingly read the3rd time, and passed. Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky, mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to.
The SPEAKER. The morning hour having exired, the business now in order is the consideration of the bill (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau, on which the Gentfrom Indiana [Mr. 1151131“entitled to the floor.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I appeal to the Gentfrom Indiana to yield to me for a moment, that I may report and have passed a bill for the relief o an a edlad.
Mr. KERR. I cheerfuIly yield to the gentleman for that purpose. CATHARINE MooK.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky, by unanimous Then I prefer. consent, reported from the ComInvalidPens a bill for the relief of Catharine Mock; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. It provides for the payment of a pension of, 8 dollars permonth to Catharine Mock, of Baltimore, wrdow of William H. Mock.
Skip Skip The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky, mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to.
Mr. LAFLIN. I ask the Gentfrom Indiana [ML KERR] to yield to me for a moment that I may report a resolution from the ComPrintmg.
Mr. KERR. I yield to the gentleman. REPORT OF REVENUE COMMISSION.
Mr. LAFLIN, by unanimous consent, reported from the ComPrintg the ollowmg resolution; wluch was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved. That 20,000 extra copiesof the communication from the SecyTreasury. with the accompanyingreport of the commission appointed to make a revision of the revenue laws. pursuant to the act of March 3, 1865. be printed for the use of the membersof this House, without covers, excluding forms of bills.
Mr. LAFLIN mtRtv the resolution was passed; on the table. Agreed to.
Mr. ROLLINS. I ask the Gentfrom Indiana [Mr. KERR] to yield to me for a moment, that I may make a report.
Mr. KERR. I yield to the gentleman. MESSENGER FOR HOUSE POST OFFlCE.
Mr. ROLLINS, by unanimous consent, reported back from the Committee of Accounts the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the postmaster of the HoRep be allowed 2 additional messengersfor the term of 2 months, to be paid out of the continent fund of the House, at the rate of 75 dollars permonth.
Mr. ROLLINS mtRtv the resolution was agreed to; on the table. Agreed to. A. OUTERIE and Mr. L. B CLARKE.
Mr. DAWES. With the consent of the Gentfrom Indiana, [Mr. KERR] I move to reconsider the vote by which the House, a few moments ago, referred to the ComElections the petition of Mr. L. B. Clarke. I also move to reconsider the vote by which the bill for the relief of Abelard Guthrie was referred to the same committee. I desire that both motions shall be entered. I think that the House, in referring those 2 matters to that committee, must have acted under a misapprehension..
The Clerk read The House, agreeably to order, resumed the consideration of the bill (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau, on which Mr. Kenn was entitled to the floor.”
The SPEAKER. Before the Gentfrom Indiana proceeds, the Chair desires to make a statement. By order of the House, tomorrow will be devoted exclusively to speeches upon this bill, no vote to be taken. The Speaker will be compelled to be absent tomorrow, the last day on which he purposes to be absent during the session. He asrequested the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Wasnaunxs] to act as Speaker protem ore.
Mr. CHANLER. Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment?,
Mr. CHANLER. I wish to make a statement to the House in regard to that order of GenlSherman . There is in the hands of the president at this moment a declaration, which I have seen, written by GenlSherman and signed by him, declaring that when he made that order, or when he gave to the freedmen a place of refuge by that order, his pu use was not to give them a permanent title in the land, but to secure them only a temporary possession, a possessory title, for the purpose of giving homes to the campfollowers who were old and decrepid. He purposel and specially excepted from that order all ablebodied men, and never dreamed that his order would carry with it the shadow of a title. He did not intend to assume, as the declaration in this section goes to show, that he could invade the rights of property or grant titles under a military order. Ierepu iates the whole doctrine assumed by this section. That letter should now be before the country, and in the hands of this House. It was in my hands to present to this House, but owing to the delay consequent on the debate, I with drew my claim to present it, and it was given to m colleague [Mr. RAYMOND] to present to this House. I make this statement in order that the gentleman, in making his argument upon this bill, may understand the exact poration that GenlSherman takes, and that neither GenlSherman nor any other officer may be dragged into this attempt to usurp legislative power under militar orders.
Mr. LIOT. Will the Gentfrom Indiana [Mr. Kenn] yield to me for a moment?
Mr. ELIOT. With the leave of the Gentfrom Indiana, [Mr. Ksnn] I will say a few words in reply to what has just fallen from the Gentfrom NewYork, [, Mr. CHANLER] I understand him to say, and I desire to see if I understand him correctly, that a letter has i been written by GenlSherman to the president, which the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Ginsum] was requested to communicate to this House, and which he has left in the hands of his colleague, Mr. Rnvsroxn] expecting that he would do it. Am I right?
Mr. KERR. I hold in my hand that Order No. 16, of GenlSherman . If it will relieve gentlemen of this crossdiscussion, I will in cororate the material part of it in my remarks. Mr. ELIOT. I understand the Gentfrom NewYork
Mr. Ottawa] to admit that I am correct in what I supposed he intendetLto saythat he was authorized either by GenlSherman or the President to communicate that letter to this House.
Mr. CHANLER. No such thing. I will not delay the argument of my friendfrom Indiana [Mr. Kenn] by undertaking to reply to the very unfair insinuation of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. ELIOT.] But I will say that I had nothing to do with GenlSherman or the President. I only stated the fact that such a paperas that was seen bv me, and that it had bReaernnpolaucnedj in the hands of my colleague, [Mr.
Mr. CHANLER. It may have been written within 48 hours, so far as I know. I made the declaration that such a letter has been written; that it was written at the express request of the President; I had nothing further to do with it.
Mr. ELIOT. I understood the gentleman to say it was put in his hands to communicate to this House.
Mr. CHANLER. I did say I had been requested to communicate it to this House.
Mr. CHAXLER. I will not say. The gentleman knows as well as I do, and he can make the declaration. But his object now is to throw a doubt or some slur upon my statement. He knows the truth of my assertion. I made the statement merely in order that my friendfrom Indiana [Mr. KERR] in his argument should make no mistake on this point. I am doing it in fair play to him, and not for the purpose of interru ting or embarrassing his argument.
Several MEMBERS. Let us have the letter.
Mr. CONKLING. Let me ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] where that. letter is.
Mr. ELIOT. I suppose that it is in the hands of the commissioner of SCarolina.
Mr. KERR. If the honorable Gentfrom Massachusetts will present that letterpl will give way for that purpose.
Mr. ELIOT. Why, sir, I had not the letter in my hands for 5 minutes. It was today shown to me in company with my distinguished friendfrom Ohio, [Mr. BINGHAM] and was read by both of us.
Mr. KERR. Has the gentleman that letter now inhis possession? I
Mr. ELI T. Certainly I have not. It iIs, suppose. in the hands of the party who obtained it from the President. It was a letter addressed by GenlSherman to the President, and will, I have no doubt. find its way in some manner to this House. I have it not, or I would produce it. with great pleasure.
Mr. BINGHAM. Will the Gentfrom Indiana [Mr. Kenn] allow me to say one word of eXplanation in reference to this letter of GenlSherman ?
Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I desire to state my recollection of the communication made by the commissioner of SCarolina. When he came today and showed this letter to the honorable chairman of the freedmens committee [Mr. Euror] and myself I thought that, as a member of the House, I ought to know how came GenlSherman to be writ.ing any letters on the subject. I therefore ventured to make that inquiry, to which the commissioner of SCarolina, according to my present recollectionof course the honor able chairman of the committee Will correct me if I am mistaken replied that the President had made the request of GenlSherman . As I understand the matter, GenlSherman Simply made a respectful answer in accordance with the request of the POTUS
Mr. WILLIAMS. Will the gentleman allow me to ask a nestion?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Will he be good enough to state when and where the Executive has made any such announcement as that to which he refers; and whether the latest outgiving from that Dept of the Government has not been that contained in the opinion of the At torney General conveyed to the Senate by the President, which is to the effect that the war against the rebellious States was not yet ended?
Mr. KELLEY. I know well what the AttyGen has said; and while I entertain to ward that officer high personal regard, based upon a very pleasant personal acquaintance, I be leave respectfully to say here that in my in gment the position upon that subject assumed by him in that communication is as radically wrong in principle and in fact as the other position to which have referred here. I prefer to take the announcement of the President himself, as he knows what the facts are. We all know, in spite of the letter of the AttyGen, that there is no war in this country. It is a patent, notorious, and nude niable fact that there is no enemy in arms any where. Gentlemen must not undertake in this country to perpetuate a war upon (pager. They have no right to keep asunder the i erent sections of this nation upon any assumed or imaginary state OfllOHiillllES until they can accomplish certain cherished partisan purposes. I have not the communication of the president at my desk now, but will incorporate it in my remarks.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I was about to ask the gentleman when and where the President had made the announcement to which he referred.
Mr. KERR. The statement is contained in the answer of the President in reply to ii resolution of the Senate, and is dated December 18, 1865, and accompanied the letter of Lien tenant GenlGrant.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I think the gentleman will look in vain for anything of the sort in that ctter.
Mr. HILL. I move to amend the pending motion to recommit the bill by addin to it instructions to the committee to amen the bill as follows: Amend the 1st section by striking out of lines 6 and 7 the following words. nnmcly, “in all parts of the U.S. ”and insertin lieu theref the following, namely. “, in nll the States lately in rebellion and also in the Statesof Delaware. Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri.” Amend the proviso in the 5th section by in line ten. between the words "the" an “ionwsenretirn. g the word 1 former.” Amend the proviso in the 5th section by in line ten betWeen the words “the” and oinwsneertrisn, g the word former, ” and strike out all between the word "authorized.” in line 12 and "to, ” in line 14. of said section.
Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois. Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment to offer a resolution tor reference to a committee?
Mr. MARSHALL. Certainly. STEAMDOAT HLOTS, AFRICAN TRADE, ETC.
Mr. “IASHBURNE, of Illinois, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to s Rnrilued, That the ComCommerce be instructed to inquire as follows, and report by bill or otherwise, namely: 1. l hether any legislation is necessaryto prevent the combinationof pilots of steamboatson the west orn waters. 2. Into the expediencyof abolishing the omensof. aval officersand surveyors. T3. Into the condition of the American trade on the coast of Africa, and what measures, if any. are nce cs lsry to extend and protect it. l
Mr. MARSHALL resumed the floor, but yielded to Mr. BITTER, who moved that the House adjourn. The motion was a eed to; and accordingly (at 4 oclock aniiT 55 minutes p.m.) the House adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. SATURDAY, February 3, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m., Mr. WAsiiiiuniviI, of Illinois, occupying the chair as Speaker profem ore. Prayer by the haplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of yesterday was read and aproved.
The SPEAKER protern ore. The House is in session, under order of the House, for the psurpose only of debate upon the Freedmens ureau bill, as the special order. No business is in order, and no motion will be in order except a motion to adjourn.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. WILLIAI. I. llICDONALD, its Chief Clerk, informed the House that the Senate had passed a bill (S.No.61) to protect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rights, and to furnish the means 1866. 627 of their vindication; in which he had been directed to ask the concurrence of the House.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. Would itbe proper, under the order of the House on yester ay, for me to move the reference of this bill to the ComJudiciary, and that it be printed?
The SPEAKER protempore. The Chair thinks such a motion would not be in order, as it is in the nature of business. PREEDMENS BUREAU. The House, a eeabl to order, resumed the consideration of the bil (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau, on which Mr. MARSHALL was entitled to the floor.
Mr. ELIOT. I would ask the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. MARSHALL] whether he would be understood as saying that in the State of Illinois the ordinary course of judicial rocced in s has been interrupted by the rebeliion?
Mr. ELlOT. If l understand the gentleman correctly he has taken the ground that in his judment the ordinary course of judicial proceeings has been interrupted in everyState of the Union in consequence of the rebellion. If that is his view, then the course of his argument is legitimate. I take issue with him upon that view, and desire to say simply that this 7th section applies only to those States and districts wherein the ordinary course of judicial proceeding has been interrupted, and nowhere 6.
Mr. THORNTON. Will my colleague yield to me for a moment?
Mr. THORNTON. I do not like to take up the gentlemans time; but as I desire to understand his posdion, I wish to ask him whether he assumes that the war is not over?
Mr. THORNTON. Then I would call the gentlemans attention for a sincle moment to the following letter of Generatl Grant to the POTUS: “There issuchuniversal acquiescencein the authority of the General Government throughout the pertions of country visited byme that the mere presence of a military orce. Without regard to numbers, is lufiicinnt to maintain order. The goodof the country and econom require that the force kept in the interior. wheret orearemnny freedmen. (elsewhere intho southern States than at forts upon the sen coastno force is necessary)should all be white troops.”
Mr. KELLEY. I desire to makeasuggestion at this point. I will not detain the gentleman a moment. Mr. Speaker, just at this point I desire to say that a distinguished general, a citizen of Alabama, who recruited his regiment of loyal Ala bamians, served with them with distinction in the war, marched with Sherman during the whole of his grand march, waited upon me last evening, and gave me, among other things, an Alabama newspn er, which regret I have not brought to the lgouse this morning, showing the execution of one woman and 5 men for larceny, under a sentence of the court; one woman and one man for stealing a horse, and one man for stealing a watch.
Mr. KELLEY. Tea, sir, hung. One man was sentenced to 99 years imprisonment, if my memory serves me, for attempting to steal a horse.
Mr. RO USSEAU. Was that under the decision of a court and jury, or of a mob?
Mr. KELLEY. It was in the regular court proceedings in a leadin journal of the State of Alabama, and was inilorsed by the editor in an article announcing that the negroes must be kept away from the cities and towns, and that the plantation was the place for them. It had the elaborate indorsement of the editor.
Mr. KELLEY. With the consent of the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. Motrine &1
Mr. SMITH. I would ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania if he has never read in the news opera of white men in SCarolina and the South having been hung for stealing horses?
Mr. KELLEY. I was coming to the matter implied by the question of my distinguished friendfrom Kentucky.
Mr. SMITH. All I wish is, that there shall be equal justice done to the people of the South as to representations on this floor.
Mr. IxELLEY and for that purpose I desire the passage of the Freedmens Bureau bill. For I turned to the distinguished gentleman who brought me the account of that last out rage, and to the other citizens of Alabama who were with him, and I said, “Is this the punishment you mete out to white men in your State for such offenses 1” and they answered unanimously, ” No.”
Mr. KELLEY. It was General Spencer, of Alabama, the colonel of the 1st regiment of loyal Alubamians. He is not a man who conceals his name.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I wish to say that he may be a distinguished man, but it is the 1st time I ever heard of him.
Mr. KELLEY. Thatis quite possible. He may be a distinguished general; for all the in telligence of the country does not reach the central "part of Kentuck.
Mr. BIO USSEAU. wisRILtoausgahytetrhJat I had command of iiorthernlAlabama and middle Tennessee for nearly 2 years, and I believe I know every loyal and disloyal man of prom inence in that country. I will not say that Colonel Spencer may not have been there, and I deny, in common With the whole army, It only proposes that where the black man is of that country, that he is a distinguished general or a distinguished anything else.
Mr. KELLEY. I would take the word of old Tecumseh Sherman against that of m distin uished military friend, much as I vslhe him. I know that General Spencer served with mark under GenlSherman , and I think at one time upon his stall“. I simply wanted to call attention to the fact that they hang black men and women for lur ceny in Alabama, and that they sentence them to 99 years imprisonment, and there is no such punishment meted out to the white rebel who steals a black mans horse.
Mr. THORNTON. Then what sort of I right is it?
Mr. MOULTON. Marriage is a contract between individuals comctent to contract it.
Mr. THORNTON. s it a political or a civil right?
Mr. MOULTQN. It is a social rit. I understand that a civil right is a right t ata party is entitled to and thathe can enforce by operation of law.
Mr. THORNTON. I would ask my colleague if meninges are not contracted in all the States of this Union by virtue of provisions oflaw?
Mr. MOULTON. I think, perhaps, they are to a greater or less extent.
Mr. THORNTON. Then is not a contract provided for by law a civil right?
Mr. MOULION. It is not especially provided for by the law regulating it. The right to marry is a right which cannot be enforced. There are a great many things a man can do that are imperfect obligations which cannot be enforced by law, and hence are not civil rights contemplated by this bill.
Mr. HORNYTON. I call my collea res attention to section 7, upon which e is now commenting, which provides that Whcncverin any State or districtin which theordinary course of judicial proceedingshas been interrupted by the rebellion, and wherein. in consequence of any State or local law, ordinance. iolicc, or other regulation, custom, orprciudicc, any of the civil riclito or immunities belonging to white persons, including the right to make and enforce contracts, to sue. be parties and ive evidence. o inherit, purchase. lease sell. hold, and convey real and personal property and to havefull and equal benefit of all lawsan proceedings for the security of person and estate, are refused or denied to negroes, mulattocs, freedmen. refugees, or any other persons, on account of race color, or any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, Arc., Now, I insist that by fair, legitimate construction under that section, if the civil richt of marriage was denied to a black man with a white woman, it would make the white man who denied it amenable to the penalty “$1,000 fine and one years imprisonment under this law. I call his attention to it, and I ask him to reply to it.”
Mr. COOK. I would like to ask my colleague [Mr. THORNTON] whether he thinks that a whiteman has the right by law now to marry a black woman, and ii that is the civil right of the white man?
Mr. THORNTON. That depends on the law. In the State of Illinois, as my coll. no knows very well, it is against the law. It e pends on the state of the law everywhere whether the thing can be done of which he inquires. If the law were against it. of course a black man could not marry a white woman. If the law allowed it, as it does allow it in the case of a white man and a white woman, it would be legal.
Mr. COO. Is it as competent to prevent, byprovision of law, a black woman from marrying a white man, as it is to prevent a white man from marry in a black woman I
Mr. MARSHALL. I was speaking in reference to the restoration of the southern States to their constitutional relations to the Union. In order thatimay give my colleague an intelligent answer, I would ask him this question: if e Senate and HoRep should admits Sens&Reps From the southern States, would not the constitutional relations of those States to the Union be restored 2,
Mr. MARSHALL. Well, sir, I said that it was within the power of the majority here to direct the Clerk to exclude from this Hall all the members from Illinois; and as Tennessee now has a loyal Governor and is obeying the laws of the U.S. as the courts are now being held thereI said that the exclusion of Tennessee from representation in this congress is all the difference now existing, so far asI can see, between the State of Tennessee and the State of Illinois; and I think that this House has the same power to ciclude by brute force the members from Illinois. that it has to exclude the Representatives from Tennessee.
Mr. MOULTON. I ask my colleague to an swer the question which I at to him, whether, in his opinion, the State o Tennessee, or Ala bama, or Mississip i, or anyone of those southern States is enti edof right to representation upon this lioor?
Mr. MARSHALL. When they send hero loyalRe Representatives who can take the oath prescribed y the constitution and the laws, those Representatives, I think, are entitled to be sworn in and to take their seats as Representatives of their constituencies.
Mr. MOULTON. I would ask my colleague whether he is in favor of enforcing or repealing the test oath.
Mr. MARSHALL. That is a new question entirely. If the gentleman will give me time to explain my views on that subject I will do so. Mr. MOULTON. Cannot the gentleman answer yes or no? I am aware that it isa hard question, and I will not embarrass him by press iu it, if he prefers not to answer. Ida MARSHALL. I feel no embarrassment whatever on the question. I state to my colleague that if he will give me time to my views in regard to that test oath, express I will do so at this time.
Mr. MOULTON. I understand that my colle ue declines to answer the question. Mr. MARSHALL. No sir; do not decline; I do not do an thing of the kind.
Mr. MOULION. I have no objection to allowing the gentleman all the time he may desire, if it is understood that it is not to come out of in time. Severn Mnxssns. Oh no; goon.
The SPEAKER protempore, (Mr. GnixnsLL in the chair) by unanimous consent, laid before the House the followmg communication: Orrics or ran Conurssrossa or Pusuc Bortmsos. Carrroe or run U.S., Washington Cirv, February 3, 1 Dssa SIB: The dome will belighted by Gardiners electric apparatus at precisely 7 oclock this evIenthiningk., i f the members could be notified of the fact, that many of them would be glad to be present with their ladies. The manner of H hting is agreat triumph of art, and the picture in the dome appears much better by gaslight than by daylight. If you think proper, please causethe membersto be informed. Yours, very truly, B. B. FRENCH, GNBMMMOMT Public Buildings. Hon. Senuvurn Conn: Spec HoRep, U.S. rnnnnarnss BUREAU AGAIN.
Mr. SMITH. I ask the indulgence of my colleague to offer an amendment. TheSPEAKER protempore, (Mr. Gmsxsu. in the chair. It is not in order.
The SPEAKER protemporc. If it is in the nature of an argument it may be read.
Mr. SMITH. Can I have itread for the purpose of offering it on Monday? h
Mr. RITTER. I yield for the purpose of having it read.
Mr. BANKS. If it is a proposition that leads to action either now or on Monday it cannot be read.
Mr. SMITH. My colleague agrees that it may be read.
The SPEAKER protempore. If it is part of the speech of the Gentfrom Kentucky it may be read.
Mr. RITTER. I decline to have it read as a part of my speech.
The SPEAker protom ore. Then the Gentfrom Kentucky [Mr. Itirrnn] will proceed.
Mr. KELLEY. Will the gentleman yieldto me a moment. I do not desire to disturb the gentleman in the cOurse of his remarks. Went to my room since I last had the pleasure of addressing the House and found t ie new aperto which I referred. It is the Tuscalposa. bserver ofksvaturday, December 9, 1865, bein the max j6thnumber of the 19thv0. nme of t t paper. I find thntI was mistaken in saying that 5 persons had been hung; there were 3 2 menand one Woman: “Ciizouir Conan the following are someof the Ieadin casestried and disposed of by the court, up to Frimy, 8th ins nt, to wit: 5 “KINXONJL ire manLarceny; Penitentiary for ears. IJoflu and Bonus, freedmenLarcenyof horse; Penitentiary for 12years. “DAVID a freedmen Larcenyof horse; Peniten tiary for 9h years 7 7. “Amos and flu, freedmen Larceny of horses: Aaron to be hangedEli, Penitentiary for 25years. Room. a freedmen Assault to murder; Peniten tiar for 3 years.” HiLitv, a freedmenStealingwatch from dwelling: Penitentiary for 5 " years. ELIZA, afreedwoman Lnrcony; Penitentiary for l5years. “Essay and Pint, freedmen Larceny of horses; to be hauled. “ trihfitf! 1866. 637 "BuLY. Fieed woman Laroeny from a dwelling: Penitentiary for 5years. “EMBLIXE and ManosnEr Murder; case undo elde. "The criminal docket for this special term is large h and precedent: and unless the negro population rearm, and that speedily. penitentinrics Will have to beerectedin every county instead of every State. This is a lamentable stateo thin, but is neverthe less true in every particular. themigre, ought, if possible, to be kept from congregatingin our towns and cities. his true place being the plantation. Sep Iated from this. He cannot obtain share subsistence: hence s has necessarily to lander and steal to supply the wants of nature. iswill bea grave subject for our lawmakers to cognate upon.”
Mr. KELLEY. It is not givensimply the proceedings in the circuit court in Ala ama.
Mr. DAWES. Was it in a State court or a U.S. court?
Mr. KELLEY. A State court, I presume, although it is not distinctly announced.
Mr. CHANLER.Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order.
The SPEAKER protempore. man will state his point of order.
Mr. CHANLER. My point of order is that my colleague from NewYork [Mr. CONKLING] and the chairman of the ComAppropriat [Mr. STEVENS] are out of or or in holdin a conversation while the Gentfrom I Kentuckv is addressing the House.
The SPEAKER protempore. The point of order is well taken. Gentlemen will resume their seats and not converse in an audible tone.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. It was no disturbance to inc whatever. Are not such things customary were?,
Mr. CONKLING. Before the Gentfrom Kentucky resumes his speech, I beg his permission to make a remark.
Mr. CONKLING. My collea efrom sbme district the 7th or the eig th, or some where there has made a remark with the aparent purpose of conveying to the Gentfrom Kentucky the impression that is speech was not listened to here, or that something was going on in derogation of that politeness due to the gentleman. I beg, therefore, to assure him that it was his speech which was the subject upon which a single remark was passing between gentlemen here. I submit to the gentleman who made this point of order with so much originality and genius, whether it was worth while to call the attention of the House to what was really a perfectl respectful proceeding to the Gentfrom Kentucky.
Mr. ELIOT. I only desire to inquire of the Gentfrom Kentucky whether he has it in his power to state the name of any out within the State of Kentucky who has and charge of matters under the bureau and who has exposed himself to this censure?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Yes, sir. I never say anything that I am not. willing to stand by. I will not come here and make such allusions to persons und refuse their names when called for )y their friends. I refer to Colonel McCaleb, as one of the men connected with the Freedmens Bureau in Kentucky and he is the man whom I told that if he undertook to arrest me and my family as others had been arrested and punished I would kill him and Captain Ken ned was another I referred to.
Mr. ELIOT. I ask the gentleman whether Mr. Kennedy was not appointed in Kentucky before the bureau took charge of affairs there?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I do not know. Colo nel McCaleb, who preceded him, received or ders from General Fiske.
Mr. ELIOT. Is it not true that Mr. Ken(I was appointed by a gentleman who occupied the position of post commander?
Mr. ELIOT and is it not true that Mr. Kennedy was removed from his office within a few days after the bureau took charge under the present officer?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I do not know how many days afterward; butl do know that be committed more outrages there than the people will be able to forget in 30 years.
Mr. ELIOT. Is it not also true, on the removal of Mr. Kennedy, the gentleman himself was called upon by the asst commissioner there to recommend a successor; and whether he did not recommend the gentleman who has ever since occu ied that position?
Mr. ROUSS AU. I was called on before his removal, and I did recommend Colonel W. P. Thomasson, who is a gentlemnn in every way nnexeeptionable, and wh0 now fills that position.
Mr. ELIOT. Mr. Kennedy being out of the way, can the gentleman name any other gentleman connected with the Freedmens Bureau against whom he complains?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I have had no further uc naintance with them, and I am sorry that I have had any. [Laughter]
Mr. CONKLING. Willthe gentleman allow me a moment?
Mr. CONKLING. As the gentleman has referred to me, I desire to set him right on a statement of fact.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Excuse me, if on please. I would rather go on. I do not like to have my train of thought broken in u n.
Mr. CONKLING. The entIhliiian does not state correctly the position took.
Mr. CONKLING. I trust shall not interfere with the gentlemans line of argument by saying that be quite misapprehends, and therefore quite misstates, the position which I took. The remark which he refers to was a question bpro rounded to the Gentfrom Ohio, i Mr. iH.NO.]
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Perhaps I (lid. Iwill read it, and the House can see whether I did or not: “ Mr. Contain o. I desire to ask the gentlemen from China question. Iwislitosuy that l listenedwith very great p easuro to the reading of the report made y exatmheingeedntleman somedays ago and having onoo this question, I agree with him, as understand his report and I obligation feel for one under great tohim. tlesirsto ask himwhatis the difference.not as a matterof clemency and discretion, but asa matteroflaw. betweennclaim presentedby a if disloyal personundone presentedby a loyal man both men were citizens of the country occupied and heldbytheenemy? Iask the questionin tholight of the decisionof the court in the prize cases."
Mr. DELANO. I do not wish to interrupt the Gentfrom Kentucky, but some time in the course of his remarks I desire him to allow me to explain what I meant by the language that I used in re ly to the Gentfrom NewYork, if he wi I give me the opportunity.
The Clerk read, as follows: ResolvedImflie HoRep, f the a greu of the U.S.: That.the present deplorable civilWar has been forced upon the couptryby the dis unionists of the southern States.now inarms against the constitutionalGovernmon and in arms around the capital; thatin this nations emergency Congress, hanishin all feelingsofincre passionor resentmen will recollectonly its duty to the whole country: the this war is not wagedon their part in any spirit of oppression, or for any purpose of conquestor subjugation or purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacyof the Constitutionand to reserve the Union, with all the dignity equality and rights of the severalStates unimpaired: and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease."
Mr. DELANO. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. In a moment. Sir. my State seceded after a fashion. We had for a time a provisional governor. General Bragg, with is army, inaugurated a rebel governor in the capital of the State, and took the State out of the Union in a certain way. But, sir, will the gentleman tell me that this made me an enemy of the Govornment? Will he tell me that the man from Tennessee or Mississippi or Alabama who foughton the side of the Government throughout the war was an enemy because someoft e disloyal citizens of his State claimed that they had carried the State out of the Union? Why, air, when did our enmity begin“! Did it begin at Shiloh, or perryville, at Stone River, Chattanooga, orDonel son? Not a battle has been fought in the West, and not one in the East, without some southern blood enrichin the soil, blood freely cured out for preservmv the integrity of the Ifhion. I deny the whose doctrine. I utterl repudiate it. I look with utter scorn upon the doctrine that any mortal man can make me an enemyto my country in fact or in law. The doctrine is false in law, false in logic, and utterly false in fact. The truth, sir, is that the war is over, and we have peace inthe country. We have a different state of things. I am not disappointed except when I come into this Hall and hear the venerable Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Sravsns] tell us that the organic law of the Union must be amended to keep the Republican party in The power.
The SPEAKER. The gentlemans time has exired.Mr. SHANKLIN obtained the floor.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I have a little more to so.
Mr. SHANKLIN. I yield to my colleague to finish his remarks.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I hope it will be under stood it will not come out of the time of the Gentfrom Kentucky, [Mr. Susanna] I hope the courtesy will be extended to the gentleman who has been speaking to finish his remarks.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will entertain an motion for an extension of time.
Mr. CONKLING. I will make that motion, with the understanding that gentlemen who have been alluded to and at in a position they do not occupy shall also have an opportunity to deny or modify what has been said3in regard to them.
Mr. BANKS. I hope the Gentfrom Kentucky will be allowed to finish his speech without any condition. It has been accorded in us on this side, and ought to be accorded to nm.
The SPEAKER stated. there being no objection, it would be ordered aecordingl.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I am much obliged for the courtesv and I yield to the Gentfrom Ohio [Sin ammo foreword ot"explanation.
Mr. STEVENS. May I make a suggestion? We are about to adjourn. There are 2 or 3 gentlemen who desire to speak, and there is but ittle time. I suggest, therefore, that we take a recess until half past 7 oclock and meet a ain for the same or ose.
Mr. to USSEAU. I desire to speak about the or ten minutes.
Mr. STEVENS. It is the gentlemans colleagues that desire to speak.
Mr. SMITH. I want my colleague to get through.
Mr. STEVENS. After he gets through, I mean.
Mr. STEVENS. You havearightto object if on choose.
Mr. SMITH. Ifm colleague will give way, I will state that I withdraw my objection to an evenin session., Mr. HANKLIN. I have no objection to that.
Mr. SMITH. As my colleague is willing to yield for a recess, I will move that the House now take a recess until half past 7 oclockp. m.
The SPEAKER protempore, (Mr. Gam mzu. in the chair.) The Chair can entertain no motion but to adjourn. But the object. of the gentleman can be attained by unanimous consent. No objection was made and the House accordingly (at 4 oclock and 30 minutes p. m.) took a recess until half past 7 oclock p. m. mENING SESSION. The House reassembled at half past 7 oclock p. m.,
Mr. GRINXELL, as Speaker protempore, in the chair. BUREAU. The House resumed the consideration of the substitute reported from the select committee on freedmen s aflhirs for Senate bill No. 60, to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens burenu; upon which Mr. SHANKLIN was entitled to the floor.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Will my colleague [Mr. SBANIUJN] allow me a moment, for the purpose of making an explanation?
Mr. ROUSSEAU. General Spencer was alluded to during the discussionthis afternoon, and l then, said t. t. I knew of no such general in Alabama, and I gave my reasons for my statement. Since then I have ascertained that General Sencer is a real personage; that he went to Ala arms from Kansas as a sailor of a Kan ms regiment. He was a very clever gentleman, no doubt, and he was a pointed colonel of an Alabama regiment, at Tuscaloosa, by General Dodge. I had never heard of the gentleman, before and I would be very sorry to do him am! injustice. I understand he issclever man, and has done some service to the country. But he Was not in the service in Alabama while I was there, but went with GenlSherman on his march; hence I knew nothing of him.
Mr. PHELPS and Mr. CHANLER addressed the House. STheir remarks will be published in the Appendix.]
Mr Phelps of Maryland, Speech entitled Freedmens Bureau. February 3, 1866. The House having under consideration the hill 2?. No. 60)to enlargethe powersof the Freedmens Bureau. Mr. CHANLER obtained the floor.
Mr. PHELPS. I ask the gentleman to yield to me for a few moments.
Mr. CHANLER. I yield to the Gentfrom Maryland for 15 minutes.
At the conclusion of Mr. CHANLERS remarks, Mr. TRIMBLE obtained the floor, but yield edto
Mr. HOGAN, who moved that the House adonrn. The motion was agreed to; and (at 9 oclock and 30 minutes p. m.)the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. MONDAY, February 5, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY. The Journal of Friday last was read and approved. PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. President, I deem it proper to say in consequence of my not being present when the final vote was taken on Friday on the bill S.No. 61 to protect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rights and furnish the means of their vindication, that had I been present I should have voted in favor of its passage.
Mr. HARRIS, it was Or(lcrcrLThat the heirs ofrloshna Chamberlain have leave to withdraw theirpetition and othIer papersfrom the flincof the Senate. 1866. 641
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I ask leave to withdraw from the files of the Senate the papers relating to the claim of the Chippewa, Ottawa, and Pettawntomie Indians. in e State of Michigan. No adverse report has been made, but on the COntrary, a favorable report was made.
The PRESIDENT protempura. That order will be made, if there be no objection.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I also move that the petition of Preston Starritt, claiming pay which e alleges to be due him as a messenger in the Senate, be withdrawn from the files of the senate and referred to the ComJudiciary.
The PRESIDENTprotempura. That order will be made, if there be no objection.
Mr. CLARK. I wish to so one word in regard to the motion submitte by the Senfrom Wisconsin. I find that when papers are withdrawn from the files of the Senate, the rule is that they shall only be withdrawn when there has been no adverse report. The clerks of the Senate, if they do not find an adverse report written out and with the papers, send down the papers to the committee to which they are reerred thou 11there is clearly evidence on the papers that tiere have been one or more adverse reports. I think that practice should be corrected. I think, if there is anything in the papers that shows the claim has been reported upon adversely, it should not be again referred to a committee without the unanimous consent of the Senate. REPORTS OI“ COMMITTEES.
Mr. CLARK, from the ComClaims to whom was referred the petition of David Baker and others, oWners of the brig Sabao, prayin for remuneration for the loss of their vessel destroyed by the rebel steamer Jtimes town, at Fortress Monroe, on the 12th of April, 1862, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the petition of J. W. Downey, praying for relief for property sold under the confiscation act, submitle an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed. He also, from the some committee, to whom was referred the petition of Selina Barclay, praying for remuneration for the loss of her progeny caused by the burning of the navy yar in Portsmouth, Virginia, in April, 1861, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana, from the ComMilAffrs , to whom was referred a resolution of the Legislature of Minnesota in favor of the passage of a law grant in a bounty to certain members of the 2nd Minnesota cavalry, submitted an adverse report thereon. Mr. ANTHONY, from the ComClaims to whom was referred the petition of J. W. Cordon, late major in the 11thU.S. infantry, raing that the properaccounting officers of the Treasury may e authorized to credit him for payments of bounty to enlisted men, reported a ill (S.No.127) for the relief of Jonathan W. Gordon, late major in the 11thregiment of infant; which was read and nssed to a 2nd reaing. Mr. WILLIAMS, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the petition of Clara Moore, praying for the pament to her of the amount of the claim of her husband for money paid for additional clerks and Office accommodations for those clerks in the registers othee at Lecompton, Douglas county, Kansas, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed. Mr. HENDERSON, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the petition of James Larry, praying for compensation for losses sustained byhim in the occupation of his property by the U.S. Army near Cold1Harbor, irginia, in June, 1864, submitted an adverse report thereon. REGISTERING.
Mr. CHANDLER. The ComComm, to whom was referred a bill (H.R.No. 204) to regulate the registering of vessels, have instructed me to report it back without amendment and with a recommendation that it pass. I ask the unanimous consent of the Senate to act uporl this bill at this time.
The PRESIDENT protem ore. It requires the unanimous consent of the Senate to consider the bill on the day it is reported.
Mr. SHERMAN. I should like to hear it read 1st.
The Secretary read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, 6:o”That no ship or vesselwhich has been recorded or registered as an American vessel pursuant to law and which shall have been licensed or other vnse authorized to soil under it form n flag and to have the protection of any foreign government during the eiristenceof the rebellion, shall be deemedor reistered as an American vessel, or shall have the rights and privileges of American vessels, oxccpt u nderthe proVisions of an act of Congress authorising such registry.
The PRESIDENT protempore Is there any objection to the present consideration of the bill just read? Mr. SHERMAN. I prefer that it should lie over. It is a ver important rule.
The PRESID NT protempore. I thes over under the rule, objection being made. BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana, asked, and by unan imous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.128) authorizing limited partner ships in the DistCol; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComDistCol.
Mr. CHANDLER asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.129) for the reliefof the heirs of James Bawden; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComPubLands. RECLAMATION of SWAMP LANDS.
Mr. FOOT submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved, That the SecyWar be requested to communicateto the Senate a copyof thememorial of Brevet. Brigadier General B. Roberta. U.S. Army, setting forth his view of a plan for reclaiming the swamp and waste lands of the lower Mississippi river.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. LLOYD, its Chief Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed the following bills; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: A bill (H.R.No. 82) allowinghpersons having lost one foot and one hand intenaval service of the U.S. the same pension now allowed to persons having suffered the same loss in the military service; A bill H.R.No. 214) for the benefit of colonel R. Bryant; A bill (H.R.No. 215) for the benefit of John W. Campbell; A bill (H.R.No. 216) for the relief of condelia Murray; " A bill (H.R.No. 217) for the relief of Robert Henne A bill (H.R.No. 218) for the relief of Charles Youley; and A bill (H.R.No. 219) for the relief of Catha rine Mock. HOUSE BILLS nnrnnnnn. The following bills from the HoRep were severally read twice by t ieir titles, and referred as indicated below: A bill (H.R.No. 214) for the benefit of colonel Mr. E. B antto the ComClaims. A bill (H. No. 215) for the benefit of John W. Campbellto the ComClaims. A bill (H.R.No. 216) for the relief of cordelia Murrayto the ComPensions. A bill (H.R.No. 217) for the reliefof Robert Henneto the ComPensions. A bill (H.R.No. 218) for the relief of Charles Youleyto the ComPensions. A bill (H.R.No. 219) for the relief of Cathh rine Moc to the ComPensions. A bill (H.R.No. BQLallowing persons having lost one foot and one and in the naval service of the U.S. the same pension now allowed to persons having suffered the same loss in the military service, was read by its title.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. The ComPensions have reported a bill precisely identical with this, which as already passed the Senate and been sent to the House.
The PRESIDENT protempore. This bill will be referred to the comPensions, if there be no objection. J. B. RITTENHOUSEI
Mr. NYE. I move to take up Senate bill No. 80. It is a bill of a sin lesection, and will take but a moment to cousi er it. The motion was agreed to; and the bill (S.No.80) for the relief of J. B. Rittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron, was read the 2nd time, and considered as in ComWhole. It directs the properaccounting officers of the Treasury, in the settlement of the accounts of J. B. Rittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific s uadron, to release him from all accountability or the amount of $13, 509, public money, stolen from him on the evening of October 30, 1865, while on duty at Panama, or such portion thereof as he shall fail to recover.
Mr. SHERMAN. I would like to ask the Senfrom Nevada if the paymaster did not appoint this clerk who seems to have been in collusion with the robber.
Mr. NYE. No, sir; he was a boy that commander Paulding sent to assist him from a ship lying in the harbor.
Mr. SHERMAN. This clerk, then, was not uppointed by the paymaster?
Mr. NYE. No, sir; he was sent to him from the receiving ship in the harbor.
Mr. SHERMA;. Had he any power or control over him?
Mr. NYE. No. sir; he was a mere servant.
Mr. NESMITH. Iwill ask the Senfrom Nevada if there isaprinted reportin this case.
Mr. NYE. There is it very full report acv companying the bill. I have stated the substance ofit. I will state to the Senators from Ohio and Oregon that this is a case where there is clearly not the least blame to be attached to the paymaster. It was fully investigated before the ComNavAffrs. The character of the man is certified to by various other persons as being of the highest probity.
Mr. HOWARD. I understand from the Senfrom Nevada that this money was lost by the fleet paymaster without any fault ofhis own; that his safe was entered by a robber and his money taken away, and that he has recovered only a small portion of it since the robbery was committed. I have not read the whole report of the case. but from whatI have read, it seems to me it is a case in which relief ought to be ranted.
Mr. NESMITH. I have not yet obtained the report, and I would prefer that the bill should lie over until time can be had to make an examination of it. I know that at the last session of Convress a similar bill was passed here, and it struck me at the time that it was opening a very wide door for frauds to reimburse men who had lost money and were legally responsible for the custody of it. While I have not mudeup my mind on this bill, I prefer that it should lie over until I can have an opportunity to examine it more particularly.
Mr. NYE. I will state that on the morning the moncy was lost. Mr. Rittenhouse immediately reported the fact to Commander Paulding, the senior officer upon that station, who, on that very day, convened a board of inquiry to examine into the matter, and they made a most thorough and perfect examination. On the very day that the money was ascertained to be lost, the paymaster himself issued a reward of $5,000 for its recovery. The report likewise shows that he immediately started a man for California, where this boy said the robber had one, at his own expense, to arrest the principa in the robbery. understand that he has not. been able to make the arrest; but from all the investigation of the Dept itself, and from all the papers contained in this report, it is a case where there could nothave been the least ossi blo fault in the pay master. He usedal the means for keeing this money that the Government furnishe him with. The impression of the key was taken unbekuown to him. In that way this loss occurred. 5,260 dollars of the money has been recovered.
Mr. COWAN. Does this bill come from the ComClaims?
Mr. NYE. It comes from the ComNavAffrs, who have investigated it and reported unanimously in favor of it. If the Senator desires further examination, I cannot lee any necessity for it.
Mr. COWAN. other cases of this kind have always been considered by the ComClaims.
Mr. GRIMES. There is no controversy as to the facts of this case. There is no doubt that the money was lost, and there is no doubt that it was lost without any dereliction, mal feasance. uonfeasance, or misfeasance on the part of Paymaster Rittenhouse. A board was immediately authorized by the commandingof licerat that station to investigate the subject, a mixed board, composed of naval officers of the line and of the stall, and the chief of police at Panama, and they have thus reported. Since that report was made, a part of the money has been dlSCO Cfedwhere it was secreted, going to confirm the correctness of the conclusion to which this mixed board arrived. Paymaster littenhouse used all the means for the safety of the money intrusted to him that it was possible for him to use. It seems to me there could not he a clearer case. The Senfrom Ohio seemed to be under a misapprehension in supposing that it was the clerk of the paymaster who was in collusion with the robbers. If so, that would be a strong point against Paymnster Rittenhouse; but it was not the clerk, it was a watchman, a man who had been detailed from one of the ships in the harbor, belonging to the crew of the vessel, to serve in the capacity of watchman at the headquarters on shore, and the testimony goes to show that he was rather a simpleminded young man. If there was an thing improperor any neglect on the part of l ayrnaster Ritteuhouse, it was that when he discovered that this young man was not a very smart and intellirvent lad, he did not apply to the commander of pthe vessel to have him discharged; but I do not know that he reached the conclusion that I have, that he was not an intelligent lad. It seems to me that there could not be a more equitable case presented for the consideration of Congress than this.
Mr. COWAN. M objection is that it is simplyequitable. It IS perfectly clear there is no egal obligation restin on the Government to pay claims of this kin, and it seems to me to e a very doubtful polic for us now to adopt to pay equitable claims whlen we are refusing legal claims by the million. Why should we? What more merit hasOne of these officers who has been robbed in this way than those people whose property has been swept away in battle for the life of the Republic? They cannot be paid. I understand the Depts now refuse to recognize any claim unless it is based upon a contract, whereas other claims where property has been taken for public use have Just. as much legal force and validit if it was taken in an emergency as if it was taken upon a contract, and if we cannot pay legal contracts I think we ought to hesitate a good while before paying these equitable claims.
Mr. CLARK. This is not new legislation, as the Senfrom Indiana supposes.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. lt is during my exerience, since I have been in the Senate.
Mr. CLARK. I cannot undertake to account for the Senators experience, but it is not new to many of us here, and certainly not new in. the experience of the ComClaims. The aymaster is the Governments officer. The government intrust to him the funds of the Government fora specific purpose, and all that has been required of the aymaster is, to guard the money faithfull wi. the means that are placed at lus disposa, and to see it correct y disbursed. It has been the practice of the Government, where an olfieer of that kind has been robbed or has lost money without any fault of his own, and the Government are satisfied there is no collusion and he has done everything that he could do to protect and keep the money safely, to reimburse him and relieve him from the obligation. It is not understood to be his money, so that he is liable at all haz ards. It is very true, the Government may not relieve him unless they choose; but you will recollect Mr. President, and the Senfrom Indiana, I think, will recollect, that we relieved all the paymasters in the case of a steamer where the money was burned.
Mr. LANE. of Indiana. Ccrtainly, I said so.
Mr. CLARK. But in that case the money was just as much the money of the paymasters as in this case. It had passed into the hands of the aymaster; and if they are to be charged with the money as their own money, there should have been no more relief in that case than in this. If they misappropriate the money, they are liable to punishment. But. there is, as the Senator supposes, danger of collusion. Take the very case in hand. So ose that this paymaster if he had chosen, or 1 it was in his mind so to do, had colluded with this watchman to take an impression of that key and give it to a 3rd man to steal that money for a consideration to him.
Mr. KIRKWOOD. Will the Senator allow me to ask a question right here?
Mr. KIRKWOOD. Is there any evidence showing how the impression of the key was procured 2
Mr. NYE. Yes, sir; the boy says the pay master gave him the bunch of keys to get something from a chest in an adjoinin room, and then he took an impression of the key with papler.
Mr. CLARK. I cannot say what the facts are in this case, because it is a case I have not examined. I am speaking as to the principles which gOvern this case. There is some times great difficulty in ascertainin" whether the officer has not colluded with the person committing the robbery, and hence it becomes very necessary for the committee to examine i866. 643 that portion of the case very strictly. I do not know what has been done in this case. I do not know whether this man ke t his safe where he ought to have kept it, or whnether he kept it in the best place with the utmost care.
Mr. GRIMES. Iwill state that in this case the paymaster was required by order of the Navy Dept to keep his headquarters at Pan ama. The headquarters building was furnished to him. This safe itself was furnished to him, and the man who was required to protect it as a guard was furnished to him by the Government.
Mr. CLARK. I am only speaking of the necessity of very great carefulness in examining testimony on a point of that kind. I have in in mind now a case similar to this. where an o cer in our Army during the war with Mexico had his safe broken open, and he was finally relieved by the Government. It did not appear at 1st that he had used all the diligence and care that he ought to have done in keepin his safe, but finally the Government relieved him There are numerous such cases. If the committee are satisfied that the man kept the money with all the care that could be required of him, and it was lost without any fault of his, thenin Imiy judgment the Governmentshould reimburse in.
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President Several Saxnroas. Let the bill go over.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Mr. President, I gave notice a few days since, that on this Monday morning I would ask the Senate to proceed to the consideration of the JtResolution proposing an amendment of the constitution, reported from the ComReconstruction, socalled; and as I understand that the honor able Scuatorfrom Massachusetts [Mr. SUMNER] designs to s cak upon the resolution, and is prepared to o so, and it was eucrally under stood that he would do so to ay, I shall make the motion, although perhaps under other circumstances I would not doit, owing to myown condition. I will, therefore. move that the further consideration of the bill now before the Senate be postponed, with a view to proceed to the consideration of that JtResolution.
Mr. STEWART. I have been waiting for a long time to get an opportunity to call up senate bill No. 74 for the admission of Colorado. I think that the Senate ought to act upon that subject speedily. Before we enter upon the consideration of a subject that is going to occupy a very long time, and will be discussed here probably for weeks, I think we should give some consideration to this question of the admission of Colorado. It Will take but a very short time, Iapprehcnd. It is due to those people that the question should be determined speedily, that they may know what the Senate are disposed to do upon the subject.
Mr. FOOT. That will be debated at length when it is taken a
The PRESIDENT profempore. the question is on the motion of the Senfrom Maine. The motion was agreed to.
The PRESIDENT protempore Will the Senfrom Maine designate which of the 2 JtResolutions he asks the Senate to take up?
Mr. FESSENDEN. The one that came from the HoRep last week. APPORTIONMENT of REPRESENTATION. The Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the following Jtresolution (H.R.No. 61) proposing to amend the constitution of the U.S.: Resolved. do. (2/3rds of both Houses concurring.) That the follomn: article he proposed to the Legislatures ot the several States as an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. which. when ratified sbpyartthroelesafoidur Constitution Le, gniasmlaetulyre: s, shall be. Auric Mr. Representatives shall be apportioned amopg the several States which may be included within this. Union according to lhcirrespective num is. counting the whole number of persons in each State. excludinir Indians not taxed: Provided, That awbhreidngeevderi n tahneeyl Statitveeo franchise tsohfarlalcbee or denied or persons color. all in the thbearseisine of fresuperehsreancetaotricoonl or shall be excluded Mr. SUMNER addressed the Senate, but without concluding gave way to
Mr. MORGAN, on whose motion the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive usmcss. After some time spent in executive session. the doors were reopened, and the Senate adiourned. Ton cannot do anything with
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. MONDAY, February 5, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Berniox. The Journal of Saturday last was read and approved.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. NEWELL. My colleague, Mr. Witicirr, is very sick, and I ask that he be excused from attending the House until sufficiently recovered to do so. There being no objection, indefinite leave of absence was granted to Mr. wniour.
The SPEAKER proceeded. as the regular order of business, to call the States and Territories for bills on leave, to be referred to the appropriate committees without debate, not to be brought back by motions to reconsider, commencing with the state of Maine. SPECIAL Causes.
Mr. BLAINE introduceda bill providing for a special enumeration of the inhabitants of the U.S. prior to October 1, 1806; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the JtComReconstruction, and ordered to be printed. COURT OF CLAIMS.
Mr. DAWES introduced a bill to amend an act amending the act establishing a court for the investigation of claims against the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComClaims. PENNSYLVANIA INSTITUTION FOR THE BLIND.
Mr. MILLER introduced a bill to exempt from taxation the Pennsylvania Institution for the Instruction of the Blind; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComWays&Means. MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY.
Mr. MERCUR introduced a bill to amend an act to incor orate the Mutual Fire Insurance company of the DistCol; which was iea a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComDistCol. CATHARINE SHISLS.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania, introduced a bill authorizmg the QuarterMGen to settle the claim of Catharine Sliisls, of vWashington county, Pennsylvania; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComClaims. 2 BROTHERS, OF WALLACEBURG.
Mr. HOLMES introduced a bill authorizing the issue of an American register to the schooner 2 Brothers, of wallaccburg; which i was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. RICE M. BROWN.
Mr. HILL introduced a bill for the relief of Rice M. Brown; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComMilAffrs. INDEMNITY ACT.
Mr. McKEE. I ask to have this bill, being a bill to amend the act ofindemnity. approved March 8, 1863, referred to the ComJudiciaryar.
Mr. HARDING. of Kentucky. I would ask my colleague if this is the same bill he desired tointroduce the other day.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. Is it in order for me to move to reject the bill T
The SPEAKER. The Clerk Wlll read the rule under which the House is now acting.
The Clerk read, as follows: “On each Monday succeedin that upon which a call for reports takes place as a ove, it is made the duty of the Speaker to call the Statesand Territories 1st for bills on leave for referenceonly and without debate, and not to be brought back by motions to reconsider
The SPEAKER. The general usage of the House has been on each alternate Monday to receive all bills presented and refer them to their appropriate committees under the injunction that they are not to be brought back by motions to reconsider. The Gentfrom Kentucky [Mr. HARDING] objects to the introduction of the 1866. 645 bill of his colleague, [Mr. McKee] and the language of the rule is such that in the opinion of the Chair the gentleman has the right to make the objection.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would ask if that does not change the entire spirit and object of the rule.
The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks it does; but the language of the rule is, ” bills on leave.”
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Then, if any gentleman objects to the introduction of any bill. it can only be done by a majority vote of the House.
The SPEAKER. This is the 1st time the question has arisen in the House under this rule, or during the Speakers service in the House, that he can remember; but the Chair is of opinion that according to the language of this rule, if objection is made by any gentleman to the introduction of any bill he must have leave granted by a vote of a majority of the House, which must be taken without debate.
Mr. McKEE. I call for the yeas&nays on the question of granting me leave to introduce this bill., The yeas&nays were ordered.
Skip Skip The question was taken; and itwas decided in the ntIirmativeyeas 116, uays 14, not voting 52;. So leave was granted for the introduction of the bill. The bill was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. EZEKIBL P. MULPORD.
Mr. SMITH introduced an act for the benefit of Ezekiel P. Mulford; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComMilAffrs. SUSAN MEADOR.
Mr. GRIDER introduced a bill for the benefit of Susan Meador; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the Committee of Invalid Pensions. J. STOUT PARKER.
Mr. NEWELL introduced a bill for the relief of J. Stout Parker; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComClaims. ALEXANDRIA and wASIHINGTON RAILROAD.
Mr. INGERSOLL introduced a bill to amend an act to extend the charter of the Alexandria and Washington railroad, passed)Iarch3, 1863 which was read a 1st and 2nd time. an referred to the ComDistCol. GREAT FALLS ICE COMPANY.
Mr. INGERSOLL also introduced a bill to incorporate the Great Falls Ice Company, of Washington, DistCol; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComDistCol. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY.
Mr. INGERSOLL also introduced a bill to incorporate the Metropolitan Fire and Marine Insurance Company of the DistCol; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComDistCol. PUBLIC BUILDINGS ATCAIRO, Illinois.
Mr. KUYKENDALL introduced a bill to provide for the construction of a customhouse, ost office and courthouse at the city of Cairo. Illinois. which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. NATIONAL CAPITAL INSURANCE COMPANY.
Mr. BROMWELL introduced a bill to in corporate the National Capitallnsurance company; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComDistCol. SWAMP LANDS IN ARKANSAS, ETC.
Mr. THORNTON introduced a bill to amend an not entitled “An act to enable the State of Arkansas and other Statesto reclaim the swamp lands within their limits.” approved September 28, 1850 which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands. IMPROVEMENT OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER.
Mr. HOGAN introduced a bill for the improvement of the Mississippi river; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComCommerce, and ordered to be printed. AMENDMENT or THE CONSTITUTION.
Mr. KELSO introduced a JtResolution to amend the constitution of the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComJudiciary, and ordered to be printed. NATIONAL TELECRAPHIC UNION ASSOCIATION.
Mr. BEAMAN introduced a bill to incor porate the National Telegraphic Union Association; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. WACCOOSHANCE LIC LITHOUSE.
Mr. FERRY, by unanimous consent, introduced aJtResolution of the Legislature of Michigan. relating to the unsafe condition of Wangooshance lighthouse, in the straits of Michilimackinac; which was read ii 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. LIEUTENANT JOHN H. HAMLIN.
Mr. LONGYEAR introduced aJtResolution in the matter of Lieutenant John H. Ham lin; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComMilAffr. HABEASCORPUS, ETC.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, introduced a bill to amend an not entitled “An act relating to HGCCCHcorpus and regulating judicial proceedings in certain cases, ” approved March 3, 1863; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. OATH IOH PUBLIC OFFICERS.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, also introduced a bill to prescribe an oath for public officers and members of the bar, and for other purposes; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. MILITARY ROAD IN WISCONSIN.
Mr. McINDOE introduced a bill ranting lands to the Stlte of Wisconsin to ai in the construction of a military. wagon, and iostal road from Earl Claire, via Chippewa Fails, to Lake Superior, in that State; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands BARBARA sAIlsON.
Mr. WINDOM introduced a bill for the relief of Barbara Samson; which was read u1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComInvalidPens. BOINDARIES or NEVADA.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Nevada. introduced abill concerning the boundaries of the State of Ne vada; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComTerritor. POST ROADS IN NEVADA.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Nevada, also introduceda bill to establish certain post roads which was read a 1st and 2nd time and reerred to the comPostOffice. LAND GRANTS to NEVADA.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Nevada, also introduced a bill concerning certain lands granted to the State of Nevada; which was read ii 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands. PUBLIC LANDS IN NEVADA.
Mr. ASHLEY, of nevada, also introduced a bill concernin the public lands in the State of Nevada; which was reada 1st and 2ndtime, and referred to the ComPubLands. ROADS IN WASHINGTON TERRITORY.
Mr. DENNY introduceda bill to provide for the construction and improvement of certain roads in Washin ton Territory; which was read a 1st and 2ndtime, and referred to the ComTerritor. HOMESTEADS FOR ACTUAL SETTLERS.
Mr. RADFORD introduced a bill for an act to amend an not entitled “An act to secure homesteads for actual settlers on the public do main and for other purpOses;” which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the comPubLands. PUBLIC BUILDINGS IN IDAHO.
Mr. HOLBROOK introduced a bill making appropriations for public buildings in the territory of Idaho; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComTerritor. LAND OFFICE IN IDAHO.
Mr. HOLBROOK also introduced a bill to establish aland office in the ferritor of Idaho; which was read a 1st and 2ndtime, and referred to the ComPubLands. rosr ROADS IN IDAHO.
Mr. HOLBROOK also introduced a bill to establish post roads in the Territor of IdahO which was read a 1st and 2ndtime, an referred to the comPostOffice. BOUNDARY BETWEEN OREGON and IDAHO.
Mr. HOLBROOK also introduced a bill for the survey of the boundary between the Territory of Idaho and the State of Oregon; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComTerritor. STANDARD OF WEIGHTS and MEASURES.
Mr. ALLISON introduced a bill to fix the standard of weights and measures; which was read a 1st an 2nd time, referred to the ComCoinage, Weights, and Measures, and ordered to be printed. AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION.
Mr. WILLIAMS introduced a point resolution to amend the constitution of the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2ndtime, and referred to the ComJudiciary. REMOVAL OF DEAD BODIES.
Mr. WARD introduceda bill to punish for the removal of dead bodies from firaves and other places of interment in the DistCol; which was read a 1st and secopd time, referred to the ComDistCol, and ordered to be printed. CLAIMS.
Mr. KERR. Mr. Speaker, Ihold in my hand several applications for the payment of claims for damages, and as they all refer to one an other, I ask topresent and refer them enmasse.
The SPEAltElt. Only bills and JtResolutions are now in order; and the business after that is the call of States for resolutions, commencing with the State of Illinois. INFORMERS [IfDEI. INTERNALREVENUE LAIV. Ii
Mr. FARNSWORTH submitted the following resolution, on which he demanded the previous question: Iiomlvirl, That the ComWays&Means be instructed to report a bill to this House repealing such provisions of the internalrevenue law as allow iniorintrs to receivea moiety of fines for an infraction of that law.
Mr. MORRILL. Iask the Gentleman to mod ify it so as to make it a resolution to inquire into the expediency.,
Mr. FARNSWORTH. It is a very simple question, and I would like to get an expression of the House upon the instruction.
Mr. MORRILL. It ought not to be acted upon without consideration.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I will change it, butI hepe the committee will report soon and that the House will act upon the subject. It isgrowing into a monstrous evil throughout. the country.
The SPEAKER. If it gives rise to debate it cos over.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I will modify it and make it a resolution of inquiry. The resolution, as modified, was agreed to. wHITE MANS DAY.
Mr. ROSS. I offer the followingresolution, and demand the previous question upon it: Whereas 2 months of the 1st sessionof the 39th Cengresshnve expired and but little progress been made in perfecting and maturing the important public measures so anXiously hoped for and expected your constituents: and whereas a large portion of our time has been devoted to legislation tor and in behalf of freedmen: Therefore. Ihil Resolved That the ComRules be instructed to inquire into the exedicncyof reporting a newrule for the Government of the house. to theeticct that one day in eachweck besetapart by the Speuker of the House to be exclusively devoted to the public business of the country and that dluring this Congress it be known as and called the“ white mansday.”
Mr. WASHBURNE. of Illinois. I move that the resolution lie on the table. The motion was agreed to. LEVYINE CONTRIBUTIONS ON SECHDING STATES.
Mr. MeCLURG offered the following resolution:, Whereiu it is clearly manifest that the continued contumaey in the secedinizbtatesrenders it necessary to exercise congressionalICRIFHIUOHin order to give to the loyal citizens of those States protection in t icir natural and personalrights enumerated n the constitution of –the U.S. iindin addition thereto makes it necessaryto keep on foot a large standing army to maintain the authority of the national Goveeornumnterynt and to keep the peace: and whereas the is alread overburdened by awar debt in curred to defend t. io nationaltyagainst an infamous rebellion, angljt is neither just nor politic to inflict this vast additional expenscon the peaceful industry of the nation: Therefore. Ifemlved That it be referred t of the JtCommeeof the Senate and House to inquireinto the expediency oi levying contributions on the secedimg Statea tqdetrayth o extraordinnry expenses thatwouldotber wi sebe imposed on the General Government and that said committee be instructed toreportby billorotherwise.
Skip Skip Mr. KERR. I move to lay the resolution on the table, and on that I call the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were not ordered. The question being taken upon agreeing to the resolution, no quorum voted. Tellers were then ordered, and Messrs. Mc Cwac and Ksaa were a pointed. The House divided; an the tellers reported ayes 41, noes 65. So the resolution was not laid on the table. Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I use to debate the resolution. The SPEAKER. Then it goes over under the rule. AMEXDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION.
Mr. ANDERSON introduced a point resolution to amend the constitution of the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComJudiciary, and ordered to be printed. EMPLOYMENT of COLORED TROOPS.
Mr. BLOW. I offer the following resolution, and demand the previous question upon it: i ItwoImd. That the ComMilAffrs obfeaduitrheoctreizdintgo inquire and report upon the expediene the employment of colorcrl troops, with their consent. in the construction of railroads in the Depts or districts where they may be stationed. main question 0r(cred; and under the operation thereof the resolution was adopted. I ENROLLED BILL SIGSED.
Mr. COBB, from the ComEnrollBill reported that the committee had examined and found truly enrolled a bill of the House (H.R.No. 143) entitled “An act for the relief of Charles F. anderson.” HARBOR OF StJoSEPH, MICHIGAN.
Mr. UPSON introduced the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Rmoloed. That the ComCommercebe instructed to inquire into the expediencyof making an appropriation to assist in the improvement of the harbor of StJoseph. Michigan. WIDOWS OF REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIERS. Mr. UPSON also submitted the followin resolution; which was read, considered, an agreed to: Relolocrl. That the Committee on Revolutionury Pensions be instructed to inquire whetherany further legislation is necessaryORBPPIOPHBJJDIOthIe aid and benefit of the surviviriWidowsof soldiersof theRev olutien and to report y bill or other vnsc. ENROLLMENT stitoaoxs REPORTS.
Mr. LONGYEAR submitted the following resolution: Whereas the reports of the surgeonsof the boards of enrollmentduring the late war now on file in the Provost Marshal Generals Bureau have been collectedat great expense and contain much information valuable to the world generally, and to the Governmentparticularly. in any future emergency: llemlved. That the ComMilAffrs be instructed to inquire into the expediencyof the compilation and publication of the said reports and report by bill or otherwise.
Mr. SCHENCK. That matter has already been referred to the ComMilAffrs. The resolution was agreed to. LOCATION OF THE CAPITAL.
Mr. BROOKS. I hope there will be no objection to that resolution.
Skip Skip Mr. DRIGGS. I demand the previous question. cave to report The previous question was 2nded, and the previous question was 2nded, and the great muJorityof the monk:of the Stateswho have. i main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the joint. resolution was referred to the t JtComReconstruction. PAVING OF PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. Li
Mr. McINDOE submitted the following resolution, upon which he demanded the previous question: Rwmleetl. That the ComDistCol are herebyinstructed to inquire into the expediencyof paving Pennsylvania avenue with the Nicholson pavement and to report by bill or otherwise.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I do not want on such instruction given to the committee. I ope the resolution will be voted down. The resolution was rejected. VINDICATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS.
Mr. wILSON, of Iowa. I ask unanimous consent that a bill now on the Speakers table, being Senate bill Ne. 61, to protect all persons in the U.S. in their civil rights, and to furnish the means of their vindication, be taken therefrom and referred to the ComJudiciary, and be printed. No objection was made. The bill was accordingly read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary, and ordered to be printed. EXPENSES OPJtCom.
Mr. STEVENS. I ask to have taken from the Speakers table a Senate JtResolution making an appropriation for the expenses of the JtComReconstruction. It is necessary to have prompt action on that resolution in order that the fees of witnesses and other expenses of the committee may be paid. The title of the resolution was read, being Senate JtResolution No.26, for the payment of expenses incurred by the JtCommee to inquire into the condition of the States which formed the Socalled confederate States of America. 4
Mr. ROSS. I objcc ItMr. STEVENS. Would it be in order for me now to move to proceed to business on the Speakers table 7
The SPEAKER. That motion would be in order.
Mr. STEVENS. Then I submit that motion. The motion was agreed to. PENSION APPROPRIATION BILL.
The SPEAKER stated the 1st business on the Speakers table was the concurring in the Senate amendments to House bill No. 36. making appropriations for the payment of invalid and other pensions of the U.S. for the year ending the 30th of June, 1867. The amendments of the Senate were read. The 1st amendment was to strike out the word “ er” and insert the words “as provided for by; so that the clause will read: For revolutiona pensions and pensionsof wid ows. children. moters and sisters of soldiers. as provided for by actsof March 18. 1818. as. The amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was to insert after the words “ 1862” the words “ and for compensation 7te pension agents and expenses of agencies.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would like to be informed of the effeet of this amendm erit. What necessity is there for changin the existing law in this respect? and I would ask if it is proposed to give these agents any additional compensation?
Mr. STEVENS. I understand that this adds nothing to their compensation; it only makes it more specific.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would like to have that clause read as it is proposed to amend it. It was read, as follows: For revolutionary pensions and pensionsofwidows children. mothers and sisters of soldiers peract of March 18, 1818M ay 15, 18ZSJuno 7. 1832;July 4. 1836. Ju y 7. 18. 58: arch 3, 843;dune 17. 1844; maitsilfiafsfii has" 3 are donfiente and expeneesof agencigs, 9. 011).
Mr. STEVENS. I. understand the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Wasnnnnvn]to ask if the appropriation remains the same.
Mr. wASHBURN H, of Illinois. No, sir; but whether a construction can be given to the law, as now proposed to be amended, which will allow any compensation in addition to what has heretofore been given by existing aws.
Mr. STEVENS. I understand it will not have that elfect.
Mr. BROOKS. I have not had time to examine this bill. But I will askthe Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. Wmnnunxm] as he seems to have examined the bill, whether there is anything in it providing that national banks shall act as pension agents, in order to relieve the country from that heavy expenditure. I think there ought to be some provision made in some of these pension bills that the national banks shall incur the expenses now incurred by the pension agencies for the payment of pensions, o. These banks are deriving great advantages from the Government, and they ought to incur these expenditures. We were promised in the last Congress that some provision of this sort should be made.
Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois. There is nothing of that kind in this bill and however favorable I might be to the proposition of the Gentfrom NewYork, [ll Mr. BROOKS] I should oppose it in this bill as being independent legislation in an appropriation bill, which the gentleman agrees with me should be kept cut of such bills. The amendment of the Senate was conturred in. The next amendment was to insert at the end of the bill the followmg as a new section: BIG. 2. Abife: That the following sumbe and the same is hereb appropriated to supply adeficiencyin the appropriation for the fiscalyear ending June 30, 1866. out 03 an; moneyin the Treasury not otherwrse appropriate:, Eor revolutionary pensions and pensions of widows children. mothers and sistersofsoldlers. as provided for by acts of March 18, 1818: May 15 1828: June 7, 1832: July 4, 1836:July 7, 1sss; ll arch 3, 1843: 1844: 1853;June 3, 1858. The amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was as follows: To insert after the words “July 14, 1862, ” the words “ to be paid out of the Navy pension fund; so that the same will read: Nor Navy pensions to Widows. children. mothers and sisters. per act of August 11, 1848 and July 14 862. to be paid out of the Navy pension fund, 140,000.
Skip Skip The amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was to amend the title by adding the words “and additional appropriations for the year ending the 301h of une, 1866. ”. The amendment was concurred in. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv the House concurred in the several amendments of the Senate; and also moped to lay the motion to reconsider on the tab e. Agreed to. sumsoss wnrrrxcs. The next business upon the Speakers table was Senate JtResolution No. 17, directing the distribution of the writings of James Madison. The JtResolution was read a 1st and 2nd time. It directs the JtcomLibrary to distribute by mail or otherwise the 500 copies of the writings of James Madison, published by authority of Congress, as follows: to the POTUS, one copy; to the libraries of the different Executive depts and of the PostMGenl and AttyGen, one copy each; to each member of the present Senate and HoRep, one copy; to the Librar of on gress, ten copies; to the libraries of eseveral States and Territories of the Union, one copy each; to such public and college libraries as may be designated by the present JtcomLibrary, 100 copies; the residue to be retained in the Dept of the (Interior for future distribution.
Mr. STEVENS moved to refer the JtResolution to the JtcomLibrary.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I hope we shall not proceed to vote ourselves books at this early period of the session. I move that the JtResolution be laid on the table.
The SPEAKER. The motion to lay on the table is not debatable.
Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois. I withdraw my motion for the present, that the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY] may explain this matter.
Mr. KELLEY. I desire simply to state that this resolution has been before the JtcomLibrary, having been examined by that committee before its passage in the Senate. It provides, not for the purchase of any books, but simply for the distribution of books now on hand.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I would like to inquire of my colleague [Mr. KELLEY] whether these books have been paid for, whether, after the passage of this resolution, we may not be called upon to ay for these documents.
Mr. KELLEY. As I understand, the Government purchased some time ago a certain number of copies of this work, and has them now on hand. This resolution simply provides for the distribution of these documents, which the Government bought and paid for long ago. It docsnot contemplate the purchase of a single volume.
Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois. Irenew the motion that the JtResolution be laid on the table. The motion was not agreed to.
Mr. SPALDING. I be e that the motion to refer this resolution to the comLibrary will be withdrawn, and that the resolution will be passed now.
Skip Skip Mr. STEVENS. I withdraw the motion to refer. The JtResolution was ordered to be read a 3rd time: was read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv the JtResolution was passed on the table. Agreed to. COXTESTED ELECTION FROM MICHIGAN.
Mr.SCOFIELD, from the ComElections, to whom was referred the petition of Augustus C. Baldwin, claiming to beentitled to the seat now occupied by Rowuxn E. Tnow BRIDGE as a Representative from the 5th congressional district of Michigan, submitted a report, accompanied with the following resolution: Remloed, ThatRowunn E. Tnownmnon is entitled to a seatin this House as a Rgprespntative from the 5th congressional district of ichlgan. The report and resolution, with the accompanyin papers, were laid on the table and ordere to be printed.
Mr. MORRILL. I ask unanimous consent to call up the bill No. 201. I do not think it will take 5 minutes to pass it. I
Mr. LeBloND. Does the gentleman wish to call u that bill for action now?
Mr. LeBloND. I insist upon the regular order.
Mr. MORRILL. Then I move a suspension of the rules.
The SPEAKER. The House is now acting under a suspension of the rules. The bill now in order, the Freedmens Bureau bill, is a special order, made such under a suspension of the rules. BUREAU. The House, agreeably to order, resumed the consideration of the bill (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau.
Mr. GRINNELL. I would like to ask the gentleman if in the State of Kentucky the writ of lichens corus is not already suspended.
Mr. TRIMBLE. I will answer the gentleman. I know that the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus was suspended, by an order of the POTUS, from one end of this country to the other, and that the president, under authority given to him by Congress, had restored that writ to all the States of the Union, excepting, I believe, in his proclamation, the States receutl in rebellion, the State of Kentucky, and the DistCol. I believe that to be the fact. But, sir, as aquestion of law, in my humble judgment, the writ of habeascorpus is restored today from ocean to ocean and from the Gulf to the lakes, by. reason of the fact that we are now in peace. Peace prevails from one end of this land to the other. Nowhere is therea hostile flag or a hostile armed foe.
Mr. GRINNELL. I wish to ask, then, how it can be asserted that this strikes down anything so long as the gentleman admits that the privile s of the writ are already suspended, unless e wishes to take issue with the POTUS.
Mr. GRINNELL. The gentleman s oaks about securing the rights of all parties. wish to know how he regards that law of Kentucky which makes it a felony for a certain class of people to go into the State, and whether be things the freedmens Bureau may not properly rectify such a law as that.
Mr. TRIMBLE. So far as any law is concerned that exists in the State of Kentucky, I will say to that gentleman, with all due deference, if he will let Kentucky manage her own affairs she will manage it very much better than anybody here can do it. The people of Kentucky will protect their people in all their rights, if their protection is le to them and will say that there are laws in other States making iscriminations and distinctions in regard to this class of persons. There are such laws in Illinois, in Indiana, in Ohio, and in many other States. The law of the State of Illinois makes it a felony for a negro to come 1866. 649 into that State and the law of the State of Indiana also does the same.
Mr. ingERSOLL. I will state that that law has been repealed now. It was once the law of Illinois, but the eulightened civilization of the 19th century has overriden that barbarism.
Mr. TRIMBLE. Does not the constitution of the State of Illinois today prohibit free no oes from coming into that State?
Mr. INGERSOLL. Illinois has repealed all laws in that regard.
Mr. TRIMBLE. Has there been an amended constitution submitted to the people since the commencement of the war?
Mr. FARNSWORTH. Thatwas not adopted; it was voted down by the)eople.
Mr. MARSHALL. It is due to the truth of history that I should sa that my colleagues [Mr. Ixosnsou and Mr. Fnnxswonru] are mistaken in. regard to the constitution of Illinois. The constitution of 1848 provides that the Legislature of Illinois shall pass laws prohibiting negroes coming into that State.
Mr. INGERSOLL. But there is no such law.
Mr. TRIMBLE. My argument was that there was a provision in the constitution of Illinois to that effect.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I understood the gentleman to state that there was a law in the State of Illinois making ita felony for a negro to come into that State.
Mr. TRIMBLE. I intended to refer to the constitution of the State of Illinois. If I said “law” it was by mistake, for I had in m mind the fact that the people of Illinois ha, by a very large majority, adopted that constitution.
Mr. 1 GEKSOLL. Alllaws upon that subject which have ever been in force in the State of Illinois have been repealed.
Mr. TRIMBLE. If the Legislature of the State of Illinois have not passed laws in accordance with the constitution of the State, that is a question for the people of the State to take cognizance of. at there are other States that make discriminations, that would place these parties in the condition of felons, if, under the provisions of this bill, they should be brought before one of these jurists who are to be appointed in every county in this country; for the provisions of this bill, as I understand, apply to the whole country, North, South, East, and West. It includes the northern States, every single one of them. There is, I believe, an amendment pending which proposes to limit the openitions of the bill to the States lately in rebellion, and the State of Kentucky, with the other border States. But, sir, I trust that partial legislation will not be adopted by the Congress of the U.S. What have Ixentucky and the other borderStates done during this controversy that they should be singled out here for class legislation, that they should be made subject to legislntion which is calculated to degrade them in their own estimation and in the estimation of every honest man from one end of this country to the other. Sir, Kentucky has stood as a wall of fire between the Government and those men in the South who were endeavorin to overthrow it. The bones of the sons of Kentucky lie upon every battlefield: their blood has crimsoned the soil of every State where the operations of this war have extended. Both armies have marched and countermarched over the fields of Kentucky. She has complied with every requisition of the Federal Government.
Mr. GltINNELL. Inasmuch as the gentleman is eulogizing the patriotism of Kentucky, I wish to ask him whether Kentucky did not, at the opening of the war, declare ier “neu trality, ” and proceed to raise troops and organize an army for her own defense as against the Government, and whether she did not refuse the armies of the Union to cross her sci
Mr. THIMBLE. I believe that at one time there was something said there about neutral iti; but I believe there has never been a time when in Kentucky, from one end of her borders I to the other, a majority of her people have not stood read to support the Union, the Constitution, an the laws passed under it. There has never been a time when Kentucky has shrunk from her duty to the constitution and the laws. Notwithstandingr all the efforts of the South to precipitate Kentucky into the rebellion, she steadfastly refused to take art in that rebellion and has uniformly stoo by the constitution. In spite of all the efforts of certain parties within her borders, she has maintained her fealty to the constitution, as she does today.
Mr. GRINNELL. I desire to ask the gentleman whether his colleague [Mr. Rousseau] was not during the war obige to go over into the State of Indiana for the purpose of organizing his regiment?
Mr. TRIMBLE. I believe that my distinguished colleague did raise his regiment and camp upon the opposite side of the river.
Mr. GRINNELL. Because he was obliged to do so.
Mr. GRIDER. I ask that the gentleman have a few minutes to finish his speech.
Mr. GRINNELL. The gentleman was only going to occupy half an hour when he began. Several Msnnnss. Let him go on.
Mr. GRINNELL. I have no objection if it does not come out of my time.
The SPEAKER. The Chair was informed, not being here on Saturday, that by arran ement with the Speaker protempore the gent e man was to speak but half an hour; but the Chair did not regard that, and allowed the gentleman to occu Ian hour. I will add but a
Mr. TRIMBLE. I have thus stated my constitutional objections to this bill, and I think that I am sustained by thatinstrument in every single pointthat I make in opposition to it; and I appeal to my friends who love this Union, who love it for all the memories of the past, who love it because it has protected them and theirs; I appeal to them to pause and reflect before thely press this measure upon these people; for tell you that, in my judgment, the effects of the provisions of this bill to us as a nation will not be told in our lifetimes. If legislation of this character is to be ressed here, lawfully fear hope will sink with llll us. Our love for this Union and desire for its resto ration will be greatly weakened and estranged. Iearnestly hope that this class of legislation will cease, that crimination, and recrimination shall cease, and that all parties shall meet here like brothers standing upon the same broad platform of the constitution, demanding for each and every section of the country every right the have under that instrument. Sir, I have no animosity in my heart against SCarolina, or against Manfc, or against Massachusetts. I cannot forget Lexington or Bunker Hill, and every right which I claim for Kentucky I would yield to Massachusetts, and I demandit. for SCarolina, and those other States that have no voice here today, whose country is now desolated from one end to the other, and whose widows and orphans are now appealing to Heaven that they may be protected in this hour of trial. We have a right to demand that laws which o crate upon on one section of this count she Iocrate equally upon others. That is alInsk, that is all I demand, and while I live I will claim that right for my State and every other State.
Mr. GRINXELL. Mr. Speaker, this bill now under discussion has been carefully considered by the committee on the Freedmens Bureau, of which I have the honor to be an humble member; and I will say, as preliminary to the remarks which I desire to make, that I have been very much surprised at the course of certain gentlemen representing especially the State of Kentucky. I do not won or that that State desires to stand well before the country as a patriotic and noble Commonwealth; but I cannot forget when I hear these extravagant claims set up here that her Governor, in the 1st year of the rebellion, refused to honor the call for troops made by the POTUS in our darkest hour; nor can I forget that when her soldiers wished to organize regiments they were obliged to cross the Ohio river into the State of Indiana, that they might organize them free from the interference of the power of Kentucky neutrality. That is a fact in history and I cannot overlook it when gentlemen here arraign the POTUS because he has seen fit to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus in the State of Kentucky. Sir, Idiffer with the gentlemen in reference to the course of the POTUS in that regard. I have a profound admi ration for his course in suspending that writ in old Kentucky as well as in SCarolina. I believe it onght to be suspended; that its restoration would bring anarchy and bloodshed. I should like to ask the Gentfrom Kentucky who last addressed the House why he has an objections to its bein suspended there?
Mr. TRIMBLE. Ccrtainlyl have. I do not think the constitution warrants its suspension in any part of the U.S., now that the rebellion is at an end.
Mr. IRIMBLE. I would be happy to reJly to the gentleman if it did not interteie with is remarks.”
Mr. GRINNELL. I desire an answer; and shall not regard it as an interference with my remarks. as am speakin withoutnnianuscript.
Mr. TRIMBLL. will the gentleman repeat his question?
Mr. GRINNELL. The gentleman says the laws of Kentuckyare honorable. just, and suited to the condition of the pee 10 of that State. I ask that gentleman why Ientucky has not reealed or amended or changed her barbarous aws?
Mr. GRINNELL. Those against the loyal black people of the State. For instance, t iat law which makes it a penal offense for a man who has worn the Government uniform and fought our battles to go into that State.
Mr. TRIMBLE. As I understand, the Legislature of Kentucky is still in session and so far as I am concerned, and I know it is the desire of every member of the partyI represent in Kentucky, I desire that that State shall provide to meet the altered condition of things, and do justice to every white man and every black man in Kentucky. 1 can tell the gentleman the reason it has not et been done. They have not had time; they have been in session only some 3 or 4 weeks, and matters of very great importance have been before them. But I have no doubt the Legislature will do full justice to all classes of her population; and so far as I am concerned, I am willing to do it today. Kentucky will not be driven and having answered the gentleman, I desire to say that I do not wish to have any personal dispute with him. But it would seem that his remarks could be construed into something of that kind.
Mr. GRINNELL. My questions arepersonal, and could not be otherwise.
Mr. TRIMBLE and your denunciations of the State of Kentucky, were they personal?
Mr. GRINNELL. I was denouncing wrong and oppression and wickedness and crime.
Mr. TRIMBLE. Does the gentleman intend those denunciations to apply to me 7
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Willthe gentleman allow me to ask him a question 7
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I desire to know when the gentleman addresses this side of the House what he means by saying, “your President.”
Mr. GRINNELL. The President has been so much complimented and praised as a great and good Union man, and as the Moses who was to lead the children of Israel
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Will the gentleman allow me a word or two?
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. As one on this side of the House, I desire to say that I esteem him as the President of the whole country; and I support his policy because it is calculated to restore the nion as of yore. While I had no action in electing him, yet he commands my respect and support.
Mr. GRINNELL. If this comes out of my time I must object.
The SPEAKER. It does come out of the gentlemans time.
Mr. GRINNELL. The difference between the gentleman and myself is, that I had the honor to give the President my vote; and the gentleman had the honor of voting forihave almost for otten who
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. A General who was in the field. I do not know whether the gentleman was there or not.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I did not hear the gentlemans question.
Mr. GRINNELL. Do you indorse the recommendations of GenlHoward, GenlGrant, and the President in regard to the Freedmens Bureau?
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvunia. I do not know exactly whatthose gentlemen have said. I am not goin to indorse an omnium gatherum of notations the Gentfrom Iowa.
Mr. GRINELL. I have read what the President, GenlHoward, and the SecyWar have said.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I say that I indorse the Presidents policy so far as the treatment of the southern States is concerned. I believe all of his messages and uh lic acts tend earnestly to a restoration of the Union.
Mr. GRINNELL. Do you indorse his recommendation in reference to the Freedmens Bureau 1 “
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I shall answer in reference to the Freedmens Bureau, when I have the opportunity, at length.
Mr. GRINNELL. The gentleman does not find it convenient to answer at this time. I should like to have an answer before he claims to be the best and peculiar friend of the president. I should like to know where we stand. This bill is supposed to be favored by the president, the SecyWar, GenlGrant, and GenlHoward, who are to execute it.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. The POTUS does not, as I understand, recommend any such bill as this, which, accordingto my judgment, is in violation of the letter and spirit of the constitution. It proposes to appropriate money without any color of law.
Mr. GRINNELL and I state that to my knowledge, us informed. the POTUS does indorse the substance of this bill.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I call upon the gentleman to state where and when the President has given his indorsementto this s.
Mr. GRINNELL. I am very much in the ndition of another gentleman here the other my; I am not at liberty to disclose the secrets 1 the President, if I had any.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. As we cannot take what is in the gentlemans mind, we must remain in the dark.
Mr. GRINNELL. If the gentleman doubts my assertion
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I do not doubt his word, but I want the whole House to be as much enlightened as the gentleman himself.
Mr. GRINNELL. It is said that this is a partial bill, and I have this to say in regard to the objection: that during the administration of General Disk, in the district of Tennessee and Kentucky, 7 and a quarter greater supplies were meted outta the white people under his bureau than to the colored free men. It isto reach those in want, the white mountain refu cc and the excolored soldier and slave, with is family; and I cannot conceive that any gentleman who has the honor of his country at heart, who believes in the emancipation proclamation, and that under the constitution we are authorized to enact the laws that are necessary to carry out its provisions, can object to feeding and clothing the naked and ministering in hos pitals to those who have been true to our flag and shed their blood in our cause.
Mr. SMITH. Will the gentleman allow me a moment?
Mr. GRINNELL. I Will yield for a question.
Mr. SMITH. I do not want to ask a question; I merely wish to make a remark.
Mr. GRINNELL. I decline to yield unless fora question.
Mr. SMITH. I wish to say thatrny colleague [Mr. ROUSSlZAU]does not belong to that class of men that the Gentfrom Iowa speaks of. He served in the Union cause 4 years during the war.
Mr. GRINNELL. History repeats itself. I care not. whether the gentleman was 4 years in the war on the Union side or 4 years on the other side; but I say that he degraded his State and uttered a sentiment I thought unworthy of an American officer when he said that he would do such an act on the complaint of a mom against him.
Mr. SMITH. I deny that my colleague made an such statement.
Mr. GRINNELL. I occupied the Speakers chair when the gentlemans colleague was speakin, and I heard the words; but the Gent emun Iias seen fit, like other gentlemen, to withhold his speech for revision, and I cannot, therefore, refer to it. I have no desire to do him the least injustice or impugn his honor.
Mr. SMITH. I will only say that my colleague did not so so.
The SPEAKER. There are 15 minutes left of the time of the Gentfrom Iowa, [Mr. Grinnell]
Mr. GRINNELL. I hope the gentlema from Kentucky [Mr. McKEn] will be allowe the 5 minutes that were taken out of my timg by interruptions.
Mr. ELIOT. I object to that. I will give the gentleman 5 or ten minutes of the time to which I shall be entitled after the previous question shall have been ordered.
The SPEAKER. The Chair wrll again remind gentlemen of the HoRep that they have adopted a rule prohibiting applause in the galleries, and that they must enfbrce that rule themselves. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.
Mr. COBB, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that the committee had examined and found truly enrolled a bill entitled, “An act (H.R.No. 36) making appropriation for the nyment of invalid and other pensions of the I U.S. for the year ending June 30, 1807, and additional appropriations for the year ending June 30, 1866;” when the Speaker signed the same. FREEDMENS BUREAU AGAIN.
Mr. STEVENS. I hope the Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. Emor] before he calls the previous question, will withdraw his motion to recommit, which now cuts ofi“amendment, as I understand it, until I can offer an amendment to the committee s amendment to this bill, which will leave it more acceptable to me.
Mr. ELIOT. I cannot do o at this moment.
Mr. SMITH. I ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts to allow me to offer an amendment to the bill at this time.
Mr. SMITH. Then allow me to make a remark at this moment.
Mr. SMITH. I am sorrythe Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Emor] is not disposed to be as courteous to me as he has been to other gentlemen upon this floor.
Mr. ELIOT. I wish to withdraw the motion I made to recommit this bill; and then, by instruction of the select committee on the Freedmens Bureau, I wish also to withdraw the substitute which has been reported from the committee, and to offer anot or substitute in lieu thereof, which I will proceed to explain.
The SPEAKER. The amendment pro. osed by the Gentfrom Minnesota [Mr. 0s ssnnv] falls with the withdrawal of the substitute 1st reported by the committee.
Mr. ELIOT. I have promised my friend. from Minnesota [Mr. DONNEIJX] to allow him to offer his amendment to this substitute, as he did to the one I have just withdrawn.
Mr. DONNELLY. I move to amend by inserting after the word “ schools, ” in section 6, the following: and the Commissioner may provide a common school education for all refugees or freedmen who shall apply therefor.
Mr. STEVENS. Can I offer a substitute for the one rerted by the committee?
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom minnesota [Mr. Dousnunr] has already proposed an amendment to the amendment reported by the committee.
Mr. STEVENS. Will the Gentfrom Minnesota [Mr. DONNELLY] withdraw his amendment so as to give me an opportunity to offer my substitute for the one reported from the committee?
Mr. donnelLY. If my amendment is withdrawn now, will I again have an opportunity to offer it?
The SPEAKER. The Chair understands that the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. EMOT] proposes to call the previous question. If that call IS sustained the gentleman will have no opportunity to offer his amendment.
Mr. DONNELLY. Then I must decline to withdraw my amendment.
Mr. ELIOT. Mr. Speaker, I will proceed now A to explain the changes proposed by the select committee in the substitute now reported, from tlhe one reported from that committee the other ay. The 1st alteration they propose to make is in the 1st section. As it now stands the President may divide the section of country containing refugees and freedmen into districts not exceeding 12 in number, each containing one or more States. The committee propose to amend the section by inserting after the words “ section of country” the words “ within which the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus is at present suspended, ” so that it will lien read, “and the resident may divide the section of country within which the writ of habeas coFnw is at present suspended, containing such reugees an freedmen, into districts, ” &c.
Mr. SMITH. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] permit me to ask him a question at this point?
Mr. ELIOT. If the gentleman thinks it important to interrupt me for the purpose of puttinv a question, I cannot object.
Mr. SMITH. I want to understand the hearing of the change in this section proposed by the committee. If the writ of habeascorpus is restored to any State, will the Freedmens Bureau betherefore withdrawn from that State?
Mr. ELIOT. No sir; “ within which the writ of habeascorpusis at present suspended.”
Mr. BENJAMIN. I wish to make one suggestion to the gentleman in reference to his amendment. I suggest to him that he modify the sentence “ States in which the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus is now suspended.” I suppose that, of course, means at the time of the passage of this bill, and that mny be a little in definite. I suggest to him that he indicate some particular time, say the (let of January, 1866.
Mr. ELIOT. I cannot yield, at present to that suggestion.
Mr. CHANLER. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ELror] allow me to say a few words, in order to set myself right?
Mr. CHANLER. Not for a personal expla nation in reference to the matter under debate?
Mr. ELIOT. I decline to yield to the nl Gentfrom NewYork, Mr. Gunmen.I have already agreed to yiel a few moments to the gentlemaii from Ohio, [Mr. SHELLABARGEB] ll
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Massachusetts is entitled to the floor, and he declines to yield to the Gentfrom NewYork.
Mr. CHANLER. Now, sir, I appeal to the House. The gentleman refuses to yield to me for a personal explanation in regard ton matter in which I am personally concerned
The SPEAKPER. The Gentfrom NewYork is out of order. The Gentfrom Massachusetts is entitled to the floor without interrntion.
Mr. ELIOT. I have promised to ield a few moments to my friendfrom Ohio, [5 Mr. Summa manna.
Mr. CHANLER. I object to the gentleman yielding, unless he yields unconditionally.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman has the right to yield to whom he pleases.
Mr. CHANLER. If the gentleman excludes me from occupying the floor he should exclude others.
The SPEAKER. The rule under which the Gentfrom Massachusetts has the right to yield to any member will be read.
The Clerk read, as follows: “While a member is occupying the floor he may yield it to another for explanation of the pending measureas wedlas for a personal explanation.”
Mr. CHANLER. Well, I ask the gentleman to yield to me for a personal exlanation.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Massachusetts has the right to yield to the gentleman irom NewYork, or to decline to do so; He declines; and the Cliairprotects him in his right.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I suggest the followiii amendment, which I hope will be accepte by the committee on free men. Ihare shown it to all the members of the committee, except perhaps one.” Add at the end of section 3 the following: Provided. That no person shall be deemed destitute, suffering. ordepondent upon the Government for support. within the meaning of this not. who. being able to find employment could. by properindustry and exertiori. avotd such destitution. suffering and dependence.
Mr. CHANLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Gentfrom Ohio to allow me to make a statement. [Criesof“Nol” “No!”] Isimply desire to say that I never asserted that my colleague [Mr. RAYMOND] was under any obligation to present the letter which has been referred to. My knowled e of the facts was limited to his possession of the paperThe SPEAHER. The Gentfrom NewYork is out of order. He mustresumeliisseat, or the Chair will be compelled to enforce the rule. The gentleman has several times appealed to the Gentfrom Massachusetts, who has refused to yield.
Mr. CHANLER. I beg pardon of the Chair. I appealed to the Gentfrom Ohio.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Ohio has no right to eld the cor.
Mr. CHANLER. Of course I did not know that. [Laughter]
The SPEAKER. The amendment of the Gentfrom Ohio is not in order at the present time.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I was in the hope it would be accepted by the Gentfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. ELIOT. I have no objection to accept it.
Mr. STEVENS. I understand the Gentfrom Minnesota [Mr. DONNELLY] will withdraw his amendment so as to allow me to submit my substitute.
Mr. DONNELLY. I withdraw my amendment because the Gentfrom Pennsylva iii; [in sirvm) has informed me that hel has embodied that amendment in the substitute for the whole bill which he is about to offer.
Mr. STEVENS. I now offer a substitute for the whole bill.
Mr. ELIOT. I think the alterations in the bill made by the substitute can be read by the Clerk in one minute.
Mr. STEVENS. That is intended to keep debate up if the previous question is not called today. This evening let it be understood that the discussion be on this bill; after that on the Presidents message.
Mr. ELIOT. It seems to me we had better finish this bill and take a vote on it now.
The SPEAKER. The proposition of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania requires unanimous consent.
Mr. ELIOT. I object to it. how much time have I?
Mr. ELIOT. I do not propose to occupy the time of this House in protracted discussion of the provisions of this bill.
Mr. LeBloND. I will inquire of the Gentfrom Massachusetts it the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania has been accepted by him or is in any shape pending before the House.
Mr. ELIOT. No, sir, it has not been and could not be.
The SPEAKER. It is ending as amendment to the substitute o ered by the committee, and the 1st question will be on the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, Mr. Stevens.
Mr. LeBloND. Then I would like to have it read.
The SPEAKER. It will be reported before it is voted upon.
Mr. ELIOT. Mr. Speaker, I shall occupy the attention of the House very briefly in closing the debate upon this bill, and possibly might refrain from speaking but that wish to bring to the notice of the House a few facts from official sources concerning the operation and the value of the Freedmens Bureau. 3 objections have been urged against this bill. 2 gentlemen, my colleague on the committee, [Mr. TAYLon] of NewYork, and the Gentfrom Maryland, [ML Punnrs] very rankly admit that we are called on for some legislation to protect the freedmen who have been, by military emauci)ation and by constitutional amendment, broug tunder the guardian care of the Government, but they contend that the provisions of this bill are not such as commend themselves to their judgment. All the of thergentleincu who have spoken on the other side of the House deprecate all legislation and deny that any bill, however drawn. having the objects in view sought to be effected can properly receive support. We see these millions of men Overwhelmed in the rough seas, but we must not stretch forth the wand of the law to art the waters for their salvation.
Mr. PHELPS. As the gentleman has alluded to me, I would like to state just here, that in view of the amendment suggested by the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. SHEILABARGER] which has been accepted, as I understand it, I with draw my objection to the bill, the principle of which, as 1 said before I indorse, only o jecting to matters of detai. I shall therefore vote for the bill.
Mr. STEWART. I just hear that yesterday at Moadevillc. Ri certain Mayor Harrison proclaimed that an one who hired a negrqdessrved to hang, and should be hung. This isa fellow they had charge as a spy and I unfortunately lent a hand in gottiu him clear. It is certain he wont to pilot Berry and is gang through here last fall and ought to be up for that.
Mr. SMITH. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Emorl allow me tosayaword in reference to Genera Fisk?
Mr. SMITH. I desire to say but a word in reference to a speech made by General Fish, in Cincinnati, in reference to Kentucky.
Mr. HARDING, of Kcntnck. ill the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] a low me to ask him a question? whom is that report signed? Is it signed by general Fisk or some subordinate?
Mr. ELIOT. It is an official reportby General Fisk.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentuck. Is it signed by General Fisk or by a subordinate?
Mr. ELIOT. It is signed by General Fisk.
Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky. I think the gentleman is mistaken.
Mr. ELIOT. What I have had read is a certified copy of a report made and signed by General Fisili, as the gentleman will see by examiniii the copy just read by the Clerk.
Mr. RIDEIt. I would ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] when be obtaiaed the communication just read.
Mr. STEVENS. I ask the gentleman if his time has expired.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Massachusetts has 9 minutes remaining.
Mr. STEVENS. Does the gentleman intend to occup that time?
Mr. ELIO. N o; Iwill yield it to my friendfrom Pennsylvania.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. Speaker, I wish I had a little more time to explain the amendment which I have offered, for it is important in 2 or 3 articulate. The hi 1 as it now stands contemplates tuming 08 the freedmen from the homesteads which were allotted to them by order of the Government, in 3 years.
Mr. ELIOT. Will the gentleman allow me to interru t him a moment?
Mr. ELIOT. I wish to say that so far from that being the case, I have information from the bend of this bureau that under the provisions of this bill all the rights of these colored men can be cared for with entire satisfaction to them; that it is all they ask, and all they want.
Mr. STEVENS. Let me read the language of the bill: That the occupants of land under Major GenlSherman s special field orderi dated at Savannah. Junuary 16. 1865, are hereby confirmed in their possession for the period of 3 yearsfrom the date of said order, an no person shall be disturbed in or ousted from said possession during said 3 years, unlessa settlements hallbemadowith said occupant, lliy the owner. Satisfactory to the Commissioner of the Freedmens Bureau. Whit does that mean?
Mr. ELIOT. Why does not the gentleman. read the rest of the section? It continues thus: Provided. That whenever the ownersof lands occupied under GenlSherman s field order s ha llbe entitled to restoration of said lands the commissioner is hereby authorised. upon the agreement and with the written consent of said occupants. to procureother lands for them. by rent or purchase, or to set apart for them cut of the public lands assignedfor that purpose in section 4 of this bill. 40 acres each, upon the terms and conditions named in said section.
Mr. STEVENS. Does that prevent the occupants from being turned out?
Mr. STEVENS. I do not think so; and I so that this bill is a robbery.
The SPEAKER. The gentlemans time has exired.
Mr. ELIOT. Before the vote be taken on 2ndingtbe demaud for the irevious question, I wish to say that I accept the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, to strike out in the “ 7th and 8th sections the words except as a punishment for crime whereof the part 5 all have been duly convicted.”
Mr. SMITH. I ask the consent of the Gentfrom Massachusetts to offer an amendment to the Senate bill.
Mr. ELIOT. I have no objection to its presentation.
Mr. STEVENS. In such an amendment in order?
The SPEAKER. It is. Both substitum mornin propose to strike out the entire Senate bill. It is in orderto perfect the Senate bill before striking it out.
Mr. SMITH. I move to amend the Senate bill by adding at the end of the last section the following words: Provided, That none of the provisions of this act gafilyexteud to, or be enforcedin, the State of Ken o 7
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state the condition of the question. a The Gentfrom Kentucky, [Mr. SHITH] to perfect the original Senate bill, moves to amend it by exempting the State of; Kentucky from its operation. The Gentfrom Massachusetts, chairman of the select committee on freedmen, moves to amend the Senate bill by striking it all out and inserting a substitute which will be reported before the vote is taken. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVENS] moves to amend the substitute by striking it all out and inserting another substitute. The 1st question will be upon the amendment of the Gentfrom Kentucky, to perfect the original bill. The next question will be upon the motion of the Gentfrom Peunsylvania to amend the amendment of the Gentfrom lliiassachusetts. v The next question will be upon the amendment of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, who proposes a substitute for the Senate bill. If that should prevail, the question will then be upon ordering the bill to a 3rd readin.
Mr. SMITIE I call the yeas&nays upon my amendment.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I suggest to the Gentfrom Massachusetts that, as it will be necessary to take votes on 3 or 4 different ropesitions before the bill can be disposed of? and as that will detain us to 6 ocloc, we allow the bill to go over until the
Mr. 1. LIOT.I do not object, if that be the wish of the House. EVENING SESSIONS.
Mr. STEVENS submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That on and after this day, until otherwise ordered, the Iiouso will take arecess daily at 4 oclock and 30 minut csp. m., to meetagain at 7 oclock and 30minutes 1:. m., for debate only in the Committee oft e Wholeou the presidents message.
PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS IN MISSOURI. On motion by Mr. THAYER, by unanimous consent, Senate bill No. 36, to quiet doubts in relation to the validity of certain locations of land in the State of Missouri, made by virtue of certificates issued under act ofveougress of Februar 17, 1815, was taken from the Speakers tab e, read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComPrivLandClms. The hour of half ast 4 oclock p.m. having arrived, the Speaker stated that the House, under an order recently adopted, would take a recess until 7 oclock and 30 minutes p. m. EVENING SESSION. The House reassembled at 7 oclock and 30 minutes p. m., (Mr. HIGBY in the Chair as Speaker protempore) and resumed, as in the ComWhole, the consideration of the Presidents annual messa e, on which Mr. Hosanna, of Ohio, was entitle to the floor. RECONSTRUCTION.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. TUESDAY, February 6, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY; The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION.
The PRESIDENT prolempore laid before the Senate a communication from the SecyTreasury, transmitting, in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of December 12, 1865, information in regard to the seiz ure of property, for a violation of the revenue laws ot the U.S., belonging to A. Rliomberg & Co., of Dubuque, Iowa; which, on motion of Mr. GRIMES, Was ordered to lie on the table, and be printed.
Skip Skip PETITIONS and MEMORIALS.R. POMEROY presented a petition of citizens of NewEngland, praying that in the passage of all bills establishing a new basis of Representation there be no distinction on account of race, color, or sex; which was referred to the point ComReconstruction. o also presented resolutions of the Legislature of Kansas in favor of an appropriation for the extension of the surveys of the public lands to the 100th meridian of longi tude; which were referred to the ComPubLands, and ordered to be printed. He also presented resolutions of the Legislature of ansas in favor of an appropriation for the erection at the capital of that State of a building for the accommodation of the U.S. courts and postoffice; which were referred to the ComFinance, and ordered to be printed. Mr. STEWART presented the memorial of Wellington dz Dorsey, of the State of Nevada, praying for the passage of a law by Congress to authorize the PostMGenl to pay them: additional compensation for the performance of extra mail service rendered in that State; which was referred to the ComPostOffices. Mr. ANTHONY presented the petition of Beale & Dixon, of NewYork, praying for legislation deemed necessary by the SecyTreasury for the adjustment and payment of their accounts under a contract for supplying the granite for the construction of the extension of the Treasury Dept; which was referred to the ComFinance. Mr. WILSON presented 2 petitions of citizens of NewEngland, praying that in the passage of all bills establishinga new basis of Representation there be no distinction on account of race, color, or sex; which were referred to the JtComReconstruction. Mr. SHERMAN presented apetition of manufacturers of agricultural implements, praying fora reduction of the tax on sales of a meal tural implements and for a removal of the tax which is now assessed upon castings made by themselves for their own machines; which was referred to the ComFinance. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.
Mr. CHANDLER, from the ComCommerce, to whom was referred the memorial of James Bawden, praying for the enactment of a law authorizing the SecyInterior to issue a patent to him for certain lands at Eagle Harbor, Lake Superior, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, and that it be referred to the ComPrivLandClms; which was agreed to. He also, from the same committee, who were instructed by a resolution of the Senate to inquire into the expediency of appropriating $100,000 for the erection of a courthouse and postoffice at Topeka, in the State of Kansas, asked to be discharged from the further consideration of the subject; which was agreed to. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred a petition of citizens of Pike county, Missouri, praying for the passage of an act for the appointment of properly qualified local engineers for each county or district,whose duties it shall be to examine and decide upon the qualifications of each and every person in their district desiring to act as engineers and to have charge and control of the steam works in any mill or manufacturing establishment, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, the committee believing it to be a local State. matter with which Congress has nothing to do. The report was agreed to.
Mr. CHANDLER. The ComCommerce, to whom was referred a resolution instructing them to inquire into the manner in which American vessels, transferred during the rebellion to British owners, are now being refurnished with American registers, have directed me to report it back and ask to be discharged from its further consideration, inas much as the HoRep have passed a bill which covers the ground. The report was agreed to.
Mr. CHANDLER. I now move to take up the bill Mr. No. 204) to regulate the reis tering o American vessels, which is the hi to which I have just alluded.
The PRESIDENT protem ore. from committees are still in order.
Mr. SHERMAN, from the ComFinance, to whom was referred the bill (S.No.84) to amend an act entitled “An act to incor porate the Freedmens Saving and Trust company, ” approved March 8, 1865, reported adversely thereon, and moved that e further consideration of the bill be postponed indefinitely. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. SUMNER, from the ComForRel, to whom was referred the message of the POTUS, Reports was. ma" 671 recommending an appropriation toward providing for the compensation of a diplomatic agent of the U.S. at the Dominican republic, reiorted a bill S.No. 130) to authorize the POTUS to apoint a diplomatic representative to the republic of Dominica; which was read, and passed to a 2nd reading.”
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM rnr. noose. A massage from the HoRep, by Mr. MCPHERSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had concurred in the amendments of the Senate to the hill (H.R.No. 36) making appropriation for the payment of invalid an other pensions for the ear ending the 30th of June, 1867. the message further announced that the HoRep had passed the JtResolution S.R.No. 17) directing the distribution of the writings of James Madison; and the point resolution (S.R. No. 25) tenderin the t anks of Congress to Vice Admiral Davi G. Farragut, and to the officers, petty Officers, seamen, and marines under his command, for their llantry and good conduct in the action in MO ile buy on the 5th of August, 1864. BNROLLED 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 Abill (H.R.No. 36) making appropriations for the payment of invalid another pensions of the U.S., for the year ending the 80th of June, 1867, and additional appropriations for the ear ending the 30th of Jone, 1866. A bill (H.R.No. 143) for the relief of Charles F. anderson. REFERENCE o? PAPERS.
Mr. STEWART. I move that the resolutions of the Legislature of Nevada in favor of a grant of lands and money to aid in the construction of the SanFranciseo and Washoe railroad and the Placerville and Sacramento railroad, which were presented on the 31st of January, be taken up and referred to the comPubLands, bills for that purpose being before that committee, introduced Since that period. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. CHANDLER. I move that the comPubLands be excused from the further consideration of the bill (S.No.129 for the relief of the heirs of James Bawden, which I presented yesterday, and that it go, together With the upers in the case, to the Committee on Private and Claims. The motion was agreed to. ARMY SUPPLIES IN DISLOYAL STATES.
Mr. CLARK. I do not rise for the purpose of opposing the resolution of the Senfrom WestVirginia, but I desire to suggest to him that. the better reference would be the ComMilAffrs, unless he has some particular preference in regard to committees. he ComMilAffrs naturally have more knowledge on this subject than the ComJudiciary, from their familiarity with the business.
Mr. WILLEY. Perhaps the Senator did not hear me when I remarked that a bill for the amendment of the law now existing, lookin to the accomplishment of this same object, Imus already been referred to the ComMilAffrs, and they have reported adversely, and indeed I offered this resolution proposing an inquiry by the ComJudiciary, on the suggestion of a member of the Military committee. It is a matter altogether immaterial to me to what committee it shall o; but I hope that to whatever committee the proposition may be referred, it will command. the approbation of the committee, and that justice will be done to the claims of these persons.
Mr. WILLEY. I certainly would be the last person in the world to initiate a policy by which the Golouuneat would be imposed upon, in by which claims presented by men who had not been loyal to the U.S. should be entertained and paid; but allow me by way of illus trating the propriety of sotne action in the case, 1 just to read an account furnished by one of these J men, received by me a day or 2 ago: The U.S. to NICHOLASItnisr. Dr. fo“r (45)45 bushels of oats(s)60. (46)45 bushel: of rye 081 21). 83 and $400 dollars. I certify that the above amount is just and eorrect, and that the articles we purchased are for public horsesattached to my command and that the same Will be issuedto the ration alloWnnrc, and that I cannot pay for the same for the waInI. t offunds. F. HYMAN, 01pmin Buttery I. In!rmimenl, Co. A, o. l., U.S.A. CALFPASTIZR VALLEY, May 4, 1562. I understand that this old man Rhine furnished not. only these goods and others at various times to our forces, but furnished 2 loyal sons to the U.S. Army, one of whom, in evidence of his devotion, slee s in southern soil, where he fell fighting brave y for his flag. When such a munand there are many such comes to the Congress of the U.S. simply askin payment for the supplies actually furnishe to the U.S., he should be placed a onanequul footing with a loyal man in a loyafstate for such an lies furnished; and I think it would be excee mgly hard to reject the applications of such men, and to say that they are no better than the rebels among whom the lived.
Mr. WILSON. I have no objection to this resolution going to the ComJudiciary. The ComMilAffai rs have reported against the proposition submitted to them as stated by the Senfrom Wisconsin, and I hold in my hand a bill prepared several days ago to repeal the law which authorized the QuarterMGen and the Commis sa General to settle any of these accounts, an after action upon this resolution I propose to introduce that bill, and have it referred to the Military Committee. If the ComJudiciary can devise any properway, with proper(guards, for entering upon the investigation an settlement of these emanda, I should be very lad to support it; but I see plainly that hundre of millions of dollars are to be called for from this Government to pay for damages and claims of various kinds and descriptions from the rebellious section of the country.
Mr. WILLEY. The Senator will observe that this does not apply to damages or anything of the kind.
Mr. WILSON. I understand that this proposition does not go to that extent; but [wish to say here now that I am opposed to lying one dollar for the damages occasioned by our ar mies or inflicted upon the people of the rebel States by our armies. I am opposed to it now, and I intend to o pose it so long as I have a seat in this body. herever we have taken property and used it for our armies and given receipts for it, I will fulfill the contract. We ought todo it. In those cases the parties ought to have their pay and have it promptly, an I suppose there are several such cases; but as to damages occasioned by themovements of our armies, or inflicted by our armies, I am opposed to yment now, and intend to oppose it to the en. The inhabitants of the States in rebellion must take the consequences of war and notin llict upon the people of this country the burden of having to pay for damages made necessary in order to subdue their rebellion. I am perfectly willing that this resolution shall go to the Committee on the jurliciary, and I hope that committee will be able to devise some means by which the people of the loyal and disloyal States who have actually furnished supplies for our Army and have received receipts for the same shall obtain their pay as soon as possible. I do not, therefore, oppose the reference.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. Before my friendfrom Massachusetts proceeds, I desire to submit an amendment which I shall offer to the ending resolution before the Senate by way of substitute, and I ask to have it printed and laid on our tables.
Mr. FESSENDEN and others. Let it be read.
The Secretary read the amendment of Mr. Doomrrmz, which was to substitute for the article of amendment proposed by the HoRep the following: After the censusto be taken in the year 1870 and each succeeding ccnsus, Representatives shall be a portioned ampii the several Slates which may o inclurledWithin this Union accordingto the number in each State of male electorsover 21 years of age qualified by the laws thereof to choose members of the most numerousbranch of its Legislature and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States according to the value of the real and personal taxable property situated in each State not belonfling to the State or to the U.S. The proposed amendment was ordered to be printe.
Mr. SUMNER concluded the speech which he began yesterday. To preserve the continuity of his argument. the speech is now published complete, as follows:
The Secretary read the following JtResolution: A JtResolution carrying out the unrnntee of a RFG in the constitution of the U.S and enforcing the constitutional amendmentfor the prohibition of slavery. Whereas it is grovided in the constitution that the U.S shall guaranty to every State in the Union a RFG; and whereas 17 reason of the iailure of certain States to maintain governments which tChoen nreitses dmSitgahtet sre, setaongdniing, iint hthaes palapesee, ot of sgeucaurraentotosru, ewlihSetaretetshaecc principal thhaesremqaud ireeament of the guarantee, governments republican in form and whereas further, it is provided in a recent constitutional amendment that Congressmay “on force” the prohibition of slavery by appropriate legislation and it is important to this on, thatal
Mr.FESSENDEN obtained the floor. I think it important to have an executive session, and if it is agreeable to in colleague, I will make that motion.
Mr. WILSON. I do not know that we have anything pressing in executive session, and if the Senfrom Maine will yield the floor I should like to let this subject pass over infor mally and take up a little bill
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I will state to m hou orable friend that it is very important that we should have an executive session this after noon.
Mr. WILSON. Very well. I shall not object.
Mr. MORRILL. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. The motion was agreed to; and after some time spent in executive session, the doors were reopened, and the Senate adjourned. It is a matter ofindif
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. TUESDAY, February 6, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borsror. the Journal of yesterday was read and approved. COST OF NAVYYARD. AT PHILADELPHIA.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the SecyTreasury, transmitting a letter from the 4th Auditor of the Treasury in regard to the cost of the navyyard at Philadelp in, in response to a resolution of the House ofJanuary 11, 1866; which wasreferred to the ComNavAffrs, and ordered to be printed. INCOME FROM PROPERTY IN THE FUNDS.
The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the SecyTreashry, transmitting the report of Hon. S. S. Hayes, of the U.S. revenue commission, upon the income derived from property in the funds and taxation generall.
Mr. WENI WORT moved that the letter of the Secrets, with the accompaning papers, be referre to the Committee of ays and leans, and that the Secretarys letterbe ordered to be printed.
The SPEAKER. As the SecyTreasury differs from the report of the commissioner, perhaps the letter of the Secretary had better be read.
The Clerk read, as follows: Tasssuav Denarun“. February 5, 1866. Sm: I have ti o honor to submit to on a report from 11011S. S. Hayes, amemberof the U.S. t!vnll((fimlsflolJlDOIl the property in the funds and the incomederived therefrom as a source of na Stitoantaels, revenue, the financial systemof the U.S. the creation of a sinking fund, and taxation in KLlNllll. Th ubjects upon which Mr. Hayes treats have beencartfully considered, and his viewsare veryably and clearlypresentedin this report. I cannot indorse his conclusions; but it is due to him and the importanceof the subjectwhich he discusses that his proort should be presented to and carefully considered1by Congress. I am very truly yours, H. MoCULLOCH. Hon. Scuurum Connx. e beakerof the hoRep.
Mr. Wssrwonrns motion was agreed to. postoffice ADVERTISEMENTS.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I ask to introduce a JtResolution for publication of notices of mail lettings. It provides that the yearly advertisements and proposals to carry the mails of the U.S., including the present year, shall be published for a period of 6 weeks in one newspaperprinted in each congressional district in the several States where the mail service is to be performed.
Mr. KASSOL. I hope the gentleman will not ask a vote without iiist hearin the views of the postoffice Dept. The law as it now stands was designed to effect a very considerable reduction in the printing expenses of the Dept. The mail lettings are now published in pamphlet form and distributed to all the postoffices and to contractors for the mails, besides the publication in newspapers. The notice now is just as elfectually advertised for the interests of the Government as it would be in the way proposed. We onght not to return without goo cause to the ogld plan, with its increased expenditures.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. It does not restore the old plan. At present the law provides that they shall be published in not exceeding 5 newspapers in every State and Territory. The operation of the law is to publish them in 5 newspapers in each State without reference to its size, so that in the small States they arepublished in 5 newspapers, while in the very large States of NewYork, Pennsylvania Ohio, and Illinois, they arepublished in but ve.
Mr. KASSON. I think the gentlemansis in error about the publication in this small States being in 5 papers. A smaller number of aers is selecte in the small States, as I am informed. Without intendin any discourtesy, Ihope the gentleman will allow me to make objection.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Iowa objects and it is therefore not before the House.
Mr. IiARNSWORTH. The gentlemen from Iowa consents that the resolution be referred to the comPostOffice. The JtResolution was then read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the comPostOffice. VICE ADMIRALVDAVID G. FARBAGUT.
Mr. RICE of Massachusetts, from the ComNavAffrs, by unanimous consent, reported back Senate JtResolution No. 25 ten ering the thanks of Congress to Vice Admiral David G. Farragut, and to the officers, petty officers, seamen, and marines under his command for their gallantry and good conduct in the action in Mobile bay, on the 5th of Au gust, 1864; which was ordered to a 3rd reading, and was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, mtRtv the House passed the joist resolution, and to lay that motion on the ta e. Agreed to. NAVAL ACADEMY STUDENTS.
Mr. MILLER, by unanimous consent, offered the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Rmloed, That the ComNavAffrsbe, and arehereby, requestedtoiuquiro into the reriety of so changing the law and regulations of the Yaval Academy as to admit students therein u to the of 21 years, so as to accordwi those:50 mitted into the Military Academy. BRONZE DOORSOF THE CAPITOL.
The SPEAKER. Before the House proceeds to the regular order the Chair desires to state that some Senators avestated to him that the bronze doors between the wing; of the Capitol leading to the old Hall of the HoRep have been injured to some extent, and the Chair has found that one or 2 swords have been taken from the statuettes. The Chair, therefore, asks consent to refer the whole matter to the ComPubBldg and Grounds.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I suggest that the committee also inquire whether the Halls shall be occupied with little drygoods and cake stands.
Mr. STEVENS and I would like to have them examine and report what that monster is out there. [Laughter]
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The in qui should embrace the whole subject. the SPEAKER. All those subjects will be referred to the Committee on public Build ifigs and Grounds, and they may report to the House. Freedmans BUREAU.
Mr. ELIOT. I call for the regular order.
The SPEAKER. The regular order is the consideration of the various propositions relating to the Freedmens Bureau, on which the previous question was demanded and 2nded yesterday, and the main question ordered. The Clgrk will now report the propositions in their order.
The Clerk read the amendments proposed, namely, 1st, that of Mr. SMITH,ence ting from the operation of the bill the State of Kentucky; 2nd, the substitute offered by Mr. Sisvsxs; and lastly, the substitute for the Senate bill reported by the committee.
Skip Skip The question was then taken upon agreeing to the amendment to the amendment as proposed by Mr. SMITH; and it was decided in the negativeyeas 84, nays 131, not voting 17; So the amendment was disagreed to. The question recurred on the substitute of fered by Mr. STEVENS for the substitute reported from the committee on freedmen. Mr. STEVENS demanded the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the ne ativeyeas 37, nays 126, not voting 19; So the substitute of Mr. Srnvsxs wastejected. During the roll call, Mr. CONKLING said: I wish to state that my colleague, Mr. HULBURD, is absent, by the leave of the House, in consequence of the illness of a near relative. I may e this statement in reference to all these votes. Mr. GLOSSBRENNER said: My colleague, Mr. Axcozu, is still absent on account of sick ness. I am authorized to say that he would have voted against all these propositions. The result of the vote having been announced asabove recorded, the question recurred on the substitut reported from the select committee on freedmen, and, being put, said substitute was agreed to. The bill Wasthen orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. Mr. ELIOT demanded the previous question on the passage of the bill. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. E BLOND called for the yeas&nays on the passage of the bill. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmativeyeas 136, nays 33, not voting 13; So the bill was passed. During the rollcall, Mr. BOYER stated that his colleague, Mr. JOHNSON, was unavoidably absent. If here, he would undoubtedly have voted in the negative. The result of the vote having been announced as above recorded,
Mr. ELIOT moved to amend the title of the hi I so as to read as follows: “An act to amend an not entitled An act to establish a Bureau for the Relief of Freedmen and Refugees, and for other purposes. ” The amendment was agreed to. Mr. ELIOT mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. YORTIPICATION BILL.
Mr. STEVENS, by unanimous consent, reported from the Committee on apiopriations a bill making appropriations for t as construe tiou, preservation, and repairs of certain fortifications and other works of defense, for the year ending 30th January, 1806; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union, and made the special order for Wednesday the 15th instant, after the ine rninv hour, and row day today until disposed of; and ordered to be printed. VINDICATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, entered a mtRtv the House, on yesterday, referred to the ComJudiciary Senate bill No. 61, to protect all persons in their civil rights and to furnish the means of their vindication. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I desire, Mr. Speaker, to make a personal explanation. Before doing so I will ask the Clerk to read a paragraph which I have marked in the report of yester ays debate, as published in the Daily Globe of this moimu. "The lerk read, as follows:
Mr. Gaixxiitn. History repeatsitself. I carenot whether the lirentleman wasfour years in the war of the Union si e or 4 years on the other side; but say thatho dotiraded his State and uttered a sentiment I thou: t u worthy of an American officor when he said that o would do such an act on the complaint of a negro against him.”
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Mr. Speaker, I did not use the language imputed to me by the member from Iowa, [Mr. GB!NNELL.] and I pronounce the assertion that has just been read, that I have degraded my State and uttered a sentiment unworthy an American officer, to be false, a vile slander, and unworthy to be uttered by any gentleman upon this floor.
Mr. (IRINNELL. Mr. Speaker, I have no explanation further than to say that the gentleman has withheld his remar s, and that I have published mine. I alluded to his remarks as I understood them, and stated distinctly that I had no desire to do the gentleman any injus tice. I critipised his laneilage as I understood it, and I stand by that criticism. If I did not represent his language correctly, then I make an apology to him in regard to that. But if I understood his language correctly I make no apolo for my criticism of it.
Mr. OUSSEAU. My object was not to obtain an a ology from the gentleman, but to so what I have said.
Mr. GRINNElrL. I have only to say that the gentlemans language is no offense to me. I stand here to discharee my duties as I under. stand they should be discharged, and I stand a on my rights as amember of this House and when I criticised the laws of Kentucky I did so from a senseof my duty; and when I characterized the language of the gentleman as I did, it was because I beliQVed it was unworthy of an American officer, and unworthy of his noble State; and I do not consider that he rep. presented the spirit of the loyal army of the country when he declared he would shoot a citizen because that citizen might have informed against him.
Mr. BOUSSEAU. I see the gentleman does not appreciate his position more than he appreciates mine. I understand the gentleman is a reacher of the Gospel. But ie has got to Team that charity that all other men understand. I am a new member here, but I have always endeavored to deport myself with the utmost courtesy and kindness toward every gentleman upon this door and it does seem to me that it came with exceeding ill grace from gentlemen who have satin their houses, who have remained in the bosoms of their families in that safety which we were lighting for in the battle field, to come here and not exercise even ordinary charity toward us, but, finding a member out of his seat, rocced to assail im, 1st by putting words in iis month he did not use, and then offer him an insult on account of those words. I say the gentleman does not apreciato my position nor his own; and I tell imthat; but that is his fault, and not mine.
Mr. GRINNELL. I have only to say that the gentleman has paraded his profession of arms before this House. I have not paraded mine. If he says that I am a clergyman, or was a minister, I have to answer that I was a man before I was a minister; and I claim now to be a man and an American citizen. I am not ashamed of m oriin or of my profession. I am here to stem up or my prinnciples and for my constituents and for my country. 1866. 689 EQUAL POLITICAL RIGHTS.
Mr. MORRIS, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to secure equal political rights to every citizen of the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComJudiciary. BERKELEY and JEFFERSON COUNTIES.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I rise to a privileged question, and call u the mtRtv the House some time ago recommitte to the ComJudiciary the JtResolution (H.R.No. 17) giving the consent of Congress to the transfer of the counties of Berkeley and Jefferson from the State of Virginia to the State of WestVirginia. I desire that avote may be taken on this subject. I hope that the motion to recou sider will be agree to. I think there will be no objection to it. I trust that then the JtResolution will be passed.
Mr. ROGERS. I hope the honorable Gen g tleman who reported this bill will not confine me to half an hour. I cannot state my objections in 30minutes.
Mr. LAWence, of Ohio. I think that halfan hour will be enough.
Mr. ROGERS. I am indebted to the gentlemans courtesy for the time I am to occupy; and as I am the only member of the committee who opposes the bill, I hope I will be allowed to have full time to state my objections and the reasons for them.
The SPEAKER. There are 45 minutes of the gentlemans bear left.
Mr. ROG RS. Mr. Speaker, this is an application to Congress to give its consent to a transfer ofJelIerson and Berkeley counties from old Virginia to WestVirginia, some 2 years after that transfer was supposed to have been made. It was supposed, according to the theory of i the report of the committee, that it was unnecessary to have any action on the part of congress toratif and consent to the transfer of a part of old irginia to WestVirginia. The report goes upon the hypothesis that the government under Governor Peirpoint was a government dejurc, and that therefore any act of old Virginia under Governor Peirpoint consenting to the transfer of any part of its territory to WestVirginia his was an act of the sovereign power ofo d Virginia, and legal.
Mr. KELLEY. The gentleman assumes, as has been done several times upon the other side of the House, that WestVirginia was recognized by the vote of the Republican poxtion of the House, ii on the ground of the consent of the State of Virginia to the organization of the State of WestVirginia. I am not, sir, prepared to say there were not some gentlemen upon this side of the House who voted upon that ground; butI am prepared to say that there was one who did not, that there were others who did no t, an d that there was one who appealed, in casting his vote in that way, that he should not be misunderstood, and many others responded, saying they could not stultif themselves by assenting to the idea that the state of Virginia was in a condition to consent. We voted or her admission because the people of this portion of our territory had organized a State, and came to congress asking for admission into the Union, and elieving we had the right to admit them, asthey had arranged all the properprelimina ries, we did so admit them. wish to enter my protest a inst the idea being sent abroad any urther, that our action recognizes Virginia as having the right to consent to anything which shou] be may e a condition for the action of this Congress.
Mr. goodBRIDGE. I would like to ask my colleague on the committee whether the contract had not been ratified before this repeal by the old State of Virginia, which I understand occurred on the 1st day of the convening of the present session is
Mr. ROGERS. No, sir, it was not ratified. Congress never has given any ratification or consent, directly or indirectly to the transfer of the counties of Berkeley o doifiarson to WestVirginia.
Mr. WOODBRIDGE. I merely want to know whether that ratification was not performed by nll parties except the consent of congress before the repeal of the law or grant by those States, and was not the jurisdiction of the 2 counties transferred?
Mr. ROGERS. The transfer of the jurisdiction of the 2 counties was not complete, and West irginia had no right by law to exercise any authority over the counties of Berkeley and Jefferson llllLil Congress had given its consent to the transfer. The act of V irginia authorizing the establishment of the State of WestVirginia, reserved in the act the control and juris iction of those counties until Congress should give its consent to the acquisition of that territory by the State of WestVirginia; and until that time the transfer was not complete. But these 2 counties were not included in the act of Congress. It is a condition of the act that Congress shall ratify the act of old Virginia consenting to the erection of WestVirginia, and until Congress consents to the erection of that State, old Virginia has the entire and exclusive control and jurisdiction over the whole of the original State.
Mr. LATHAM. I wish to correcta mistake of the gentleman in regard to the act to which he refers, and which is now the matter under consideration by the Housenot the act authorizing the erection ofu new State. The act under consideration now, giving consent to the transfer of the 2 counties, was a subject which took place at a period subsequent to the act of the State of Virginia giving its consent to the establishment of the State of WestVirginia and its admission into the Union by Congress. The act which gives the consent of the State of Virginia to the transfer of these 2 counties, states that the jurisdiction of the State of Virginia over these counties shall cease upon their admission by ilie State of WestVirginia, without the consent of Congress and the jurisdiction did so cease, was voluntarily withdrawn by their authorities, and the jurisdiction of WestVirginia ext ded over them immediately upon their admission by the State of WestVirginia. If the gentleman will allow me, I will read the act.
Mr. ROGERS. That will not be disputed; that is not the point I am making. The point is, that when WestVirginia wa. but into an independent position as a State, of Virginia stated in her act giving her consent that she should have entire sovereign control over every foot of that State until Congress gave its ratification to the contract between the 2 States, and that originally, when WestVirginia was admitted as a sovereign State into this Union. it was upon the exress condition that certain counties, naming them, should constitute the new State, and that these counties remained subject to the sole control of the State of old Virginia. Now, suppose that at any time after old irginia had given its consent, and before Congress had given its consent, and entered into the agreement necessary to complete the transfer, did Virginia had withdrawn iier consent, could she not have done it? Is there a lawyer in this House who will say to me that although a State may consent to the transfer of a portion of its territory to another State on condition that she shall hold sovereign power over that territory till Congress recognizes the act, that she has not the right at any time be before Congress ratifies the agreement towith draw her consent from that contemplated contract? Is it in the eye of the law a consummated contract at any time unless the 3 parties consent and agree to the contract at the same identical time. Either party has a right to withdraw its consent at any time before the agreement is full consummated.
Mr. LATHAM. Iwill just state that upon the admission of WestVirginia into the Union there was no contract between Virginia and WestVirginia. There could be none, because WestVirginia had no existence until admitted into the Union by the Congress of the U.S., and consequently it followed, as a matter of course. that the jurisdiction of the State of Virginia should be extended over all the territory which was erected into the State of WestVirginia until WestVirginia became a State by admission into the Union by the Congress of the U.S. There could be no agreement between the States until WestVirginia became a State. After the act authorizing WestVirginia to become a State in the Union, the Legislature of Virginia provided by 2 separate acts for the transfer of the counties of Berkeley and Jefferson, a clause of one of which reads thus: “Ifa maiority of the votes at the polls openedand held pursuant to this act bein favorof thesaid county of Berkeley becomingpart of the State of WestVirginia as then shall the said county becomepart of the said state of WestVirginia when admitted into the sameWith the consent of the Legislature thereof.”
Mr. WOODBRIDGE. Iwill ask my friendfrom NewJersey whether the contracting parties, WestVirginia and “old Virginia, ” as he calls it, the one making the grant and the other, receiving it, had not one all that they could do before the repeal of this grant by the Legislature of the socalled present State of Virginia. I think that all the gentlemans law could be answered, even though “old Virginia” were so far in the Union as a State as to make her or dinances valid at the time when she passed the recent act of repeal. But so far from that, I believe that an act that she might pass would have no contro over the acts passe by aState which was at the time of the passage of the act recognized by the General Government as being a State in the Union; for when the last act was passed, although as a State she was not in the sense that some contend out of the Union, yet she was in such a conditionthat she had not the power to pass ordinances and laws of any binding force either upon Congress or the count. o ryI will say in addition, that the Legislature which passed the recent act of repeal was organized Without taking the oath of office which has been prescribed by Congress or byits own constitution.
Mr. ROGERS. The present Legislature was organized under Governor Peirpoint and is now recognized as the Legislature of the State of Virginiade ure, by the President and other officers of the federal Government and she holds her powers to legislate now under and by the same authority she did when she passed the act giving her consent to the transfer, and by virtue of that same power she has withdrawn her ech sent and repealed her former law. I ask the gentleman this question: suppose that we had had no war; that we had continued in (peace and prosperity, and that old Virginia ha passed an act of her Legislature to transfer a portion ofher territor to WestVirginia; thatestVirginia had may ea constitution similar to this, and that before Congress had given its consent old Virginia had withdrawn her consent from that proposed compact or agreement, would she not have had a right to do so at any time before Congress ratific that contract?
Mr. WOODBRIDGE. I will state, then, Mr. Speaker, as a matter of law, that if there were in this grant conditionsprecedent to be performed by the other party before the grant should become operative, then, if the conditionsprecedent were not ierforiiied, the grant might fall. But I conten that the ratification by Congress is not a conditionprecedent, and that such ratification subsequent to the full acceptance of the grant by the contracting parties is all that is necessary.
Mr. ROGERS. I will ask the gentleman one question. Could the at be complete, and would a State have a right to take possession of the territor of another State, by virtue of acts of the legislaures, before Congress had given its consent, and would the acts of that State over territory of the other State be legal without the consent of Congress?
Mr. WOOD BRIDGE. I can only answer the gentleman by referring to what I have ul ready said.
Mr. ROGERS. New, sir, let me proceed With the decision I attempted to rea. The court decides, and it is the SCOTUS, as follows: 2 Now. it is perfectly clear, that although Congress might have refused their conentto the proposed separation. y1ttheyhad no authority to declareKentucky a separateand independentState. without the assent of Virginia or upon terms variant from those which Virginia had prescribed.” I ask what authority the Congress of the U.S. has this day to declare these 2 counties o. part of the State of WestVirginia without the consent of old Virginia. There is the point, the very point which is raised in this case, which the learned gentleman who made this reart has referred to as sustaining his report. Yhat right, lask, has the Congress of the U.S. to ratify an act upon the part of WestVirginia and old Virginia, which has been revoked upon the part of old Virginia, who has expressly withdrawn her consent before congress has had an opportunity to express its assent.
The SPEAKER. The gentlemans time has explired. Mr. ROGERS. I hope the gentleman Will not cut me off here.
Mr. LAWREh CE, of Ohio. time does the gentleman ask?
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I donotobject if it does not come out of my time.
Mr. HALE. I hope that the time of the Gentfrom NewJersey will be extended half an hour, and that it will not be taken out of the time of the Gentfrom Ohio. There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly.
Mr. WILSON. of Iowa. yield for a question 7
Mr. LAWRENCE. of Ohio. If Congressnow sends back the question to the people, by what means can Congress compel the people to take a vote upon this question?
Mr. DAWES. I won d like to have the clause of the constitution read.
Mr. LAWRENCE. of Ohio. I will read the clause in the constitution of WestVirginia. The 2nd section of the 1st article of the constitution, after naming the counties absolutely made part of the State, provides: “And ita majority of the votescastat the election or elections held as provided in the schedule hereof, in the district composed of the counties of fendletou Hardy. Hampshire and Morgan shall be in favor of the adoptionof this constitution, the said 4 counties sha I also be included in and form part of the State of WestVirginia; and if the same shall beso included and a minority of the votes cast at the rind electionor elections in the district COmgDSFd of the countiesof Berkeley. Jefferson and Fro erick shall be in favor of the adoption of this constitution. then the 3 lastnamed counties shall also be in and form part of the State of West included irginia.
Mr. DAWES. I would like to have my friend answer this question: whether the district composed of Jefferson, Berkeley, and Frederick is the district composed 9f Jefferson and Berkeley? It is the district composed of Jefferson and Berkeley which it is proposed to transfer to WestVirginia, but there is another district known as Jctlerson. Berkeley, and Frederick.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Oh, es, the vote contemplated both of them. The vote was to be taken in the several counties.
Mr. DAWES. That is not the question I raised. It was, whether they consented that that particular district, composed of the several counties, should be transferred upon the vote of the several counties. Was it not that secific district, namely, the district comose of those 3 counties; and was that he same district which we vropose now to transfer?
Mr. LAWRE. CE, of Ohio. 2 of the counties are.
Mr. DAWES. I do not understand the assent to be that these 3 counties or any 2, or anyone of them, are transferred, but 3. I suppose it to be this: that they may assent to a particular district embracing 3 counties for very good reasons. I do not say that they are so. for I do not propose to Object to this resolution particularly; but they may have very good reasons why 2 of these counties should not go unless the 3rd one went with them.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Iwill not controvert the gentleman on this subject, for I do not regard the question as at all material.
Mr. DAWES. While Iain up I desire to put myself right on the record. Some gentlemen from these 2 counties sent to me (I do not know why, particularly) remonstrance s against this measure, purporting to be signed by 1200 citizens of one of the counties and by 600 of the other. I presented their petitions. I say I do not know why I was selected as the organ to present them. but I would inquire of the gentleman whether these parties hold an opportunity to be heard before the committee?
Mr. LAWRENCE ofOhio. Iwill answer all that. The question which the gentleman makes is one of construction. That is, it is a question of the construction of this clause in the constitution of WestVirginia, whether 2 of the 3 counties named in that district could become a part of WestVirginian on avote taken in those 2 counties several y. Well, sir, I am not very particular as to what construction shall b. but on that clause of the constitution of WestVirginia, because if there be any difficulty about that clause, it is removed by other acts of the Legislatures of Virginia and of WestVirginia.
Mr. DAWES. What I want to find out is whether these 1800 people, whose petitions I presented, as will be found by reerring to have had an opportunity to be heard.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. In answer to that, I have already stated, and the report to which I have already referred shows the fact, that laws were passed by the Legislature of Virginia, while that was a recognized State, giving the consent of the State to the transfer of those counties, and authorizing a vote of the people of those counties and all these petitioners and remonstrants then had an opportunity to be heard when that question was voted upon by the people of those counties.
Mr. DAWES. What I wanted to know was this: some 1800 men have selected me as their organ, every one of them an entire stranger to me, to present their remonstrance. Now, I wish to know if the committee gave them my opportunityto be heard, not whether they ha some opportunity somewhere else.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Iwill state that all these remonstances were before the committee, besides a large number of petitions asking the consent of Congress to the transfer of these counties.
Mr. DAWES. I know that the remonstrance s were there, because I sent them there. I only want to know if the men had any opportunity to be heard, whether you gave them any notice. That is all. Just put that on the record.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. No, sir; we did not send out a constable with summonses saying to these men that we were in session and would be pleased to hear them. They never asked any permissionto be heard, and we never notified them that we were in session; but we were always ready to hear all who desired to be heard.
Mr. DAWES. I wish to inquire of the chair man of the ComJudiciary, if he is in the House, whether he did not receive anote from one of these men requesting an opportunity to be heard.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. The chairman is not here at present, or he could answer for himself. I would ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts this question, whether those remon strances are signed by men who were entitled to vote. whether they are not rebels who had no right to vote?
Mr. DAWES. I have already stated that every one of them is a stranger to me and I know, of course, nothing about that. I suppose that a great deal the better way to ascertain that fact would have been to hear them. I would inquire of the gentleman one thing further: ifthe committee ever notified the member who presented these remonstrance s that they were hearing this case, so that he could give notice to the parties?
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. So far as Iam advised, no member of this House, and no citizen of either of these States, and no man has ever asked permission of the committee to be heard. but after a full examination of this whole matter the committee made this report: “The information in possessionof the committee leaves no doubt on their minds as to whatwould now bethercsultofn voteforthe restorationof these countiesto thestate of Virzinia. The question is onewhich hassince the closeof the war entered largely into the local politicsof these counties. The party whichstyles itself the Union party, and is called by its opponents the radical party is unanimously in favor of retainimz these countiesin WestVirginia: while the democratic. or, as it styles itself, the conservative party. Is generally in favor of restoring them to the ateof “ At theiar mnnmuaa. l election held on the 4th Thurs day ofOctober, A. D. 1865the Union ticket received in Berkeley county 923 vthoitretys.asenvdetnhe socalled democratic 100 and votes: and in the countyofJelierson. the vote as returned by the supervisors of the count to the Governorwas tor the Union ticket 304 votes and for these called democratic ticket 199 votes.” This report was made, printed, and laid on our desks on the 12th of anuary, and yet no request has ever been made to be heard in opposition to it or at any time on the subject.
Mr. DAWES. I do not see that that answers my question. I have no doubt that that is the cone usion that the committee came to without a hearing. I wish the gentleman to understand that I am in favor of giving the assent of Congress to this measure. I am on the record in the last Congress to that effect. I suggested to the members from WestVirginia in the last congress the necessity of obtaining that assent. I am here now, without any solicitation of my own, the organ of 1800 men in these counties, whether loyal men or not, as remonstrants against this measure. I thought it was due to them that the committee should state to the House whether they had had an opportuniy to be heard. There is always a decent way of doing everything, and I have no doubt the committee in this case have adopted that way. I do not mean to say that they have not.
The SPEAKER. The time of the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. LAWRENCE] has expired.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I hope my time will be extended a few minutes.
Mr. WHALEY. I do not wish to interfere with the Gentfrom Ohio. I merely wish to answer the question of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. DAWss] as regards the petitioners from these counties, of whom he states that he is the or an. He asked the Gentfrom Ohio [Ii Mr. LAWRENCE] whether they had had the privilege to be heard before the committee. I only desire to say that they have anotheror nupon this floor, who has been heard to the ful est extent I refer to the Gentfrom NewJersey [Mr. Rooms] 1 hat is all I desire to say, and will now yield the remainder of my time to the Gentfrom Ohio, Mr. Lawnnxcn.
Mr. AWRENCE, of Ohio. I say again, in answer to the inquiry of the Gentfrom Massachusetts, that, so far as I am advised, the committee has never denied any gentleman the privilege of being heard beforet emin opposition to this resolution. On the contrary, so far as I know, no application has ever been made to the committee for a hearin; none has ever been made by the gentleman himself; and the distinguished Gentfrom NewJersey, [Mr. Rocnas, who opposes this resolution, was heard beforet ecommittee as he has been heard on this floor.
Mr. DAWES. I wish merely to state that I did notex ect anyinvitation. It was notamatter that I desired to be heard upon. But 1 have been informed by these men, as a matter of complaint, that they addressed a note, on 2 different occasions, to the chairman of the committee [Mr. Wilson, of Iowa] beggin an opportunity to be heard; and that they adhad neither any notice nor any reply to their note. I wished to draw that out; that is all.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. How that iIs do not know. I never heard of any such note or any request to be heard.
Mr. DAWES. The gentleman will understand my position, I hope.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Yes, sir, I in sist that the Legislature of Virginia, if it were a valid Legislature, could not now withdraw its assent to the transfer. It could not with draw its assent to the transfer, because WestVirginia has acted upon the faith of the transfer, upon the faith of the law giving the assent of the old State of Virginia to the transfer. That clause of the constitution of the U.S. which requires the assent of Congress was not inserte for the benefit of the States concerned, but to enable the Congressto protcct the interests of the U.S. An therefore Vitginia, old Virginia, has no right to claim any benefit from the tact. that Congress had not given its assent to the transfer prior to the time when the socalled Legislature of the State of Virginia undertook to pass an act withdrawing herconseut to the transter., Virginiucould make no such objection or resume ier jurisdiction until Congress had refused assent to the transfer, or had for an unreasonable time delayed to assent.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. Will my friendfrom Ohio [Mr. LAWRENCE] allow me to interrupt him for a moment?
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I understau that the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawes] has addressed an inquiry during my temporary absence from my seat to the ComJudiciary. If he will now propound his question I Will answer it.
Mr. DAWES. I will say to the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. WILsON] that I did not make the inqui in any spirit of complaint. But the parties who have made me ticir organ (why they selected me I cannot tell) have complained to mo. that they had not been allowed an opportunity to be heard before the committee, and I inquired of the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. LAWRENCE] if the remonstrauts had had an opportunity to be heard before the ComJudiciary on this question. I did so that they might see in the report of our proceedings here an answer to my inquiry. lhe Gentfrom Ohio replict that they had exressed no such desire to him. I then inquired if the chairman of the ComJudiciary [Mr. WILSON] had received a note which they had addressed to him. I had under stood from them that they had twice sent a note to him, but had received no reply.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. In answer to that inquiry I will make this statement: after this an ject had been passed upon by the committee and the report had been submitted by my colleague [Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio] to the committee, and had been agreed to by them, I received a note from a Mr. endleton, who resides in one of the secounties, not asking to be heard before the committee, but stating generally his reasons for not desiring this action on the part of congress. It was not such a letter that I deems it. called for an answer from me, but a mere general statement to me of his objections to this proposed action of Congress. No one that I can now recall to mind asked of me an opportunity to appear before the committee, ett er askin it in person or by letter. If any such letters have been written, they have failed to reach me.
Mr. DAWES. One of the gentlemen told me that he had written such a, letter.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I can only say that if any such letters have been written to the chairman of the committee, they have failed to reach him. I
Mr. DAWES. That is suficient for my purpose;I only wish to have it appear in the G obe that these letters were not received.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. It may have been owing to the fact that that region of country is now in such a disturbed condition that the mails are irre lar.
Mr. ROGERS. The gentleman will permit me to say that the Legislature of old 1rginia does claim jnrisdiction over those 2 counties, and they are both represented in that body.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I have not so understood.
Mr. ROGERS. The new constitution of old Virginia was adopted in 1864, and these counties, along with tccounty of Frederick, were constituted a judicial district, and to each one of them were apportioned 2 delegates in the Legislature of Virginia. By an act of the Legislature, of 1864, they are made a art of the 8th congressional district: an each county is now represented in that Legislature by 2 members.
Mr. HUBBARD, of WestVirginia. Can the Gentfrom NewJersey tell me the names of those members?
Mr. HUBBARD, of WestVirginia. Can he tell me when those members were elected?
Mr. ROGERS. No, sir. They attemted to hold an election about. a year ago, but 10Vernor Peiqioint sent an army to prevent them. They have since held an election under the new constitution. They voted for the new constitution.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Then Iam correct; neither of those counties are represented in that body sittin at Richmond, known as the Legislature. No elections have been held there. So far from it, those counties have been recognized as part of WestVirginia by th. national Government, and a military force has been sent out by command of the President to prevent the authority of Virginia from having any control over them whatever. Mr. Speaker, I have briefly answered the several grounds of objection which I understand have been taken by my colleague on the ComJudiciary. wish now to make a single remark in answer to what was said by the distinguished Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Kennnu] He said, ifI understood him correctly, that the new State government set up in Virginia under Governor Peirpoint, in 1861, derived its validity from the fact that it was admitted as a new State in the Union, and not because government was thereby guarantied to an existing geographical State of the Union, and that WestVirginia was admitted as a new State and derived no validity from the consent given to its erection by the Peirpoint new State government of Virginia.
Mr. KELLEY. I do not now whether I made myself understood. I wanted to state the proposition that some of the members of Congress who voted to admit WestVirginia excluded as far as they could the conclusion that they voted for it u n the ground that the State ofVirginia ha given its assent. I was of that number. We believed the State of Virginia had been overthrown; that the territory belonged to the U.S.; that the people on it owed allegiance to whatever government was administered by the U.S.; that these were in the Union while the constitution of Virginia had been overthrown; that therefore the territory which had been known as the State of Virginiawas mere territory which the congress of t to U.S. was bound to provide with government as fast as the ar mies of the U.S. could bring it under the control of the Federal Government, and they consented to admit WestVirginia as a new State intothe Union as they would admit a new State made out of the counties of old Virginia and the border States.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. the consent of Virginia?.
Mr. KELLEY. here was nowhere any State of Virginia to consent; it had been overthrown.
Mr. STEVENS. Will the gentleman allow me a portion of his time?
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. I will yield to the gentleman ten minutes.
Mr. DAWES. I would inquire if one of those 17 was not the man that the gentleman voted to admit here as a Representative?
Mr. STEVENS. I never voted to admit anybody as a Representative that my friend did not ask me to vote for. [Laughter]
Mr. DAWES. My friend is laboring under a mistake.
Mr. DAWES. The gentleman voted to admit a man that the ComElections reported against. Mr. STEVENS. I doubt it. Well, I do not know; I have not looked at it.
Mr. DAWES. I refer to Joseph Segar. The committee reported against him; he came here with only 25 votes.
Mr. STEVENS. I believe I voted him in, and then voted him out. [Laughter]
Mr. DAWES. Is the gentleman certain about that?
Mr. STEVENS. No, sir, I am not. During those 2 years we made a most ragged record, as the gentleman well knows. [Laughter]. how, sir, I was describing this convention. I say that that convention, consisting of 17 members, made a constitution and ordered an election for Governor, at which Governor Peirpoint was elected by 3300 votes, 2/3rds of them Yankee soldiers, and he was declared in the markethon e of Alexandria Governor of the 150 counties of Virginia. Call that a State, do you? and it was a Legislature consisting of 11 men called under the action of that convention that have their consent, that these counties should be annexed to WestVirginia.
Mr. LATHAM. Will the gentleman allow me to correct an error of fact into which he has fallen “I
Mr. LATHAM. It was an net of the Legislature of Virginia at a time when the State of Virginia had jurisdiction over the whole of what is now West irginia.
Mr. STEVENS. I am speaking of the last legislature.
Mr. LATHAM. The last Legislature passed no such act.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not refer to the present Legislature. There was a Legislature consisting of 11 or 12 men before the present Legislature was elected. They sat at lexandria.
Mr. STEVENS. Then there is not any consent at all. That other Legislature was dead and buried long ago.
Mr. LATHAM. All the legislation bearing on the nestion now before the House was passed bteLegislature of Virginia before the State ofWestVirginia was erected.
Mr. STEVENS. Well, sir, I do not know, much about that, but I do know that it is said that Virginia has withdrawn her consent. Now, the present Legislature is certainly acting under the constitution that was made by these 17 men at Alexandria. Well, after Lees surrender, Governor Peirpoint took an omnibus or I believe it was an ambulanceand took the records and all the officials, the whole governmentdownto Richmond. [Laughter] and then these 11 men constituting the new Legislature altered the constitution the Legislature altered the constitution and allowed other persons to be elected and rebels to come in, for Governor Peirpoint complained that unless they did that he could not find loyal men enough in the State to make up a Legislature. That is the government and that is the Legislature that has been withdrawing its consent! Sir, it is ridiculous. No man enjo s low comedy more than I do, but these low arces are too small to be acted on the theater of the nation; they ought to be spurned; there ought to be no sanction for them here. I shall vote for the resolution just as it is reported, because I am willing to annex any art of our conquered province that was once ir ginia to WestVirginia, just as the Platte country was annexed to Missouri. I am willin to o further. I wish the State of WestVirginia adtaken her natural boundary the crest of the Blue Ridge, so as to include the whole of the noble valley of the Shenandoah. I shall vote for the resolution upon the ground I have mentioned and none other, but I shall votes against the preamble, and I hope the House will vote it down, for it is not necessary and it is not quite true.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry my distinguished friendfrom Pennsylvania cannot agree with me. I think, however, the difference between us is not a very material one in its practical results. I do not stand here to vindicate the government of Virginia since it has been transferred to Richmond. Tlam not here to assert that it is alegal government. But I do say that whatever government in a geographical State is recognized by congress, is the government of that State, and it makes no difference whether it shall be composed of few counties or composed of many; whether it shall be able to exercise jurisdiction all over its geographical limits or over only a portion of them. I maintain, then, that this State of WestVirginia became a State by the joint action of congress and the recoized State government in old Virginia and that that recognized government in old Virginia (the government of Peir soint, which was set up after the rebellion had riven out the original lawful State government) was a government lawfully set up under section 4 of article 4 of the constitution of the U.S.
Mr. BLAINE. Will the gentleman allow me to make an inquiry of him at this point? This legislation took place. 4 1866., 697
Mr. BLAINE. As there are several very able constitutional lawyers in this House, I desire to submit a query that seems pertinent to this discussion. Section 3 of article 4 in the constitution reads thus: "New Statesmaybe admitted by the congress into this Union; but no new State shall be ormed orderectedwithin the jurisdiction of any other State: nor any other State be formed by the junction of 2 or more States or parts of States. without the consent of the Legislaturesof the Statesconcernedaswell as of o Congress.” The section seems to be divided into 3 clauses, and my query is, whether the 2nd does not, by fair grammatical construction, contain nn absolute inhibition on “the erection of a State within the jurisdiction of another State.” In this way bringin that semicolon into conflict with some precedents in our history. I shall cheerfully vote for the pending bill, and I should find no difficulty in justifying the vote, if it were needful, on the ground that WestVirginia was the creature of revolution, as I think she was in her origin as a State.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Ideuy that the State of WestVirginia is the creature of revolution; it is wholly the creature of law; that is, it is a State lawfully created in the forms required and authorized by the constitution. It is too late for this Congress to say that under the clause of the constitution which the Gentfrom Maine [Mr. Burns] has read a State may not be formed out of another State, for Kentucky was formed out of the State of Virginia.
Mr. BLAINE. Kentucky was ceded to the U.S and afterward erected into a State.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. That is the same thing.
Mr. BLAINE. I think the case somewhat diderent, but I confess to the Gentfrom Ohio that I do not think there is much in the point I have raised except a criticism on punc tuation.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. Speaker, I desire to make a single remark somewhat personal to myself. It has several times been said in the course of debate that I hold that the States that were engaged in the rebellion are dead.” Now, I have never said anything of that kind. In my a eech on this subject, argued that, whether ey are out of the Union, or dead, ling about in the Union it amounts practice 1 to the same thing. but I never pretendedt at those States are dead; I insist that they have never been dead, that they have always lived as States. The only difference in my position from that of some other gentlemenw o have spoken is that I affirm that during the war they were States under the confederate government, and not under the Government of the Union.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I was about to call the previous question; but, as I have 12 minutes of my time remaining, I yield the remainder of my time to the Gentfrom Ohio. [Mr. Bi. GiiAii] with the understanding that he will call the previous question.
Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I wish to remark that the preamble of this resolution is wholly unim ortant, and Itriist it will be voted down. I sulimit that the State of WestVirginia is a State of the Union. I submit to the House that it is too late to challenge the power of the Congress of the U.S. to authorizethe formation of a new State within the jurisdiction of a State of this Union with the consent of the Legislature of such State; for it was done by the 1st Congress, composed in a great measure of the very men who framed the constitution. The Gentfrom Maine [Mr. BLAINE] is mistaken in his statement that the territory of Kentucky was ceded to the U.S. I affirm that the State of Kentucky was erected within the territory of the State of Virginia, by the consent of her Legislature, and by not of Congress admitted into the mon.
Mr. DAWES. I would remind the Gentfrom Ohio that the same thing Was done in the case of the State of Maine, which was formed out of part of the territory of the State of Massachusetts, with the consent of the Legislature of Massaclusetts.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. 5. H. BOYD VERSUS JOHN Mr. KELSO
The SPEAKER laid before the House pa. pers in the matter of contest of S. H. Boyd vs. ohn Mr. Kelso; which were referred to the ComElections. cpmisxr iiizsvss.
The SPEAKER also laid before the House a communication from the SecyWar, transmitting, in compliance with a resolution of the House, information in regard to the seiz ure of the land of Clement Reeves, on the Dela ware river; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. ENROLLEDJtResolution SIGNED.
Mr. COBB, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that they had examined and found tru y enrolled a JtResolution directing the distribution of the writings of James Madison; when the Speaker signed the same. TRANSFER OF COUNTIESAGAIN. the jtResolution was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and bein en giossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time.
Mr. ROGERS. I offered an amendment to the resolution, on which the question has not been taken.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman gave notice that he had an amendment to offer, but he did not offer it.
Mr. ROGERS. I ask leave to offer it now.
The SPEAKER. It can only be received by unanimous consent. bjection was made.
Skip Skip Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio, demanded the previous question on the passage of the JtResolution. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. ELDRIDGE demanded the yeas&nays on the passage of the JtResolution, and tellers on the yeas&nays. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. ELDRIDGE, and Lnwasxcs of Ohio, were apointed. The House divided, and the the lers reportedaycs 20 scren. So the ycas&nays wore ordered. The question was then taken on the passage of the JtResolution; and it was decided in the allirmatweyeas 112, nays 24, not voting 46;. So the jomt resolution was passed.
Mr. KELLEY. I move to amend the title so as to read as follows: “Jtresolution giving the consent of Congress to the transfer of the counties of Berkeley and Jefferson to the State of WestVirginia.” and on that I demand the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the motion was agreed to. Mr. LAIVRENCE, of Ohio. mtRtv the JtResolution was passed, on the table. Agreed to. INTERNAL nsvnNUE.
Mr. MORRILL. I ask unanimous consent to take up House bill No.201, to declare the meaning of certain parts of the internalrevenue act, approVed June30, 1864, and for other purposes. It is important that this should be passe now, in order that the Dept may prepare their blanks.
The SPEAKER. It will come up as unfinished business toine rrow before the morning hour. The hour ofhalf past 4 oclock p. m., having arrived, the House took a recess. EVENING SESSION. The House reassembled at half past 7 oclock p. m., (Mr. Conn in the chair.) and resumed, as in ComWhole 0n the state of the Union, the consideration of the Presidents annual message. HARBOR OF ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Wednesday. February 7, 1866. Prayer by Rev. Gsouos W. Buiocs, D. D., of Salem, Iassachusetts. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
Mr. JOHNSON, it was Ordered, That thememorialof HoratioStonc. praying for an npipropriationto enable him to complete the statue of iimilton. on the files of the Senate, be referred to the ComLibrary. On motion of
Mr. HENDERSON, it was Ordered, That the papers connectedwith the claim ofA. 5. Robinson. arising under the treaty of Guada loupe llidalgo with Mence and the papersconnected with the claim of J. W. yo, for compensation for improving a lot of public ground, hie" on the files of the Senate, be referredto the ComcClaims. REPORTS OP COMMITTEES,
Mr. LANE, of Indiana, from the ComPensions, to whom was referred a petition of noucommissioned Officers, musicians, and privates, who have been disabled in the U.S. service, praying for an increase of pension, reported a hill (S.No.131) supplementa to the several acts relating to pensions; which was read and passed to a 2nd reading.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. I will state that this bill increases the pensions of private soldiers and non-commissioned officers from 8 to 12 dollars permonth.
Mr. GRIMES, from the ComNavAffrs, to whom was referred the memorial of Robert B. Riell, a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy, praying that he may be promoted to the rank antiplace of commanderin the Navy, from which, he alleges. he has been unjustly withheld, asked to be discharged from its further consideration; which was agreed to.
Mr. HENDRICKS. The ComJudiciary, to whom were referred a memorial of the Chamber of Commerce of the State of NewYork praying for the passage of a law exempting suitors in the national courts of the southern States from the Operation of State stat utes of limitations for a period long enough to give loyal creditors an opportunity to enforce their claims, and a simiidr petition from the Boston Board of Trade, have instructed me to report them back with a recommendation that the committee be discharged from the further 5 consideration of the memorials, for the reason that further legislation, in the opinion of the committee, seems not to be necessar, as the act entitled “An actin relation to the limitation of actions in certain cases, ” approved June 11, 1864, seems to provide for the cases contemplated by the memorialists.
The PRESIDENT protempore. That order will be entered if there be no objections. Mr. WILLEY, from the ComDistCol, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.98) to incorporate the Metro oli tan Fire and Marine Insurance Company of the DistCol, reported it withoutamendments. Mr. CHANDLER, from the ComCommerce, to whom was referred a JtResolution (H.R.No. 45) to change the name of the ship Art Union to the name of George M. Barnard, reported it without amendment. Mr. CLA K, from the ComJudiciary, who were instructed by a resolution of the Senate to inquire whether any further legislation is necessary to prevent the kidnap. pin of freedmen and the revival of the slave tra e on the southern coast of the U.S., reported a bill (S.No.132) to prevent and pan ish kidnapping; which was res and passed to a 2nd readin.
Mr. POLAND, from the ComJudiciary, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.69) tofprovide for the revision and consolidation of the statutes of the U.S., reported it without amendments.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. I desire simply to say that it is known to every one that we were not able to afford protection to our commercial marine pending the recent troubles. They were compelled to seek the protection of other flags in order to carry on our own home commerce and transact the business of our own people. It became a necessity for them to sail under the flags of other nations; They were not safe upon the high seas under our flag, and they could not pay the immense insurance risks that it was necessary to pay if they were under American colors. There 18no sound reason in policy er in justice why any extraordinary burden, such as requiring a special act of Congress, should be imposed upon that large merchant marine that was compelled to occupy that position. I hope the bill will not pass, and upon the passage of it, when the question upon its passage shall be before the (Senate, I should like to have the ear;&nays.
Mr. whLSON. I would like to have this bill go over until tomorrow morning.
Mr. CHANDLER. There is to be no more debate u, on it. I will make no reply to the Senfrom California. I hope theyeas and na s will be given the Senator.
Mr. WILSON. If there is to be a vote taken upon it, I have no objection.
Mr. CHANDLER. There will be a vote upon it. It is a clear case.
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to a 3rd reading, and was read the 3rd time. The PRESIDENT protampon. On the passage of the bill the yeas&nays are demanded. The cams&nays were ordered.
Mr. GRIMES. I understand this bill simplysays that where a person has transferred:1 ship to a foreign flag during the pendency of the recent war, it shall not be recommissioned and rere istered as an American vessel until there shallDrbe some action upon it by Congress in each particular case.
Mr. GRIMES. That is the law now in regard to each particular case, and it seems to mceminently. properthisbillshould pass. There are cases, or a s, where the party owning the vessel ong t to c permitted to reregister his vessel, but there are certain cases where they ought by no means to be permitted to reregister their vessels. The Senfrom Ohio 5 cake of this bill as being a penalty that is to e inflicted upon shipowners who have transferred their vessels to a neutral flag. We ought to impose a penalty upon them. If on do not, Mr. presicut, when you have anot ier war, the 1st day that war is declared, all the ship ping of the U.S. will be transferre to a neutral flag; and how are you going to recnforce i your Navy? How are you going to secure vessels to keep up a blockade such as you ke tup during the recent war? There ought to e a penalty imposed on these men who have shirked the payment of this 10%. insurance which the honest and patriotic shipowners have paid, and who now, after having enjoyed all the advantages of foreign vessels in the carryin trade, and after having filled their pockets wi British gold, come here and ask to be put upon precisely the same foundation with the loyal shipowners who have been paying. during the last 5 years, this 10%. insurance. I am as muchinterested in what gentlemen from the West call theirintercsts in the carrying trade as any other map can be, but it seems to me it is manifestly due to the shipping interests of the country, and to the patriotism of the country, that a bill of this kind should pass.
Skip Skip The question being taken by yeas&nays on the passage of the bill, resultedyeas 31, nays 12; ABSENT 7. So the bill was passed. A messa e from the HoRep, by l
Mr. McPnsnsox, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed aJtResolution (H. t. No. 17) giving the consent of Congress to the transfer of the counties of Berkeley and Jefferson to the State of WestVirginia, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed without amendment the following bill and JtResolution of the Senate: A bill (S.No. 86) granting the franking privilege to Mary Lincoln; and JtResolution (S.R. No. 26) for the payment of the expenses incurred by the JtCommee to inquire into the condition of the States which formed the socalled confederate States of America. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the JtResolution (S.R. No. 20) extending the time for the completion of the Burlington and Mrs souriRiver railroad, with amendments, in which the concurrence of the Senate was requested. The message further announced that the HoRep had passed the bill (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the freedmens Bureau, with amendments, in which it. requested the concurrence of, the Senate. EMANCIPATION and REBEL DEBT.
Mr. WILSON. I move that the Senate take up Senate JtResolution No. 24, proposing an amendment to the constitution, with a view to its reference. The motion was agreed to, and the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution.
Mr. SUMNER and Mr. WILSON. Let it be read.
The Secretary read it, as follows: Be it "mined. &. (2/3rds of both Houseseon curring.) That the following article he proposed to the Legislatures of the several States. which when ratified by3/4ths of said Legislatures, shall valid. to all intents and purposes, as a part of sabide constitution. namely: ARTICLE. No paymentshall everbemade by the U.S or any State. for or on account of the emancipation of any slave or slaves, or for or on account of any debt contracted or incurred in aid of rebellion against the national Government.
Mr. POMEBOY. I do not object to this “. resolution, but I think the Senfrom lllas sachusetts cannot but be reminded of what passed between him and myself when the bill to ay for slaves emancipated in the DistCol was before the Senate. I thought then it was a most injurious and wicked precedent for this Government to aeknowled e by a payment that there could be any such ting as property in man. The Senfrom Massachusetts then insisted that it was a sort of peace otiering that we ought to give to the slave holders here. chusetts thought it was a ransom. But I have come to the conclusion that I was right then, and I believe I am now, that we onght from the beginning never to have paid a dollar in any form for property held in that regard. I believed that if we once established the precedent for it. it would be a dangerous precedent, and one which we had reason to believe would be followed. The effort of the Senfrom Missouri[Mr. Hizxnsnsos] to get $15,000,000 in payment for the slaves emancipated in his State failed, to be sure, but it did not fail for lack of the votes of the Senators from Massachusetts. They both voted for it. It failed on other accounts. I am very glad, indeed, that this resolution has been introduced; but. we ought to have taken the ground in the be ginning never to pay a dollar for the emancipation o slaves, and then we should never have had a recedent.
Mr. will ON. I suppose if all of as could have seen the end from the beginning we never should have offered Missouri any compensation for emancipation soon to come, nor should we have offered) it to the people of the DistCol. We did not see the end from the beginning, and like practical men, utting liberty and the great cause above a few dbllars, we commenced in this District by saying these people. I never regretted it. 1 do not think any harm will ever come ofit. We have at down this rebellion at the cost of more than 300,000 lives and 3000 million dollars of national debt, and nobody knows how much of State and individual indebtedness has grown out of it. We have wrenched these slaves from their masters by power. It is more than we can expect of human nature that these men should never clamor for some consideration, and I think we have a right to take, and ought to take, security for the future.
The PRESIDENT protempera. The question is on the motion to refer this resolution to the JtCommee of 15. The motion was agreed to. masoniiss BUREAU. On motion of
Mr. TRUMBULL, the Senate proceeded to consider the amendments of the HoRep to the bill of the Senate (S.No.00) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I only desire at this time to move that the amendments of the House be printed, and ueterred to the ComJudiciary. The motion was agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. MCPHERSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed a bill (H.R.No. 201) to declare the meaning of certain arts of the internalrevenue act, approved une 80, 1864, and for other purposes, 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 bill and JtResolutions; which were thereupon signed by the President protempore. A bill (. Mr. No. 204) to regulate the regis terin of vessels; A JtResolution (S.R. No. 25) tenderin the thanks of Congress to Vice Admiral David The other Senfrom Massa G. Farragut, and to the officers, petty officers, seamen, and marines under his command for their gallantry and good conduct in the action in Mobile bay on the 5th August, 1864 g and A JtResolution (S.R. No. 17) directin the distribution of the writings of James mayison. HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. The followinn bill and JtResolution from the Hense of lRepresentatives were severally read twice by their titles, and referred as indicated below: A bill (H.R.No. 201) to declare the meaning of certain parts of the internalrevenue not, approved June 30, 1803, and for other purposesto the ComFinance. AJtResolution (H. It. No. 17) giving th consent of Congress to the transfer of the countiesof Berkeley and Jefferson to the State of WestVirginiato the ComJudiciary. APPORTIONMENT of REPRESENTATION.
The PRESIDENT protempore If there be no further morning business, the Chair will call up the unfinished business of yesterday, which is the JtResolution (H.R.No. 51) proposing to amend the constitution of the U.S., the pending question being upon the amendment proposed by the Senfrom Massacliiisetts, [Mr. SUMNER] upon which the Senfrom 9 [Mr. Fussnsnss] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. HENDERSON. With the very kind permission of the Senfrom Maine, before lie commences his argument, which I suppose will go to the whole question and be, as every thin that comes from him is, able and exhaust ive, desire to submit anamendment to the amendment, so that the proposition that I had the honor to submit some days ago and had referred to the ComReconstruction may at the same time be considered in the lengthy arguments of Senators upon the various propositions that may be submitted for the amendment of the constitution.
The PRESIDENT protempore The question will be on the amendment to the amendm ent, which will be read.
The Secretary then read. the amendment to the amendment, which was to strike out all after the word “that” in the amendment, and to insert the following in lieu thereof: The following article be proposedto the Legislatures of the several States as an aniepd at to the constitution of the U.S. whirh. When ratified by a 3/4ths of usrapiodse Legislatures shall be a part. of the said constitution namely: ARTICLE ll. No State. in DTCSCHIJIHtRhe qualifications requisite for electors therein shall discriminate against any personon account of color or race.
Mr. SU. NER. I said he was the editor of the leading reli ions:1 er of NewEngland.
Mr. SUMNER. Will the Senator yield to me a moment?
Mr. SUMNER. The Senator will bear in mind that at the same moment that I introduced that proposition of amendment I introduced a bill, which was by act of Congress to declare that all men were equal before the law, and that there could be no denial of rights, civil or political. The 2 measures were to go together.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Itisnot formebojudge the honorable Senators logic. I am unaware how far 2 measures so entirely distinct ca n go together, one an amendment to the constitution to endure foupall time, and which lies at the bottom as a foundation principle, the other an act of Congress that may be repealed tomorrow, and which provides no sanction, no penalty, no measure, no machinery, nothing 1866. 705 but u ree nactment of the constitution itself in language not half so forcible. I know that the honorable Senator would gladly make it as strong as possible. But I was appealing to him to answer me, not that I ask him to an swer now, but in the ordin form of address to answer me why and how e can denounce one measure in the strongest possible terms as a compromise, as showing a want of moral principle as an abandonment of moral principle, while he himself ollers another which is handed upon the same idea, and can only at: comlish the same results.
Mr. SUMNER. I take issue with the Sonator precisely on that point of the argument, and at the proor time shall answer him.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Very well. Howisita renunciation of power? If that was his exact language, I misapprehended it.
Mr. SUMNER. The Senator could not have been in his seat whileI treated of that part of the question, for he has not stated at all m proposition. My proposition was identical with that of the President. It was in case of a lapse of a State government, and when it became the duty of Congress to interfere with reference to that government, it must seethat it was republican in form. I expressly limited the application of the argument to such a case, an the Senator will bear in mind that the preamble of the JtResolution introduced by me goes on that theory. I have made no suggestion that under the guarantee clause we could revise the statutes of the States generally.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Very well, sir, the gentleman as sI misapprehended him.
Mr. SUMNER. It ink the Senator was not in his seat and could not have heard me.
Mr. FESSENDEN. It was not my intention to misrepresent the Senator.
Mr. SUMNER. “All the States” is the e of the proposition. laiigura. "
Mr. FESSENDEN. I hold the proposition in my hand, and have read from it.
Mr. SUMNER. I beg the Senators pardon. It was altered when I sent it u to the desk. The Senator will find it in the lobe as it was offered.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I took it from the printed copy as laid on my table. I will read it as it is in the Globe: That thora shall be no oligarchy, aristocracy, caste or monopoly, invested with peculiar privileges and powers, and there shall be no denial of rights civil or political on account of color or race anywhere within the limits of the U.S or the jurisdiction thereof. A few moments ago, when I was arguing against the power to legislate in this way in regard to civil and political rights, on the ground of the guarantee, the Senator told me that he conten edfor no such thing, that he confined it to the States which were lately in rebellion.
Mr. SUMNER. Will the Senator allow me to interrupt him there? I should like to explain to him why that is altered. Last Friday this senate solemnly declared that under the constitutional amendment it had power to decree the equal rights of all personseverywhere throughout the U.S., without distinction of color. The moment that that was declared, I said to friends about me on both sides of this Chamber that that fixed the duty of Congress with regard also to political rights. If Congress can decree equality in civil rights, aforliori, because it is much more important, it can decree equality in political rights; and as the preamble to my proposition recited 2 reasons or moving causes to the resolution, one the guarantee clause and the otherthe constitutional amendment, felt that it was my duty, acting upon the vote of the Senate, to insist that this declaration of equality for all should be coextensive with the Republic, claiming as I do under the guarantee clause that it operates necessarilyex m termini within all those States where there has been a lapse of government, and claiming that under the recent constitutional amendment it operates every where within the limits of the Republic. That is the explanation.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I am obliged to the honorable gentleman for the explanation. bntI confess my utter stupidity; I do not understand it, unless he means that 11t!he 1st place he intended when he introduced his resolution to provide that there should be no oligarchy, &c., in the States which had been in rebellion, con. fining it to them}, 1 and leaving the other States to have oligare y or aristocracy or an thing they liked, and we not interfering. T s be based on the guarantee clause. I suppose he will not deny that he knew all about the effect of the recent constitutional amendment at the Same time. But with reference to the rest of the States, he does not rely on the guarantee clause, but he relies on the power to enforce the prohibition against slavery.
Mr. SUMNER. The power to carry out the constitutional amendment.
Mr. FESSENDEN and that constitutional amendment abolishes slavery, does it not?
Mr. FESSENDEN. Then there is a provision authorizing Congress to carry, it into effect. So far as the slave States are concerned, he relies for this provision on the guarantee clause; and so far as the free States are concerned where there is no slavery and has not been, he relies on the slaver clause.
Mr. SUMNER. Thatist e Senators statement.
Mr. JOHNSON and others. Let us adjourn, and you can go on tomorrow.
Mr. FESSENDEN. No, Mr. President, I will not speak 2 days. I beg the honorable Senators pardon. I would rather omit entirely all I have to say on the subject now and take some other occasion, than to have an adjournment on my account.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. Mr. President, I rise to ask the courtesy of the Senate, whichI have never asked before, and I do it the more readily from the fact that I speak very rarely in this body. I desire to address the Senate; and the notes that I have made by way of prep aration are at my room, and unless some gentleman prefers to go on now, I should very much prefer either an adjournment or an executive session, so that I may be permitted to speak tomorrow.
Mr. WILSON. Will the Senator allow me? Let this pass over informally so that we can take up a little measure of legislation.
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. With the understanding that I have the floor for tomorrow, I have no objection to that being done.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Foor.) The Chair suggests that the properdisposition would be a motion to postpone the pending question until ton;orrow.
Mr. GltlMES. I move that itbe postponed until tomorrow at one oclock. The motion was agreed to. DISTCOL SCHOOLS.
Mr. WILSON. I move that the Senate take up the bill (S.No.35) to grant one million acres of public lands for the benefit of public schools in the DistCol. The motion was agreed to; and the bill was considered as in ComWhole.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be read.
Mr. WILSON. The ComPubLands reported a substitute. I do not think it will be necessary to read the original bill, but let the substitute be read.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no objection, the substitute reported for the bill will be read.
Mr. SAULSBURY. I move to strike out, in the 4th section, the words “without distinction of color or race of the children attending them.” I do not propose to debate this very new subject in the Senate of the U.S.; but as I wish to make one straight forward record while I live, and that a record in reference to the white and black races, 1 ask for the yeas&nays on the adoption of my amendment. The yeas&nays were ordered.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish to inquire of the Senfrom Massachusetts whether in this bill by this particular provision he means that the funds shall beequally distributed, or on the other hand that the children of different colors shall go to the same school. What is his purpose on that subject?
Mr. WILSON. We have provided by law for the establishment of colored schools here. Since emancipation we passed a school system for this District, 11most excellent one, too, and under it a large number of colored schools have been established. I understand the bill to mean simply and I think the Senfrom Indiana must certainly understand it that it divides the money prorata according to the children, without an distinction of color, and those in the colored schools will receive the same benefit that those receive who are in the white. schools.
Mr. SAULSBURY. I have no objection to the poor children of the DistCol or elsewhere being educated; but having been here now for some 7 years, I never saw such zeal manifested in reference to the education of the children of this District until it became necessary to educate a large class of black children. We have a greatmany oorchildren in my State, and we provide schoo s for them. There were a great many poor children in the DistCol before the abolition of slavery, but there was no proOsition then to takea million acres of the pubic lands and apply them to schools for children, either white or black in this District, or in any State of the Union. I do net wish, however, to discuss the question.
Mr. JOHNSON. I understood the honorable member from Massachusetts to say that the law as it now stands authorizes the establishment of schools for the education of colored children, but does not make it obligatory on the schools q 1 866. 709 where white children are received to receive the colored children; that is to say, there is no authority to have a mixture of children in anyone school. I understood the honorable member to say so.
Mr. JOHNSON. If that is so, it cannot be done under this amendment. I understand the whole amendment is that the appropriation which is here made is tobe a plied to the support and maintenance of all the schools. If it adsaid “all the schools, ” it would have included the colored schools as well as the white schools, and nothing more is done by supersdding the words “ without distinction of color or race.” It is true that perhaps until now no propositionof this sort has been made, either with ref erence to this District or any other art of the U.S. whether includedwit in a State or included within a Territory. But whatever may have been the Origin or the motive for the establishment of schools and their support, as far as I am concerned, I would very willingly vote anything in reason to carry out the object. If the poorer class of white children in the District have not been properly educated before, and we are about to educate them now only because there are black children to be educate, that furnishes no objection to me in voting for the bill. I want all] to be educatedLand perhaps, looking to results, ldoking to policy, it is more peculiarly necessary that the blacks should be educated because they are without the means of educating themselves, whereas the mass of the white people have the means of educating their own chi dren. I shall therefore vote for the amendment of the committee.
Mr. WlLSON. I wish to say, Mr. President, to the Senfrom Delaware, that I offered a bill containing this proposition to give a million acres of public land for educational purposes in the DistCol 7 or 8 years ago, some years before emancipation, and I think I have offered it annually from that time to this, or nearly ever year. It has been in the ComDistCol several times. Last Congress I think, it went to the ComPubLands and was not acted upon. This year it went to the ComPubLands, and the have made a report in favor of it. I certain y hope that the Senate will pass the bill, that it will become a law, and that the children in this District, without dislinction of color or race, ofwhite orblack, will have the advantages ofit. The Senfrom Maryland tells us that the white eo ile here have the means to educate their c il ren. I think, if the Senator will read the reports made annually for the last 7 or 8 years in this District, he will come to the Conclusion that they have not had the means to do it or if they had the means they have neg lected to use them.
Mr. JOESNSON. From the organization of Iowa as a Territory and u to the present time, how much public land, eitiier in the State or out of the State, has Iowa received?
Mr. GRIMES. I cannot state the precise amount or number of acres, but I will state this: that some of the Senators constituents, and I presume he was instrumental in passing the bill through Congress, succeeded in securing a grant of land to certain railroads in the State of Iowa. Those railroads are owned entirely by eastern capitalists. One of the conditions of at grant was that every alternate section of land alon the line of those railroads should be increase in value and raised from $1 25 an acre to $2 60 an acre; the result of which was that the settlers who went upon the lands were compelled to just double the price they would have pai (paify the grant had not been made. If the Senator regards that as a grant of land to Iowa, we had, I think somewhere in the neighborhood of 1800,000 acres of land granted; but the Government is not injured by it. The Government derives just as much revenue from 1/2 of the land that she would have derived from the whole of the land if the grant had not been made.
Mr. JOHNSON. I did not suppose the Government was injured; I only thought that perhaps Iowa was benefited.
Mr. GRIMES. I do not see any deduction that can legitimately be drawn from the inquiry of the Senator, in connection with this bil.
Mr. RAMSEY. I think it is desirable, if this bill is to become a law, to prevent the location of the scrip in anyone of the States at all events. With that view, I offer this amendment
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. POMEROY in the chair.) There is a pending question before the Senate by we of amendment to an amendment. The amendment of the Senfrom Delaware is an amendment to an amendment.
Mr. RAMSEY. If that shall be rejected, I propose to offer, as a proviso, that not over 100,000 acres of this scrip shall be located in an one State.
The PRESID NG OFFICER. It will bein Order after a vote is taken on the amendment of the Senfrom Delaware.
Mr. CONNESS. I wish simply to say that I concur in all that has been said by the honorable Senfrom Iowa in regard to this bill. If the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts, in the pursuit of his object, which is a worthy one, wrll show to the Senate the amount devoted to public education here bothot white children and colored children, and its insuf ficiency, I will vote with him any sum of money that IS necessary to the support of a propers stem of education here mm the national Treasury; but I agree entirel with what the Senfrom Iowa has said: wet, as to the in sufficiency for purposes of education in the District of a donation of lands; next, as to the mischievous results that will almost certainl flow from such a donation; and therefore I sha I vote against the amendments proposed and against the bill.
Mr. WILSON. Mr. President, ifI believed what some of these Senators from the North west tell us, that this proposition to grant one million out of 900 million acres of public land for the benefit of schools was to all with crushing power upon the northwestern States and especially upon the State of the Senator o Kansas, I should certainly not press iton the Senate. I am among those who believe that God Almight made the country for those who occupy. it. I have always vote and I mean to vote, in spite of the narrow gauge that is brought in here by some Senators to run upon, for using the public land in such a way that it will improve the condition of the new States, educate their people make internal improvements, settle up those States and improve their condition in every way. I have so voted here, and I mean to vote so as long as I have a seat here.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Did you vote for the homestead bill?
Mr. WILSON. I voted for the homestead I have been always for it since I was able to comprehend everything connected with it. I will say further than that that I voted with the greatest reluctance for 2. ill passed here a year or 2 ago making a large grant of land for agricultural colleges. I did not believe in the wisdom of it, and I have not seen yet that it was entirely wise; but I know that the land granted has realized about 8 cents to the acre to the States. The scrip has sold and brought that to the persons who have held it.
Mr. WILSON. Several of them got 80 cents to the acre, and I have no doubt that this scrip will bring aboutthat amount. We have got 900 million acres of public do main, and we have got the homestead law. The Senfrom Kansas introduces almost every other day some proposition for a grant of land for railroads or some other improvements in the State of Kansas, and I have been accustomed to vote for all such measures, because I thought they developed the country, and made the land that we reserved and every body clses land more valuable. But now here is a small measure to take a million acres out of 900 million acres of land, for the benefit of the schools of the DistCol, the ca ital of this great nation, where we ought to have good schoolhouses, pattern houses, and where we ought to have good teachers, and ought to have all our poor children educated, ought to have the means by which every poor white boy and black boy, too, can obtain a good education. Sir, I said the people of this District were oor. The Senator tiiom Iowa tells me that it is one of the wealthiest districts in the country. There may be some men of wealth here
Mr. GRIMES. I was not talkin about wealthy men, but the wealth of the District, the assessable property of the District.
Mr. WILS N. There is unquestionably some property, but if you can find a poorer spot on Gods heritage than the DistCol, I should like to have it pointed ouk There is an immense poulation here, black and white, living from ban to mouth, ready to do any sort of thm to get the means to get through the day an the night, and who wake up the next day without anything to begin upon. I believe that our policy in erecting these public buildings, this veryCa itol where we are assembled, has brought to the District at great many laboring men who have poor families. If these laboring men were in Philadelphia, NewYork, Boston, or in almost any other art of the country, their children would have e means of education; here it is very difficult to obtain them. I want to give them the means; and as the DistCol is under our control, I think we ought to aid them in it. The Senfrom California suggests we shall not get it.
Mr. WILSON. We shall etatleast 7 or 800,000 dol ars for educational purposes out of this measure. I have nota on t of it.
Mr. CONNESS. Will the Senator permit me to say a word?
Mr. CONNESS. As I do not wish to occupy any time again on the subject, I wish to call the Senators attention to how this matter of donation of lands for purposes of education works. In 1850, when Ca ifornia became aState of the Union, she fell heir to 500,000 acres of land, which was a donation made, I believe, by law in 1841, for purposes of internal improvements; but California, as she thought wisely, in her constitution devoted that land to the purposes of education. 16 years have transpired since the State came to have a nom inal title; such as this act would give to the DistCol, to those lands, and in that time 5,000 acres of the 500,000 acres have been set apart by the Government of the U.S. to the State of California5,000 of the 500,000 acres in 16 years! The State issued scrip, as the DistCol probably will if this act shall pass, and it has resulted in complications that no persoh can understand nor even render clear now. After 16 years 5,000 acres of land are all of the 500,000 that have been set apart by the Government of the U.S. for the purposes of education. I tell the Senator, because I am equall earnest with him to aid in educating the children of this District, to ask for money so that you can get education, for you cannot glet it from land, in my opinion.
Mr. LAN, of Kansas. I should ike to ask the Senfrom Massachusettsa question: he stated that I was in the daily habit of introdu cin bills
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. The railroud grants. Each of those bills provides that the o d sections shall be given to the railroads, and the even sections shall be increased in value double and sold for $2 60 peracre. There is no provision iu this bill from my reading of it that prevents the cities of Geor etown and Washington from taking that particu or land that we hold at $2 50 peracre, so that instead of granting them a million acres of land at $1 26 you grant them. 1866. 711 a million acres of land that we sell at $2 60 peracre. by my reading of the bill.
Mr. GRIMES. Does the Senator say that if this bill shall pass there will not be any greater facilities than there are now? It is true that under the land warrant system vast quantities of land were taken u, whole counties, and are held now by non-residents and unoccupied, because the warrants could be got at the rate of about 70 or 80 cents an acre. When this scrip is bought at 20, 25 or 30 cents an acre the owner of it can afibrd to enter and hold the land for a long time and pay taxes on it, when he could not afford to enter it and hold it and pay taxes on it if he entered the land at $1 25 an acre. That is the difference between an entry under the scrip system authorized by this act and the present system of paying $1 25 an acre.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I should like to ask the Senfrom Indiana what is the difference between these 2 cities going into Kansas and locating that land in a body, ordermitting the scrip to go, as it will go, into o hands of a company of men or one individual of wealth who will locate it in a body. We have had some experience in this. That is to be the result. It is not to be divided out among actual settlers, but to be sold to speculators and to be entered in a body to remain there to curse my children and the children of the citizens of Kansas and other new States.
Mr. HENDRICKS. The question of the Senfrom Kansas I will try to answer. If one man could bu this scriand go and locate the whole of it in ansas, the objection would be well urged, but we have got to take facts as they are. We know that no one individual is going to buy this scrip. We know from the history of the past that this scriwill fall into the hands of 1,000s and peraps 100s of 1,000s of people, if there were enough for that purpose.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. There was scrip issued to the Sac and Fox Indians in our State. 110,000 acres of that scrip fell into the hands of one individual, 30,000 to another, and 2odd 1,000 to another. There are over 160,000 acres of land to be held by 3 individuals in the center of our State, on scrip similar to this, issued in the same way.
Mr. HENDRICKS. That is a singular circumstance that I never heard of before. My attention had never been etflled to the Indian scri. I believe Indian matters are very likcl to all into the hands of a few persons. Ill seems that the Indians are used for the benefit of every few people, and their scrip seems to result to the benefit of a very few people. Now, I know the fact that the land warrants that were issued to the soldiers under the acts of 1850 and 1856 did not fall into the hands of a few men, and I understand the fact to be that thescrip that is being sold by the States under the agncultural college law does not fall into the hands of a few men, but is purchased by men as they desire and need it, very much of it falling into the hands of men who make homes upon the lands where they locate the sen. This is all I desire to say, simply that this bill is framed as carefully as a bill can be, I think, to secure the ends intended, and also to prevent the accumulation of the lands in the and s of non-residents, to secure the fund er manently for the benefit of schools in this district; and the money that is received cannot be used for the support of schools, but when realized is to be invested in Government stock and the interest used for the support of schools. Should this scrip sell for 80 cents peracre, as suggested by the Senfrom Massachusetts, it would bring $800,000; that at 6 or cent. would be $48,000 a year, which wouldpbe a great benefit to the schools. If on principle I could support the bill, I should be very happy to do so.
Mr. STEWART. I think we might avoid the difficulty of the scrip going on the market for a trifle by a shght amendment. I move to amend in the nint line of the 2nd section, after the word “sold, ” by inserting “at not less than 8 cents peracre.” The PRESIing OFFICER. That amendment will not be in order until a vote is taken on the pending amendment. The resentquestion is on the amendment of the Senfrom Delaware to the amendment of the committee.
Mr. GRIMES. I think I can answer the question that the Senfrom Maine has put. Ha asks how it happens that there is a united sentiment here on the part of the Senators from the Northwest when there is an application made to vote any public lands away. I think his own experience will furnish a sufficient answer to that, when I ask him how it happens that whenever there is a proposition here to repeal the fishing bounties, by which this Government has paid $25,000,000 during the last 60 years, we have a united front against the passage of that bill from NewEngland.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. Neither my children nor the children of Kansas claim to own the public lands of that State, but we have to travel the roads of Kansas, and such a grant as this prevents the constructigp of roads. We want to educate those children in our State. such a grant as this prevents the education of the children of the State. Upon us devolves the duty of developin the State of Kansas and of settling it up. Ie protest against any action of this body that prevents tic settlement of these new States, and we notify the Senate that such action as this will have that effect. The Senator speaks of large grants to new States. There is not one of them, except the swamp land grant, that had not for its obJect the settling up of the States, the invitipg of immigration. Every railroad has that eticct. So far as Kansas is concerned, and I believe sofar as Minne sets is concerned, we have never had and do not expect to ask for any swampland grant. We have had no grant except for objects invit in immigration, settling up the country, developing it, in which the State that the Senfrom Maine represents is as much interested as we are. I rose before the Senfrom Maine to move a recommitment of this bill. I would like to have the opportunity of going before the committee an urging the obJections there that my constituents have to the passage of the bill.
The PRESIDINGOF 1CE. Docsthe Senfrom Kansas make a motion to recommit?
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I did propose and expect to make that motion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is in order, if made.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion of the Senfrom (kansas, that the bill be recommitted to the ComPubLands. The motion was agreed to. BURLINGTON and MISSOURIRIVER RAILROAD.
Mr. GRIMES. I move to take up for concurrence the House amendmentsv to Senate JtResolution No. 20. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the amendments of the ense of lte Representatives to the JtResolution (S. It. Yo. 20) extending the time for the completion Of the Burlington and MissouriRiver railroad. The 1st amendment was to insert at the end of line ten the words “due by reason of the completion of said section of 20 miles, ” so as to read. “said company shall be entitled to its lands due by reason of the completion of said section of 20 miles.” The amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was in line 17 to change the word “sections” to “section.” The amendment was concurred in. On motion of Mr. BROWN, the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Day February 7, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Bovxrox. The Journal of yesterday Was read and approved. scuoouna wavnnrums.
Mr. SPALDING, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to authorize a register to be issued for the schooner Wavertree, of Cleveland, Ohio; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComCommerce. LANDS IN KANSAS.
Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for a grant of lands to the State of Kansas in alternate sections to aid in the construction of certain railroads and tele graphs in the State of Kansas; which was read a rat and 2nd time, and referred to the comPubLands. Also, a bill to subject Indian lands and allotted lands in Kansas to the laws thereof; which was, read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComIndAffrs. RESOLUTIONS or KANSAS.
Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas, submitted concurrent resolutions of the Legislature of the State of Kansas concerning the U.S. circuit and district courts; which were referred to the ComJudiciary. Also, concurrent resolutions of the same Legislature asking for the extension of the lane of public lands to the 100th meriian of longitude; which were referred to the ComPubLands. BOSCOLRANCH.
Mr. ECKLEY, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to amend an act entitled “An act to grant the right of preemption to certain purchasers on the Soscol ranch, in the State of California;" which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands. INTERNALREVENUE.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I am directed by the ComCommerce to ask the consent of the House to have abill reported and put upon its passage at the present time. I ml ask to have the bill read. I think there will be no objection to it. It is a matter of considerable importance demanding immediate action.
Mr. MORRILL. I must ask the gentleman to withhold it until we act on the bill which was pending last evening. I call for the regular order of business.
The SPEAKER stated that the regular or tier of business was the consideration of bill of the House No. 201, to declare the meaning of certain parts of the internalrevenue act, approved June 30, 1864 and for other purposes.
Mr. MORRILL. The 1st part of this bill is intended to reach all the stockholders of certain corporations who are taxed by the internalrevenue law, whether they are citizens, residents, or aliens. By a decision of the cir cuit court of Maryland it has been held that a certain section of the internalrevenue law, intended to apply to the income tax, applied to the taxeswhich are collected from corporations, and therefore aliens escaped. The 1st part of the bill is intended to remedy that defect. The latter part of the bill is intended merely to a ply to returns that have been heretofore may o in some instances by parties in coin, the taxes upon which have been paid in paper. I take it there is no objection to the bill. It meets the a probation of the Dept.
Mr. DAVIS. I would ask the gentleman if this bill changes the existing law in regard to scridividen s.
Mr. KASSON. I desire to ask the gentleman a question. This bill declares that the words “ all such interest or coupons. dividends or profits, whenever the same shall be paya ble, ” shall aply to all such interest or conpons, dividen s or profits, whenever the same are or may be payable. Now, I desire to inquire of the chairman of the committee [Mr. Mouuii. i.] whether in the case of a declaration ofinterest due to these stockholders, but not paid, it Would be covered under this declaration of meaniu, although payable at some in detinite or definite future day. In other words, if these corporations attempt to evade this tax by postponing the payment of the dividends to some futnre time, would they be reached by this declaration of meaning?
Mr. MORRILL. I do notrthink that this bill changes the existing law in that respect. So far as dividends are concerned, the surplus profits must be reported and taxed each year. his bill quotesthe present law and recnactsit so as to a ply it. to our own people and aliens alike. T int is the whole extent of this bill.
Mr. KASSON. I fear it will then mislead us into another difficulty. that the law may be construed to mean that these corporations can only be taxed at the time the dividends are pay able, and that if they merely issue certificates of claims to be paid in the future they will not be taxed.
Mr. MORRILL. The original law enforces all such interest or responsibility whenever the same is or may be payable and that portion of the law is incorporated in this bill in precisely the same language.
Mr. KASSON. I always desire to follow the recommendation of the committee, and shall not vote against this bill, although I think there may be some difficulty under it. I desire now to call the attention of the gentleman to what I suppose to be the Omission of a word in one of these sections. Section 4,as printed, reads: That whenever the rates and amounts contained in the lists or returns as aforesaid shall be stated in coined money. it shall be the duty o eachassessorro cciving the sameto reducesuchratesand amountsto their equivalent in legaltender curren. according to the value of such coined moneyin sai currency at the time and place wheresaid lists or returns are reccivuble and which value the said nssessorshall ile termine and the lislsre iiired bylawtobofurnishrd to collectors by assessors. “all in all casescontain the severalamountsof taxesor dutiesassessede. stimated, or valued in legaltender currency only. I think the word “ when” has been omitted after the word “ timc.” in the clause “value of such coined money in said currency at the time and place where said lists or returns are receivable, ” dic.
Mr. MORRILL. I will move to amend the section by inserting the word “ when" after the word “ time.” The amendment was agreed to.
Skip Skip Mr. MORRILL. I now call the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; which was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. by The question was upon the passage of the bill. Mr. MORRILL called the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill was passed. Mr. MORRILL mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. DIPLOMATIC APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. STEVENS, by unanimous consent, reported froni the ComAppropriat a bill making appropriations for the consular and diplomatic expenses of the Government for the year ending 30th June, 1867, and for other purposes; which was read a 1st and 2ndptime, referred to the ComWhole on the state of the Union, and made the special order for Thursday, the 15th instant, after the morning hour, and from day today until disposed of, and ordered to be printed. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the SecyTreasury, transmitting a communication from the ComrIntRev in regard to certain income taxes collected from the estates of deceased persons who died previous to December 31, 1863, in answer to a resolution of the House ofJanuary 29, 1866 which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. QUABANTINE IN NEWYORK.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I rarely ask the attention of the House to anything out of the regular order of business; but I have a matter in charge from the ComCommerce which is of a strictly public character, and which is somewhat ur ent. The committee have directed me to as the consent of the House for its consideration at this time. I refer to a bill which was introduced by the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. RAYMOND] and referred to the ComCommerceving relation to authorizing the SecyWar and the SecyNavy to place certain hulks and vessels at the dissal of the commissioners of quarantine another properau thorities at ports of the If U.S., in anticipation of the cholera.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Does it not require unanimous consent to consider this bill at this time?,
Mr. INGERSOLL. I object to it at this time. APPOINTMENT or REAR ADMIRALS, ETC.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, by unanimous consent reported back from the comNaval Afihirs House bill No. 163, to further regulate the appointment of rear admirals, and for the appointment of certain volunteer officers to the regular Navy, and moved that the same be printed and recommitted to the committee. The motion was agreed to. INDEX OF EXECUTIVE DOCUMENTS.
Mr. LATHAM reported, from the ComPrintg, the following resolution: Resolved. That the Clerk of the House be and hois heroby directed. to prepare a digestsdindex of the executive documentsand reports of committeesof the HoRep from 1839to the close of the presentCongress, to correspondwith theindex of the some documentsfrom the comme nce ment of the Government to the close of the 24thCongress.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would like to inquire of the gentleman who has reported this resolution whether any estimate has conmade of the cost of printing this index.
Mr. LATHAM. The committee have not taken intoxonsideradon the printing of the in dex, as that matter was not referred to them by the resolution which was offered by the Gentfrom Massachusetts, [MTBANRS] The index will not be prepared until aRer the close of the present Congress; and when it shall have been prepared, an estimate of the cost of printing must then be made before it can be mater]. The committee can then take into consideration. the number to be printed as well as the expense, which was not a matter before the committee at this time.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. If this resolution should be adopted, it will involve the printing of the work which is to be prepared by the Clerk. I would like to know from the committee, as they have of course made an estimate, how much it will cost to print this index after it shall have been prepared. of the Clerk of the House; and there is where
Mr. LATHAM. The resolution reported by the committee does not involve the printing of the document at all.
Mr. whASHBURNE, of Illinois. Then, Mr. Speaker, if this index is not to be printed, what is the object of having it prepared? Of what use will the mere manuscript copy be?
Mr. BANKS. With the consent of the Gentfrom WestVirginia, [Mr. Luann] I will state my object in the introduction of this resolution. A great many reports of great importance to the country, and embodying a vast deal of learning, are now hidden away in the Library of the House, so that there is no possible reference to them unless members take the trouble of going through the volumes one by one. Hence I introduced this resolution, proposing that the Clerk of the House be directed to make an in dex of these reports. I do not want thisindex printed at all. The cost of the preparation of this index will be inconsidemble; it probably cannot exceed 50 dollars. The object is to have an index 1prepared in manuscript, and deposited in the ibrary of the HoRep, so that members can ascertain what is contained in the various reports.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. If the resolution provides sim h]; for what the Gentfrom Massachusetts F Mr. BANKS] states, I have no objection to it.
Mr. BANKS. It contemplates nothing more than that.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Does it provide for that alone in explicit terms?
Mr. BANKS. It does not provide for the printing of the index; it simply provides for the compilation of an index.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Does it provide for a mannscrit index to be deosited in the Library of the base? I would ike to have the resolution again read.
Mr. BANKS. Permit me to say Mr. Speaker, that thereis scarcel anything which would be more important an useful to the House than the work provided for by this resolution. The cost of its preparation will be comparatively nothin.
Mr. IVASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to amend the resolution so that it shall provide the manuscript shall be deposited in the ibrary, and shall not be ordered to be printed.
Mr. SPAIDING. I suggest the Gentfrom Illinois shall amend so as to provide for a limitation of the expense; provided it shall not exceed more than
Mr. BANKS. Mr. Speaker, the resolution provides that the index shall be in the custody it ought to be. There is an index from the commencement of the Government u to 1839, and this proposes simply to complete that index up to the present time. I hope that the resolution will not be amended.
Mr. LATHAM. I will state further in ref erence to the amendment, that the index cannot be printed under this resolution, and that after the manuscript has been prepared it will require further action of the House in order to have it printed. I demand the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, modified his amendment so as to provide that the manu scrit shall be deposited in the Clerks office of the HoRep. The House divided on the amendment, and there werea es 25 noes 67. Mr. WASHBURiiE, of Illinois. I demand the yeas&nays. I want to see whether we are to leave this enteringwedge for the expend iture of 1,000s of dollar. The House divided; and there wereayes 19;. not a sufficient number. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded tellers on the yeas and iiays. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Wasn auusi: of Illinois, and LATHAM, were a pointed. The House again divided; and the tellers reportedayes 19; not one 5th of those present. So the yeas&nays were not ordered. The amendment was disagreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois moved that the resolution be laid upon the table. The House divided; and there wereayes 23, noes 7. Mr. SPALDING demanded the yeas&nays. Mr. HARDING, of Kentucky, demanded tellers on the yeas&nays. Tellers were not ordered, and the yeas and na s were not ordered. of the resolution was not laid upon the table. Mr. SPALDING demanded a division on the adoptionof the resolution. the House divided; and there wereayes 82, noes 16. So the resolution was adopted. Mr. LATHAM mtRtv the resolution was adopted; upon the table. Agreed to. REPRESENTATIVES FROM. ALABAMA.
Mr. BROOKS. I rise to a question of riv ilege. I hold in my hand the credentia s of 6 Representatives in congress from Alabama. I suppose they must go to i etoiiib of the Cap ulets. [Laughter] Maxssns on the Republican side. Yes, yes, that is it.
The SPEAKER. Under the order of the House they will be referred, without debate, to the JtComReconstruction. wounss niours.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, while I am up, permit me to ask a question in reference to my duty on another subject. I hold in my hand the petition of a large number of women who, for my gallantry the other day, are favoring considerable number of petitions claiming the right to vote; and on looking over the list of the committees of the House, I can find no committee to which I should refer that petition. I have thought of the ComClaims, but I do not know whether the chairman of that committee would be sufficiently gallant to give so important petition its proper consideration. I have thou it of the comPostOffice, which refers to mails, and might also be supposed to take an interest in females. [Laughter]
Mr. DAVIS. Let it be referred to a committee of old bachelors.
Mr. BROOKS. I next thought Of the ComJudiciary; butI t ought m honorable friendfrom Iowa, [Mr. Witsoxl with whom I once served, would not have gallantr enough to give it. attention. I therefore ask the a vice of the House as to where this new subject, not recognized by the rules, shall be referred.
Mr. STEVENS. Let it. go to a special committee, so that we may have a report on it.
Mr. BROOKS. I thank the honorable Gentfrom Pennsylvania. I suppose the ComReconstruction, which is absorbing everythin, and which has just absorbed the credentia s of the Representatives from Ala bama, will have to take into consideration the claim of 15 million women to the right to vote. I move its reference to that committee.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I move to refer it to the ComElections, where the gentleman may have an opportunity to advocate it. [Laughter.]
Mr. BROOKS. I am now serving every day on that committee, and I do not like it.
Mr. DAVIS. I desire to say that this morning I sent to the Clerk of the House a similar petition to that referred to by the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. Baooxs.] I ask therefore that it may be referred to the same committee. BNROLLEDJtResolution SIGNED.
Mr. GLOSSBRENNER, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that the committee had examined and found truly enrolled JtResolution of the Senate (No. 25) tendering the thanks of congress to Vice Admiral David G. Farragut, an to the officers, petty officers, seamen, and marines under his command, for their llhntry and good conduct in the action in MO ile bay, on the 5th of August, 1864; when the Speaker signed the same. COMMUNICATION FROM SECYWAR.
Mr. NICHOLSON asked leave to take up from the table a communication from the SecyWar, which was laid on the table yesterday and ordered to be printed, and to have the same referred to the ComMilAffrs. No objection being made, the communication was so referred.
The SPEAKER proceeded, as the regular order of business, to call the committees for reports commencing with the ComPublic nds. PUBLIC LANDS IN SOUTHERN STATES.
Mr. JULIAN, from the ComPubLands, reported back House bill No. 85, for the disposal of the public lands for homesteads to actual settlers in the States of Alabama, mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Florida, and aske its present consideration.
The Clerk read the bill. It provides that all the public lands in the States aforesaid shall be disposed of according to the stipulations of the homestead law of 1862, no entry to be made for more than 8 acres; provided that no discrimination shal be made on account of race or color, and that mineral lands shall be reserved.
Mr. TABER. As one of the members of that committee, I do not assent to this majority report, and Idesire at the propertime to offer an amendment.
Mr. JULIAN. I am willing that the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. TABER] should have an opportunity to submit his amendment to this hill 1 he desires it.
Mr. TABER. I offer the following amendm ent: and providedalso. That nothing in this acsthall be so construedas to precludosuch personsas have been or shall bepardoned by the POTUS for their participation in the recent rebellion ffom the benefit of this act.
Mr. THAYER. I would like to ask the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. TABEB what there is in the bill which gives rise to the necessity of the amendment he has offered.
Mr. TABER. By the provisions of the homestead law all persons that are not able to take an oath thatt ey have at no time taken part against the Government in the rebellion have no right to participate in the benefits of the homestead act. he consequence is that all those who have served in the rebel army, no matter whether voluntaril or otherwise, are precluded from the benc t of the act. My amendment proposes that those who have been pardoned, and those that may be pardoned, may be permitted to enter upon these lands, the same as others.
The SPEAKER. The Commissioner of the Land Office.
Mr. TABER. I move now that the bill as amended be printed, and laid before the House. it is a very important matter. There is a large amount of land to be disposed of, and the provisions of the bill ought to be thoroughly understood before it is acted u on. I move that the consideration of the bill e postponed, and that the bill be printed.
Mr. JULIAN. I hope a different course will be pursued. Iyielded to the gentlemnn for the purpose of offeriig his amendment. I cannot yield for a motion to postpone.
Mr. RICE, of Maine. I move to amend as follows: in line 12, after the word “acres, ” insert “and in lieu of the sum of ten dollars required to be paid by the 2nd section of said act there shall be paid the sum of 5 dollars at the time of the issue of each patent.”
The SPEAKER. That is not in order at this time. The motion of the Gentfrom NewYork was to amend by adding to the bill a proviso at the end. Mr. RICE, of Maine. I hope the Gentfrom Indiana [Mr. Jvuax] will accept it, so that I can make my amendment., Mr. JULIAN. I accept it, if there is no objection. Mr. LeBloND. I object.
Mr. RICE, of Maine. I will withdraw it, then, and offer it at another time.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman can only arrive at his object by offering it as a substitute.
Mr. RICE, of Maine. I will withdraw it, and offer it again after the pending amendment is disposed of.
The SPEAKER. If the previous question is moved on the bill and the pending amendments, the gentleman may not have an opportunity to oller it, because the previous question will not exhaust itself until the 3rd reading of the bill. If the Gentfrom Indiana moves the previous question only on the pending amendment, there will be an opportunity for the Gentfrom Mainc to offer his amendment.
Mr. RICE, of Maine. I understand the Speaker to say that I can offer a substitute for the bill?
The SPEAKER. The gentleman can offer a substitute embracing all the original bill and what he proposes to add to it.
Mr. RIPEE, of Maine. I offer that substitute.
Mr. LeBloND. I would like the gentleman to yield to me for a moment, that I may state the reasons why I think this bill onght to be recon imitted and printed together with the report of the ComrGLO.
Mr. JULIAN. I must decline to do so. I prefer to submit what I have to say, and then I will yield for any questions. The bill reported by the ComPubLands proposes to extend the homestead law of 1862 over the 5 land States specified in the bill. Those States contain of surveyed public lands which have been offered for sale 46 million acres. “lie reposition is simply to extend the homestead law over the whole of that immense do main, and to that, I take it, no olficction Will be urged from any quarter in this case. If we had adopted an extensive system of confiscation the necessity of this bill would have been less. As it is, homesteads are imperatively demanded both by the corwhites and the poor blacks of the South who have heretofore constituted the background of the institution of slavery, now abolished, creatin a necessity for new openings for homesteads in that region and a wider field for free labor.
Mr. PLANTS. I will inquire of the Gentfrom Indiana if this bill will not interfere with the operation of the freedmens bill which we have just passed? Will it not come in conflict with that?
Mr. JULIAN. This bill is entirely consistent with that bill, and supplementary to it. It certainly does not abridge any right to be conferred proposed by the freedmens bil.
Mr. CHANLE t. I would ask the gentleman to what bill he refers, which he says this bill is supplementary to? Mr. JULIAN. I said that this bill will be in aid of the freedmens bill, and not in conflict with it.
Mr. CHANLER. What bill is it supplementary to?
Mr. JULIAN. If it changes the freedmens bill at all it will be a change in the nature of a supplement, extending the rights conferred by the freedmens bill, and not abridging them.
Mr. CHANLEH. Iundqrstand the gentleman to say that this bill was supplementary to the freedmens bill.
Mr. LeBloND. Will the gentleman yield to me for a few moments before he calls the previous question?
Mr. LeBloND. I hope this House will not at this time not conclusively upon this bill, for the reason that it contains some provisions that, in my judgment, are not compatible with the best interests of the Government. I believe that this bill ought to be recommitted to the committee, and the report of the ComrGLO printed, in order that the members of this House may understand the real point that is involved in the bill now pending. I see, by the report which the chairman of the committee [Xllln JULlAN] sent to the Clerks desk and had read for the information of this House, there is embraced the identical idea of the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. Tsasu] as contained in the amendment which he has offered. It is, that all those who have been engaged in the rebellion, whether they went into it voluntarily or were forced into it by surrounding circumstances, and have been pardoned by the president, shall not be excluded from this bill. By reference to the 2nd section of the act to which this is supplementary, it will be seen that it is provided that none of those who have been engaged in the rebellion shall enter any land whatever. Now, Iam opposed in that way, or in any other, to exclude any portion of the American people, especially after the pardon of the Executive has been extended to them and I hope that this bill will be recommitted, and that the report of the ComrGLO will be printed, in Order that we may fully understand the bearin of this bill. I do not believe in t to policy of ersecuting these persons. In the language of the commissioner, these individuals must live in our midst. Many of them have families; and they must maintain themselves or become dependent upon public charity for support. Now, sir, is it good policy on the part of the Government to exclude this class of  individuals from obtaining a homestead when the result of such exclusion must be to make them paupers? Isay that such a policy is bad, and ought not to be tol erated.
Mr. JULIAN resumed the floor, but yield edto
Mr. TABER. I ask the Gentfrom Indiana to yield to me.
Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, the amendment, as I understand, conforms to the principle set forth in the letter of the Commissioner of Public Lands, and also, I understand, the principle stated by the gentleman who reported this iiill: to wit, there would be great propriety in amending the homestead act. This is a special bill aplying to these States, taking the public lands from market and providing that they shall be disposed of in a certain manner. If there is appropriety in establishing the principle of the homestead not, there is appropriety in establishing it at this particular time. It is known there may be difficulty and delay. If the bill be permitted to pass without the amendment, every man who has been forced to serve in the confederate army against his will is precluded from the enjoyment of the benefits of the act. I believe no one will deny, if these men are allowed to come under the homestead law they will be better citizens than if they are allowed to remain as they have been heretofore. I hope that the further consideration of the bill may be postponed so that the bill, amendm ent, and report may be ordered to be printed. It is too importantabill to be disposed o so sum marily. hope that the action of the House 1 will yet be that the subject may be thoroughly investigated before it shall be passed upon by the House.
Mr. CHANLER. Will the gentleman yield to me for 5 minutes?
Mr. HARDING, ofIllinois. With the crmission of the Gentfrom Indiana, [Mr. JU i. i. iN] I wilIsay a word on this subject. As I understand the object of this bill, it is that none but actual settlers shall have the benefit of the public lands of these States. I have been familiar with the disposition of public lands for nearly 30 years and can bear testimony to the fact that enpiial 1st seizes them. how, those who in my o ainion, have. the 1st right to the occupancy of these landsare actual settlers. But il Illinois they have had to pay on an av eragv ten dollars peracre, because the capital ists have speculated on the public lands and the ca italists now hold them in vast quantities; in the Vest. I think if the gentleman should extend his observations to the States in the West he would be astonished at the result. I desire to say that] hope the system will be extended to all the public lands.
Skip Skip Mr. JULIAN. I move the previous question on the amendment. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. ABER. On that amendment I demand the eas and us s. The yeas an nays were ordered; and the question being taken on the adoption of the amendment, it was decided in the negative yeas 37, nays 104, not voting 41; So the amendment was disagreed to. initiation LAW.
The SPEAKER. The mornin hour having expired during the rollcall, this bill es over until tomorrow during the morning our, and the special order now is the consideration of the bankrupt bill, upon which the Gentfrom RhdIsland [Mr. JENCKES] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. HOGAN. I ask that the bill reported from the ComPubLands which we have just been considering be printed. I would like to know what it is.
Mr. JULIAN. The bill has been printedI and is on the files of members.
Mr. HOGAN. I would like to have the bill and the amendments printed. It can be done by tomorrow mornin.
The SPEAKER. There is a proviso reported by the committee at the end of the bill which has not been printed. With that exception the bill is printe.,
Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois. That will. be in the Globe of tomdrrow morning.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire to move togo into ComWhole on the state of the Union on the special order.
The SPEAK JR. The special order in the House is the consideration of the bankrupt bill. It was made the special order to come in immediatcly after the hreedmens Bureau bill was disposed of, and to continue from do today until disposed of. The gentleman m RhdIsland [Mr. Jsx exss] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. CONKLING. Will the Gentfrom RhdIsland state what is his intention in regard to the disposition of this bill as to time and manner? “
Mr. JENCKES. I do not reoseto debate the bill. It has been beforet e House and the country so long that every one understands it. I, propose simpfiy to explain some modifications which the committee propose to make in the bill, and then to ask the previous question on its passage, unless some gentleman who is opposed to the principle of the bill Wishes to enter into a discussion of it. I have no desire to preclude debate. EXPENSES OF AJtCom.
Mr. STEVENS. Will the gentleman allow me to have taken from the Speakers table a JtResolution from the Senate for the payment of expenses incurred by the point committee to inquire into the conditiono the States which formed the socalled confederate States?
Mr. CONKLING. If I may now say sword in rely to the Gentfrom RhdIsland, I wilIbe glad to say to him that I have some amendments which I would like to offer to this bill, and some suggestionsI would like to make; I do not wish to ebate it. other gentlemen, I know, have suggestions of more or less consequence that they would like to make. The bill comesu quite unexpectedl to me this mornin, and confess that or one would be very let? to have it lie over until iomorrow.
Mr. JENCKES. I shall be lad to hear the suggestions of the gentleman, if I do not lose my right to the floor.
The SPEAKER. The bill will be the special order tomorrow after the morning hour, and from day today until disposed of. 1866. 719
Mr. JENCKES. I would ask the Gentfrom NewYork, and other gentlemen who have amendments to propose, to submit them. Perhaps we may agree on them without discussion in the House.
Mr. CONKLING. They can be read tomor row mornm.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that the House proceed to the consideration of the business on the Speakers table. The motion was agreed to. BURLINGTON and MISSOURI RIVER RAILROAD.JtResolution of the Senate No. 12, extending the time for the completion of the Bur lington and MissouriRiver railroad, was taken from the Speakers table and read a 1st and 2nd time.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I ask that that bill be considered now. I think there will be no objection to it.
Mr. KASSON. I desire to say to my colleague that I understand there is a general bill extendin the time to all railroads, and I have an amendment that I wish to offer to that bill that will include this special proposition. I hope my colleague will let this resolution lie over until that bilfeomes up.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. My colleague [Mr. Kasson] is mistaken in relation to the effect of this bill. This bill does not relate to ageneral extension of time; but it provides that this company shall have its time extended from the 1st of July next until December to complete a section of 20 miles upon which they are now at work, an which they will not be able to complete by the 1st of July next, owing to the ditheulties they havemet with in bridging the Des Moiues river.
Mr. KASSON. If that is all, I have no objection to it.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. That is all. The bill was then read at length. It provides that in case the Burlin ton and MissouriRiver Railroad Company shal complete the section of 20 miles from the present terminus of its road by the 1st of December, 1866, and the certificate of the Governor of Iowa shall be filed with the SecyInterior of such comletion, the company shall be entitled to its Ian s, asprovided in section 8 of the act entitled “ u act to amend an not entitled An not making a grant of land to the State of Iowa, inalternate sections, to aid in the construction of certain railroads in said State, ” and its rights shall be in all respects the same as if the same sections should have been completed on the 1st of July next.
Mr. STEVENS. I would ask if this does not grant additional advantages in some way.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. t does not. The only effect of this bill will be to give this railroad company from the lst of July next until the let of December following to complete the section of 20 miles upon which they are now at work.
Mr. STEVENS. If it was stated merely in the bill that the time was so extended, then I could understand it. But it goes further and speaks about giving other sections.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa., The act to which this is an amendment provides that this railroad company shall be entitled to receive a certain amount of lands for this section of 20 miles whenever the same shall be completediand a proper certificate made thereof. The company have met with delay in the construction of a bridge over the Des Moines river. The high water and the ice this winter have carried away their temporary work; and it is necessary to give them this time, or they will forfeit that amount of land, to which they would be entitled if the complete that section of the road by the 1st o July next.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not object to the extension of time; but I do not like the wording and phraseolo, of this bill in other respects.
Mr. KASSON. I have the bill in my hands, and I find that it provides that in case the railroad shall complete the section of 20 miles from the present terminus of the road, by the 1st of December next, and the certificates are filed, then the company shall be entitled to these lands as provided in the original bill, in case it should be completed by the 1st of July. The objection may be taken to it, perhaps, that this would constitute a waiver in respect to lands to which it would be entitled by reason of subsequent sections to be complete. There is another objection to t lewordin of the last clause. It says, “and its rights shall be in all respects the same as if the some sections should be completed on the 1st of July next.” It is intended to apply to the 1st section, which includes the bridge, and that clause should be amended so as to make it clear.
Mr. WILSON, ofIowa. I will moveto amend the bill by striking out the word “ sections” and insert the word " section.” I
Mr. KASSON and I would also suggest that after the word “lands, ” the words “by reason of the completion of said section” be inserted, so that it willthen read, ” then the said company shall be entitled to these lands, by reason of the completion of said section, as provided in section 8, ” 820.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I have no objection to that amendment if m colleague [Mr. Kas sox] will offer it. Butt at is justw at the bill means now.
Mr. BRIGGS. Why should not this bill take the ordinary course, and go to the ComPubLands? It would seem that the bill is not matured, even in the minds of the Gentlemen who are in favor of it. There may be somethings in it which want lookingintoa little and I be e it will take the usual course.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. The bill is under stood by those who are in favor of it, and it is understood to mean just exactly what I have stated. The only confusion there is comes from putting in the title of the act of which this is an amendment, and which the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvsxs] seems to think will cover 11 something that does not appear upon the place of the bill. But it is necessary, in order to describe the particular law to which this is an amendment, to copy the title. I now call the previous question on the bill and the amendment of my colleague, [Mr. Kassov]
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; which was upon the amendment offered by Mr. Kitssos. The amendment was read, as follows: Insert after the word “lands” the words "duo by reason of the completion of said section of 20 miles:" so that the clause. will rend thus The aid company shall be entitled to its lands due by reason of the completion of said section of 20 miles, &c. In the next to the last line strike out the letter “s” in the word "sections.” The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. DRIGGS. I now move that the bill be referred to the ComPubLands.
The SPEAKER. That motion isnot in order. The previous question does not exhaust itself till the 3rd reading of the bill.
Skip Skip The question now recurs upon ordering the bill as amended to be read a 3rd time. The bill as amended was ordered to a 3rd reading, and was accordingly read the 3rd time. The question recurring on the passage of the bill, Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, demanded the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill was passed. Mr. WILSON of Iowa, mtRtv the bill was passed on the table. Agreed to. INTERNALREVENUE.
The SPEAKER. The Chairis informed by the Clerk thatin the bill (H.R.No. 201) passed this morning, a bill to declare the meaning of certain parts of the internalrevenue act, approved Juue 30, 1864, and for other purposes, there was an error in the printing of) the bill. The word “continued, ” in the 6th line of the 3rd section, ought to be “contained.” If there be no objection the correction will be made in engrossing the bill. There was no objection. FRANKINE PltIVILEGE TO MRS. LINCOLN. The next bill taken from the Speakers table was the bill S.No. 86) entitled “ An act granting the franing privilege to Mary Lincoln, ” which was read a 1st and 2nd time.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I hope that this bill will be put on its passage now. The bill, which was read, provides that all letters and packets carried by post to and from Mary Lincoln, widow of the late Abraham Lincoln, shall be conveyed free of postage during her natural life.
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to. PENSIONS. The next bill taken from the Speakers table was the bill (S.No.69) entitle “An act to provide for the payment of pensions " which was read a 1st and 2nd time, an on motion of Mr. Srsvsss, referred to the ComInvalidPens. CLERKS IN postoffice DEPT. The next bill taken from the Speakerstable was the bill (S. No.96 entitled “An not authorizing an increase of the clerical force in the postoffice Dept;” which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and, on motion of Mr. WASH, mums, of Illinois, referred to the comPostOffice.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the bill was referred, on the table. Agreed to. LAND DISTRICT IN OREGON. The next bill taken from the Speakerstable was the bill (S.No.80) entitled “An act to create an additional land district in the State of Oregon;” which was read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComPubLands. COLLECTION or sotnmns cums. The next bill taken from the Speakerstable was the bill (S.No.88) entitled “An act to restrict the excases of collecting soldiers claims against the government;” which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and, on motion of Mr. Srs vsxs, referred to the ComJudiciary.JtCom on. The next business on the Speakers table was JtResolution (S.No.26) tor the payment of expenses incurred by the JtCommee to inquire into the condition of the States which formed the so exlled confederate States ofAmer ica; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The question recurriu" on ordering the JtResolution to a 3rd reading, Mr. LeBloND called for the reading of the JtResolution, and it was read. It appropriates $10,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to pay the expenses of the JtCommee of Congress appointed to inquire into the condition of the States which formed thesocalled confederate States ofAmer ica; which sum is to be drawn from the Treasury upon the order of the SecyS, as it shall be required from time to time by the committee having such investigation in charge; and any portion of the sum thus appropriated that shall be allowed by the JtCommee to witnesses attending before it, or to persons employed in its service for perdiem travelin, or other necessary expenses, and paid by the SecySenate in pursuance of February 7, the order of the JtCommee, is to be credited and allowed by the accounting officers of the Treasury Dept.
Skip Skip Mr. STEVENS. I call the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, 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 the 3rd time. Mr. STEVENS demanded the previous question, which was on the passage of the JtResolution. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered., Mr. FINCK demanded the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered.
Mr. ROSS. I he e the Gentfrom Pennsylvania will exp aiu the object of the Jtresolution.
Mr. STEVENS. All that I can say is that witnesses are daily being examined before the ComReconstruction in pursuance of the orders of this House.
Mr. ROSS! It is not proposed to deprive the House of the services of members and to let them go down South?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Theyarenot to have the samqprivilege that my colleague had at the last session of traveling over the lains at the expense of the Government. [Lang ter.]
Mr. ROSS. I understand that the POTUS has appointed individuals to make this investigation.
Mr. STEVENS. I have stated what the committee are now doing. Of course I do not know what the committee may hereafter resolve to do.
Mr. ROSS. I regard the resolution as unnecessary in ever respect.
Mr. GRIDE l. oes he know of any wrt nesses who have claimed mileage for attending before that committee?
Mr. STEVENS. I can tell the gentleman that the SergeantatArms has advanced considerable sums of money upon bills approved to ay witnesses.
Skip Skip The previous question wastnken on the as sage of the JtResolution; and it was decided in the allirmativeyeas 102, nays 25, not voting 55; So the JtResolution was passed. Mr. STEVENS mtRtv the JtResolution was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. KENTUCKY soumuus noun.
Mr. SMITH, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on the Militia, reported" ! resolutions in regard to the appropriation of certain property in Missouri and Kentucky for the establishment of Soldiers Homes, and moved that they be referred to the ComMilAllahs. The motion was agreed to. TESTIMONY IN REFERENCE TO CLAIMS.
Mr. SMITH also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to perpetuate testimony in cases of claims against the quartermusters and commissury Depts; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComClaims. EVENING SESSIONS.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that the rules be suspended and the House resolve itself into the ComWhole on the state of the UlllOn
The SPEAKER. At half past 4the House, under the order which has been passed, will take a recess for an evening session. The Chair will state that last evening no member was prepared to go on; and if no member is yet pre pared the evening session had better be dispensed with. 1
Mr. LAWRENCE of Ohio. I understand the Gentfrom Oregon is prepared to go on this evening. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.
Mr. GLOSSBRENNER, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that the committee had examined on found truly enrolled abill (H.R.No. 204) entitled “An act to reu late the registry of vessels;” when the Spea "er signed the same. REVENUE FROM REBEL STATES.
Mr. SMITH, by unanimous consent, offered the followm resolution; which was read, considered, an agreed to: Rmloed. That the secyTreasu bBJlnd, is hereby, requestedto furnish to the HoRep in tabular form the total amount of money paid into the Treasury of the U.S. from all sourcessince the 1st of April and May, 1865. to this date by the Stateslately in rebellion. NAVY APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. STEVENS. I now demand a vote on my motion to o into ComWhole on the state of the Union. The motion was agreed to. The House accordiu ly resolved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union, (Mr. BLAINE in the chair) and proceeded to the consideration of House bill o. 122, making appropriations for the naval service for the year ending June 30, 1867.
The CHAIRMAN stated that by order of the House general debate on the bill had been closed, and discussion was now limited to 5 minutes on amendments.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I would inquire whether we are going to have an op r tunity to amend the bill in the House. he reasonI make the inquiry is, that if the item for the purchase of Seaveys Island, which has been stricken out in committee is sustained in the House, then I wish to move to discontinue the bridge betweenSeaveys Island and the nav “yard. l
Mr. KASSON. This bill consists of but one section as I suppose, and the Gentfrom Massac usetts [Elia Rlcn] may, if he chooses, prepare a section for discontinuing that bridge and put it at the end of the bill. It is a new subject and can be at in at the end.
The CHAIRMAN. That cannot be considered in the House only in ComWhole.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to strike out the provision contained in lines 124, 125, and 12sign For purchase of the right of drainage through the yard, now held by the city of Charlestown. $25,000. I do it on the ground thatI do notknow why, Congress should be called upon to drain the city of Charlestown.
Mr. KASSON. I will answer the question why thelU. S. should do this. There is now the right on the part of the city of Charlestown to drain the wastage of that city right through the navyyard. It is obnox ious, in many respects, to the occupants of the yard. It will cost more than $25,000 to the city of Charlestown to make a new drain and relieve the navyyard from the nuisance. It is proposed by the Navy Dept to allow this much ($25,000) to be relieved from the existence of the nuisance. It will be applied. by the city of Charlestown for a new drain.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would like to know what claim there is upon the Government of the U.S., that owns this property, to permit the city of charlestown to go through her property. The U.S. Government owns the navyyard there, and the city of Charlestown has no right whatever to go through there without the consent of the Government. If we deny that consent, then they must build another drain at their own expense.
Mr. KASSON. The gentleman is in error. It is an easement.
Skip Skip The question was taken on the motion of Mr. Wssunuuun, of Illinois, to strike out the provision in regard to drainage; and there were ayes 34, noes 23; no quorum voting. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded tellers, and they were ordered. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 58, noes not counted. So the motion was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to strike out the item contained in lines 135 and 136: For building for offices. $167, 381. I do it for this reason. The nestion was fully and largely discussed in this House as to Seaveys Island. There could be no more necessary item than that. But the House decided that that which we had done without during the war we could continue to do without awhile longer . I do not mean to test the sense of the House upon every question. I consider that vote as an instruction to us, and I mean to act upon it, that lar o items which we have done without during the war we can do without for another year. I mean to acquiesce in it, so far as I am concerned, and t crefore I go for striking out this item which I think we can do without very conveniently. The motion wasagreed to.
Mr. SPALDING. I would ask the gentleman if this is the same mayor who was in o cc during the last Congress?
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. No, sir; I believe not.
Skip Skip The question was taken on Mr. Wasnsuaxss amendment; and it was agreed to.
Mr. GRINNELL. I move to strike outlines 140, 140 one, and 142, which are as follows: NewYork: For machine shop. main building. $289, 612.
Mr. KASSON. Will my colleague explain why he moves to strike out that provision? I should be glad to know his reasons.
Mr. GRINNELL. 1 make this motion to carry out the general policy that has been indicated by the louse in regard to this appropriation bill. I think we have passed by objects fully as meritorious and fully as much required by the necessities of the country as this appropriation. That is the only reason I have. We have here an appropriation of $298, 612. I do not believe there is any necessity for this appropriation at this time, and thereforeI move to strieit out. I am for reducing our expenditures. With such a mighty Navy as we now have, and which has served all our purposes during the war, I think we can afford to let some of our ships lie up and some of our men rest.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I move to amend the amendment by striking out the last word of it and I wish to add to what the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. Kassox] has said, that this is not an appropriation to commence a new work. The work has already been authorized by Congress, and a partial appropriation has already been made for its construction.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. Can the gentleman refer us to the law in which that appropriation was made?
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I do not recollect whether it was made in the very last appropriation bill, or in the last but one. But the work is now in process of construction. previous appropriations have been made for that purpose, an this appropriation istopay for the wor in part which has been constructed, and to pay for that which is yet to be constructed to complete the building. I presume that that statement will be sufficient to satisf the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. GBINNELL] who made the objection. Mr. PIKE. In the debate in the ComWhole the other day, as has been very well said by the chairman of the ComAppropriat, it was argued that as we had got along through the war without these new works, we could now, at this period and in the present condition of our finances, get along for aTyear or 2 without these large appropriations. I. pen that ground, an important appropriation for an increase of the navyyer at Kittery was refused by the committee. It is now proposed that at a less advantageous place, where work is done, as is shown by the records of the Navy Dept, very much less cheaply, an appropriation of $1,500000 shall be made, mainly for new works. New, I think that the committee, in order to be consistent with itself, should sustain the motion to strike out this appropriation, together with the other appropriations in this section for new works or one, I am prepared to vote to sustain that proposition so that when the time comes, if it ever shall come, when we are to increase the naval constructive forces of the country, we shall begin at the proper, the most economical place, and not at the most expensive place. I hope the motion of the Gentfrom Iowa will revail.
The CHAIRMAN. Debate is exausted upon this amendment.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I withdraw the amendment.
Mr. DARLING. Mr. Chairman, I move proforma to amend by striking out the word “eight” in line 142. It is well known, sir, that throughout the period of the war the navyyzirdat NewYork city was entirely inude note for the performance of the work demon edofit by the requirements of the country; and the Navy Dept was obliged to get the necessary work performed outside of its own yards, in order to preserve the etheiency of its Navy, and to keep it afloat. A large amount of work has been contracted for and put. under way in that yard, and without these appropriations that work must stop. It is, in my judgment, very Hoor economy to crmit work in progress to ecay and go to ruin for want of the necessary appropriations to complete such work. Vhy, sir, are we to bid the nation pause in all its great works nowin progress, because the rebellion has terminated? Have we, because the war has ended, ceased to be a nation? Have we ceased to need a Navy or an Army? If so, then let members vote against all appropriations of the public money for military or naval purposes. Sir, in the name of my constituents in the city of NewYork, I demand that these great public works, which the interests of the country requires should be carried fortvard, shall not be crippled by a blow at all necessary appropriations. Sir, have not the ComAppropriat had this matter in their charge? Have they not carefully considered it? certainly they have; and now, when they, after examining all the bearings of the question, ask the House to adopt these appropriations, I trust gentlemen will not, without sufficient reason, move to strike out appropriations which have received the sanction of the committee, because believed to be necessary. I withdraw my amendment.
Mr. WASHB URNE, of Illinois. Irenewtho amendment. Now, Mr. Chairman, I think there was ngreat deal of force in what the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvsss] said, that the ComWhole, in passing upon the questionof seaveys Island, had declaredasa general principle that we are to strike out of this bill. all expenditures not absolutely necessary. I am free to say that I think this bill embraced no more meritorious appropriation of this class than that for Seaveys Island. I know very well that the Portsmouth navyyardjs one of the best navyyards for ship buildingin the U.S. I believe that ships can be built better and more cheaply at that yard than at any other in the countr. 1 hat appropriation for Seaveys Island was, thereforc. one of the strongest possible cases of its kind that could he presented to us. But the House, otter due deliberation decided to strike out that appropriation, an in doing so initiated, in my view, a principle which, properly applied, will strike out from this bill appropriations amounting in the aggre gate to millions of dollars. Now, I call the attention of the committee to the stupendous appropriations which are here asked for the NewYork navyyard, amounting to $1,300,000
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I stand corrected $1,500,000, not for the commencement of new works, not for necessary repairs of great and permanent improvements; and "war, I have failed to be convinced by anything said by the Gentfrom NewYork that there is any necessity, now that the war has closed, in the present state of the Treasury, to make this vast appropriation and sir, I shall move, if no one else oes, item by item, that the be stricken out so far as regards the NewYork navyard. I know one word in reply to the Gentfrom Iowa, (Mr. Krisso. i He said that by striking out these items, one by one, acombination may be formed so as to pass them in the House. I am willing to leave it to the House; I am willing to leave it to gentlemen of the House to form combinations to vote in these appropriations if they desire to do so. For one, I am against them, both here and in the House.
Mr. WASHBURNEf, of Illinois, withdrew his amendment.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would inquire of the gentleman how much has really been expended on these improvements when we were in war, and how much we would want. Of course the chairman of the ComNavAffrs knows. I see an additional appropriation of $587,000. L
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I will say that this bill comes not from the ComNavAffrs, and is not in their charge. It comes from the committee authorized by the House, and hythisHousechargedwiththe duty of examining the estimates that are sent in here by the Treasury Dept, and of reporting upon those estimates, such as they think are well sustained, and rejecting those which they think are not we sustained. Now, sir, I desire to say that it will puzzle the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Wssunusne] or anybody elfito carry in his head for 3 or 4 years the amount of money that has been exended in building or any other work for which appropriations have been repleatedly made. I have no desire to occupy the time of the committee. I will only ask permission to send to the Chair the report of the SecyNavy.
The CHAIRMAN. the Gentleman is cak in in the time of the Gentfrom Illinois.
Mr. PIKE. How much is this building to com?
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. 298,612 dollars.
Mr. PIKE. What is the aggregate appropriation 7
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I figure it up $ 587,000.
The CHAIRMAN. Debate on this amendment is exhausted.
Mr. KASSON. Iask the gentleman to with draw his amendment, and I will renew it. The amendment was accordingly withdrawn.
Mr. KASSON. We have been for 2 or 3 years making appropriations for this identical machine shop an ironplating shop. The works are in progress, they are nearly completed, and it will be found by looking a little further down this bill that there is an appropriation for machinery in this very builing that this appropriation proposes to complete. Now, why will gentlemen, on general declarations, propose to have these uncom leted works to go to ruin? That is the simp e question. We last year find an estimate of $150,000 for the continuation of these works. This year it is proposed to appropriate an amount for their compl etion, puttingt cmachinery in and making them edective. The appropriation of last year was for all the purposes of the NewYork navyyard. The appropriation this year is for the completion afihough that language is not usedoi the work on the machine s o, because you find below an appropriation 50 to put the machinery in. With this simple explanation of facts I have discharged my duty as a member of the comappropriations, and I leave it to the Committee oip the Whole to say whether they will abandon a work nearly completed or continue it. I withdraw my amendment.
Mr. CHANLER. wish to inquire of my colleague whether this document he has just been readin was committed to him by the SecyNavy to communicate to the House, or whether it is merely at his own option that he presented it, or was itgiven to him to communicate to the country through his paper? I understood him to say, when he he an opportunity, through the kindness of the chain man of a certain commutee, that he did not want at any time, and was unaware of any 0c casion when he could be in any especial combination or alliance With myself; and be rather insinuated that that sort of thing was not possible. I only want to give the gentleman an opportunity of Withdrawing from his present position, for if he is advocating this appropriation becausepf its merits, he and myself are on the same side. I call his attention to the fact that the insinuation applies just as well to this case as it did to the question of lands in the South, when a matter was in his hands and he was expected to advocate an amendment which GenlSherman s letter to the president was expeeted to aid him in advocating. I make this statement upon information; I do not know anything about it myself. I call the attention of the House to the fact that circumstances may occur under which I may be found in very by company.
Mr. BERGEN. I renew the amendment to the amendment. The question arises whether navyyards are necessary at all. According to the argument of the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. WASHBURNE] the country should have no navyyards. But if navyyards are necessary. let us make the appropriations which are required to make sue improvements as the exigencies of the age demand. If the Government intends to build its own vessels in the public yards, then it is necessary that they should erect the necessa means, shops and buildings. They must eit or do that, or aban don the building of vessels in the public yards, and resort to the ship ards of private individuals. If gentlemen desire to e so very eco nomical, they better introduce a bill to sell all our navyyards, and abandon altogether the idea of building vessels at the public expense. So far as the city of Brooklyn is concerned, I have no doubt it would be to her interest to have this navyyard closed. But that would not be to the interest of the Government. It is to the interest of the Government to put in that yard all that is necessary to carry on the business it desires to carry on there. I hope, therefore, that this appropriation will not be stricken out, as these buildings have been erected at a great expense, and this appropriation is necessary to complete them, an make them such as will enable the Government to carry on its business properly.
Mr. BERGEN withdrew his amendment to the amendment.
Mr. DAVIS. I renew the amendment to the amendment. I desire in all matters of legislation of this character to act with prudence and judgment. I have thought sometimes that while we are claiming to favor a system of economy, the result is that it is false economy we are fu voring. But we should lay aside our prejudices in this matter, and try to understand, if we can, what appropriations are really necessary and what appropriations may be dispensed With. Now, sir, we are told that large amounts of money have already been exon edin the construction of these works at the Brooklyn nav ord y
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The last Congress, ifI am not mistaken, made an appropriation of $150,000 for that purpose.
Mr. DAVIS. Well, sir, those appropriations, whatever they were, have been expended; and although the war is over, although gentlemen may think that further appropriations for construction are unnecessary, I ask them to consider whether it is wise or expedient for us to allow constructions already commenced to go to ruin: or whether it would not be wiser, now when the war is over, when the burdens of tax ution are being reduced, to go on and putthose works in such a state as to furnish adequate facilities whenever the changed condition of our affairs shall require them. The war in which we have lately been engaged is over; yet I fear that thelegislution which is being enacted by this Congress may yet invite foreign interference and a foreign war. Sir, I for one wish to be ready whenever that hour shall come; for come when it may, I shall stand by the in of my country.
Mr. IKE. Mr. Chairman, this appropriation is defended simply upon the ground of the necessity of the case. how, it appears by the report of the SecyNavy, which i has been read by the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. RAYMOND] that the appropriationsal ready made for this work are partiulF expended; and it is urged, that in order to render effectual a former appropriation of $100,000 or $150,000 partially expended, it is necessary now to appropriate $489,000. Itdoes notappearfrom the report of the SecyNavy how much has been expended; while it does appear that the 2nd item, $191,000 for a machine shop, is altogether new work. So that we are called n)o" to appropriate the very handsome sum of halfa million dollars simply for a buildin 5 and when we et down still further, we find almost 200,000 dollars more for machinery for that building. Ihope the committee will pause before voting for this appropriation.
Mr. STEVENS. I move, for the purpose of closing debate, that the committee rise.
Mr. KASSON. I ask the gentleman to with draw that motion for a single moment, that; I may so a word in reply to the Gentfrom NewHampshire, [Mr. PATTERSON] to correct a mistake of fact.
Mr. STEVENS. Imiistinsist on mymotion. The gentlemnn and myself have both had our full s are in the discussion. The motion was agreed to. So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. BLAINE reported that the ComWhole on the state of the Union, having had under consideration the Union generally, and particularly the bill (H.R.No. 122) making appropriations for the naval service for the year ending 30th June, 1867, had come to no conclusion thereon.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that when the House again resolves itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union on this bill all debate upon the pendin paragraph and the amendments thereto shalf terminate in 2 minutes. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. I more that the House again resolve itselfinto ComWhole on the state of the Union on the naval appropriation bill. The motion was agreed to; and the House accordingly resolved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union, and resumed the consideration of the special order, the bill (H.R.No. 122) making approprintions for the naval service for the year oning 80th June, 1807.
Mr. KASSON. Mr. Chairman, Kittery is responsible for a good deal of trouble about all these navyyards, I find. Even for Kittery we nppropriated for iron foundery, for shop, for ironc adding. for condensers, for road and timber slips, and for various other things, a great many 1,000 dollars. For all the work which needed to be completed appropriations were made. There should be no confusion as to the facts. A machine she in NewYork has been commenced and its csigned to be completed, and it is so certified by the report of the SecyNavy. We have uppropriated for Iit, think, for 2 or 3 years a ready and it will be ready with this appropriation, for work. If there be works which are not commenced let them be stricken outthe committee desire it; but let no work go to wreck which has been already commenced. That is all I have to say.
The CHAIRMAN. Debate on the para h bv order of the House is now closed.
Mr. SPALDING. I want to move ajnoformd amendment in order to say a few words.
The CHAIRMAN. Debate is not now in order. The question recurred on Mr. Gaixxnnts amendment. The committee divided; and therewere ayes 45, noes 43: noBuorum voting. Mr. WASHBURN, of Illinois, demanded tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. WASH suusn of Illinois, and Benonxmere apointed. The committee again divided; and the tellers reportedayes 09, noes 46.
The Clerk read, as follows: For mdehineshop. boiler wing. $191, 480.
Mr. PIKE moved to strike the appropriation Out. The amendment was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: For ironplating shop, 898. 922. M Mr. SPALDIN G moved to strike the appropriation out. The committee divided; and they wereayes 62, noes 48. So the amendment was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: For quaywall extensionat derrick, 8100. mo.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved to strike the appropriation out.
Skip Skip The committee divided; and there were ayes 41, noes 4o. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Sumner; and Costume were appointed. The committee again divided; and the tellers reportedayes 51, noes 45. So the amendment was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: For quaywall extension at sewer. 8100. o“). Mr. BENJAMIN moved that the appropriation be stricken out. The committee divided; and there were ayes 44; noes not counted. Mr. ASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. BENJAMIN and Wanxsa were uppointed.
Mr. KASSON. 1 ere is no more reason for striking out this appropriation than for any of the others, but I suppose the vote will be the same; and I hope that there will be no division, but that the amendment will be considered as adopted, and go to the House with the other amendments.
The CHAIRMAN. If there be no objection, the amendment will be considered as adopted. There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly.
The Clerk read, as follows: For dredging channels. 865,000.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved that the appropriation be stricken out.
Mr. DAVIS moved to amend so as to appropriate $80,000 for filling the channel up.
The CHAIRMAN decided the amendment was not in order.
The Clerk read, as follows: For filling low placeson new purchase. $100, 060.
Mr. ROSS moved to strike the appropriation out. The motion was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: For machinery for new machine shop. boiler shop, pattern shop, and smithery, 8180.000.
Mr. SPALDING moved that the appropriation be stricken out. The motion was agreed to.
The Clerk read, as follows: For the purchaseof the Runles property. 890.000.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved that the appro nation be stricken out.
Mr. BERGEIT. Fhave made some inquiry in relation to this property. When I 1st saw the appropriation Twas opposed to it; but on examination of the matter again I have arrived at the conclusion that it is to the interest of the Government to purchase the property. If the navyyard is to be continued there then the Government will be, compelled at some time or other to purchase it. It ought, therefore, to be purchased now. The Government at this time hires the property. It is now using it. It has found it necessary to rent it. Now, it is cheaperto bu than to rent it. We can buy it now on favor able terms. The former owner is dead, and it is in the hands of the heirs. They may sell it for division. They offer to sell now on fair terms. If the Government neglects to buy it, it will probably be cut up into small parcels, lots of 25 feet front, and instead then of having one set of owners to deal with, we shall have perhaps some 30 or 40, and it. will cost double or treble the amount that it is now proposed to pay for it. I have known instances in that part of the country where land, under similar circumstances. has been sold for division and has been bought afterward for $2,000, whereas before the division it was offered for $300. Now the Government has an op or tunity to buy this property at a fair price. It is to its interest to avail ltselfofthis opportunity. The Government sometimes, like individuals, is pennywise and pound foolish. The water on this root is deeperthan on any portion of the front of the navyyard. It has a rout of some 300 feet on the East river. It is necessary for building large vessels; If it was not necessary for the use of the Government, it would not be occupying and renting it. I hope, therefore, that the appropriation will not be stricken out.
Mr. DARLING. I move to strikeout the last line. Sir, I hope the House will pause before they strike out this appropriation. The matter has been fully exp ained by my colleagues. But there ll one point I desire to bring to the consideration of the House. This property is located between the street and the navyyard. It is the only property not owned by the Government between that street and the yard. It is absolutely necessary for the protection of our Government property that this piece of land should belong to the U.S. In addition to that, it gives us a very large additional waterfront, not only the front immediately on the property, but the front on the street adjoining, which will come underthe control of the Government and can be used by it by act of the Legislature of our State. Hbw. sir, a mere appropriation of $00,000 for a piece of property under such circumstances and of so much value should certainly find favor in this House as a mere matter of investment, the Government getting 3 dollars for one. It is not wasting money; it is not expending money that you are never going to see again. It is money expended for the actual, necessary uses of the Government, for the protection of its property and the convenience of its business. Rerefore hope that the committee will consent to retain this appropriation in the bill.
Mr. PRICE. The only repl I haveto make to the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. DAn use] in reference to this matter is simply this: that the Government of the U.S. is not now in a condition financially to o into any speculations in real estate. It will etime enough for us to undertake a measure of that kind when we shall have paid our honest debts that are pressing upon us at this time. Another consideration is that the Government has got along without this property for the last 30 years, and if 30 years experience has proven that the operations of the Navy oi the U.S. can be successfully carried on withont the Ruggles property, I presume it is safe to say that for the next few years, until we are in a better condition financially, we will be able to get along in the future as we have done in the past.
Skip Skip Mr. BERGEN. I withdraw my amendment to the amendment. The question recurred on the amendment. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, called for tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Kassos and ALLEY were appointed. The committee divided; and the tellers reportedayes 46, noes 53. So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. J. HUMPHRE Y. Imove to insert after line 160 the following: For protecting from destruction and decay unfin ishedbuildings and structuresalreadycommenced. for which no appropriation is madein this bill. 20,000
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I have no objection to that. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. TAYLOR. I move to strike out lines 167, 168, and 169, which are as follows: Philadelphia: For dredging channels. 54. o.
Mr. PIKE. I hope that will not be stricken out. It was demonstrated in the last Congress that the water is very shallow in the neighborhood of Philadelphia, and it is therefore necessary that this dredging should be done. [Laughter] The amendment was disagreed to.
Mr. CONKLING. I move to strike out lines 171 and 172, which are as follows: gtase Bulkleys pntent dryer, with buildings completo, Mr. STEVENS. I desire to say one word 11 on this subject. This is a new invention, which has been thoroughly tested, by which it is found that in one day you can season lum her that by ordinary processes it would take months to season. This is, perhaps, of as much importance as any item in the bill. The invention has been fully tested at the navyyard here, and found to be of much service. I hope the Gentfrom NewYork will withdraw his motion to strike out.
Mr. CONKLING. Everybody knows that there is no braver man in this House than the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srsvsxsj and he never showed his courage more than he does in proposing to this committee that they shall vote money to pay for a patent right, a new invention. Why, sir, I am perfectly aston ished; after we have been striking out appropriations for necessary repairs, after the committee have voted over an over again to leave buildings partially completed, which the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. Knssms] says will to wreck and ruin, that any gentleman shougod have the courage to rise here and propose that we shall pay such a sum of mono as this for some brannew patent right for oing something or other that has always been done in some other way and I hope, upon the most ordinaryprinciples of cousistency and economy, such an outrage will not be committed as the making an appropriation for this purpose.
Mr. STEVENS We have saved enough by striking out approriations for the NewYork navyyard to pay or this 20 times over. [Laughter]
Skip Skip The question was taken upon the amendment of Mr. assume, and there were, upon a divisionayes 57, noes 45. So the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL moved to strike out the following: For repairs of all kinds. 858, 480.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Ihope that will not be stricken out. We have not struck out appropriations for repairs.
Mr. NGERSOLL. l hat is no reason why we ought not to strike out any. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I move to strike out the clause reading “for completing sawmill, $25,000.” I do not see what use there is for a sawmill if we do not have a dryer. [Laughter]. The motion was not agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Imove to strike out this clause, in relation to the Norfolk navy yard: For repairsof drydeck, masonry, and gates, 823,000 and I shall move to strike out all of the part relating to the Norfolk navyyard, as it is read. for the reason that I do not now want to rebuild these navyyards. The rebels destroyed them, and I do not propose to rebuild them for them perhaps to again destroy and burn them.
Mr. DAVIS. I wish to ask my friendfrom Illinois, [Mr. Wasnnuaur] as this may have some connection with reconstruction, if our rule does not require it to go to the JtComReconstruction without debate? [Laughter.] But I wish to say that when we refuse to make appropriations for the necessary repairs of our navyyards in the loyal States, l can see no reason why we should make appropriations for navyyards in a foreign territory. If we are going to act on this system of economy, let us o so in our own dominions and not in our foreign dominions. Representatives from Alabama, will have to take into consideration the claim of 15 million women to the right to vote. I move its reference to that committee.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I ask unan imous consent of the committee to pass upon the question of striking out all those items in gross, in relation to the Norfolk navy ard, as they all depend upon the same principles.
Mr. KASSON. I must object to that and I wish to say a word on the motion to strike out this para raph for repairs, 820., of the Norfolk navyyar. That yard is already in a condition to be of essential service to the Government; the Government is already using it to a considerable extent. We made an appropriation for it last year, and it is now considere by the Navy Dept of rent consequence for the economical repair anguse of the Navy. If Gentlemen regard it simply as an appropriation for the benefit of certain persons resiing in the neighborhood, it is eminently properof course to strike it all out. If, on the contrary, they desire to make the yard fit for the economical administration of the Navy Dept, and give them facilities for repairs and the necessary buildings at the navyyard, where it can be (lone cheaperthan it would be to crowd all the work in other navyyards, then these appropriation should be retained. So far as I know, the ComAppropriat were perfectly unanimous in regard to these appropriations, and they are moderate in comparison with the magnitude of the yard. I think it would be about as appropriate to strike out the appropriation for any other navyyard as to strike out these; and it would be no more to the detriment of an economical administration of the Navy dept. It is well known that between NewYork and Pensacola there is but this one nayard, and it is of very essen tial importance 0th as a station for the Navy and for repairs.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. If this clause shall be stricken out by the committee, I will then move an amendment like the one moved by the Gentfrom NewYork, Mr. J. Hunrnnav, in reference to the NewYork navyyard, making an appropriation of $20,000 to cop what Government property there is there in repair. The amendment of Mr. Wnsnsmmr: of Illinois was then a eed to.
Mr. WILSO, of Iowa. I would now suggest, for the purpose of saving time, that a vote be taken upon a the rest of the appropriations for the Norfolk navyyard, as the vote just taken is probably a test vote. 1. KASSON. I must object to that. I think it ought not. to be done, because we must make some of the appropriations here named in order to be able to continue to use the yard asit is now. It is the merest insanity to strike out in this sweeping manner appropriations for things of so much necessity for the properadministration of the Navy Dept.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved to strike out the following: For quaywall, $15,000. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL moved to strike out the following: For iron and copperstoreNo. 11, $35,000. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, maved to strike out the following: For shipjoine rs shop and timber shod No. 12. 945.000. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved to strike out the following: For furniture and galley storehouseNo. 13, 836, ”. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL moved to strike out the following: For storehouseNo. 14. $46,000. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. ROSS moved to strike out the following: For completion of stables, 810,000. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL moved to strike out the following: For railway track and cars. $8.000.
Mr. KASSON. If it is possible for gentlemen to pause a moment, will say that this appropriation is necessary. to make the property now there useful.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved to strike out the following: For now dredging machine, leows, and dredging, 545,000. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL moved to strike out the following: For new shears, $30,000. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to amend by striking outline 208, reading as follows: For building for offices, 315,000. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. INGE RSOLL. I move to amend by striking out, in line 209, these words: For machinery and tools. $50,000.
Mr. KASSON. That item is necessary to make effective the usual repairs at the yard. The amendment was not agreed to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Imove to amend by striking out in line 210 the words “ 56 ” and insertingin lieu thereof “ 20;” so that the line will read: For repairs of all kinds, Mr. KASSON. In order to show the committee the character of the yard as it now is, and the importance of these appropriations, I will call attention to the fact that we appropriated last year for that yard $468, 500. his shows conclusively that there is there a very large and valuable property, which it is our duty to make useful to the GOvernment; and in view of those specific works, the appropriations for which we have struck out, thereby rendering necessary some additional accommodations, the amount here appropriated for repairs ought not to be struck out nor even reduced.
Mr. INGIfiltSOLL. In my opinion, Mr. Chairman, the SecyNavy ought to be instructed to dispose of, at public sale, all the Government property at Norfolk not necessary for thenaval service; and that which is necessary for that service ought to be removed to some other location more suitable for a navy yard. As I understand, that is an unhealthy location for a navyyard. A MEMBER. Unhealthy politically, especially.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Ihe navyyard established there by the Government some years since has, within the last 5 years, gone to decay and ruin, simply from the unhealihiness of the location. I refer more especially to a disease known as “ secesh on the brain;” and it will be remembered that it attacked that navy yard with great violence in 1801. I think that not asingle dollar ought to be appropriuted for rebuilding that navyyard. Let as appropriate only the amount that may be necessary for the removal of the Government property to a more suitable location. It seems to me absurd to appropriate 50 or 60,000 dollars for repairs at that yard. If it is to be a navyyard equal to the demandsof the Government, a upropriations of 3 or 400,000 dol ars annually will be necessary to keep it up. Appropriations of 50, 60, or 70,000 dollars are just so much thrown away, or, in other words. given to the beneficiaries of the Government there.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I with draw my amendment, and offer the following: Strike out line 210. readin asfollows: "For repairs of all kinds. $56,000:"an insert the following: For the protection of the navyyard at NorfolkI 820,000o, rsomuch thereofasmay be necessary.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I desire to know from the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. Kassox] what amount of money will be required to put that navyyard in as complete a condition as it was before the rebellion.
Mr. KASSON. I refer the gentleman to the estimates of the Navy Dept as the only information that he or I can procure.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I want a direct answer. I do not wish to be referred to the report of the SecyNavy. Does the gentleman himself know? I
Mr. KASSON. If the gentleman will take the trouble which any legislator who desires to be well informed should take, if he will look at the book which has been placed in his hands, he will find that $484, 500 was the amomit asked, and that we have now struck out a part of that.
Mr. KASSON. I will if it does not come out of my time.
Mr. KASSON. The gentleman can follow me. At the Norfolk navyyard, right there at that unhealthy spot, at the beginning of the rebellion there Were about 1000 laborers, as honest, as loyal, as devoted to the Government of the U.S. as men can be found anywhere; and whenever they had protection against the enemys military force, they organize Union Leagues and established the operations of a loyal government there and this bitter spirit to deprive these laborers of support, many of whom have gone from the North since the war has commenced, is unworthy ofus. We have millions of property useful to the Navy Dept requiring these appropriations, and they ought to be granted, or we ought to have a proposition for the abandonment entirely of that navyyard, and such a one should be referred to the ComNavAffrs before it was acted on by the House.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Mr. Chairman, I wish to say the proposition of the Gentfrom Iowa, even in a charitable point of view, cannot be supported, for $20,000 would not keep 1000 men for 30 days. When I asked the gentleman what amount of money it would require to put this navyyard in the same condition it was in before the rebellion, and he responded if I had gone to the ordinary channelsof information I could have found out, I considered his answer an impertinent one. Had he possessed the knowledge e would have answered my question. He only wanted an excuse to cover his ignorance. The SecyNavy asks for $468,000. Next session of Congress we will be asked for halfa million more; and then half a million more. So far as my knowledge goes, at least, it would require $1,500,000. A MEMBER. 5 million dollars.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Ten million dollars were appropriated and expended by the Government on that navyyard before the breaking out of the rebellion.
Mr. INGERSOLL. It could not be restored for less than $1,500,000. It is said to be a mass of ruins, and that the only object there is to protect the repertyof the Government. The Gentfrom Iowa does not propose to make appropriations equal to the entire restoration of that navyyard. ow, I say that appropriations for continuing a semblance of a navyyard there is only so much money thrown away. I will vote only money enough to keep that navyyard in condition until we can dispose of it; and then to establish one in a locality where the political sentiment of the people will protect it.
Mr. KASSON. I move to strike out the last 3 words. I think my friendfrom Illinois [Mr. Iuonasonn] has made another mistake for want of accurate information. I have been, as have many others, to that navyyard, and Iknow of most of the appropriations both made and asked for. They have raised the Merrimac, and are now raising the Congress and Cumberland. A greatnaval storehouse is necessarily there. I only ask on will appropriate as much as is necessary fbr the existing condition of that navyyard. I withdraw my amendment. The committee divided on the amendment of Mr. Wasnntmxn, of Illinois, and there were ayes 54, noes 42. So the amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER took the chair, and stated that the hour of half past 4 having arrived, the House resumed its session and took a recess until half past 7 oclock p. m. EVENING SESSION. The House reassembled at half past 7 oclock p. m., (MnConn in the Chfllr) and resumed, as in ComWhole on the state of the Union, the consideration of the Presidents annual message. RECGNSTRUCTION.
Mr. HENDERSON. M friend says not one, and I presume it is the act that not one of them was pardoned. Then, sir, how can these people in the rebel States expect that their traitors against the Government shall all he pardoned when they struck down poor old John Brown and all his followers? There is no consistency in it. They condemned John Brown and executed him and his associates in crime, and I hold that they did right and at the same time, I claim that the leaders in this great rebellion nre infinitely more guilty than he, and that they ought to suffer the same measure which the meted out to him. Then, sir, when this is one, when a sufficient number from each of those States have been brought before the tribunals, tried, convicted, and executed, then our Government will be sustained, and the confidence of the loyal people will be reiestablished, Our country will go on prospering and flourishing, while " 01d John Browns bodyliesamolderinzin themve and his soul goesmarching on.” [Applause] moossrltucrlou.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Turnsnar, February 8, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. Senfrom NCAROLINA.
The PRESIDENT protempera. That order will be entered if there be no objection.
Mr. POMEROY, from the ComPubLands, to whom was recommitted the bill (S.No.85) to grant one million acres of public lands for the benefit of public schools in the DistCol, reported it with an amendment. Mr. HARRIS, from the ComPubLands. to whom was referred a bill (S.No.93) to quiet the title to certain lands within the corporate limits of the city of SanFranciseo, reported it without amendment. Mr. DOOLITTLE, from the ComIndAffrs, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.121) to provide for the enlargement of the Winnebago reservation in the Territory of Nebraska, and for other purposes, reported it with an amendment.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. Imove hat the communication of the Indian superintendent and agent for Nebraska, in relation to the Winne bago reservation, accompanying the bill, be printed. The motion was agreed to. niLLs INTRODUCED.
Mr. CLARK asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introuce abill (S.No.134) in addition to the several acts to establish and amend the judicial system of the U.S.; which was read twice by its title, referred to the ComJudiciary, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. GRIM Sasked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.135) to declare certain streams in the State of, Iowa not to be navigable streams; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComCommerce.
Mr. WILSON asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.136) to repeal the act authorizing the settlement of claims against the U.S. by the quartermasters Dept for property used or destroyed by the Arm an avy; which was read twice by its title, referred to the ComMilAffrs , and ordered to be printed. BENATORS FROM COLORADO.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I move that the Senatorselect from the State of Colorado be admitted to the privilege of seats on the floor of the Senate. The motion was agreed to. AFFAIRS IN UTAH.
Mr. STEWART submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved, That the ComJudiciary be instructed to investigate and consider what congressional legislation, if any, is necessary to securethe enforcement of the laws and the protection of citizens of the U.S. in their ciVil and political rights in the Territory of Utah, and to report by bill are er wise. thH MADDER ROOT.
Mr. NYE. We had under consideration on Monday the bill (S.No.80) for the relief ofI. B. Itittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron, and it was not finished on that day. I do not know whether it requires a motion now to take it up or not.
Mr. NYE. If so, mom that the Senate proceed to the consideration of that bill. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in ComWhole, resumed the consideration of the bill (S.No.80) for the relief of J. B. Rittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron.
Mr. MORGAN. I now move to take up the motion to reconsider the bill (H.R.No. 135) to extend the time for the withdrawal of goods for consumption from public store and bonded warehouse, and for other ur oses.
Mr. BUCKALEW. I this will elicit debate, I should like to have permission of the Senate to take up my resolution to appoint a committee on ventilation; I suppose that will create no debate, and will occupy no time. understand that this subect will be debated. I hope the Senfrom NewYork will permit me to submit that motion.
Mr. CONNESS. I wish to remind the Senfrom Pennsylvania that in regard to this bill which the Senfrom NewYork desires action 11 on, the day it passed the Senate, believing that it had passed both Houses, I tele graphed the entire hill to the city of SanFranciseo, as it is a very important measure to the mercantile community there, and it has been kept thus far endin in the Senate by a motion to reconsider. While I do not wish to interpose an objection to an preposition comin from the Senfrom Pennsylvania, he will see the importance to us of disposing of this. question.
Mr. BUCKALEW. I will await my chance afterward.
The PRESIDENT protempore Is the senate ready for the question on the motion to reconsider its vote assing the bill?
Mr. FESSENDEN. I will inquire if my friend is not mistaken about that. If they do not enter their goods during the 1st year, will filmy pot have the privilege of exporting them en
Mr. MORGAN. Certainly. This, sir, is all the explanation I shall make at this time.
The PRESIDENTdprotempore. The morning hour has expire. There was strictly no unlinished business yesterday, but the Chair is advised that, although the JtResolution (H.R.No. 61) to amend the constitution of the U.S. was not made a special order for this hour, yet it was generally understood that it should be considered at this hour, and upon that the Senfrom Indiana [Mr. LANE] is entitled to the floor., Mr. MORGAN. I hope the Senfrom Indiana will allow us to dispose of this subject. I do not like to eneroach upon the time during which he expected to address the Senate; yet I Wish to remind him, and to remind the Senate, that this bill is one of importance, and if it can be disposed ofin a very short time I should be glad to have it disposed of.
Mr. LANE, of ndiana. I should like very much to extend the time for the investigation of the present subject before the Senate, but I see that it will lead to debate. The Senfrom l RhdIsland is in the midst of a speech in opposition to the bill, and Ipropose, therefore, to avail myself of the kinness and partiality so generously accorded to me last night by the Senate, and proceed to address them, if such be the will of the Senate. APPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATION. The Senate, as in ComWhole, resumed the consideration of the JtResolution (H. It. No. 61) proposing to amend the constitution of the U.S., the ending question being on the amendment of iii. HEN nsnsox to the amendment proposed by Mr. SUMNER.
The RESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. CLARK.) Order! Orderl,
Mr. DOOLITTLE. If the Senfrom Maryland will yield, I will move an executive session.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I hope we may not go into executive session now. Idesire to dispose of the Freedmens Bureau bill, which has come back from the HoRep. I wish to bring that matter before the Senate.
Mr. GUTHRlE. I hope the bill referred to by the Senfrom Illinois will not be taken up. I want to say a word for old Kentucky against the imputations that have been cast upon her.
Mr. JOHNSON. I will yield the floor to the honorable Senfrom Kentucky if he desires to speak now. 18r. HENDRICKS. Oh, no; he wants to speak on the Freedmens Bureau bill, I understand, whenevar it shall come up.
Mr. JOHNSON. I am in the hands of the Senate and willin to proceed now.
The PRESIDI G FFICER. This Senator is entitled to the floor.
Mr. FESSENDEN. My friend will allow me to as a word. I do not wish to interfere at all with the course of proceedings now. If he desires to speak tomorrow, I shall of course make no objection; but I wish to say simply that it is important to act upon this measure at some time, and if we go on making one speech a day on the subject, and then goin into executive session or doin something e se, it is not very likel that we shall act on the resolution until the Illegislatures of the several States have adjourned. Although I do not desire to interfere particularl with the course of things at this moment, 1ymust express the desire that hereafter we may be prepared to go on with the debate and occupy the ordina time of the Senate until the usual hour of adjournment, by the addresses of such members as choose to express their views on the subject. After today I shall, with the leave of the Senate, if not disagreeable, ask that the ordinary time of the daily session, at least, may be taken up in the discussion of this subject when we begm upon it each (lay.
Mr. JOHNSON. I certainly shall do nothing now or at any time to delay a decision of the Senate on this amendment. I am perfectly willing to o on now, or wait until tomorrow.
Mr. FR MBULL. If the Senfrom Maryland will allow me, as he has the floor on this resolution, if he will give me the flour, I will move to take up another subject, and let him go on tomorrow.
Mr. JOHNSON. I have no objection to that; but, before giving the Senator the floor, I move that the JtResolution before the Senate be postponed until tomorrow at one oclock.
Several SENATORB. The Senfrom Kentucky desires to speak now. other Snnxroas. No; on another bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The nestion is upon the motion of the Senfrom Marylou to postpone the JtResolution until tomorrow at one oclock.
Mr. JOHNSON and to make it the special order for that hour. The motion was agreed to.
Skip Skip MessaGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. McPnnnsos, its Clerk announced that the House had passed a bill (H). Mr. No. 85) for the disposal of the public lands for homestead actual settlement in the States of Ala bama, Mississip i, Louisiana, Arkansns, and Florida. 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 bill and JtResolutions; which were thereupon signed by the President protempore: A bill (S.No.86) granting the freaking privilege to Mary Lincoln; AJtResolution (S.R. No. 20) extending the time for the completion of the Burlington and MissouriRiver railroad and A JtResolution (S.R. No. 26) for, the payment of expenses incurred by the point committee to inquire into the condition of the States which formed the socalled confederate States of America. rnrnnmrss BUREAU.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I am instructed by the ComJudiciary to report bac the bill (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau, with the amendment of the HoRep, with the recommendation that the Senate concur in the House amendment, with certain amendments, which I send to the Chair. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of this subject at this time. The motion was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 1st amendment recommended by the committee will be read.
The Secretary read the 1st amendment, whch was in section one, line 8, of the amendment of the HoRep, after the word “country” to strike out the words “within which the privileges of the writ of habeascorpus was suspended on the 1st day of February, 1866;” so that it will read: That the act to establisha Bureau for the Relief of Freedman and Refugees, aprovedMarch 3, 1865s. hall continue in force until otherwiso provided by law and shall extend to refugees and freedmen in all parts of the U.S and the President may divide the section of country containing such refugees and freedmeninto districts. 8w.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. CLARK.) Senate}; the Chair thinks.,
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. 5radlleerrileosrg er!
Mr. McDOUGALL. Mr. President, I would suggest to the Senfrom Illinois that he make another reading of Gil Blas, and then he will be a better jester. The questions involved in this measure are not those that can be disposed of by accidental jests. They are grave, and lie at the foundation of things. We had the war of the Revolution. We then had a war with GreatBritain in 1812. In in early recollection, I remember there were such things as sailors homesa few in the Republic 3, I think, alone, where persons who ha been llIl)!1llC(I by the accidents of flood and field niight have refuge., I do not remember that there ever was a single soldiers home. If it was a thin extant, it, did not come within the scope o my observation, or was not in any printed paperthat came within my cognition. We had the war with Mexico. These were the 3 wars precedent to this last. I do not know that we adanything more after that than a soldiers home, and I believe the only soldiers7 home there was, certainly the only one within my cognition, was in and about the DistCol. Here is a proposition to organize a system of asylums throng out the vast extent of the South. Asylums for whom? We may assume that they are for stalwart negroes from Africa, or their descendants; and in and about that business is to be employed the Federal Government, with all its power. They are to have houses of refuge an places of home all through this country. They are to be specially protected. 1 ask when and where were the white men of the Revolution, when and where were the men of 1812, when and where were the men of the war with Mexico, when and where were the white men of our people injured, damaged, suffering in battle or from flood, taken care of with the intense anxiety exhibited here, and when were such laws brought into force before, impinging, as they do, upon the constitution?
Mr. TRUMBULL. Will the Senfrom California allow me to say a word?
Mr. TRUMBULL. The bill under consideration provides for white refugees, and under the very bill a) which this is an amendment we have been feeding more white persons than colored persons in seine localities, and I presume we are doing it today, and this bill is for white refu ees as well as colored persons.
Mr. McfiOUGALIi. Mr. President, I being a white man, say for the white men and white women, that they will take care 01 themselves except under very extraordinary circumstances. The Senfrom Illinois, the chairman of this committee, knows very well that this bill was not made for white women or white men, or white men and womens children. It was made to cover, as they say, a forlorn racelost by whom? By the incon siderate action of the Senate and the HoRep and the Government of the U.S., for with consideration they would have all been properly taken care of and had opportunities to make homes for themselves and not to have needed your asylums of refuge.
Mr. TRUMRULL. Will the Senator allow me to give him a statement of the figures on that subject? up,
Mr. TRUMBULL. I have before me the official reon, which shows the consolidated number o rations issued in the different districts and States during the months of June, July August, September, and October, 1865. In June there were issued to refugees 313,627 rations, and 36,181 to freedmen. In August in Kentucky and Tennessee there were issued to refugees 87,180 rations and to freedmen 87,195 almost an equality.
Mr. JOHNSON. The immediate question before the Senate is the amendment proposed by the ComJudiciary, tie effect of which, if adopted by the Senate, is to make the bill general instead of local, as it was meant to be by the action of the HoRep.
Mr. JOHNSON. I understood the honor able Senfrom Illinois to say he desired a vote this evenin.
Mr. TRUMB SLL. I hope we may get a vote touight and dispose of this bill.
Mr. JOHNSON. I have but a word to say. I cannot vote for the bill for reasons that I as signed very briefly on a former occasion, because I do not think we have the power to pass it. The object of the bill is a very correct one; these peo10 should be taken care of; and as it is equal? applicable to the whites and to the blacks, an the whites in many of the States requiring as much protection as the blacks, I would very willingly vote for the bill if I thought we had the power to pass it; but on the question of power I have no disposition now or perhaps at any time in the present stage of this bill to trouble the Senate. Irise principally for the purpose of saying that the information upon which my colleague actedI only regret that he is not here; would not speah on the subject ifhe would be here before the bill was disposed ofis not to be relied upon. I have upon my table a letter written by 2 of the Senators from the section of the State to which he referred.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. If the Senfrom Maryland will give way, I move that the Senate do now adjourn.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I hope not. I hope we shall dispose of the bill. I feel compelled to call for the yeas&nays on the motion. The yeas&nays were ordered; and being taken, resultedyeas 11, nays 28; ABSENT 22. So the Senate refused to adjourn.
Mr. DAVIS. Mr. President, this bill came back from the HoRep yesterday after the Senate had convened, ifI recollect aright; and it was printed and laid on the tables of Senators only this morning after the session opened. I have not had an to read the substitute bill which wasoPoTilllllty o cred and accepted by the House as an amendment. I do not see any extraordinary reason for hurrying this bill so rapidl through the Senate. I therefore move thatt is subject be made the special order for half ast twclve oclock tomorrow, to give myse f and other gentlemen who choose to examine the bill an Opportunity of deing so. The motion was not agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment proposed by the committee.
Mr. HENDRICKS and others. amendment? What is the The Seensum. In the 1st section of the amendment of the HoRep the committee propose the followmg amendment: In line 6ght strike out the words " within which the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus wassuspended on the lat da of February. 1866;"so asto read: The Brcsident may divide the section of country gpntamingsuch refugeesand freedmeninto districts, o.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish to inquire of the Senfrom Illinois if that is an amendment from the committee or a proposition of his own.
Mr. TRUMBULL. It is the amendment of the committee, considered, I think, when the Senator was present. We considered it for an hour at the last meeting.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I thought the proposition was to limit it to the States in whichslavery had been abolished since 1860.
Mr. TRUMBULL. No, sir, that was not the agreement of the committee. It was to strike this out and leave the bill as we passed it in this respect.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I remember I went to the ComNavAffrs before it was concluded. I thought that was decided.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The conclusion to which the committee came was to strike out these words.
Mr. HENDRICKS. As the amendment exlends the bureau all over the States, I ask for the eas&nays. I e yeas&nays were ordered.
Mr. HOWARD. I beg to say in behalf of my colleague, that he has paired off with the Senfrom Delaware [Mr. RIDDLE] and has left the Chamber.
Mr. POLAND. I was desired by my colleague to saythat he had arranged to meet Mr. Baneroft at the depot and accompany him to the Presidents House; and having to be ab sent for that reason, he has paired off with the Senfrom Maryland, Mr. JOHNSON] in. STOCKTON. my colleague [Mr. Wiilollr] desired me to state if his name was called, that he had gone home to NewJersey exceedingly ill, and was necessarily absent from the Senate.
Mr. JOHNSON. I agreed to pair of? with one of the Senators from Vermont, who was called away by business connected with the orders of the Senate, which he was obliged to attend to. He would have voted for the bill, and I against it.
Mr. SAULSBURY. My colleague informs me that he has paired off on this bill with the Senfrom Michigan, [Mr. ennxptsitj
Skip Skip The question being taken by yeas&nays, resulteyeas 29, nays 7; ABSENT. 14. So the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. GUTHRIE. The bill, I suppose, is subject to further amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair was going through with the amendments of the committee, and will attend to the amendment of the Senator after going through with those amendments. The next amendment was in section 5, line 8, after the word “owner” to insert “his heirs or assi us, ” so as to read, “unless a settlement shal be made with said occupant by the former oWner, his heirs or assigns, satisfactory to the Commissioner of the Freedmens Bureau.” The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment of the committee was in section 5, line 15, after the word “ occu ant” to insert “ upon the terms and conditions named in section 4 of this net;” so as to read, “to procure other lands for them by renter purchase, not exceeding 40 acres for each Occupant, upon the terms and conditions named in section 4 of this not.” The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment of the committee was in section 5, line 17, after the word “ the” to insert “ same, ” and strike out after “conditions” the words “ named in said section;" so as to read, “or to set apart for them out of the public lands assigned for that purpose in section 4 of this bill 40 acres each upon the same terms and conditions.” The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was in section 7, line 3, after the word “rebellion” to strike out “and in which the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus was suspended on the 1st day of February, 1866.” The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was in section 8, line 5, after the word “rebellion” to strike out “ and in which the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus was suspended on the 1st day of February, 1866.” The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was after the Word “rebellion” in line 30 of section 8, to strike out the words “ or in which the privilege of the writ of habeascorpus was not suspended on the 1st day ofFebrunry, 1866.” The amendment was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on concurring in the amendment of the HoRep as amended.
Mr. GUT RIE. I move an amendment to come in at the end of section 8 in the form of a proviso: Providml, That whenever the writ of habeascorpus shall be restoredto any State not declared in rebellion. then and in that event the officers and machinery of the Freedmens Bureau shall be withdrawn from said State at the discretion of the POTUS I ask for the yeas&nays upon this amendment. The yeas&nays were ordered. The Secretary proceeded to call the roll, and Mr. ANTHONY resonded to his name.
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I desire to ask the Senfrom Illinois a sin lequestion Several Snxxrons. It is too late.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senfrom RhdIsland has answered to his name. The Senfrom Wisconsin can, however, proceed by unanimous consent. I Several Simmons. Go on with the call., The call of theroll was concluded, with the following result: YEAS 9 NAYS 15. ABSENT 17.” So the amendment was rejected. the amendment of the HoRep, as amended was concurred in.
Mr. TRUMBULI.” I move that the Senate do now, adjourn.
Mr. SAULSBURY. I hope not. It is too early to adjourn. There is important busi uses
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is not debatable. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tnunson, February 8, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Borsrox. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. PUBLIC LANDS IN enmrouxu.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, luid befmn dho Home Leomrmuuuiteou from the SecyInterior, transmitting a letter from the ComrGLO, in regard to receipts, &c., from the sales of public lands in California, in answer to resolution of the House of January 30, 1866; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. Former its Secretary, announced that the Senate had agreed to the amendment of the HoRep to the JtResolution (S.R. No. 20) extending the time for the completion of the Burlington and Missouri River railroad. THE PHILADELPHIA NAVYYARD.
The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, also laid before the House a letter from the SecyTreasury, transmitting a copyof an appraisement made by the chiefs of the ureaus of Yards and Docks and of Construction and Repairs in regard to the cost of the Philadel phia navyyard; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. TAX ON SPIRITS.
Mr. EGGLESTON. I ask the unanimous consent of the House to offer a resolution which I think of great importance to the country at this time. It is as lollows: Ruched. That it is unwise to reduce the revenue tax on spirits.
Mr. BRANDEGEE. I object. ousnsnrmn AT NewYork.
Mr. DARLING. I ask the unanimous consent of the House that the bill introduced by in regard to hulks for quarantine purposes in NewYork harbor be considered by the House 110W.
Mr. EGGLESTON. I object. PRINTING or A BILL.
Mr. MORRIS. I ask consent of the House to have bill NO. 256, to secure equal political rights to all the people of the U.S., printed. No objection was made, and it was so ordered.
Mr. RICE, of Maine. I call for the regular order of business. PUBLIC LANDS IN SOUTHERN STATES.
The SPEAKER. The regular order of business is the consideration of the bill reiorted esterdny from the ComPublands, ing House bill No. 85, for the disposal of the Pubhc lands for homesteads to actual settlers in the States of Alabama, Mississip i, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Florida; the pendin question being on the amendment reported y the committee.
Mr. RICE, of Maine. I move to amend by inserting after the word “ lands” the words: and in lieu of the sumof ten dollars, required to be paid by the 2ndsectionof said not, there shall bepaid the sum of 5 dollars at the timcof theissuo of eachpatent.”
Mr. JULIAN. I accept that amendment. The question recurred upon agreeing to the amendment reported by the committee, as mod ified.
Mr. JULIAN called the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. The amendment of the committee, asmodified was then agreed to. The bill, as amended, was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. Mr. JULIAN. I call for the previous question on the passage of the bill. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. IABER called for the yeas&nays on the essage of the bill. the yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the aliirmntiveyeos 112, uays Mot voting 415; So the bill was passed. Mr. DRIGGS, when his name was called, said, it was my intention to have supported this bill, but for reasons satisfactory to myself 1 am compelled to vote " no.” At the conclusion of the rollcall, but before the result was announced, Mr. TRIMBLE said, Iwas just entering the Hall when the call of the roll was completed. If I had been in my seat in time I should have voted “ no.” Mr. BROMWELL. If I had been here in time I would have voted “ ay.” Mr. ONEILL. I would have voted “ ny, ” if I had been in my seat. Mr. NIBLACK. I was detained from my seat until too late for me to vote upon the passage of this bill. If I had been here I would have voted “ no. ”, Mr. GRIDER. Idesire to state that my colleague, Mr. Rlrrsn, is detained from his seat today on account of indisposition. If he had been here he Would have voted against this bill. The result was announced as above. Mr. JULIAN mtRtv the bill was passed; on the table. Agreed to.
Mr. JULIAN. My colleague on the comPubLands [Mr. EUKLEY] has been instructed to report a bill from that committee. As he is not now in his seat, I would ask that his right to report that bill be reserved until he shall be present. No objection was made.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. STROUSE. My colleague, Mr. Dum SON, has been called home on account of sickness in his family. I therefore ask for him indefinite leave of absence from attendance upon the sessions of this House. Leave was accordingly granted. PRINTING of ltlPMTS.
Mr. CLARKE, of Ohio, from the comPrintg, reported the following resolution, upon which he calied the previous question: Rvmlrwl. That the report of the committee to investizatcthe condition of the Indian tribesbeprinted and that 3000additional copiesbo mm for the useof the House.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question was ordered; and under the operation thereof the resolution was agreed to.
Mr. CLARKE, of Ohio, fromthe same committee, also reported the following resolution; which was reconsidered, and agreed to: Resolved, That there be printed 6,000eopies of the report of the ComrIntRev; 2000 eo ics for thense of the loose and 4000 for the useoftho office of internalrevenue. 1865. 749 run assessment. more; l. L. B. CLARK! and AQHIABD OUTFIRIB.
Mr. SLOAN. I would like to ask the gentleman whether the claim (Mr. Guthrie is not one arisin under a contest.,
Mr. DAWES. It isnot. The circumstances, as I understand them, are these: some ten years ago, before Kansas and Nebraska were organized as Territories, Mr. Guthrie came here as the agent of the residents of that region of country to induce Congress to erect territorial governments; and be exerted, I have no doubt, a good influence in bringing about that result. He thinks that in acting as an agent of that character, he was a quasi Delegate, and as such has some claim upon Congress for compensation for the time and money he expende. He never so far as I know, claimed an election in anyis age. I Mr. LOAN. Then it is substantially a claim to:1 him forlobb ng.
Mr. DIES. Well, suppose that is the fact. I do not express any opinion upon the claim but it is such a claim as ought to be considered by the very able, intelligent, and firm ComClaims which I am glad to know we have.
Mr. DAWES. The Iowa case has been before both committees. The gentleman over looks the distinction I make. In this House the ComElections cannot bring in a resolution to pay out of the contingent fund of “the Eouseany such claim as that. It puts the Committee ofElectlonsin a position where we must say what claims are to be allowed. lhat is the duty of the ComClaims, and I have out reluctance to take that duty away from t 2 ComClaims.
Mr. ROGERS. By what law and authority has this House, by virtne of a mere resolution, to gay a contestant?
Mr. DAWES. There is an appropriation of money by Congress, called the contingent fund of the House, to be devoted to the payment of the contingent expenses of the House on a mere resolution. The act of Congress appropriating that money is the warrantupon the Treasury, and the SergeantntArms makes report to the Comptroller of the Treasury of such sums us are liable to be exnded for the contingencies of the House. it is in that way contestants are paid out of the contingent fund and the ComElections have no more ability to pass upon the meritsof this Iowa case than the ComClaims, for they are as ignorant of the facts as the latter committee; they know nothing of the merits of the case except by tradition. "I know about it, and you know about it, Mr. Speaker; all others, except a few venerable contemporaries, know of it only by tradition. The ComElections hre not loo ng into the past, but they are required to look into the future and see into the rightsof members here to seatsupon this floor; and we do not desire to be diverted from that duty by any collateral matters to be referred to us. I do not see why it should be referred to the ComElections any more than it should be referredto the Committee on Revisul and Unfinished Business. I demand the previous question.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois, moved thdt the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. 1dr. DAWES. I yield to the Gentfrom 110.
Mr. SCHENCK. I am not going to engage in any argument at large upon this subject.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. Iraise a point of order, that the question is not debatable after a motion is may e to in on the table.
Mr. DAWES. I hope he gentleman will withdraw that motion.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that the House a few days see discharged the committee of Claims from are consideration of the ctitions in relation to Mr. Guthrie and Mr. larke, and referred the same to the ComElections. The Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. D. swes]moves to reconsider the vote by which theywere referred, and the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. HARDING] moves to lay that motion on the table; the effect of which, if car ried, will be to leave the petitions with the ComElections.
Skip Skip The question was taken (is the motion to lay the motion to reconsideron the table; and there were, on a divisionayes 55, noes 47. Mr. DAWES. Idemand tellers on the motion to lay on the table. Tellers were ordered; and the Speaker appointed Mr. DAWES and Mr. NIBLACR.
Mr. GRlNNELL. I ask the House to allow the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Senn ex] who has Iliad this matter in charge to makea statement.
The SPEAKER. If the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Haunmo] withdraws his point of order the housemay allow the Gentfrom Ohio tMr. Sonnsex] to speak.
Mr. ARDING. of Illinois. Iwithdraw the point of order.
Mr. WASHBURINE, of Illinois. I desire to ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] what was the action of the ComClaims and of the House in the case of Mr. Clarke.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I desire to say a word in regard to that case of Mr. Clarke. It is the only cas in which the contest was made in good faith and failed. It has been postponed8 from one Congress to another as an isolated case, and nothing has been done with it. I hepe it will go to the same committee, and receive a fair consideration.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I wish merely to state, in relation to the claim of Mr. L. B. Clarke, that it has been reported upon favorably by 4 committees, I believe. At the last session of the 3Eighth congress a bill for his relief passed bothiIouses, but it failed to reach the resident in time for his signature. It was then reported from the ComClaims. v The 1st report in the case was made by the ComElections; and 3 favorable reports have been made by the ComClaims.
Mr. DAWES and that is the question now before the House.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois and now that claim is presented with another hitched on it, that has conhere for ten years.
Mr. SCHENCK. I have the floor, I believe.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. Will my colleague [Mr. SCHENCK] state to the House how this claim arose; how this gentleman, Mr. Guthrie, came to be here as a representative from Ne braslra before it was organized?
Mr. DAWES. Do not mix the 2 cases together.
Mr. SCHENCK. I will not go into the merits of this case at all, for I do not think it proper thatI should. The question now is, to what committee it shall o, and I am perfectly conffdent it will have air treatment and full consideration, let it go to what committee it may.
Mr. DELANO. I desire to say to the House that the ComClaims have no disposition to shirk their duties in the recommendation they have made in reference to this matter. We considered that the ComElections would be better prepared to report upon the merits of this subject than the committee of Claims could be. The circumstances ottendin the contest, the facts connected with the who a subject, they supposed would be within the reach of that committee, and that they would be more familiar with the principles upon which the failing contestant should receive his pay than could be the ComClaims. It seemed to us that the exhaustion of the contingent fund would make no difference in regard to the propriety of the ComElections considering this subject. I do not know that an committee necessarily holds the key to the Treasury. If the ComElections find that there is a meritorious claim here they have as much capacity to report a bill or the payment of it as the ComClaims have. I think that the subject is emi nently one belonging to the ComElections; that they are better preared to judge whether the claim is surrounde by such circumstances as make it properthat it should be paid and I think, therefore they onght to report upon these facts, and, if they find it necessary, report a bill for the payment of the claim and it is upon that ground that we deem it properthat this subject should be with the ComElections; and I have not heard anything from the honorable gentleman, the chairman of the ComElections, [Mr. DAWES] to change my mind upon that subject.
Mr. DAWES. I will say that that might be true, if the present ComElections had any knowledge whatever of this matter. That committee, eve member of it, is just as much a stranger to that contest as the committee of Claims and they have no better access toinformation than have the ComClaims; they stand in relation to that claim just precisely as the ComClaims do; and their duties are very different from these required of the ComClaims. As I anglerstand it, the duty of the ComClaims is to find out the evidence upon which such claims rest. I will say, in behalf of the ComElections, that they have no desire to shirk any properduty that may be assigned to them. But the House is aware of the amount of duty that is unfortunately devolved upon them at this session and it does seem to me that every reason requires the Hfiuse to send this matter to the ComClaims. That committee has had this matter under consideration, and, as was stated by the Gentfrom Iowa, Mr. wH. SON] it has reported favorably upon it 3 times already; while it has been regorted upon but once by the Committee of lections, and that was at back beyond our recollection, and when the matter was fresh in their hands.
Mr. SCHENCK. I hope the House will not consider that I have abused its courtesy to me. I was permitted to take the floor to make an explanation of the facts in the case of Mr. Guthrie, how it was thathe came here, and how his case came to be referred to the ComClaims, without going into an argument as to which committee should take charge of it. Now, I do not like this plan of putting into the belly of, a speech an argument upon another subject, when that was not the object for which the speech was to be made. I say this with entire courtes to gentlemen on both sides. I repeat, 18 Mr. Guthrie came here, and his claim was referred to the ComElections at the last Congress, and it was decided then that it ought to go to the ComClaims. At this Congress the claim was referred to the ComClaims, and they refer it back to the ComElections. I say that the House should decide upon that question one way or the other. Under the circumstances, I would prefer the ComClaims. But I think the case should be disposed of in some way. Now, to answer properly the courtesy of the House in giving me the floor, I will call the previous question.,
The SPEAKER. The pending question is e uppu motion to reconsider the motion of the Gentfrom Illinois,[Mr Hammad to lay n the table.
Mr. SCHENCK. Then it is not necessaryto call the previous question, and therefore I will not do so.
Skip Skip Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I withdraw the motion to lay on the table. The question recurred on the mtRtv the ComClaims was discharged from the further consideration of the petition of Mr. L. B. Clarke and the bill for the reliefof Abelard Guthrie, and the same were referred to the ComElections. Mr. DAWES demanded the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the mtR agreed to ayes 61, noes 40. The question recurred on the motion to discharge; and being put, the motion was agreed to The petition and hill therefore remain with the ComClaims. NAVY APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that the rules be suspended, and the House resolve itself into ComWhole on the state of the Union on the special order, to finish the small remnant of the Navy appropriation bill. The motion was ogre to. Y, So the rules were suspended; and the Home accordingly resolved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union, (Mr. BLAINE in the chair.) and resumed the consideration of House bill No. 122, making appropriations for the naval service for the year end in June 30, 1867.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I move to amend the bill by striking out lines 211. 212, and 213, which are as follows: Pensacola, Florida: For muster otiico. $8. 104. The amendment was disagreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I move to strike out line 214, which is as follows: Fodnew gate to dock basin, $30,000. That is a large price for a gate.
Skip Skip Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, called for tellers on the amendment. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Ixcsusonr and BOYER were a pointed. The committee divided; and the tellers reportedayes 30, noes not counted. So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I move to strike out lines 216 and 217, which are as follows: For commandantsquarters, $28, 245.
Mr. KASSON. I wish to say that command ants uarters are erected in every yard, if no other uildings are erected, he being the chief executive officer, who always residesin the yard. The commandants quarters at Pensacola were destroyed, or nearly so, and this appropriation is necessary for the purpose of putting them in a condition for Occupanc.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Whether this amendment shall be adopted depends entirely on whether it is the policy of the Government to rebuild the navyyard at Pensacola. I hope that polic will never be carried out. this yard at ensacola has been a greater expense to the country than any other yard in the country. There never was but one vessel built there, and that was the Pensacola the greatest failure that ever was; she cracked and had seams in her through which a man could almost crawl, and she was finally brou htto Washington and patched up here, an her whole cost was $1,000,000. That has been the result of the Pensacola nayyard. I do not want thatard rebuilt, nor tenavyyard at Norfolk. hat is the reason why I am against all these appropriations. We have other and better navyyards, where we can build shipss. 1 better and cheaperthan we can at these yar They have destroyed the yards, and I am against rebuilding them. 1866. 751 I
Mr. KASSON. Idesire only to say that it is nota question of reconstructing the navyyard at Pensacola. The simple question is whether the property we have there 5 all be protected, and whether we shall provide quarters for the executive officer of the yard who has charge of that property. It is no proposition to rebuild the navyyard. That is all have to say.
Skip Skip The question was taken; and the amendment was agreed toayes 60, noes not counted.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I move to amend by striking out line 218, reading as follows: For quarters for officers, $50,000. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I move to amend by striking out lines 219 and 220, in these words: For repairs of all kinds, $109, 618.
Mr. ROGERS.R. Chairman, I would like to know what is the reason for egriking out these appropriations, which have been examined an approved by the ComAppropriat, unless it is simply because these yar s hop en to be locate in the southern States. ow, the truth is that no other navy yard in the U.S. so much demands appropriations for its maintenance as this navy.ard at Pensacola. I suppose the House must nowtthat we expect hereafter to have awhole, an undivided country, embracing both North and South, and that it may be necessary that we should protect the South from invasion as much as the North. I am opposed to what seems to be the policy of some gentlemen here to strike out appropriations simply because the works for which they are designed are lo cated in the southern States. At some future time, when we may be engaged in a war with a foreign country, it will be necessary that we should be able to protect localities in the South as well as in the h orth. It strikes me thatit is but a narrowminded prejudice which prompts members of this House to attempt to prevent legislation which may be necessary to prevent the southern portion of the country from being overrun by foreign enemies. This verynnwise policy is not at all justified by the fact thatwe have just emerged from a rebellion in which the South was the main participant and the main actor.” Although Maximilian may soon cease to occupy his throne in Mexico we may yet have a contest with England; an it isneeessary that we should fortify our whole country, South as well as North, so that we may be prepared to meet the combined hordes of the European Powers, if they should attemptto infringe upon our just rights. Because I dgsire that we s iall be able to protect our country, to repel invasion, to vindicate the rights of the nation against the assaults of any foreign enemy, I am opposed to striking out of this bill a ipropriations which may be necessary for the efenseof the counin a time of eril.
Mr. THAYEI. I move proforma to amend the amendment by striking out the last word. It appears to me, Mr. Chairman, to be of the utmost consequence that we should reserve the nawyard at Pensacola. Thatis the point from which we must defend the Gulfof Mexico. That is the point from which our ships designed for the defense of the Gulf must issue forth, and td which they must go for repairs and supplies. It seems to meto be a very crazy kind of policy to abandon the only navyyard on the Gulf that is competent to furnish the necessary means for our defense in that uarter. I hope the gentlemen of this House Wi 1 reflect before determining to adopt any such policy. I trust that they will sustain the navyyard at Pensa cola as one which is necessary for the defense of the U.S. in that uarter. Q Why, sir, if weare to senour ships from the Gulf of Mexico to northern navyyards the nearest navyyard north of the Gulf is, believe, at Norfolk, and that navyard is now in ruins. Hence, if this navyar at Pensacola be not maintained, every s ip that may go to the Gulf of Mexico for the protection of our commerce and the general interests of the U.S. in that quarter, must make this long voyage to a northern navyard in order to have any petty repair made. ow, sir, it is a most unWise and foolish economy contemplated by the amendment of the Gentfrom Illinois. It is penny wise and pound foolish, and I do entreat gentlemen to consider the effect of their votes on questions of this magnitude on the General interests of the U.S. before they cast them.
Mr. THAYER. Let me ask the gentleman a question. Does he think it advisable for the protection of the interests of the U.S. that we should have no navyyard in the Gulf of Mexico?
Mr. INGERSOLL. Yes, so far as the construction of ship s is concerned.
Mr. INGERSOLL. No, if you mean such navyyards as we have at Portsmouth, NewYork, and Philadelphia. I would vote a reasonable appropriation for thatnavyyard, so that ordina repairs to vessels could be made there.
Mr. "HAYER. How can reairs be made unless you havethe necessary worshopsthere?
Mr. INGERSOLL. Of course you cannot make repairs without the tools. If you mean by reairs the buildin of a ship over again, then say better sink the ship and build a new one where the materials can be procured at it cheaperrate, for it would cost more to repair a ship in that sense at Pensacola than to build a new one in the North. Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. DARLING. I move to strike out the last line. Mr. Chairman, I go upon the maxim that in times of peace we should be prepared for war. I hold that to be a safe principle for our Government; and in that view, what has been said by the honorable Gentfrom Pennsylvania, Pir. THAYER] in regard to the navyyard at eiisncola, is true, and ought to have weight with the House. While it may be true that no ship may be needed to be constructed at Pen sacola, still we should have a yard there for the pn ose of making repairs of our ships stationed in the Gulf and in our southern ports. I maintain we ought to have a united country, and for that purpose it is essential we should have navyyards at different points. It is necessary that certain reairs should be made to our vessels statione in the Gulf, and it is necessary that machinery and other facilities should be established there so as to preclude the necessity of sending ships to the Nporth for repairs. I trust that the House will be more lily eral in regard to these appropriations, and not strike them out because t iey hopion to be for yards in the southern part of the U.S.A.
The CHAIRMAN. The debate on the amendment to the amendment is exhausted, and the gentleman withdraws it. The question now is On striking out lines 119 and 120.
Mr. BLOW. I oppose the amendment to the amendment, and I rise to make astatementin be half of the ComAppropriat. By reference to the estimates ofappropriation itwill befound that $452,000 was the estimate sent us by the Navy Dept for the Pensacola navy yard, the committee have reduced that amount to $200,000, and this committee has already out down that amount to about $150,000; and if this appropriation, which is absolutely necessary to sustain the yard, is stricken out, the whole amount claimed for this yard by the Navy Dept will be absolutely reneed to $137,000. Better, 1,000times better, strike down this navy"yard altogether, if you have no confidence in the Dept which asks you to sustain it, or the committee which brings these carefully reduced estimates to your attention. I hope, with all deference to gentlemen upon the other side, that this $100,000 will not be stricken out, and that the Pensacola yard will at least be kept in a situation for the repair of our vessels until we determine on some policy in regard to all of the navyyards of our country; and I beg gentlemen from the northeastern portion of the countryI mean especially from NewYorkand New enland to examine this bill in connection their own estimates and notice the very small and partial reduction that has been made. I think we have Voted $500, simply for repairs at the NewYork, navyyard. t strikes me that this appropriation of $109,000 is an absolntence essity; and I the only point before this committee is whether they willstrike out Pensacola altogether, as proposed by the Gentfrom Illinois, or make this appropriation which, under existing circumstances, is an actual necessity.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I withdraw my amendment to the amendment.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to reduce the approuiation to $20000.
Mr. wASHBUIZtNE, of Illinois. I ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania to allow me to have read an amendment which I send to the Clerks desk.
Mr. STEVENS. Certainly; let it be read. The amendment was read, as follows: Amend the paragraph so asto read as follows: For the reservation of the property of the U.S. at the lensaeoln navYyard mrss muoh thereof as may be necessary. 320,000.
Mr. STEVENS. I accept that as my amendm ent; and now I move that the committee rise, for the iinpose of closing debate.
Mr. lHAYER. Will my colleague allow me to ask him a question I
Mr. STEVENS. Certainly; I yield for that purpose. It
Mr. THAYER. I simply want to ask whether my colleague has information that the yard at Pensacola is in such a condition that vessels of the U.S. coming into Pensacola from tl o Gulf of Mexico can be reaired? Mr. STEVENS. I think it is in such a sit uation that partial repairs can be made, not full repairs.
Mr. THAYER. Can those repairs continue to be made without this appro nation I
Mr. STEVENS. I do not new of any reason why they may not. I think, however, that we had better wait to see whether this yard is to be seized by traitors again after we repairit. I must now insist on my motion that the committee rise.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. Will the gentleman yield to me fora moment?
Mr. STEVENS. I will,if the gentleman will renew my motion.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I promised the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. STEvrLvs] to renew his motion for the committee to rise.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I will do so, when I get through. [now move to amend the amendment of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Min SrsVENS] by striking out the last words of it. I do this for the purpose of replying to some extent to the speech which has been made by the honorable chairman of the ComNavAffrs, [Mr. Riot1] representing here to some extent the Navy Dept, and thus endeavoring to control the action of this committee.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. Will the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Wasnnuaxs] allow me to finish my remar s?
Mr. wASHBURNE, of Illinois. I will, ifI can have as much time as the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. RICE] may have.
The CHAIRMAN. The Gentfrom Illinois [ML Wasuuunxu] has 5 minutes time.
Mr. PIKE. I wish to say a word in reply to the Gentfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Iwithdraw my amendment.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I ask the gentleman to withdraw that motion for a single moment, that I may say sword in reply to the Gentfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. STEVENS. I must insist on my motion. The motion was agreed to. So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. BLAINE reported that the ComWhole on the state of the Union, having had under consideration the Union generally, and particularly the bill (H.R.No. 1222)making appropriations for the naval service for the year ending 30th June, 1867, had come to no conclusion thereon.
Mr. STEVENS. Imove thntwhen the House again resolves itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union on this bill all debate upon the pending section shall terminate in half a minute. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. more that the House again resolve itself into ComWhole on the state of the Union on the naval appropriation bill., The motion was agreed to; and the House accordingly resolved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union, (Mr. BLAINE in the chair) and resumed the consideration of the special order, the bill (H.R.No. 122) making appropriations for the naval service for the year ending 30th June, 1867.
The CHAIRMAN stated that the House had ordered all debate on the pending section to close in half a minute.
Skip Skip The question being taken on the amendment to strike out lines 219 and 22 and insert in lieu thereof, ” for the preservation of the property of the U.S. at the Pensacola navyyard, or so much thereof as may be necessary, $20,000;” it was agreed to.
Mr. ROGERS. I move to amend by striking out in lines 239 and 240 the item “$10, 500"and inserting “ $11,000.”
Mr. STEVENS. The question is not open to debate.
Mr. ROGERS. I did not understand the motion as cutting off debate on the whole bill only on that section.
The CHAIRMAN. The Speaker of the House inquired of the gentlemen from Pennsylvania [Mr. Srsvsxsj; what his motion was, and he answered that it was on that section; and there being but one section in the bill the Chair rules that all debate is cut off.
Mr. STEVENS. It was on the section, and there isbut one section in the bill.
Mr. ROGERS. Then I move to reconsider that motion.
Mr. ROGERS. Then I move that the committee rise. The motion was not agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Doss the Gentfrom NewJersey [Mr. Rooms] press his amendment?
Mr. ROGERS. Not if I am not. allowed to speak. The reading of the bill having been concluded, Mr. STEVENS moved that the committee rise.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I ask tha gentleman to withdraw the motion. Mr. STEVENS. I withdraw it.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I desire to offer 2 additional sectionsto this bill. I will state in advance that they call for no appropriations in money whatever, while they will enable the accounting officers of the Treasury in one case to settle theirbook properly, and in the other case to equalize the istribution of bounties for the destruction of enemies vessels which have been already passed by Congress.
The CHAIRMAN. The proceeds by unan imous consent of the ComWhole, because amendments are not debatable.
Mr. RICE,of Massachusetts. I offer to amend by adding the following as a new section: Sec. 2 and be 1! Abife: That so much of the 1st sectionof the notmaking appropriations for the naval service. approvedMay 2i. 1864a. sappropriates$250,00Ofor bnuntiesfor the destruction of eno mies vessels. asperact of July 17, 1862, be amended sothat said appropriations shall be a plied toallcases of destruction of enemiesesscls uring the recent rebellion, and at the samerate asis provided for in the act. to which reference is made.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. make a point of order. will not press it here.
Mr. R[CE, of Massachusetts. I hope the gentleman will not object. This is merely explanatory of an appropriation that has already been made.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair decides that the amendment is in order, as it only regulates an appropriation previously made.
Mr. RICE, of Iassachusetts. Is debate in order on this?
The CHAIRMAN. No, sir; the proposition was received by unanimous consent. The motion to add the foregoing section was agreed to.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I offer the following as another amendment: SEC. 3. Abife:. That for the purpose of settling the accounts of disbursing o cers of the Navy. prior to the passage of the act making appropriations for the fiscal years 1863and 1864the SecyTreasury be and he is hereby. aut or iled to transfer from the appropriation for pay of the Navy to the appropriation or contingencies, the sum “$235, 40412.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. That certainly cannot be in order under any rule that ever existed on the face of the earth.
Mr. RICE. of Massachusetts. That relates to agapropriations that ll
Mr. l ASHBURNE, of Illinois. It is in the nature of a private claim.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. The Gentfrom Illinois is mistaken. It is not an appropriation of one dollar. The object of the section isto save an appropriation of $245,000.
Mr. WASHBURN, 0t Illinois. Is debate in order?
The CHAIRMAN. It is not and the Chair will rule the amendment out of order.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I have an amendment to offer to come in at the end of line 20 7 on page 2.
Mr. STEVENS. You cannot go back to offer amendments.
The CHAIRMAN. It is not competent for the committee to go back to any portion of the bill that has been passed. An amendment in the form of an additional section to the bill would be in order.
Mr. BENJAMIN. Then I offer it as an additional section to the bill.
The Clerk read the amendment, as follows: No portion of the amount herein appropriated shall be paid in violation of the not entitled “An act to prescribean oath of office, and for other purposes.” approved July 2, 1862. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. I move that the contmittee rise and report the bill to the House. The motion was agreed to. So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. BLAINE reported thatteComWhole on the state of the Union had had under consideration the special order, being House bill No. 122, making appropriations for the naval service for the year en June 80, 1867, and had directed him to I wish to I hope the gentleman. r report the same to the House with sundry amendments.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire to inquire whether if this bill is now postponed till tomorrow, it will come up before any other business after the morning hour?
The SPEAKER. If the House passes from its consideration now, itwill go upon the Speakers table and can only be reached by a motion tob proceed to the business on the Speakers ta e.
Mr. STEVENS. As the Gentfrom RhdIsland, [Mr. Jason2s, desires to go on with the bankrupt bill today. I move that the further consideration of this bill be postponed 1until tomorrow immediately after the morning our. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES addressed the Chair. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.
Mr. GRINNELL. I ask unanimous consent to make a personal explanation.
Mr. JE CKES. I yield for that purpose. No objection was made.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I ask the gentleman to read his own language in reference to what I said.
Mr. GRINNELL. I have it here, and I will read it: “Thisdiscussion is notplainly promotiveof the most commendable temper. T tohonorableGentfrom Kentucky [Mr. Rousseau] declared on Saturday. as I can ht his language, that if hewere arrestedon the comp aint of a negro and brought beforeone of the agentsof this bureau. when he becamefree hewould shoot him. Is that civilization? It is the spirit of burbarism that has too long dwelt in our land. the spirit of th infernal regionsthat brought on the rebellion and this war.” I further said, in reply to the Gentfrom Kentucky, [Mr. SMITiIz] “I occupied the Speakerschair when the gentlemanscolleaguewas speaking and I heard the words; but the gent cman hasseen it. like other dgentlemen. to withhold his speech for revision, an I cannot. therefore, refer to it. I havano desireto do him the least injustice or impugn his honor.”
Mr. GRINNELL. I have discharged my duty. I have allowed the member to report himself, and he does not seem disposed to take advantage of his own wrong to retract his words. He throws himself back upon his style of dignity, and he has a perfect right to do so.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. I wish the gentleman Would indicate what words he expects me to retract. I do not understand him.
Mr. GRINNELL. I have not asked the gentleman to retract anything. I simply wished to allow him an opportunity to explain himself by his own speech. to show what was the difference between his declaration and my statement of it. Ithought that he said that he would shoot a negro, while it appears by his speech that in 2 instances he said that he would shoot a white officer of the U.S. while on duty. That is all the explanation I wish to make, and I am willing to stand in that position. If the gentleman means to say that Kentucky is the on y State whose sons do not turn their backs in the day of danger, thenI apprise him that there are other States northward whose sons I defend from cowardice. It is not for me to boast that I belong to the professien of gor Mars, and I have not had muc experience m net running, but trust I have a comfortable amount of that quality which means standing still and both awaiting and meeting the consequences of my acts and words at home and abroad.
Mr. ROUSSEAU. Mr. Speaker, I cannot allow the gentleman to become defender of the troops from the free States. I simply wish tosay that I have made no reflection upon the soldiers of the various States. I have fought with them, sir, and I only wish that the Gentfrom Iowa had been willing to be present to see how bravely and gallantly the troops from his own State and all the free States o orted themselves in time of battle. I have ought with those men; Iknow them; and I would rather die than cast a reflection upon them.
Mr. McKEE. Mr. Speaker, I have nothing to say with reference to this question. I simply wish to make a correction of the report of my own speech telegraphed from this city by the Associated Press. I am reported as having said that Kentucky was the most disloyal of a lthe rebel States. I am correctly reported in the Globe. My remark was that Kentucky has been one of the most disloyal.
Mr. McKEE. I do not wish to withdraw that remark. I only mean to add that that State has not only been one of the most dislo al, but one of the most troublesome of all the disloyal; and she is the only State which has now prac tically succeeded by her legislation in caning out the doctrine of secession. [Laughterj
Mr. JENCKES. I think that the House will thank me for having yielded to these gentlemen; for we have now otained an exact definition of the position of Kentucky; and I hope it will be ever remembered. I desire now to call up the special order, the bankrupt bill. ORDER OF BUSINESS. I
Mr. MORRILL. I wish to inquire, Mr. Speaker what is the position of the loan bill? As I understand, that bill was made a special order for today after the morning hour.
The SPEAKER. The loan bill was made a special order for todny after the morning hour; but in accordance with the usages of the House, the bankrupt bill having been made a special order previously, antedates the loan bill, which will come u as soon as the bankrupt bill shall have been disposed of. BANKRUPT BILL. The House, a eeably to order, resumed the consideration of the special order, the bill (H.R.No. 7) to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the U.S.
Mr. JENCKES. I wish now to move the adoption of the amendments reported by the committee. All of those amendments except 2 are merely corrections of the printing, or are designed to make the provisions of the bill more clear. 2 of the amendments are matters of substance.
The SPEAKER. The Chair would suggest that the bill as amended by the committee be offered as a substitute for the original bill. By this means the whole bill will be open to amendm ent, while otherwise only amendments to the amendments could be offered.
Mr. JENCKES. I thank the Chair for the suggestion; and I now offer the bill as amended by the committee as a substitute for the original 1.
Mr. CONKLING. I should like to make a suggestion to the Gentfrom RhdIsland. A number of gentlemen have suggestions to make and possibly amendments to offer to the different sections of the bill; and I suggest that by unanimous consent the bill be considered as in ComWhole, and be read by sections for amendment and debate.
Mr. JENCKES. The only objection to that is in the time that would be consumed in the reading of this long bill; it consists of over 50 sections.
The SPEAKER. Any gentleman has the right at this time to have the bill read.
Mr. CONKLING. I do not propose that there shall be any waste of the time of the House. All I desire is that the reading of the bill may be by sections, and considered as in ComWhole, so that amendments and suggestions may be made, and the whole subject he presented intelligibly to the consideration of members.
Mr. JENCKES. Mr. Speaker, I have no objlection to that.
The SPEAKER. If there be no objection, the bill will be considered as in ComWhole, and read by sections for amendm ent, on which the 5 minutes debate will be in order. There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message was received from the Senate, by Mr. Foaxsv, its Secretary, notifyin the House that that body had passed Senate bil No. 80, for the relief J. B. ltittenhouse, fleet paymaster of the Pacific squadron; in which he was directed to ask the concurrence of the House. ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED.
Mr. COBB, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that they had examined and found truly enrolled JtResolutions and bill of the following titles, namely:JtResolution (S.No.20) extending the time for the completion of the Burlington and MissouriRiver railroadJtResolution (S. hio. 26) for the payment of the expenses incurred by the JtCommee to inquire into the condition of the States which formed the socalled confederate States of America; and An act (S.No.86) granting the freaking privilege to Mrs. Mary Lincoln; When the Speaker signed the same. MISSOURI CONTESTED ELECTION.
The SPEAKER presented a deosition in the case of S. H. oyd vs. John t. Kelso; which was referred to the ComElections. BANKRUPT BILLAGAIN.
Mr. HALE. I desire to inquire of the chair man of the select committee whether it is proposed to bring this bill to a final vote to ay?
Mr. JENCKES. It will not be possible to do so.
Mr. HALE. There are man things, while approving the general idea of the bill, which, in the brief examination I have made of it require amendment at least for its security and fair working in certain localities, depending on the size of the districts; and there are also other questions as to the practical details of the bill think we onght fairly to consider.
Mr. JEXCKES. It was for that purpose. I agreed that the bill should be considere as in the ComWhole, and read by sections for amendment.
Mr. HALE. Will time be allowed for the consideration of these matters?
The SPEAKER. The bill Will be read for the amendment, on which the 5 minutes” debate Will be in order. The Clerk rocceded to read the bill.
Mr. HAL. Do I understand it is necessary to move an amendment in order to be entitled to speak on the bill?
The clerk read the 2nd section, as follows: SEC. 2. Abife:. That the several circuit courtsof the U.S.within and for the districts whero the proceedingsin bankruptcy shall be pending shall huvengeneritlsuperintcjienceand jurisdiction of all casesand questions arising under this not: and exceptwhen special provision is otherwise mode, may. upon hill. petition, or other process. properof any party aggrieved hear and determine dthltelcioansehaesrenb. cyogurartnotef demquaiytyb. eeTxheerepisoewdeeritshllelrltblJyusraisid cpurt or iiny iustice thereof. in term time or vacution. Sui circuit courts shall also have concurrept Jurisdiction with the district courts of the same district of all suits at law or HIQILDILY which mayor shall be brought by the assign ccin:inkruptcy againstany person claimin nn nilverse interest, or by such perrsiognhtasgqafipnrsot suOcrtyiiOsSliFglnlldebea. tnokurcuhpint gtraannsyfeprraobpleerttoy oorr vestedin we assignce: butiio suit at law or in equity shall in any case. a maintainable by or against. such assicncezor by or against any person claiming an adverse interest. touphinzthe property and rights of property aforesaid. in any court whatsoever. unlcm the same shall he brought Within 2 yearsfrom the time the cause of action accrued. for or against such assiunce; Provided, Ibnt nothing herein contained salsiiSililgrnecveiivsenpaprmighutted of. action barredat the time such
Mr. HALE. I move to strike that section out.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I understand the bill is now being read for information.,
The SPEAKER. No; for amendment. The general debate will be in order when the bill has been gone through with for amendment, under the suggestion of the Gentfrom NewYork, whiich was unanimously agreed to.
Mr. HALE. I make this motion for the punpose of inquiring of the chairman of the select committee what object is gainednby giving concurrent jurisdiction to the Federal cir cuit and district courts. I fail to see any desirnble object that is attained over what would be attained if the jurisdiction were confined to the district courts. It is well known that in practice ordinarily now the circuit courts are ield by the district judges. It is very seldom that:ijustice of the Supreme Court is associated with:1district judge and it seems to me that there are objections to retaining the provisions of this section, by which uny. case of bankruptcy may, upon application of any party interested, be forced into the circuit court instead of the district court. In the northern district of NewYork, for instance, where I reside, there is a large territory. The cire uit court is lim ited in its terms to, I think, only 2, and at 2 points, practically, in the district. So that the party of the creditors may. by application of the adverse party brining the House into the circuit court instead of the district court, be driven to a distance of 4 or 500 miles to preserve their rights under this bill. I simply desired to call the attention of the chairman of the committee to this fact.
Mr. HALE. I wish simpl to see ifI misunderstood the provision of the bill, when I understood that by this section concurrent jurisdiction is given to the circuit. court in all proceedings throughout.
Mr. JENCKES. Not in all. In that the gentleman is mistaken. If he will look at the 1st section he will find that the district court has jurisdiction upon all matters relating to the personal relations of the bankrupt. with his creditors, and the circuit court has concurrent jurisdiction in all cases that relate to the property of the bankrulrit.
The SPEAKER. The time for debate has expired. The question is on striking out the section.
Mr. SLOAN. I rise to oppose the amendment adored by the Gentfrom NewYork, and in doing so, I entirely dissent from the statement made by him, that the district court. of the U.S and the circuit court of the U.S. are the same thing. I do not undertake to say what may be the condition of those 2 courts in the State of NewYork, or in the district to which the gentleman refers, but I undertake to say that in the State of Wisconsin, and in other States, those courts are distinct and different courts.,
Mr. CONKLING. The gentleman has entirely misapprehended what I said.
Mr. SLOAN. I did not misapprehend the gentleman. In theory, of course, be understands that they are distinct; but I understand him to say that in practice the district judge holds the circuit court.
Mr. conKLING. I mean to say precisely this, that so for has business accumulated in the SCOTUS, that the circuit judges, in other words, the justices of the Supreme Court, do not, and, from the nature of the case cannot, to any extent sit. in the circuit court.
Mr. SLOAN. I so understand the gentleman; but while these courts are theoretically distinct, they are also practically distinct and dilierent tribunals in the state of Wisconsin, and I believe in other States. A justice of the Supreme Court holds the circuit court; and one of the main merits of this bill, in my judgment, is that this section leaves a choice to parties whether they will have their rights determined by the district or the circuit court. There is danger that if exclusive jurisdiction were given to one court a district judge of any peculiarity of mind might endeavor to carry out the law upon strange principles.
Mr. JENCItES. If the gentleman Will allow me to intorru t him, I will remind him that under the old law the district judge of Missouriheld that. the act. was unconstitution al, and he would not open his court.
Mr. SLO N. Certainly and the giving the right to persons to choose the tribunal, and in important cases to appeal to the circuit courts of the U.S., where the justices of the Supreme Court sit to determine upon their rights, is. in my judghment, one of the rent mec its of this bill. Is ould be very reuctant see suitors, whose interests were involved in these proceedings, confined exclusively to the district courts. I admit that as ageneral thing their operations might crliaps not be prejudicial to the interests o litigants. But there certainly ought not to be any Objection to giving litigants the right to go into the higher tribunals, 4. 1866. 757 and the preferable tribunals in some States, for the purposes of justice and I trust that no amendment will be favored by this House which at all impairs or interferes With the right of the circuit court to exercise concurrent jurisdiction and supervision over this matter. If the bill went further in that direction it would meet my up robation still more.
Mr. CONKLING. I withdraw my amendment to the amendment and I will now move to amend the section by striking out all down to the end of the 14thline. I do so for the purpose of saying, a word in reply to the Gentfrom Wisconsin, [Mr. Sicix.] understand that there is a local reason in the State of Wisconsin why the circuit judge does sit, and the district judge does not; or if the district judge does sit why causes are not brought before him with as much alacrity as they are before the circuit judge. That is a local reason. Now, look for one moment at the operation of this bill elsewhere. so as to test the validity of the general assertion and argument of the Gentfrom Wisconsin. Take the State of NewYork as an illustration, where there is nothing local that I am aware of, one way or the other, bearing upon this question, except the geographical extent of the district. suppose that there some man, either the bankrupt imself or the creditor wishing to collude with the bankrupt, or having some motive of fraud in some way, proposes that proceedings shall take place in the circuit court; and the parties interested live in the county of Erie, or the county of Chautauqua, or the county of Niag ara, or anywhere in the western part of the State. The proposition practically is that witnesses, counsel, parties, creditors, a crowd of people, are to be driven 325 miles to find a term of the court. Or if it takes place at another season of the year, and if it is applicable to the only other term, the parties may live in the northeastern part of the State, while the term is to sit in the county of Ontario, or the county of Onondaga. Thus the parties are to be carried adistance of 450 miles to get into an appellate jurisdiction, to get before a different triunal; to get not their rightsnot to make one hair white or one hair black, not at all but to get, in truth, before the same identical judge, with no other rivht but to have the same form of proceedin an the same result.
Mr. SpOAN. would like to ask the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Conuusc] i the circuit courts in NewYork are not held in the same places as the district courts?
Mr. CONKLING. No, sir. On the contrary, so seldom are circuit courts held, so much have they become a shadow, so far as relates to the idea of their being held by the judges of the Supreme Court, that a bill is now pending in the Senate to abolish them altogether, to sweep them away, because it is impossible for the judges of the circuit court to hold them. In the district where I live, I believe there are but 3 terms apointed of the circuit court. One of them is aiisolutely a shadow, and the other 2 are held by the district judge. So that in truth it is nothing but the same courtiu another name, with this fact added, that the cir cuit court is held but twice a year, and then at positions far from each other. The district court, however, is dotted about in so many 10 calities, and is so frequent in occurrence, as to lessen very greatly the evils of which I speak.
Mr. JENCKES. The reasons stated by the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Consume] or striking out the portion of the section which he has indicated are precisely the reasons which influence the committee in inserting it. The district of NewYork is undoubtedly the most difficult to manage of all the districts in the U.S. The remedy for the difficulty is not in making provisions for that district alone, and causing inconvenience to all the rest of the districts in the U.S., but in dividing that district. The reason which the gentleman dwells most upon is this: they have now in that district but 4 terms of the i district court in which to try cases arising under this act or any other. By giving the circuit court jurisdiction in these cases they have 6 terms; and if the same judge holds both courts, there will be 6 chances for the trial of a case, where, under the plan suggested by the gentleman, there would be but four or wall any peculiar inconvenience be exerienced in this class of cases by reason of the extent of the territory. The same difficulty exists now in all revenue and all admiralty cases, and in every case of which that court has exclusive jurisdiction under the constitution and laws of the U.S.
Mr. conKLING. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. CONKLING. Will the gentleman be good enough to explain how the northern district of NewYork differs in this respect from the whole of Kentucky, for example, a district by itself, or half of Ohio, a district by itself, or various other districts equal or nearly so in territorial extent?
Mr. JENCKES. I think the gentleman is mistaken about Kentucky; and certainly in Ohio there are 3 districts. o Several Manama. Two.
Mr. CONKLING. The Gentfrom Kentucky [Mr. McKee] says that there is only one district in Kentucky.
Mr. JENCKES. Well, perhaps Kentucky may come in the same category as the northern district of NewYork; but the remedy for that is to divide the district. AsI understand, a bill has been presented, or is to be presented, for the purpose of correcting that evil in the northern district of NewYork. The gentleman makes one other suggestion; and as I suppose I shall have to meet it several times, I will just hint at it now. It is that other machinery than that provided in the bill is required. I think, however, that ifthe gentleman will examine the matter closely he will find that sufficient machinery has been provided. All the formal business in these proceedings will be done by officers called registers. Every issue in law which parties may raise in any case will be made up and stated by the register and cer tified to the court; and if a question is not of sufficient importance to justify parties in loing 300 miles to try it, they won d be very foolish to have it stated and certified. If parties choose to have a case tried in which the question is frivolous, the burden is thrown upon them, not upon the courts or the officers of the courts.
The SPEAKER. Debate is exhausted upon this amendment.
Mr. CONKLING. I withdraw it. The question recurring on the motion of Mr. HALE, to amend by striking out the 2nd section, it was not agreed to.
Mr. ROGERS. I move to amend the 3rd section by striking out in the 19 th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd lines the following words: and he shall in open court. take and subscribe the oathprescribedin thenotentitled “ An act to prescribe an oath of ofice, and for other purposes, ”approved July 2. 1862.
Mr. JENCKES. I would ask the Gentfrom NewJersey whether, if those words be stricken out, the officers who may be appointed under this bill would not be obliged to take the oath required by the provisions of that act of 1862?
Mr. ROGERS. I do not see how that could e.
Mr. JENCKES. That act applies to all civil officers.
Mr. JENCKES. I do not rise for the purpose ofo osing the motion to strike out.
Mr. ROGERS. I modify my amendment as follows: I move to strike out the words “the oath prescribed by the act entitled An act to prescribe an oath of office, and for other purposes, approved July 2, 1862, ” and in lieu thereof to insert: An onlhthu the will supportthe constitution of the U.S., and will aithfully perform the duties of said office accordingto law. It seems to me, unless the gentleman wants to make a distinction between individuals sit uated in different parts of the country, in violation of the constitution, he will be satisfied with the amendment I have offered. The amendment was rejected.
Mr. CONKLING. I move to strike outthe 1st line, for the purpose of callin the attention of gentlemen who are intercste in this bill to afeature which begins here. If the Gentfrom RhdIsland is right in the suggestion that he made when he was up before, that they are to divide the districts an make requisite arrangements to bring into being men enough to carr this act into operation, it is well that the House should begin to understand this bill in this one section, implies, if it is to be carried out, an unlimited number of officers.
Mr. JENCKES. They are to be limited by the fees.
Mr. CONKLING. It provides that it shall be the duty of the circuit judges of the U.S. to appoint in such districts one or more registers in bankruptcy. It is Only limited h the otion and the discretion of the judge. it may e one and it may be 100.
Mr. JENCKES is limited also by the fund from which these registers are to receive compensation.
Mr. CONKLING. It does not meet the point raised, that it gives the judge the power to appoint as many officers as he chooses, and for any purpose whatever. When a pointed they can o nothing but what any cler can do. They are to perform an office which is purely clerical. They are to do chamber business, exparte business, which the clerk or deuty clerk can do now. My objection is, that ere is a cors of Officers to be brought into existence use css for the purposes prescribed, to whom jurisdiction should be given. if they are to be created at all. to hear and determine litigated questions. The amendment, therefore, it seems to me, belongs either to this section or to the next. If these registers are to be appointed, then the next section should be so amended as to make them use ul for some practical purpose, whereas now they perform a mere clerica duty which otherwise could be discharged by clerks or deputy clerks of the court.
Mr. JENCKES. The gentleman is under a misapprehension about the duties of these officers, and I wish to meet the objection here because we shall have to consider it hereafter. He says the duties may be performed by the clerks of the court. But the clerks are local. Take the northern district of NewYork. They are located at Utica and Buffalo; they cannot leave their offices. But suppose there are a dozen causes prepared in Ogdenshur, in Platts burg, and elsewhere, then the judge of the northern district of NewYork, upon application of the parties or the counsel in those cases, can send a register to either of those towns to meet the parties the applicant for bankruptcy or the cre itors or the assrgnee, whoever is contastingand whatever they agree upon he can enter as the order of the court and carry it back to the clerks office. It is to save this very trouble and difficulty that this class of officers is provided for. They are movable, not fixed. They travel about to suit the convenience of the parties having business in the courts, and do not oblige parties or counsel to travel 2 or 300 miles for the sake of making a formal motion, where entry might be made by the clerk without the presence of the judge. Thus all the difficulties suggested by the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. COKKLING] in his previous and last remarks may be overcome by these officers if they do their duty; and it is the interest of the courts to provide the best officers they can for that purpose, because if they do not, the business whibh the registers do not do will come back upon them, and they will have to hear and decide upon these matters of formalit.
Mr. THAYER. I wish the gentleman would state while he is up whether these officers are not inlpoint oflaw and of fact, judges; whether their unctions are not judicial; whether they do not decree bankruptcy and have cognizance of (Luestions of law: and whether a mere clerk of the court is ordinarily competent to discharge such duties.
Mr. JENCKES. Certainly; it requires that the persons shall be counselors of the court and earned in the law. This is taken from the English law. There are these officers in bankruptcy there; but they are fixed, and it is the strongest objection to the law of 1861, that parties were obiged to seek these reisters offices and one of the amendments I at uded to in my gpening remarks, that was proposed in the nglish House of Commons, was to make these offices movable.
Mr. DELANO. I have not had time or opportunity to examine the provisions of this bill. should like to ask whether it is retroactive in its effects.
Mr. JENCKES. Certainly; it takes the business of the country as it finds it.
Mr. DELANO. Then I suggest whether the gentleman had not better be strict in what be proposes by his amendment. We shall certain y require all the agents to go on with this business that the bill prevides for if we give it the latitude and breadth that is proposed by the chairman of the committee.
Mr. JENCKES. I do not see how it canbe limited without
The SPEAKER. The time has eXpired on the amendment of the Gentfrom NewYork.
Mr. LeBloND. I move to strike out in lines 20 and 21 these words: An act to prescribethe oath of office, and for other purposes. approvedJuly 2. 1862. That will simply leave persons to take the oath that is prescribed by law, and if there is any change afterward in the character of the oath necessary to be taken, it does not then become necessary to follow up this law or repeal it. I think that that will answer the purpose. I belieVe the chairman of the committee [Mr. JEXOKES] fully understands that without this provision they would be required to take what is known as the test oath and if that oath is subsequently changed, whatever the oath then may be, that is the one they would have to take. It is therefore unnecessary to incorporate this in this bill.
Mr. ROGERS. I do not understand that the testoath law is applicable to officers of this kind, if there was no provision for it in this bill, and I understand the chairman of the committee to say that he is willing to have this provision stricken out. I hope the House will not refuse to do so, as long as he is willing to have it done. I do not suppose the House wants to prevent anybody from actin in the position of registrar, or whatever the o cc is, in the southern States. Yet there are places, I suppose, where there is nobody living who could take the oath unless some person who has gone there from theNorth.
Mr. PRICE. I only want to say to the Gentfrom NewJersey, [[Mr. Roosas] who considers himselfthe specia friend of the president, that the President has solemnly declared that he proposes as the rule of his future conduct that traitors shall be punished and treason made odious and that is a part of what is accomplished by this bill.
Mr. tOGERS. The President has issued a general amnesty that extends to all persons who have not held civil offices under the confederate government and to all persons in the military service under the ran of colonel. Now this bill goes further than that. Itprovides that no man, even tihose who have not held civil office under the confederate government, and military officers under the ran of colonel, shallshold this Office without taking an oath that they have not aided the rebellion. Therefore in the State of SCarolina, and some of the other States, it is not probable that a single person cometent to perform the duties required by this hi 1 can be found to take that oath; because every person of any capacity in those States has been engaged in this rebellion. Therefore I do not see how this bill is to have the Federal features it dhght to have to extend o all over the U.S. with this requirement in it and if there is any loyal man in the southern States, though he may have gone from the North, he is as much entitled to the benefits of the provisions of this bill as any man in the North can be and to whom is he to apply under this bill? He can rip ly to no body there, unless some one is pic edup in the North and sent down there to perform the duties prescribed by this bill.
Mr. YNCH. I rise to a point of order. My point is that this discussion is not relevant to any proposition before the House, but relates to a imposition that has been before the House and been voted down.
The SPEAKER. The Chair overrules the point of order. The question is upon the motion of the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Li; BLO ND] to strie out a part of the pending section.
Mr. ROGERS. The chairman of the committee from which this bill comes, [Mr. Jizxcnss] I understand is willing that those lilies shall be stricken out. If that is done it will leave the person who is to hold this position in thesame situation as any other officer would be. If he comes within the requirements of the act requirin the test oath to be taken by him, then he wilfhave to take it; otherwise he can discharge the duties of this office without being obliged to take that tyrannical and unconstitutional oath. Now, I do not suppose the chairman of the select committee iroposes to exclude persons from performingt c duties required by the provisions of this bill, if they do not come within the provisions of the original actimposing that oath. I do not suppose that in time of peace, when the war is over and has been over for some 7 or 8 mouths he intends to compel persons to take this test oath, which was only required to be taken in time of war, under the plea that it was necessary for the purpose of suppressing the rebellion. I do not suppose that we want to apply in time of peace this test oath any further than we did in time of war and if a person who holds othee under this bill does not come within the terms of the oppressive testoath bill, why should you require him to take it to do more than was required, tyran ically and unconstitution ally, of an; onein time of war?
Mr. POMEROY. I move to amend the 4th section by striking out from the word “and” in the 16th line down to and including the word “court” in the 21st line, as followa: and he shall also keep a dockct of all cases in which he shall act, and make thercin short memoranda of his actionin all cases which docket shall be kept in the officeof the clerko the district court, and shall form a part of the minutebook of the proceedingsof snid court: and to insert in lieu thereof the following: and he shall also make short memorandaof his proceedingsin eachcase in which lic shall act on a docket, to be kept by him for that purpose and he shall from timeto time. asproceedingsaretaken, for ward to the clerk of the district court a copy of said memorandn. which shall be enteredby the said clerk in a properminutebook kept in his office. As the section is now framed it provides that the register shall kee a docket in the office of the district court. ow, in a large district it is perfectly impossible that the register can kee a docket and enter memoranda of his proceeings in it in the office of the district court. The object of this amendment is to provide that from time to time, s proceedings are taken before the register, he s u1 forward to the clerk of the district court memoranda of those proceedings, and that the clerk shall enter them in a minutebook to be kept by him; which is practicable, while the other is not. It arrives at the same result that was arrived at by the committee in this section. It seems to me that as the section now stands it cannot be carried out in large districts.
Mr. JENCKES. Will the Gentfrom NewYork allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. JENCKES. Is the object of his amendment to require the keeping of 2 dockets, one in the clerks Office and one by the regis ter?
Mr. POMEROY. No; the register must necessarily keep at his own office the record of his own roccedings; but the official docket must be ept in the clerks office as a matter of course. That is the source to which every person oes for information upon these subjects. “he official register is teregister kept by the clerk of the district court.
Mr. JENCKES. I think if the gentlemans amendment went a little further it would not be objectionable.
Mr. POMEROY. I will modify the amendment so asto make itacce table to the chairman of the committee, provided that it will carry out the object.
Mr. JENCKES. The reason for this particular provision is this: that if the register of the court meets, at some place 2 or 300 miles from the clerks office, a dozen petitioners, and there is no objection to the entering offormal decrees, his act at that time is the act of the court, and that his minutebook or docket shall be carried back to the court and become a part of the records of the court; not I that he shall keep a private docket of his own, 1866. 759 but that the contemporaneous act, that which he does in the presence of the parties, shall be the record of the court. I cannot see any hard ship in that.
Mr. POMEROY. The amendment that I propose carries into effectthe very result which the chairman of the committee aims at. It is perfectly impossible, as I said before, that the rester shall keep a docket in the office of the clerk: and all that he can by any possi bility do is, wherever he may be, to keep a minute of his proceedings for his own information. The amendment I propose provides that immediately upon an proceedings being taken before him, he shalIsend to the clerk of the district court a coy of those proceedings, which shall be entere in aminutebook to be kept by the clerk, and which minutebook is the regular docket of the proceedings. I do not see how it can be arrived at in any other way.
Mr. JENCKES. I see no objection to the gentlemans amendment.
Mr. DAVIS. I suggest to m colleague that he insert the word “certified” before the word co.
Mr. JENCKES and I so gest to him to insert the word “ forthwith” begire “forward.”
Mr. POMEROY. I accept both modifications.
Mr. Pouanors amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Mr; JENCKES. If the amendment of the Gentfrom NewYork should prevail and this bill should become a law, it would have the effect to create that class of officers called commissioners, who have been found so objectionable under every bankrupt law heretofore passed. The very object of the language which he gentleman moves to strike out was to prevent the establishment of any such courts of inferior juie sdiction. It was the intention that these regisers should be administrative officers in every respect, except that they should be authorized to state questions for judicial decis ion, the object being to maintain uniformity of practice in the administration of the law. If the gentleman will examine the bill a little further, he will find in section ten a provision by which commissioners, to be appointed by the Supreme Court, are authorized to establish rules of practice and a uniform code of procedure throughout the U.S. Hence all that these reisters will have to do will be to go round an, meet the parties and their counsel, and make up the questions for the decision of the court. If the gentleman recollects the practice under the old law, he dodbt less remembers that where questions of this kind were left to commiSsioners in the different countieslocal tribunals like justices of the peacethere were as man different rules of practice, even in the same district, as the number of these inferior Officers. It is highly essential, it appears to me, that a measure like this should come within the constitutional requirement, and should be uniform throughout all the districts in the U.S., and all the offices in the various districts.
Mr. HALE. I submit, Mr. Speaker, whether the commissioners to be appomted by the supreme Court could not as readily provide Uniorm regulations for the practice before these registers as provide uniform regulations for the several districts.
Mr. JENCKES. The effect of the gentlemans amendment would be thatin many cases there would be 2 hearings, one before the commissioner, as the register would in fact be come, and another before the judge. That is just what we want to avoid.
Mr. HALE. It may be that the honorable gentleman desires to avoid precisely what I wish to accomplish. I desire that there shall be within the reach of every party interested in these proceedings a tribuna before which he may be heard without involving an expenditure of time and money greater than the amount in controversy would justify. This advantage he cannot have under the bill as it stands.
Mr. JENCKES. Does not the gentleman see that under his plan there must be 2 hear in s in every disuted case? Mr. HALE. 0t necessarily.
Mr. JENCKES. In 9 cases out of ten there would be 2 hearings. But if the parties come before a competent register, a counselor of the court, whose duty it is to make up a case for the decision of the judge, and both parties agree upon his statement, and he certifies the issue, then there is but one hearinv, and that is before the judge. In this way, the practice is uniform.
Mr. HALE. Does not the bill now provide that uncontested matters shall come before the register and be decided by him?
Mr. JENCKES. If the Gentfrom NewYork and myself were on different sides of a case, and happened to meet 300 miles from the place where the court was held, I have no doubt we could agree to a statement oflaw that the register should make up, so that when we come to court we shall have a definite issue to work upon. It would be as much for our interest as for the interest of the party. The question recurred on Mr. Harms amendm ent, and it was disagreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. It is certainly one of the most difficult questions to fix the amount these officers should be aid. Theidea was to make the bill selfsustaining, and that the otheers should be paid out of the fees paid into court according to the labor to be distributed fairly among the officers. The whole of their pay is under the direction of the judges. The clerk knows from the docket how many cases are entered in different places, and the judge can direct so many registers to this place and so many to another, so that a fair division maybe made among them and their traveling and other incidental expenses are paid. If the gentleman will reflect a moment, it will occur to him that $2, 600 is more than we pay the district judges. The district judge of Connecticut gets only $2, 500, and he has to payIhis own expenses. Mr. THAYER. I think that the duties of these officers will be more laborious than those of the district judges.
Mr. JENCKES. Perhaps they will. But sir, they will be attache s oi the court and will have an opportunity to practice in a great many cases besides those in bankruptcy. It will be very easy, I think, to obtain the services of competent persons in the different districts who, for the purpose of obtaining practice an skill under this act, if it become a law, will be willing to take the offices at a very low compensation.
Skip Skip The question being taken on the amendment of Mr. BAYER, it was not agreed to.
Mr. POMEROY. I move to amend in line 42, after the word “paid, ” by inserting the words, “by the clerk of the districtcourt. That is evidently the intention of the bill, because the subscquent sections say that these fees are to be aid by the court.
Mr. JENC iES. I have no objection to accepting that amendment. The amendment was accordingly made.
Mr. DAVIS. I move a verbal amendment in the 41st line, by inserting the word “necessary” before the word “incidental.”
Mr. JENCKES. No objection to that. The amendment was accordingly made.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I move to strike out the word “ register” where it occurs in section 5; or I will qualify it by moving to strike out the same word wherever it occurs in the blll. 5 I make this proposition that I may get some little information on this subject, not having had the benefit derived from the discussion of the bill at the former session. If I undemtand the provisions of the bill, it is intended to give jurisdiction to the U.S. court o all matters relating to the estate of bankrupts, whether these questions arise between citizens of a particular State or between citizens of different States. In other words, I understand it to add largely to the jurisdiction of the U.S. courtto take from the State courts a large amount of business which now belongs exclusively to thOse courts. Now, sir, in the State at which I hvo we have, I believe, 2 U.S. courts asso ciated at a point very distant from portions of the district. If I understand the effect of this bill it refers to the U.S. courts the adjudication of all questions pending in the State courts the moment the act of bankruptcy is committed. For instance, if an ejectmentsuit is ending in a certain court between parties, and either of the parties commits the act of bankruptcy, that very moment all proceedings in that court are suspended, relating to that particular cause, and all other causes of the suitors who may be prosecuting this debtor.
Mr. JENCK S. I beg to correct the gentleman. This bill takes effect upon the relation of debtor and creditor. It has nothing to do with real actions.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I stand corrected. Then suppose a bankrupt has an interest in alawsuit relatin to a tract of land. The suit. will have to be determined in the State courts, whiLe at the same time his estate may be entirely administered upon by this register at the U.S. court; but all his personal pIroperty is transferred to the jurisdiction of the U.S. court. Now, sir, I will undertake to say if this bill passes, that it will be extremely inconvenient to my constituents. In place of resorting to our State courts for a remedy against a man who has purchased a large amount of produce and who has failed to make the final payment, this bill requires the parties to travel miles. perhaps to Chicago, or lose their claim. I understand further that the register who may administer upon agentlemans estate may be a lawyer who has been counsel in the State courts or I call attention to the fact that if these reisters are qualified in this way, they must be awers of some court of recor in the State, orin the U.S. court. They cannot be iuterested in any case in their own district, but they may be interested in the State courts before the case is transferred to the jurisdiction of the U.S. court. Now, sir, I will express the opinion that if this bill is to meet the approbation of the people, it must enable the people to have an adju dication of their rights in their home courts and not transfer them to courts at a great distance from their homes where their business istransacted and Where under the State laws these questions are now determined. I will not add anything more.
Mr. JENCKES. Mr. Speaker, the committee must have used language very inaccurately if they have conveyed an such idea as that stated by the gentleman. think it is provided in about as clear a manneras can be that these registers shall not act as counsel or attorneys for any parties in any matters connected with bankruptcy and sir, instead of creating the difficulty which the gentleman suggests, their office is created to remove that very difficulty. Instead of the gentlemans nei hbors having to travel 200 miles to Chicago, this bill authorizes the court to come down, by means ofone of these registers, into his neighborhood, and instead of creating the embarrassment which the gentleman has referred to, it will have a tendency to relieve it entirely.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. I understand that in all cases of dispute the register has no jurisdiction and must refer them to the court.
Mr. JENCKES. Instead of increasing the difficulties of litigation, this machinery, if it will act well at all, will simplify the trial of every case, whether it be one growing out of the ownership of land or of common debts; because it brings all matters relatin to the settlement of a bankrupts estate within one jurisdiction at one place, and does not oblige his creditors to travel all over the country to pursue him in different courts wherever he may be found; everything is to be adjudicated at the place of his residence by a court of competentjnrisdiction, and that essens litigation instead of increasing it in almost every instance.
Mr. SPALDING. I move that the House do now adjourn.
Mr. GARFIELD. I ask my colleague to 100s of withdraw that motion to allow me to introduce a bill for reference.
Mr. SPALDING. purpose. HARBOR IMPROVEMENTS IN 01110.
Mr. GARFIELD, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to provide for the improve ment of certain harbors in Ohio; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the ComCommerce, and ordered to be printed. I withdraw it for that. HOLDING EVENING SESSIONS.
Mr. STEVENS. I wish to make a privileged motion. I find there are several reli gious and other meetings that gentlemen wish to attend. I therefore move that the order of the House for night sessions be suspended until next week Tuesday.
The SPEAKER. The House has ordered a recess to be taken each day at 4 oclock and 30 minutes until otherwise ordered. It is under the control of the majority of the House at any time to suspend or change the order. The motion of Mr. Srsvsxs was agreed to.
Mr. SPALDING resumed the floor. REVENUE REPORT Mr. WARNER. With the permission of the Gentfrom Ohio, [ML SPALDING] I ask the unanimous consent of the House to offer the followmg resolution: Renolnrd, That the revenuecommissionappointed to inquire into and report upon the bestand most eflicient means of raising and collectin a revenue be requestedto report to the HoRep such portion of the testimonyrelative to the industry and revenue of the country taken by them as they may deemexpedient.
Mr. SPALDING. I move that that resolution be referred to the ComWays&Means.
Mr. WARNER. I wish to say that this information
Mr. SPALDING. I cannot give way any further.
Mr. WARNER. I hope the gentleman will hear a suggestion.
Mr. SPAl. DING. I must decline to yield.
Mr. WARNER. Iappeal to the gentlemans courtesy for one moment. This resolution comes from the committee
Mr. SPALDING. I decline to yield. hi Mr. WARNER. Then I withdraw the resolution.
Mr. SPALDING. I renew the motion that the House do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and thereupon (at 25 minutes to 5 oclock p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Fawn, February 9, 1866. Prayer by Rev. H. C. Fisn, D. D., of New ark, NewJersey. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. Senfrom ALABAMA.
Mr. GUTHRIE. I hold in my hand the cer tificate of election of Hon. George S. Houston, as Senfrom the State of Alabama for the term ending March 4, 1867. I hope that it may be received and laid on the table; and I deem it proper to state at this time that I understand that Mr. Houston has been a consistent Union man during the war.
The PRESIDENT protemporc. That order will be made if there e no objection.
Mr. SUMNER, from the ComForRel, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.No. 154) to further secure American citizens certain privileges under the treaty of Washington, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, and that it be referred to the ComCommerce; which was agreed to. BILL INTRODUCED.
Mr. MORRILL asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.137) to amend the acts approved August 6, 1861, and July 16, 1862, establishing it met propolitan olice in the DistCol to increase the efficiency thereof, and for other purposes; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComDistCol. MEDICAL STATISTICS OI" THE WAR.
Mr. SHERMAN submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved, That the SecyWar he directed to communicate to the Senate a compendium of the medical statistics collect d during the war in the officesof the Provost Marshal General and the surgeon General. INVESTIGATION OF COTTON FRAUDS.
Mr. DAVIS. I offer the following resolution, and ask for its present consideration: Whereas charges of fraud. peculatiun and extortion have beep made against agents of the cotton bureau by citizens, and especially cotton planters and cotton factors: and whereassaid charges have also been made through the public toss and the serious attention of the Senate calle thereto: and whereas it has been made to appear to the Senate that agentsin someinstanceshave beenindicted by the State courts for swindlina and the jurisdiction ofraid courtsin the premiseshiiving been denied and the accusedngenLstakenout of the and s of the civil authorities h military force: toRrse, sboelv, ed. That a committee. to consistofScua and thesume is hereby, appointedto investigatethe said charges. with authority to have brought before them personsandpapers: and said committee will report the result of its mVOIUIBUOn to the Senate for its action. Tho. PRESIDENT protempore. It raquirel 1866. 761 unanimous consent to consider the resolution today. Is there any objection?
Mr. SUMNER. I think it had better lie over.
The PRESIDENT protempore Objection being made, it lies over under the rule.
Mr. SHERMAN. If the Senfrom Massachusetts will withdraw the objection, I desire to make an explanation in regard to this resolution.
Mr. SUMNER. But that will open the way to its consideration today. If the Senator thinks it advisable, however, to consider the resolution today, I will withdraw it.
The PRESIDENT protempore Does the Senfrom Massachusetts withdraw his objection?
Mr. SUMNER. I do, at the request of the Senfrom Ohio.
Mr. DAVIS. Mr. President, I will ask no other assurance than that the Senate will raise such a committee upon probable cause being made out. lie
Mr. SHERMAN. On specific charges being may e.
Mr. DAVIS. I am informed from various sources that the instances of corruption in relation to cotton and the bringing out of cotton are very numerous, and that they are of the most flagitious character, and upon the largest scale. A friend of mine in Kentucky who was engaged in cotton operations was in the whole of the West and Sout west. He spoke from his own personal knowledge, as he said, and with a solitary exception, in the sweep of 1,000 miles, he did not know a solitary agent Military or civil, of the Government that had been brought into contact with cottonthat had not been corrupted by it. He told me that General Canby was the only solitary man in the sweep of 1,000 miles that had been connected with cotton transactions who had not been corrupted. by it, and vhe knew the fact. There are gentlemen in this city now that have given me information of the most extensive and flagitious corruptions of the agents connected with the sale and collection of cotton, these agent s being in the service of the U.S. f the honorable Senfrom Ohio desires, as I do not doubt that he does desire, that light should be thrown in upon this subject, and if he will get his friends to agree to raise a committee to investigate cotton frauds, cotton swindling, and cotton speculations generally, upon a specification of the charges, I will promise to bring them in.
Mr. DAVIS. If I am to be remitted to any Dept of the Government I shall expect no success in this investigation. The way to reach it with certainty is by congressional investigation, and it is by the investigation being intrusted to the friends of the investiation. Let a committee be raisedas used to e the principle in relation to all committees the majority of which are friendly to the object of the investigation. I will give one example of these frauds. There is a gentleman nowm the service of the Treasury Dept of the U.S. who is a cotton agent, and has been down the Mississippi and up the Red river engagel in purchasin cotton and bringing it out, an he told me fiat General Taylor, who is in the service in the Mississipi region of country, had lawlessly and fraudu ently seized upon his cotton and had it appropriated out in such a manner as to reap himse fa consider able portion of the avails of the sale of that cotton. But I understand that the Senfrom Ohio is receding from his position. All I want is for the Senator and the Senate to stand up to this position: let the Senate raise a fair committee to investigate any cases that may be specified, and let. the friends of the investigation have the strength of the committee. It is certainly not a very fair way of investigating charges of fraud, or any other matter of maladministration, to place the investigation in the hands of men who wish to stifle it. If the honorable Senator and his friends, the majority in the Senate, will stand up to what I understood to be his position in the 1st instancethat when there are cases specified of fraud in cotton transactions they will raise a committee to investigate these transactions, and a fair committeeI will ask nothing more; and when such a committee reports in favor of the exoneration of men to whom these frauds have been ims puted, I shall be among the 1st to retract those charges.
Mr. SHERMAN. I have but a word to say in reply to the Senfrom Kentucky. The rule that I adopted when a member of the HoRep was this: when alle gations of fraud were made against the Officers of the Administrationthen a Democratic administration, and I thought a very bad one I refused to have anything to do with them until specific charges were made, reduced to writin, and signed by responsible)urties. Then I undertook to investigate the c arges, and then a committee was appointed by a Dem ocratic HoRep. of which I was chairman, and the majority of which was not friendly to the investigation; but the investigation was had, a fair investigation, and various matters were disclosed. Now, if the Senfrom Kentucky desires to investigate these char cs, if he says to us that he is satisfied that frau has been committed in the cotton operations of the Government, I am perfectly willing to vote for a resolution to be introduced by him organizing a committee to investigate these charges, of which he will undoubtelly be the chairman; and if he can discover any fraud in the operations of the cotton agents of the Government, I shall be most happy to sustain him in punishing the Officers engaged in that fraud.
Mr. DAVIS. Will the gentleman permit me to add one word?
Mr. FESSENDEN. The gentlemen from Kentucky and Ohio have addressed the Senate 3 times apiece on this matter, and I think I ought to have a turn by and by.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. CLARK in the chair.) Does the Senfrom Maine yield the floor to the Senfrom Kentucky?
Mr. DAVIS. I will merely remark to the honorable Senfrom Ohio that, with his permission, I will, cmbrae e other matters be sides cotton frauds in an auxiliary resolution. I know that in the State of Kentucky officers in the employment of the GOvernment have extorted money from the people to the amount of 1,000s and tens of1,000s, and indeed 100s of 1,000s of dollars, in the name, and ostensibly for the benefit of the U.S., and the mass of that money, I have reason tobelleve, has gone into the pockets of these officers, and notadollar of it into the Treasury. I hope that the honorable Senators disposition to investigate will allow me to bring in other subjects.
Mr. CONNESS and Mr. MCDOUGALL addressed the chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. CLARK in the chair.) The Chair will recognize the Senfrom California on the left of the Chair, [Mr. Cossnss.]
Mr. CONNESS. I move to postpone the further consideration of this resolution, and that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the motion to reconsider the vote on the passage of the bill (H.R.No. 135) to extend the time for the withdrawal of goods for consumption from public store and bonded warehouse, and for other purposes, which was pending yesterday when the morning hour expired.
Mr. DAVIS. If the honorable Senfrom California will withdraw his motion, I will not detain the Senate more than a moment, and will then consent to it.
Mr. CONNESS. The morning hour has nearly expired, and the bill to which I refer is of great consequence. I hepe we will be able to get to its consideration. However, I will give way to the Senator if he will only occupy a moment.
Mr. DAVIS. I was merely going to say Mr. MCDOUGALL. I believe Iain next entitled to the floor, if my colleague waives it to an bod. I addressed the Chair when he did. [he IRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will feel bound to accord the floor to the Senfrom California, if he claims it, the Senfrom Kentucky having spoken twice in the same debate.
Mr. DAVIS. I have no objection to any gentleman occuing the floor who wishes it.
Mr. CONNESS. I move to Iay this resolution on the table. The motion was not agreed to.
The PRESIDENT protem are. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the special order, which is House resolution No. 51, upon which the Senfrom Maryland [Mr. Joussos] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. I ask the Senfrom Maryland to yield to me for one moment.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. I wish to be understood on this subject. I do not approve of this resolution. Probably my objection to the resolution may have been sufficiently stated. I do not believe in Senators or Representatives belonging to a police commission. I would not vote for the resolution under any circumstances, because I am opposed to it upon principle. I think that the office of a Senator is something above a police officer. That is all I desire to say. APPORTIONMENT or REPRESENTATION. The Senate, as in ComWhole, resumed the consideration of the JtResolution (H.R.No. 51) proposing to amend the conending question being on the amendment of Mr. Hux nnason to the amendment proposed by Mr. SUMNER.
Mr. CONNESS. Willthe honorable Senator at this point allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. CONNESS. Suppose one of these States, the State of NCarolina for instance, if this amendment should be adopted, should enact that a property qualification should be required for the exercise of the franchise, not applicable to the colored people alone, but applicable to all alike and such an amount was established as would lead to the exclusion of a large number of the colored population necessarily from the polls, would not that State, notwithstanding this amendment, be entitled to representahon for its entire population, black an white, inas much as the exclusion was not on account of race or color, but a property qualification applying universally? I ask the Senator for information.
Mr. JOHNSON. Unquestionably; and I have said nothing that could be construed as denying that proposition. None are to be deducted from the number which is to regulate the representation except the entire class against whom some qualification is required for the exercise of the right of franchise that is not required of the white race. If the same apolitication is required for both, of course are is no distinction; and the honorable members question therefore is answered, as I think he will see bylooking at the terms of the resolution. What I said was, that as the franchise is now reulated in NewYork, unless she changes it, either by abolishing the freehold qualification now demanded, or by requiring a like qualification upon the part of the white voter, the whole of the colored population of NewYork will be deducted in the estimate.
Mr. CONNESS. Will the honorable senator allow me one instant?
Mr. CONNESS. I wish to say that I did not propound the interrogatory with a view of questioning the correctness of what the Senator had stated; but at this point I desired a discussion by him of the effect of such a statute in one of these States under this amendment; and with that view, I at the question.
Mr. SUMNER. May I interrupt the Senator there?
Mr. JOHNSON. It was my purpose, Mr. President, before ceasing to trouble the Senate, to allude to the proposition to which the honor able member has just called my special attention; but I can dispose of it now in a word or two.
Mr. SUMNER. I hope the Senator will pardon me; butI thought he was passing from that branch of the question; otherwise I should not have interrupted him.
Mr. JOHh SON. Perhaps it was more connected with this branch of my argument than any other, but it was not the branch of it in which I had proposed to refer to that proposition.
Mr. SUMNER. Then I beg the Senators pardon, and I hope he will go on with his argument without reerence to m interruptiOn.
Mr. STEWART. Allow me to suggest that under this amendment I do not think Chinamen can be counted.
Mr. JOHNSON. Certainly they will be counted in the whole number.
Mr. STEWART. But notin the basis of representation under this amendment. I think this same rule would operate on Chinese as on negroes, for they are “ colored.” The provision of 51s amendment is in reference to exclusions on account of race or color.
Mr. JOHNSON. You are very much mistaken. Your State will be the 1st to say, ” We are entitled to just as many representatives after this amendment passes as before.” If you think your peeple will be satisfied with losing any part of their representation, I submit it to you, perhaps youhad better reconsider before you give this vote, because you may lose, and will lose.
Mr. STEWART. I think the Pacific coast would lose representation under this amendment.
Mr. JOHNSON. You would either lose or you would not lose. If you would not lose, it is because you would not fall within the proviso; and it is unjust for you to apply to us a provision which you are not willing to apply to yourselves. If you do lose because you fall within the proviso, then look to it.
Mr. KlRKWOOD. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. KIRKWOOD. I like to hear the Senfrom Maryland argue a question, and he has argued this question on he basis of fairness. When we propose to change the organic law, of course what has been the organic law cannot be used as an argument why it should be continued as such. Igask the Senator now to consider for a moment a question of fairness. Iowa, which I in part represent, has about the same population as Maryland; our people are nearlyal white people, whereas 1/3rd or one 4th of these of may land are colored people. Now, in fairness, i the colored men in Marvland cannot vote, if they are unfit to vote. why should they be counted in the representation against an equal number of white men in Iowa who can vote 1 In other words, in fair ness. why should 2 Marylauders count equal to 3 Iowaians?
Mr. JOHNSON. Will the honorable member tell me why it is fair that Iowa should be represented in part because of her female population?
Mr. KIRKWOOD. Maryland is; and it is equaL
Mr. JOHNSON. I know; but why is it that you are entitled to be represented because of your female population? t is not because you consider them competent to vote, for you do not let them vote.
Mr. KIRKWOOD. I did not know that the Senfrom Maryland was such an adept in the Yankee plan of answering one question by asking another. To me and to my people the proposition seems very plain. This matter of the inequality of representation in the more popular branch of Congress has been a matter of complaint for a long time. Our people cannot understand why in fairness, when we are oing back to lay the foundation of our organic aw, 2 gentlernen in Marylandand I respect them as highl as the Senator does, because I am myself a Aarylander by birthshall count in representation and in voting equal to 3 gentlemen in Iowa, or why one white man in SCarolina should count equal to 2 white men in Iowa. This is an idea which the senator does not seem to have looked at. If these men are not fit to vote, why should they count against us who are fit to vote?
Mr. JOHNSON. I understand the honorable member, and I have answered him, I think, by anticiation, by calling his attention to what Mr. hibdison said was the received opinion of the Convention, and I do not think any member on this floor is higher authority than Mr. Madison; I speak with all respect to my friendfrom Massac usetts: “It is not contended that the number of peoplein each State ought not to be the standardfor regulating the proportion of those who are to represent the people of each State.”
Mr. KIRKWOOD. That was the argument in determining the present constitution; but in an attempt to change it, we must look for a different rule.
Mr. KIRKWOOD. We would feel some objection, if we feltin regard to negroes as the Senator does, to having our women balanced off all the time by negroes in Maryland.
Mr. JOHNSON. But you have not the prejudice.
Mr. SUMNER. He did in all his arguments and speeches.
Mr. SUMNER. May I interrupt the Senator?
Mr. SUMNER. My argument is, that if, to carry out the irohibition of slavery and to complete its abolition it shall be regarded as necessary to give the franchise, it is within the power of Congress to give it and now I ask mfiy honorable friend to give the Senate the ben et of his opinion on this precise point. If Congress under that clause can secure equality of civil rights, may it not, a dforhorz, secure equality in political rights, no or that clause? I do not ask the Senator whether in his opinion it may under that clause give equality in civil rights. I assume that. Tmost sincerely accept it, and the Senator, knows very well that the Senate has acted accordingly. Senators all about me have assumed that power; and now I ask the Senhtor, as a constitutional law yer, to whom we refer every day, whether if you can do the one you cannot do the other?
Mr. JOHNSON. I answer that in the negative very decidedly, and have only time to give a few reasons ibr it. There are certain rights which belong to a free man. He has a right to contract; he has a right to support himself; he has a right to do everything necessary to make him a free man, or rather to enable him to enjoy life as a free man, that another free man can do; but he is just as much a free man without having the right to exercise the political right of franchise as heis with the right; for otherwise the result would follow which I have just stated, that there are a great many who are not free men now in Massachusetts. The whole female sex not only are not, but never have been, free women. The whole object of this clause is not to give to congress the right to interfere with the power of the States over the political status of their population, but to prevent the States from interferin with the right of one who has been a slave an remains in the State, to do what a white man can do under the general laws.
Mr. FESSENDEN. To secure the rights essential to freedom.
Mr. JOHNSON. Certainly, the rights essen tial to freedom, and nothing else.
Mr. JOHNSON. That is begging the question.
Mr. SUMNER. Is not the franchise more essential than the other?
Mr. JOHNSON. No. I considered myself a free man a good while before I was 21 years of a e, and I had not the right of franchise. I should consider myself a free man, if I was to go to Massachusetts, during the time that I was living out the residence which her laws require to enable me to vote; and I should consider myself a free man, too, I If could not read the constitution in English. How essential is it to secure freedom in Massachusetts that Congress should interfere with that? It is absolutely necessary. Now, as to this “appropriate legislation;" the honorable member has referred more than once to the opinion of Chief Justice Marshall in the case o McCulloch vs. The State of Maryland. What was that? The question, with reference to which the observation alluded to by the Senator was made by the Chief Justice was, whether the Congress of the U.S. a had the power to establish a Bank of the U.S. They came to the conclusion that it had, and why? upon several grounds: 1st, that it was include within the power to regulate commerce; and 2ndly, that it was included in the power to collect taxes; not that it was necessary, not that commerce could not on and taxes could not be collected without it, but if Congress thought that such an institution was an appropriate one to enable them to have a better regulation of commerce and to collect the taxes and preserve the money of the U.S. better, and with more facility than they could without it, they had a right to select that institution. If the honorable member had read the whole of that decision
Mr. JOHNSON. No doubt he has; if he has he must have foundbe has not cited that passagethat the learned Chief Justice says it must not be entirely foreign to the object placed within the legislative power of Congress; it must be connected with, if not absolutely necessary to, the exercise of the power. Now he is begging the whole question when he says, that it is absolutely necessary, in order to may e a man a free man, that on should give him the right to vote by legislation. That assumes that every free man has a right to vote. Is that true? The honorable member from Maine [Mr.] the other day said and said what he is borne out in by all the authorities it is not necessary to go to Cicero and Socrates and the many illustrious names that came so eloquently from the Senfrom Massachusetts; you find it everywherethat the right of suffrage, the right of voting, depends upon governmental regulation; there is nothing innate in it. The question who is to exercise it is submitted to the discretion of the Government. Shall a man without property vote? Every State in the Union at one time said no. Shall a man without property hold office? Every State said no. Should the slaves vote? Every State said no. Shall the alien vote? Almost every State said no. In some of the States they are admitted to the right of suffrage, and I think improperly in any, as a matter of expediency, but not in all; but are they any the less free men? Is any inherent and natural right violated by such an exclusion? Certainly not. The right grows out of political institutions, and exists, or does not exist, just as the Government who establishes them thinks proper to grant it or to deny it. I could speak much longer upon this subject, but I am troubling the Senate and exhausting myself. Now, a word or 2 as to the of this proposition. You think it will produce peace and quiet. I hold your opinions, in as much respect as I hold the anyone; but I entertain a very different opinion.
Mr. JOHNSON. As to this particular amendment of the constitution?
Mr. FESSENDEN. They do not put them in command of the Army.
Mr. JOHNSON. They meet them as broth ers. They do not put them in command of our Army, but they would have no objection to it, I am sure, because they have entire and absolute confidence in their honor. But you are not putting them in command of the Army. The onorable member and no member of the Senate has a right to say any southern man would be sent into this Chamber and take the oath that you require and not observe it or any oath that you may administer.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Theyhavetaken an oath and broken it.
Mr. JOHNSON. But as long as that law exists he must decide and nobody else. The act of 1793 has not been reealed, and all the subsequent legislation auxi iary to it is also upon your statutebook unrepealed.
Mr. HOWE. I take it it has not passed be ond the power of Congress to resume it. JOH SON. That is another matter. HOWE. Under the constitution the power belon s to Congress.
Mr. JOHNSON. But once executed, it does not belon to Congress. but now let me apply it to the onorable mcmber from Wisconsin. Has not Congress exercised the power? Have you not admitted all these States into the Union oug ago? You say they are out. I say they are not. That is a question to be tried.
Mr. HOWE. That is not the issue between the Senfrom may land and myself. I never used the expression that any of these States were out of the Union. I have, on the contrary, constantly protested that nothing had gone out of the Union.
Mr. JOHNSON. I am glad that I misunder stood the honorable member. Then they are not. How did they get in? By being recognized by congress; and if they are recognized by Congress, how is Congress to get them out? It is a power that is exhausted when it is 1st executed. Once in the are in forever.
Mr. HOWE. I no erstand that is your position.
Mr. JOHNSON. That is my position. They are in forever, so far as Congress is concerned; but whether in or not, one thing is certain: we have a right to receive them into this Chamber.
Mr. SUMNER. suppose they get out of rac tical relations with the government, what then ?
Mr. JOHNSON. They can resume their prac tical relations. Heaven forbid that a man the moment he stops any particular relation is supposed to he never thereafter capable of resum in it.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Both sides must agree, must they not?
Mr. JOHNSON. The honorable member from Maine says with the agreement of both sides. Did we agree that they should go out? I have heard the honorable Senator say from time to time that not only we did not agree, but we would not admit it, and we have been carrying ona war now for 4 or live years, costing countless treasure and half a million of lives to get them in, and I thought we had accomplished it, and I was never more surprised in my life than, when I thought we had succeeded “ in the object of the war, to find gentlemen advocating a position which made us a great deal worse 011turn when we began it. However, that has nothing to do with the purpose I had in view whenI was interrupted. Iwant them in. I think it is the only way in which you can pacify the country. am not afraid of them.
Mr. FESSENDEN. The honorable Senator misapprehcnded my question, and I will state it now in order that there may be no misunderstanding on the part of the reporters. My friendfrom Massachusetts putthe question, suppose they are out of practical relations to the Union, what then? he. reply of the honorableSenator who is speaking is that they may 770 Feleufihgi resume them. I ask, may they resume them at their own will entirely, or does it require the assent of the other party with whom those prac tical relations have been dissolved? That is my question.
Mr. JOHNSON. I say under the circumstances they can, just as much as the other party. Each party as the same right to resume that the other has. You do not eny to congress the right to resume relations with them.
Mr. FESSENDEN. You cannot force it upon them.
Mr. JOHNSON. You can enforce it upon them, or on can
Mr. FESSENDEN. You cannot compel them to send Sens&Reps here if they do not choose to do so.
Mr. JOHNSON. That is the fault of the original constitution. You say they have no organized governments. Have they not Governors and members of their Legislatures and of their judiciary? What branch of government is it that they are without? How are their people now governed? Bly you? No, except very partially. How areal their domestic concerns regulated? How are all their contracts enforced? How are theirmarriages solemrnzed? How is property conve ed? B yourlaws? No. Ily the State laws. ct although they are clothed with all the attributes of government, and just as absolutely clothed with them as they were before the war commenced, you saythey are not governments within the sense of the constitution because the moment you admit that they are State governments in the sense of the constitution, then they have the right to be represented here. But I have wandered from the purpose I had in view. What I wanted to say wasand I say it now in conclusionthat to quiet the country to reinstate it in the prosperity which it had and which it has temporarily lost, to bring us all together again as one family, endowed with the capacity 0t winning a name which will make us the envy of the world, let us take them to our bosom, trust them, and as I believe in my existence, you will never have occasion to reret it. You will, if the event occurs, look bac to your particiation in it in future time with unming edde ght, because you will be able to date from it a prosperity and a national fame of which the world furnishes no example, and on will be able to date from it the absence o all cause of differences which can hereafter exist, which will kee us together as one people, looking to one estiny and anxious to achieve one renown.
Mr. CONNESS. If it would not trouble the Senator, I estimate very highly the value of his opinion upon the question propose to suggest, and I would like to have it. n speaking of the relation of those States to the Government now, did I understand the honorable Senator to mean the State governments that now exist in those States, or the governments that existed there prior to the rebellion?
Mr. JOHNSON. They havesright to change their government. You know that is an inherent right. g
Mr. CONNESS. Have they changed their government? Have they not organized the government now existing under comulsion?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir. I o not so understand it as a question of fact.
The PRESIDIN OFFICER, (Mr. HARRIS in the chair.) The question is on the amendment of the Senfrom Missouri[Mr. Hes nnasos to the amendment of the Senfrom Hassac usetts, Mr. SUMNER]
Mr. SHERMAN. I understand my friendfrom Missouridoes not desire to speak upon the pending question this evenin, and if it is the pleasure of the Senate to go into executive essron I will make that motion.
Mr. GRIMES. With the permission of the Senator, I desire to move that the Senate now pIroceed to the consideration of House hill o. 33.
Mr. SHERMAN. Very well. For the purpose of enabling the Senfrom Missourito obody doubts that; and l have the floor on Tuesday morning, I will move that the pending resolution be postponed until Tuesday at one oclock, and be made the special order for that hour. The motion was agreed to. ADJOURNMENT to MONDAY. On motion of Mr. WILSON, it was Ordered, That when the Sonata adiourns today, it be to most on Monday next.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. MCPHERSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed the following bills; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: A bill (H.R.No. 264) granting a pension to Mrs. Altazera L. Wilcox, of Chenango county, in the State of NewYork; A bill (H.R.No. 265) granting a pension to John Hoffman, of Madison county, in the State of NewYork Abill (H.R.No. 266) granting h pension to Mrs. Elizabeth Fogg, of the State of Maine; an A bill (H.R. No.267) granting a pension to Virginia K. V. Moore. The message further announced that the HoRep had concurred in the amendments of the Senate to the amendment of the House to the bill (S.No.60) to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau.
Mr. GRIMES. I now move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of House bill No. 33. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (H.R.No. 33) for the relief of Charlotte Bence, widow of Philip H. Bence, late catain of company F, 30th rement Iowa vo unteerinfantry, which directs the SecyInterior to place the name of Charlotte Bence, of Bloomfield, Davis county, Iowa, widow of Captain Philip H. Bence, of company F, 30th regiment of Iowa volunteers, on the pension roll, at the rate of 20 dollars permonth, for and during her widow good.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Before the bill passesto its 3rd reading, I will inquire whatt is case is. Is there any repOrt about it? Does itcome from a committee?
Mr. GRIMES. Yes, sir; it passed the HoRep, and met the approval of the ComPensions in the House; was sent to the ComPensions of the Senate, and has been reported back by that committee“ without amendment. The chairman of the committee is here and will explain it.
Mr. TRUMBULL. If it is not establishing any new precedent, I have no objection to it. Does it come within the rule of other pensions?
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. Yes, sir, it comes within the rule we have established With regard to those killed on detailed service and furlough. This man was sent to transact some business in Iowa and was shot down while on his Way home by uerrillas.
Mr. TRUMBULL. Is it not alarger pension than is granted to most widows?
Mr. LANE, of Indiana. It is a captains pension.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I will inquire if the wid ows of all captains receive the same pension.
Skip Skip The bill was ordered to a 3rdy reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. collar or cums.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I move that the Senate proceed to consider Senate bill No.83. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in ComWhole, proceeded to consider the bill (S.No.33) in relation to the Court. of Claims. It proposes to repeal the 14thsection of an act approved March 3, 1803, entitled “An act to amend an act to es against the U.S. ” approved February 24, 1865; and from the final judgment, or decree, in all cases heretofore decided by the Court of Claims of the charactermentioned in the 5th section of the act of March 3, 1863, an a penl is to be allowed to the SCOTUS at any time within 90 days after the passage of this act, except in cases where the amounts found due oy the court have been aid at the Treasury; and the regular session of the Court of Claims is here after to commence on the 1st Monday of December in each ear.
Mr. GRIMES. will inquire of the Senfrom Illinois what is this 14thsection of the former act that is proposed to be repealed?
Mr. GRIMES. Who gave the Opinion of the court?
Mr. TRUMBULL. That opinion was an nounced by Chief Justice Chase. The law specially provided for apeals. The have refused to entertain appea s; but I anderstand if that 14thsection were out of the wa, the would entertain apeals. I do not thi, an I did not think at the time, that the 14th section altered the previous provisions of the act; but the court have come to a different conclusion, and regard it as vesting a sort of discretionary power in the SecyTreasury. The sole object of this bill is to remove this obstacle to taking appeals to the Supreme Court. I say the sole object; but another clause in the bill fixes the commencement of the term of the court on the 1st Mon day of December instead of the 1st Monday of October. It does not make any difference in the old law, except to repeal the 14thsection. tablish a court for the investigation of claims
Mr. DAVIS. My own opinion iskand alwaya i866. 771 has been, that every debtor ought to pay his debts. If the honorable chairman of the ComJudiciary would introduce a bill authorizing every creditor of the Government to pursue the Government just like a private individual, and that the Government, when a judgment was had a instit, should at once pay the judgment debt, think it would be the best policy that could be adopted. Iknow of no higher o ligation than to pay a debt due from the Government to its creditors. It to me is a farce, adenial of justice, for a government to owe honest debts and to allow no mode for coercing payment. For myself, I am in favor of that obligation of the Government as far as practicable. I think, in relation to the bill now under consideration, that whenever there is a judgment of the Court of Claims against the Government for a debt, the law ought to instruct the Treasury officers at once to pay it. The idea of a Government that is intended to protect all people and to secure to them what are their rights, being bound by no practical obligation for the payment of its debts as to my mind always been an absurdity an a piece of high injustice. I be e, therefore, that the honorable chairman of e ComJudiciary will propose an amendment to this law requiring the Treasury Officers, when ever there is a judgment in favor of a citizen against the Government for a debt, to pay in ctanter the amount of the judgment.
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senfrom Kentucky certainly will have no objection to this bill. It may not o as far as e desires, but the very object of this bill is to repeal a clause which the Supreme Court construe as giving a sort of discretion to the Treasury Dept to pay a judgment or not. Now, I desire to repeal that, so as to take away any such implication. It was upon that very ground that the Supreme Court decided that they would not entertain jurisdiction of an a pen]. We wish to remove that, so as to may e the judgment what the law intended it to be, a final judgment.
Mr. GUTHRIE. The reason very often why judgments are not aid is because there is no appropriation for t cm, and the remedy would be to make appropriations. I know personally that a tgreat many judgments are not paid because ere is no appropriation out ofwhich they can be paid, and it might be that if your Court of Claims worked very fast, they would draw upon what you provide to pay other things. In looking at this matter, there ore, it is right to look at your means and put your officers in possession of them.
Mr. DAVIS. I have no doubt thd the sig gestion of my colleague is alto ether correct, and I would remedy the defect ofwant of appropriations by giving the same chancery proceedings in favor of a creditor a inst the Government that I would have in avor of a creditor against an individua debtor.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I will ask the Senfrom Kentucky one question, with his permission, and it is this: if a party should present his claim to the Court of laims, and that court should give a very close construction to the law or the contract upon which the claim is based and reject it, an the party thought he had a good case, would not the Senate e willing to give an appeal to the Supreme Court? That is one of the purposes of this bill.
Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir; and I would be willing to vote a provision to make it mandatory upon the court to entertain the appeal. I would not leave it to their discretion at all.
Mr. HENDRICKS. This bill does not leave a discretion.
Mr. DAVIS. I understand the objection to the existing law, as made by the chairman of the ComJudiciary, to be that the Supreme Court have assumed it as a principle of the law, that where it is discretionary With the Treasury officer to pay the debt or not the court will not entertain an appeal. I would be willing to modify the law by reairing the court to cutertain the apeal. Iwou d not allow them to assume any such position, and in that way to bafile the right of acitizen who thought he had not received justice in the Court of Claims from the benefit of his appeal. But the objection in my mind is this: that whereacourt of the U.S., be it the Court of Claims or any other court, have rendered a judgment in favor of a citiien against the Government, the Government should be required to pay it, and the officers of the Treasury who disburse the public moneys should be required to make payment upon the rendition of the judgment; and if there is not on hand money with which to pay the judgment, the creditor of the Government should have the same right, by seques tration and other chancery proceedings, to seize upon the property or funds of the Government that he would) have to seize upon the property or funds of an individual. I want the Government to set the highest example of the payment of debts, and I Want the Government to beheld to the most direct and reasonable responsibility for the payment of all its debts to the citizens of the C U.S. I think that is the duty of the Government toward every citizen.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I would prefer that this bill should lie over for the present. I should like to have an opportunity to look at it. I have some doubt:1 out it myself, and unless my friendfrom Illinois is very anxious to have it considered today, I prefer that it should go over.
Mr. FESSENDEN. What does that have to do with the question of appeals?
Mr. TRUMBULL. The Supreme Court have decided that it gives the SecyTreasury a supervisory power to pay the judgment or not.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Even if it does, that does not affect the question of apeal.
Mr. TRUMBULE. They say that it affects it in this way: that the judment of the Court of Claims is not a final u gment; that under the 14thsection of this law, the Court of Claims is a mere commission to examine, a sort of board of auditors, and their judgment not bein final, they are not a court that can enter judgments because they are subject to Deptal supervision under the 14thsection. Now, there is no such supervision exercised; it is not in point of fact done; but the judgments are ai out of the appropriation which we may e; and the sole object of this bill is torepeal that 14thsection. When it was moved in the Senate as an amendm entI recollect the circumstance very well I thought it had no effect whatever, and I recollect making no objection to having it put upon the bill; but it has presented a very serious difficult. The object of this bill is simply to repeal that 14thsection, so that the Supreme Court will take jurisdiction of the cases. ow, if my friendfrom Maine wishes the bill to go over so that he may have an opportunity to examine it, I have no sort of objection.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I should like to have an opportunit to examine it.
Mr. TRUMEULL. Iain entirely willing that it shall go over if any Senator wishes that course taken. I move, therefore, that any further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow. The motion was agreed to. HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. The following bills from the HoRep were severally read twice by their titles, and referred to the ComPensions: A bill (H.R.No. 264) granting a pension to Mrs. Altazera L. Wilcox, of Chenango county, in the State of NewYork; A bill H.R.No. 265) granting a pension to John Ho man, of Madison county, in the State of NewYork; A bill (H.R.No. 266) granting a pension to M13. Elizabeth Fogg, of the State of Maine; an A bill (H.R.No. 267) granting a pension to Virginia K. V. Moore. STURGEON BAY SHIPEANAL.
Mr. WLSON. I move to take u the bill (S. No.85) granting to the State ofWisconsin 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, which has been reported by the ComPubLands. The motion was a eed to; and the Secretary commenced the resing of the bill.
Mr. RAMSEY. I move that the Senate adjourn. The motion was agreed to; there being, on a divisionayes 21, noes 10; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Fai February 9, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by Rev. B. W. CHIDLAW. The Journal of yesterday was read and aproved.
The SPEAKER. This being Friday, the 1st business in order is the call of committees for reports of a private nature, beginning With the ComInvalidPens, where the call rested on last Friday. ADVERSE imronrs.
Mr. BENJAMIN. from the ComInvalidPens, made adverse reports in the 772 Februaiyfi, following cases; which were laid upon the table and ordered to be printed: The petition of Ifbnry Pease and others, pray in for pensions and he petition of citizens of Alleghany county, Pennsyvania, asking for pensions. ALTAZERA L. WILCOX.
Mr. BENJAMIN, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill pension to Mrs. Altazera L. Wilcoxg, raontfineglae nango NewYork; which was read a 1st and 2ndtime.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I am instructed by the committee to ask for the consideration of this bill at the present time., The bill was read at length. It provides that there shall be anted to Mrs. Altazera L. will cox, widow o a private of company B, 114th regiment of NewYork volunteers, a pension at the rate of 8 dollars permont, to commence from and after the passage of thisact, and to continue during her widowhood.
Mr. ISENJAMIN mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. JOHN HOFFMAN.
Mr. BENJAMIN also. from the same committee, reported a bill granting a pension to John Hoffman, of Madison county, in the State of NewYork; which was read a 1st and 2nd time.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I am instructed by the committee to ask the consideration of this bill at this time. The bill was read at length. It provides that there shall be granted to John Hofliuan, of Madison county, NewYork, a pension at the rate of 8 dollars permonth, to commence from and after the passage of this act, and to continue during his natural life.
Mr. SPALDING. Let the report be read, that we may understand the necessity for this bill. The report was read. It states that John Hoffman enlisted in the U.S. marine service at Philadelphia on the 16th of Au ust, 1827. While serving on the Gram us at ensacola, he was twice admitted to t 9 hospital there for disease contracted while in the line of his duty; and he was finally discharged at NewYork on the 6th of May, 1830. It is well established by the testimony of respectable ersous that the petitioner has never recovered from the disease be contracted on shipboard while in the line of his duty. He is aged and in very des titute circumstances, and the committee therefore report a bill for his relief.
Skip skip The bill was then orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. BENJAMIN mtRtv the bill was passed, on the table. Agreed to. ISABELLA POGG.
Mr. BENJAMIN, from the ComInvalidPens, also reported a bill granting aipenson to Mrs. Isabella Fogg, of the State a Maine; which was read a 1st and 2nd me.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I am instructed by the committee to ask for the consideration oIy this bill at this time. The bill was read atlength. It provides that a pensron shall be granted, at the rate of 8 dollars permonth, to Mrs. Isabella Fogg, of the State of Maine, to commence from and “after the passage of this act, and to continue during her natural life; she having been totally disa bled while acting as nurseon board a U.S. hospital boat nearLouisville, Kentucky. Mr. WASHBURN,of maudehusetts. I no tice that this bill is not in the form usual with bills of this character, which generally provide that the pension shall continue during widow hood. therefore move to amend the bill by striking out the words “natural life” and inserting the word “ widowhood.”
Mr. BENJAMIN. I think I can satisfy the Gentfrom Massachusetts [ML Wasnnvss] that his amendment should not prevail. I am aware that it is the general policy of the Government in granting pensions to confiue them to the widowhood of the parties. That, however, is in the case of rsons receiving pensions in consequence of being widows of those who have lost their lives in the service of their country. But this pension is proposed to be granted on account of the services the party herself has rendered; not because she is the widow of a soldier or sailor, or of anyone who has lost his life in the service, but in consequence of her having been herself disabled while in the service. Hence the committee were in favor of “ nting her a pension during her natural life, us placing her upon the same footing, in that respect, as if we were granting a pension to a soldier or a sailor. She appears to have been in the service as a nurse, and it is in consequence of disability incurred in that position that this pension is asked and grante by the committee.
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. This is not a matter in which I am particularly interested, but I would suggest that the principle the House has adopted in all this class of cases is to grant the pension during widowhood. The object of the pension is to give support to the widow, and if that support is provided at any future time by marriage, the necessity for the pension ceases. I only make this suggestion from the fact that the action of the House has always been to give a pension to a woman during her widowhood. Mr. STROUSE. I desire to ask the Gentfrom Missouria sin is question. I desire to inquire whether this o pass of persons are not provided for in the general law the same as males who have been in the service? f Mr. BENJAMIN. They are not provided o Mr.
Mr. JOHNSON. I think they ought to be provided for by general law. There is a large class of persons who have rendered service in this way, and who are no doubt entitled to the bounty of the Government.
Mr. "BENJAMIN. We have had the matter under consideration, and the law, we think, will undoubtedly be extended so as to embrace employe s of the Government.
Mr. FARNSWORTH. I trust, Mr. Speaker, that the amendment of the Gentfrom Massachusetts will not prevai. This is not, as I understand, the case of a woman who asks a pension on account of the disability or death of er husband. The pension is asked on nbeouut ofadisability incurred by the lady herself while acting asa nurse attending on our sick soldiers. I see no reason why a woman who has contracted a disability in the service of the Government during this war is not as much entitled to a pension for life as a man who has contracted disability in the same way. In the case of a woman who applies for a pension on account of the death of her husband or father or brother, a different principle, of course, a plies. The pension in such a case is grante upon the principle that the woman is dependent upon er husband or father or brother for support, and when she marries she ceases to be thus dependent. But in such a case as this, where the woman herself has been in the service of the Government, and has while so engaged become disabled, she should have a pension for life. Thus far I am in favor of “womens rights.”
Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. I desire simply that the House shall understand this question. There is one important distinction which gentlemen seem to overlook. In the case of a person disabled, the general law gives him a pension during that disability; and when ever the disability ceasesit may cease in the course of a year or twothe pension ceases. Butwhenever we pass a special act, that act continues in force during the lifetime of the person receiving the pension, whether the disability continues or not. Now, the controlling principle of all our legislation in regard to pensions granted to widows has been that such pensions are granted to aid the recipients to obtain a livelihood during their widowhood, and that in case of the remarriage of a widow, the necessity for her obtaining a livelihood by her own exertions ceases. Hence the pension, according to the principle of our pension law, continues only during Widowhood. My reason for offering my amendment is that I obJect to the provision of the bill in this respect, because it is contrary to the general rule which has been established by the House, limiting these pensions to the wi owhood of the recipient. only desire that the principle established in previous cases shall be followed in this instance. If there is to be any change in this respect, it should, it seems to me, be a change in the general law. We should not say that in 9 cases out of ten the pension shall be during widowhood, and that in the 10th case it sh be during the natural life of the party. The object in such cases as this should be, I think, not to grant a certain stipend during the life of the pensioner, but to furnish her assistance so long as she may need it; and if she changes her condition so that she no longer requires assistance, the pension, according to the whole policy of our pension laws, should cease. The amendment which I have offered is in accordance with our previous legislation, and I think it should be adopted.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I call for the reading of the report accompanying the bill. The report was read.
Mr. BENJAMIN. I desire to say afewwords in reply to the Gentfrom Massachusetts. In my Opinionand it is the opinion in which the committee shareit would make no difference as to the granting of this pension, if this lady now had a husband. She erself has remdered the service; she herself has suffered the disability. I will add that her disability is total; but notwithstanding that, she would, by being placed on the pension rolls, come within the rule adopted at the Pension Office, and be obliged to undergo a close examination, as every other pensioner is obliged to do. Should she erehance recover, Iaprehend the pension wi cease. As I said liefore, we are granting this pension in consequence of the disability she has received, as rewall for the services she has rendered, an not in consequence efthe services of a bus band or son, or any other person. This being the case, we cannot see why any distinction should be made between a soldier, one of the male sex, to whom this congress would grant a pension, and one of the other sex. I trust, therefore, the amendment of the gentleman will not prevail, and that the House will grant the pension asked for during her natural life, whether she marries or not. She has rendered service, cEective servicc and the fact of that service has been attested by some of the most promi nent officers who have served during the war. They. certify to the assiduit with which she attended to the wounded soldiers during all the campaigns of the army of the Potomac, and the other armies of the country. Before the close of the war she was disabled in this way. She is totally disabled. There is no possibility of her recovery, and but little proba ility of her living for many years. I trust that the amendment will not revail.
Mr. HENDERSON. Mr. Speaker, Iunder stand that this bill asks for a pension in consideration of her own services, and not in consideration of the service of her husband. Now, I do not see why that pension should cease if she should marry. I hope that this House will not be so ungallant as to say that a lady who has rendered important service to the country shall only have her pension so long as she remains single and shall cease when she marries. It is wrong. I hope that the House will 1866. 773 be equally gallant to this lady as they are to the gentlemen to whom they may grant pensions. We do not say that the pension shall cease if a man marries, and I do not see wh the pension should cease in the case of a emale if she should happen to marry. I hope the amendment will not prevail.
Mr. BENJAMIN. We are not proposing to change the law on the subject at all. We do not put this upon the ground stated by the gentleman, although I may agree with his views in regard to the granting this pension. This pension is granted upon the ground that this party has earned this pension, and does not claim it by virtue of any services of her husband. I demand the previous question.
Mr. STEVENS. I hope we will provide that all restrictions shall be taken off, and her pension doubled, when she gets married, for services rendered to her country. [Laughter.]
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question was ordered.
Mr. JOHNSON. Is she not a married woman now?
Mr. BENJAMIN. I do not know. I suppose she is a widow.
Mr. JOHNSON. If she turns out to be a married woman she will have to kill her husband in order to get her pension. [Laughter.] The amendment was rejected.
Mr. BENJAMIN mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to.
Mr. TAYLOR, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill granting a pension to Virginia V. Moore; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. lhe bill provides that the name of Virginia K. V. Moore, daughter of Richard D. Moore deceased, late of company K, 72nd regiment of Illinois vo untcers, shall be placed 11 on the list of invalid pensions, and there shall be paid toher guardians, from the passage of this act, 8 dollars a month until she has attained the ace of 16.
Mr. SLOAN. I move to strike out the words “from the passage of this act, ” and to insert “from December, 1863, the date of the death of Mr. Moore.” Under the general law the pension begins from the date of the death, if the application be made within one year. In this case the father died and soon after the mother, leaving a girl of some 8 or 9 years, and a year passed in proceedings for the appointment of a guar dian. Now, in my opinion, there is no reason why the same rule of law should not apply. Here is an orphan whose case is manifestly just, and I hope that her pension will commence from the death of her father.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, the billIhave reported is in conformity with the rule establish edby the ComInvalidPens, that in cases of this kind the pensions should commence at the passage of the act. I think myself this orphan child should receive 9. pension from the date of the death of her father; but on account of the rule I am precluded from accepting the amendment. There is no doubt from the investigation I have given this case that her father died of disease contracted in the line of his duty. The ComrPension, for reasons satisfactory to himself, said it did not come under the general law, and therefore we have been compelled to report this special act. While I am not authorized to accept the amendment of the gentleman, yet if the amendment is proposed to the House I certainly shall vote for it.
Mr. SLOAN. I am very glad to hear the fihntleman who reported this bill announce that c thinks the amendment is just and that it ought to be adopted, although the committee have adepted a technical rule in the other direction.
Mr. TAYLOR. I demand the previous question.
Mr. FARQUHAR. Will the gentleman with draw that motion for a moment?
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. I hope my friendfrom NewYork will withdraw o previous question for a moment.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, Iam glad my friendfrom Indiana [Mr. FliRQUHAR] has sought this opportunity to bring this question before this House. I think when it is iully understood by every member on this floor they will be ready to sustain this report of the committee in this as perhaps in every other case. In reference to this question, if the ComInvalidPens were to grant all the prayers of the people all over this countr, if we were to yield to all the appeals of members who come before us with apeals for sympathy, we would impoverish the Treasury. We cannot do it. We must establish some general rule by which Weare to be governed. e have attempted to do justice in this and in all other cases. I will now refermore particularly to this case. It is the case of a mere child of 8 years of age, whose father died of disease contracted in the service. The mother has since died, and the aplication is made on the part of the guardian fdr a pension. Now, it does not come under the general pension law; it is, as my friendfrom NewYork says, a gratuity outside of the pension law; but upon a close examination of the whole case, believing that this claimant was a mine r, and that her father died in consequence of his servicesto the country, we came to the conclusion that we should give her 8 dollars a month until she arrives at the age of 16 years, and we have so reported.
Mr. SLOAN. Vill the gentleman yield to me for a moment?
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. Certainly, certainly.
Mr. SLOAN. I think the gentleman hardly states the case with fairness when he says that this child is not entitled to a pension.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. I did not say so.
Mr. SLOAN. I think the proof before the committee was overwhelmiu that her father died from disease contracte in the service although upon the roll technically there had been pIace, somehow or other, no one can tell how, a statement that he died of disease contracted before he entered the service.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. I be the gentleman not to make a speech;I yielde to the gentleman to make an explanation, and not aseech.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania has censured the Chair for not compelling gentlemen to obey the rules. He new states that he declines to yield, and the Gentfrom Wisconsin is therefore out of order.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. I yield to the gentleman for further explanation.
Mr.]dSLOAN. I. understood the gentleman to ie.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania stated distinctly that he only yielded for explanation and did not yield for remarks.
Mr. SLOAN. I only wish to add a word, and that is, that the ComInvalidPens have passed upon the proof which established the gotthat the father died from disease contracted in the service, and for that reason they have awarded this pension to his orphan child. It is not a matter of charity, buta matter of justice. It is a case which not only appeals to the eharit of the House and of the nation, but which is a so sanctioned by the strictest principles of justice.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. The gentleman has stated the views of the committee exactly. The committee would not have reported in favor of paying this poor youn irl 8 dollars a month until she is 16 i they had not been perfectly satisfied that it is a just and meritorious claim, but the committee did not feel themselves justified in chaning the principle adopted not only by themse ves, but also by the House, in reference to all these cases, and that is that the pension shall commence from the time of the passage of the act.
Mr. FARQU AR. I would askthe gentle man if this pension is not to be given or the services of the art?
Mr. LAWRENC, of Pennsylvania. I admit that, but it is utterly impossible in most cases to get all the testimony in reference to those services. In many cases the application is not made for 5 or ten ears after the decease of the rent. Would you go back in such cases an date the pension from the death of the individual, when the evidence by which you can establish the claim has been lost? Now, I repeat again that this case is outside of the pension law. The ComInvalidPens considered themselves instructed by the House a few days ago in the adoption of thisvery principleby an almost unanimous vote, when they decided that the pension should commence at the passage of the act and not at the death of the petitioner whose case comes u outside of theIaw and now we have repo not only in accordance with the opinion of the committee, but in accordance with the implied instructions from the House. I believe the report is right, and I hope it will be sustained by the House.
Mr. HILL. If I understand the princlple upon which pensions are granted, it is upon the ground of services having been rendered. If this bill is placed upon the ground that it is I. Cer gratuity, then I am opposed to it. I do not understand that it is the duty of this Congress to grant gratuities to any person or to any class of persons. But if, as I um erstand to be the true state of the case, this relief is to be granted upon the ground that service has been rendered to the country by the parent, and that the loss of the life of that parent deprives the infant of its natural guardian and protector, then I see no reason why the date of the compensation should not be the date of the loss of life. Why fix an arbitrary rule which is not governed by any reason or any good common sense, and say that the pension shall begin when the actgranting it shall happen to be approved, although the application or the pension may not be made for years? Why do we say that some time in the future the)ension shall begin to run, although the rightto the pension began at the very time the husband or the father died. as the case may be? If the members of this committee regard the vote of this House the other da as an instruction to them, then I think it is highly important that the House should give instructions the other way, should give instructions founded upon some principle of justice and equity and right, rather than upon an arbitrary rule that cannot be supported upon any of these rounds. The loss of terelative is the ground of the claim, and the compensation should be granted from the very moment that loss occurred, although the claim may not be presented for 20 years. In that way you will have a correct, clear, and welldefined principle not one that is entirely arbitrary, but one based upon a sufficient reason and I am in favor of such an amendment to the bill as will recognize that principle.
Mr. PERHAM. I feel that I ought to say a word in regard to this subject. The Gentfrom Indiana [Mr. Fanquum] has taken it upon himself to censure the ComInvalidPens for what he is pleased to denominate a want of interest for the soldier, and to intimate that the committee is not coming up to the demands of the people in regard to this subject. Now, I am unable to state what information the gentleman has in regard to the action of the committee
Mr. FARQUHAR. The report of the committee, which was acted upon by the House some ten or 15 days ago.
Mr. PERHAM. I wish to say in reference to this matter, that we have now in this country, I believe, the most liberal pension laws that are in existence in any country upon the face of the earth, and that they are administered in the most generous spirit of any laws administered an where. on also have a Pension Committee, which committee has labored incessantly, from the time of their appointment until now, 2 days every week, for the purpose of providing for such kind of meritorious cases as the present law fails to provide for. After we have abored in this way, I do not think it is for any member upon this floor, who has not the means of knowing what that committee is doing, to get up here and say that we are not meeting the expectations of the peole.
Mr. HILL. ill the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. PERHAM. Not now; I have but little time. We have measures now before us which we are maturing as rapidly as possible, and we will be ready to report them y and by, that no doubt will fully meet the expectations of the gentleman and the country. At least we mean that it shall do so; we mean to perform our duty in every sense of the word in regard to this subject. Now, in rerd to the special bill under cons1derat10n, I desire to state that there are propositions to go back for 20, 30, and I think in one instance, 40 years for a pension and others ask that we shall go back for ten years, or 5 years, or 3 years, and so on. The committee came to the conclusion that they had better establish some principle by i which they would be guided as a general rule; 1 not, however, an arbitrary rule, from which they, would not deviate under an circumstances. 1 With this view they prepare the bill that is now under consideration. There may doubtless be a question in the; l minds of some whether this applicant is actu ally entitled to a pension. We have come to 5 the conclusion that under all the circumstances it is properthat Congress should grant relief; and we are not. aware of any better principle than that which we have adopted. Should there arise any isolated case which, in the opinion of the committee, should demand a deart ure from this general principle, we would old ourselves at liberty to deart from it in such a case, unless the House s iould give us instructions to the contrary.
Mr. TAYLOR. The ComrPension has ruled that this case does not come within the general pension law, for the reason, I believe, that he is governed by the record evidence in all such cases; and no record in this case shows that in the opinion of the su conwho certified the disabilit this man had ung disease before he entere the service. Not withstanding that certificate, however, there is Overwhelming evidence that this man was in sound health at the time he entered the service, and that the sickness with which he died" was contracted while he was in the service. I can only explain the certificate of the surgeon on the supposition that there must have been a clerical error by which this mans name may have been inserted in a certificate designed for another person. But for that opinion, expressed in the certificate of the surgeon, there would have been no difficulty with the ComrPension, and this child would have received a pension under the general pension law. In regard to the rule by which I was governed in drawing this bill, I felt that I was acting under the instructions of the committee. As the chairman of the committee has referred to this matter, I do not know that it will be deemed a breach of privilege for me to state that when the question was taken in committee upon the adoption of this rule, 7 members were resent, only 5 of whom voted, 3 voting or the rule and 2 against it. There was not a majority of the committee voting in favor of it; and therefore I can hardly regard it as an established rule of the committee. But if it is a rule, I consider it as wrong in its application to this case. I shall therefore vote for the amendment. I believe that this child should receive a pension from the date of the death of her father.
Mr. HILL. With the permission of the Gentfrom NewYork, F Mr. TAYLOR]it may be an excessive eneroachment on his courtesy Idesire to ask him a question.
Mr. HILL. Is not this bill now presented because technically the case does not come under the existing pension laws, while meritoriously it is a goo case?
Mr. HILL. I will ask the gentleman further, whether in his view any valid principle which would deprive the child of the pension from the time of her parents death ( which gave her the ground for her claim) until the present time would not also deprive her of it for all time to come?
Skip Skip Mr. TAYLOR. Certainly. Now, if the gentleman has no further inquiry, I demand the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; which was upon the amendment of Mr. SLOAN. The question being taken, there were, on a division; ayes 43, noes 43no quorum voting. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, called for the ears&nays. to cm&nays were not ordered. Mr. NGERSOLL, called for tellers on or derin the yeas&nays. Telers were refused. No quorum having voted upon the amendm ent, The SPEAKER, under the rules, ordered tellers, and appointed Messrs. Stout and Bsrv JAMIN. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 58, noes 43. So the amendment was agreed to. The bill was orderengross and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. AYLOR mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message was received from the Senate, by Mr. Foaunr, its Secretary, notifying the House that that bod had concurred in the amendments of the House to Senate bill No. 60, to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau, with sundry amendments, in which he was directed to ask the concurrence of the House. ADVERSE REPORTS.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania, from the ComInvalidPens, made adverse reports on the following cases; which were laid upon the table: The petition of Mrs. Priscilla E. Hodge; The petition of Henry May for increase of pension; and The petition of David T. Stephenson for relief. ALBERT unvrss.
Mr. VANAERNAM, from the ComInvalidPens, reported a bill for the relief of Albert Nevins; whch was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill provides that the name of Albert Nevins, late a private in company K, 90 2nd regiment NewYork volunteers, sha be placed upon the list of pensioners at the ra e of 25 dollars permonth, in lieu of 8 dollars permonth eretofore allowed him, to commence from the passage of this act.
The SPEAKER. The morning hour has expired, and the bill will go over until next Frrday. PRINTING OF A REPORT.
Mr. LAFLIN, from the ComPrintg, reported the fo110wingresolution; on which he demanded the previous question: Resolved, That 5,000deo ies of the report of the ComClaimsof thelQt instant be printed for the useof the membersof the House.
The SPEAKER. The report of the committee of Claims in reference to claims from persons in the disloal States.
Mr. FARNSWO TH. What is the necessity for printing 5,000 copies of this report?
Mr. LAFLIN. This is simply a report of the ComClaims concernin cases continually presented in regard to claims for damages sustained during the rebellion by persons o aiming to be loya residin in the rebel States. The resolution reports by the committee of Claims was adopted by the House. Now, every member of the House daily has applications from individuals from every section of the country to know what will be the action of the House on this subject; and for the purpose of meeting this call it is desired that the report should be printed. I will state that the printing of this number of this report will cost $4 60 per 1,000 25 dollars in all; and that is all it will cost.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question was ordered; and under the operation thereof the resolution was adopted. Mr. LAFLIN mtRtv the resolution was adopted; upon the table. Agreed to. 1866. 775 RELIEF OF CITIZENS OF BENICIA, CALIFORNIA.
Mr. BIDWELL, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the relief of citizens of Be nicia, in Solano county, California; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands. SELECTION OF LAND IN CALIFORNIA.
Mr. BIDWELL, by unanimous consent, also introduced a bill to facilitate the selection of lands ranted to the State of California by the U.S.; which was read a 1st and 2nd time and referred to the ComPubLands. BUSINESS ON SPEAKEKB TABLE.
Mr. ELIOT moved that the House proceed to the consideration of the business on the Speakers table.
Mr. LeBloND. What business upon the Speakers table does the gentleman wish to get at
Mr. ELIOT. When we go to the table the gentleman will see.
Mr. LeBloND. I simply wanted to know whether there was a negro in it, as I thought this was a “white mans day.” [Laughter] RECEPTION OF MAJOR GENERAL OSTERHAUS.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Speaker, the Gentfrom Massachusetts yields to me for a moment. I understand there is in the Hall a distinguished general of the U.S. Army, who represents a loyal foreign element in the country, and who has shown military skill and great personal courage n on many a wellcontested battlefield during the war for the preservation of the Union. In order to pay him that honor and respect he deserves for his valuable services, I move that the House take a recess for 5 minutes, and that the Speaker present him to the House. There was no objection, and it was so ordered. A recess was accordingly taken.
The SPEAKER having conducted Major General Osterhaus to the Speakers desk, said: Gentlemen of the HoRep, when the people of this Republic took u arms for its salvation there were 1,000s an scores of 1,000s born in other lands who had emigrated to these shores to live and to die under our flag, and who, impelled by the same patriotism as our nativeborn citizens, rallied to its defense on many a battlefield. Conspicuous amount these is the gentleman whom by your order to you today, Major General Osterhaus. [Applause.] I Major General Osterhaus said: Gentlemen, must excuse me if cannot speak your tonguage as I ought. I came to this country and I tried to learn it very hard. But the troubles to overcome were stronger than my tongue. Mr. Speaker is right. I came to this country to find in the flap of the U.S. the symbol of individua freedom and of general liberty. I once opposed a confederacy in the cars 1848 and 1849. I tried hard to defen the German union, and yet we had to succumb. But we were guided by the symbol of the stars and stripes and when the question came u in this country to defend that symbol, I thought I was in duty bound to try to defend it again and I did as far as I could. I did my best. But, gentlemen, I did not learn to speak English. on must excuse me. [Laughter and applause] Genera Osterhaus then came down from the Speakers desk and was introduced to the members of the House of the Speaker, after which the House resume business.
Mr. ELIOT renewed his motion to take up from the Speakers table the Freedmens Bureau bill. The motion was a eed to; and the House accordingly proceede to the consideration of Senate bill No. 60, being a bill to enlarge the powers of the Freedmens Bureau.
Skip Skip Mr. ELIOT. I move that the House concur have the honorof introducing, in the amendments of the Senate, and upon that I call the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the amendments of the Senate were several] agreed to. Mr. LlOT. mtRtv the House agreed to the amendments, and to lay that motion on the table. I the latter motion was agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT. A message in writing was received from the POTUS, by Colonel VILLIAM G. Moons.
The SPEAKER. The Chair lays before the House a message of the POTUS in response to a resolution of this House. To the HoRep: In reply to the resolution of the HoRep of the 10th ultimo, requesting the POTUS, “it not in compatible with the public interest, to commu nicate to the House any report or reports made by the judge Advocate general, or any other officer of the Government, as to the grounds, facts, oraccnsations uponwhich JeffersonDavis Clement C. Clay, jr., Stephen Mr. Mallory. an David L. Yulee, or either of them, are held in confinement, ” I transmit herewith reports from the SecyWar and the AttyGen, and concur in the opinion therein expressed, that the nblication of the papers called for by the resolution is not at the present time compatible with the public interest. AndrewJohnson. WASHINGTON, February 9, 1866. War DEPT Wssnmoron Cirr. February 7. 866. Mr. Palsmnsr: I have the honor to acknowledge the referenceof the House resolution calling for the reports of the Jail e Advocate General on the cases of JeffersonDavis. Clement O. Clay, D. L. Yuloe, and S. B. Mallory. These reports were made for your own information, apd contain abstracts of evidence and exparte proofs in possession of the Bureau of Military Justice. Pendin any action in respect to the parties accused, the publicution of these reports is, in my opinion, incompatible with the public interest, The concurring opimion of the AttyGen is also herewith submitted. Your obedient servant EDWIN M. STANTON, SecyWar.
Mr. CONKLING called for the reading of the report of the AttyGen; which was read, as follows: AttyGen’s Office WASHINGTON, January 31. 1566. Sin: Sundryreports of the factsthat go to show that JeffersonDavis and other rebels have been uilty of high crimes have been madeto you as the chief executive officerof the Government. Most of the evidence upon which theyarebased wnscbtain edezparto, without notice to the accused, and while they were in close custody as military prisoners. Their publication might wron: the Governmentor the accused, or both. bile I seethat much wrong mayflow from the publication, 1 cannot see that any good would comefrom it. In my opinion, thenI public and private justice alike demand that they a ould not be made public. I am, sir. very respectfully, JAMES SPEED, AttyGen. To the Pnsimrxr. NAVAL APPROPRIATION BILL. The House then proceeded to the consideration of the bill (. Mr. No. 122) making approriations for the naval service for the year ening 80th of June, 1867, reported from the ComWhole on the state of the Union esterday with sundry amendments.
Mr. STEVENS. I call the previous question on agreeing to the amendments from the ComWhole on the state of the Union.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. Iask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania to give me permission to offer, an amendment to one of the amendmentmreported by the ComWhole on the state of the Union before he moves the previous question.
Mr. STEVENS. I withdraw the previous question for that purpose.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I desire to move to insert a proviso after lines 138 and 139, on page 7.
The SPEAKER. The amendment of the committee is to strike out lines 138 and 139.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. Then I will move to insert after line 130 7 the following: For purchase of Oukmnn kEldrid eswharf. 8136ooo: Promded. That this amount shal cover the whole cost of the property, and that the purchase can be made upon termsmutualy agreedupon by the SecyNavy and the mayor and alderman of the city of Charlestown.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I submit that that amendment is not in order; it contains an appropriation that has not been considered in 0mWhole.
The SPEAKER. The Chair sustains the point of order.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. This matter was considered in ComWhole on the state of the Union.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. This is apro viso I propose to a clause that was considered in ComWhole on the state of the Union.
The SPEAKER. The committee propose to strike out this clause. The gentleman can attain his object by voting against striking out these lines.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. But that will not enable me to get in the proviso.
Mr. STEVENS. I suppoae anyone who would vote against the appropriation would vote against the proviso also. t would make no dlITGIBIJCE.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. The 1st amendment reported from the ComWhole on the state of the Union was to insert on page 3, after line 45, the following proviso: Provided, That there be transferred from the a gropriation for fuel to the contingent expensesof c arenaof Equipment and ooruiting, 8&03100. The amendment was agreed to. The 2nd amendment reported from the ComWhole on the state of the Union was to strike out lines 119, 120,121, and 122, as follows: For purchaseof Soavoys Island. 8105.00o providrd, That aperfect and aproved title in feeto the whole island canbeobtain and vested in the U.S. for that sum.
Mr. SPALDING. I demand the yeas and na s on that motion.
Mr. LYNCH. I desire to say aword on that amendment.
Mr. STEVENS. I hope the gentleman will be allowed ten minutes.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I object, unless I can have ten minutes to reply.
Mr. STEVENS. Am I not entitled to an hour to close the debate?
The SPEAKER. The gentleman should have claimed that right before the House proceeded to vote on. the amendments.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not propose to speak myself, butI wish the gentlem n rpm Maine to be hear.
Mr. SPALDING and I objectunless can have ten minutes.
Skip Skip The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the netiveyeas 62, nays 80, not voting 40;. So the amendment of the ComWhole was not agreed to. The next amendment was to strike out the following: For purchaseof the right of drainage throuirh the yard. now held by the city of Charlestown. 823.000.
Skip Skip The question was taken; and there were, upon a ivisionayes 27, noes 56; no quorum voting. Mr. BANKS called for tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. BANKS and NICHOLSON were appointed. The House divided; and the tellers reported that there wereayes 35, noes 62. Before the result of the vote was announced, Mr. SLOAN called for the yeas&nays upon agreein to the amendment of the comWholc. The yeas&nays were not ordered. So the amendment was not agreed to. RECEPTION or GENERAL 080033.
Mr. SCHENCK. I desire, at this time, to submit to the House a proiosition similar to one that hasbefore been submitted this morning. This House has shown a very proor disposition to receive with due respect an honor the defenders of the country. I have the pleasure to announce the presence in the Hall of Major General George Crooke, whose services with GenlSheridan in the valley of the Shenandoah, as well as his performances elsewhere, will be so well remembered by this House. I therefore move that the House now take a recess in order to enable the Speaker to introduce General Crooke to this House. No objection was made. The House aeeordingly took a recess.
The SPEAKER having, amid applause, conduedted General Crooke to the Speakers desk, sai: Gentlemen of the HoRep, for a portion of the time in which the country was engaged in the war for its salvation, the valley of the Shenandoah was the scene of many defeats of our national arms. But toward the close of the rebellion there appeared a general, who, by his may etic power over his meii, and by his brilliant ash, stands perhaps equal to the bravest of all in the land; and he converted the valley of the She and oah from a valley of humiliation to a valey of victo for our national arms. Prominent among the generals who aided Phil. Sheridan in his eroic achievements was Major General George Crooke, whom I have now the pleasure, by your order, to introduce to on. generaEACpropolkaeu. seJ [Applause]bers of the House were then introduced to General Crooke by the Speaker. At the conclusion of the recess the House resumed its session] RECEPTION OF GENERAL WARD.
The SPEAKER, under the rule, ordered tellers; and appointed Mr. Wasniiiiasn, of Illinois and Mr. ltieii, of Massachusetts. The House divided; and the tellers reported a cs 46, noes 51. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, called for the ess&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered.
Skip Skip The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmativeyeas 76, nays 73, not voting 34; So the amendment was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv just taken; upon the table. Agreed to. The next amendment reported from the ComWhole on the state of the Union was read, as follows: On page7, strike out lines 141 and 142, as follows: For machine shop, main bui dinti. 52. 612 On agreeing to the amendment, there were, on a divisionayes 51, noes 54. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinms, demanded the yeas&nays. the yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the a irmativeyeas, 73, iiays 66, not voting 43; So the amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was to strike out the following: For machine shop. boiler wing. $191, 480. The amendment was concurred in.
Mr. STEVENS. I hope that the next appropriation will be kept in, as it is necessary. The next amendment was to strike out the following: For ironplating shop, 898, 922. The amendment was non-concurred in. 1. tea. 1 866. 777 The next amendment was to strike out the following: For quaywall extension at dErriek. 8100. o“). The amendmenwas concurred in. The next amendment was to strike Out the following: For quaywall extension at sewer. 8100.000. The amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was to strike out the following: For dredging channels. 865.000. The amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was to strike out the following: For fillinglow placeson new purchase. $14!).000. The amendment was concurred in. The next amendment was to strike out the following: For machinery for pew machine shop. boiler shop. pattern shop and smithery. $180,000. The House divided; and there wereayes 16, noes 40.
Skip Skip Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. SPALDING and DARLING were a pointed. The House again vided; and there were aycs 57, noes 64. Mr. SPALDING demanded the yeas and as s. The yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmativeyous 73, nays 62, not voting 47 So the amendment was concurred in. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. mtRtv the House struck ouglthe paragraph, on the table. Agreed to.
The Clerk read The next amendment of the committee was to strike out after line 166 and insert the following: For protecting from destruction and decaythe unfinished buildines and other structuresalreadycommenced. for which no appropriation is made in this bill. 820.000. The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment of the committee was to strike outlines 171 and 172, as follows: Fiaa) Buekleys patent drier with buildings complete.
Skip Skip The question being taken on this amendment, no quorum voted. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. HILL and Gmsssammsr. were appointed. The House divided; and the tellers reported aycs 51, noes 48. So the amendment was agreed to. The next amendment of the committee was to strike out lines 189 and 190, as follows: For repairof drydock masonry and gates. 820030. The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment of the committee was to strike out line 191, as follows: For quaywall, 515.000.
Mr. WASHBURNE of Illinois. I suggest that the vote may be taken on the amendments in gross, unless some gentleman wishes totako a separate vote on some one of them. The SPEAKER. The Chair will regard the House as concurring in all these amendments unless some gentleman desires a separate vote. The followmg amendments of the committee were then reported, to strike out the following items: For quaywall. 815.000. For iron and cop or store No. 11. $30.000. Fgsoshipjoineis shop and timbereshed No. 12, For furniture and galley storehouse, $36,000. For storehouse No. 14. $46,000. For completion of stables. 810.000. For new dredging machine, seows, and dredging, Eggo new shears. 800.000. For building for Offices. 815.000.
Skip Skip The question being taken on the foregoing amendments, they were agreed to. The next amendment of the committee was to strike out line 210 and insert in lieu thereof the following: For the protectionof propertyatNorfolk navyyard. 20.000o. r somuch thereof asmay benecessary. The amendment was agreed to. The next amendments were to strike out the following items: For cummandants quarters, 83. 25. For quartersfor otheers. $60,000. The amendments were agreed to. The next amendment was to strike out lines 219 and 220, and insert the following: For the preservation of the property of the U.S. at the Pensacolanavyyard, or so much thereof as may be necessary, 820,000.
Mr. THAYER. I ask a separate vote on that.
Skip Skip The question was taken on the amendment, and it was agreed to. The next amendment of the confmittee was to add the following to the bill: Sec. 2. Abife:. That so much of the 1st sectionof the actmaking appropriations for the naval service, approvedMay 21. 864. as appropriates3250. 0Ofoor bonnties for the destruction of ene mies vessels, as peract of May 17. 1802. be amended sothat saidappropriations shall beapplied to all cases of destruction of enomies vrxscls during the recent rebellion and at the same rate as is provided for in the act to which reference is made.
Mr. STEVENS. I believe I must ask a separate vote on that.
Mr. conKLING. Mr. Speaker, should anybody vote on that who does not know what it means?
Mr. HALE. I ask to have the section of the act to which this amendment applies repeated.
The SPEAKER. That canbe done by unanimous consent.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. The 11thsection of the not making the appropriation referred to contains this provision, that when ever it is necessary to destroy an enemys vessel at sea instead of bringingitinto porttobeadjndicated upon under the prize law, abounty shall be paid to the captors equal to $100 per man onard of the vessel destroyed; an that itshall be equal to $200 per man on board the enemys vessel, provided the enemysvessel be superior to the captor s. In case the enemys vessel captured or destroyed is inferior to her captor, then the bounty to be paid is $100 perman on board the enemys vessel. That is the regular provision of the prize law., Now, when that act was passed, no appropriation was made for such beauties. At a subsequent session of Congress an appropriation o $250,000 was made to ca outthe provisions o that law. The accounting officers of the Tre ury construed the law to be applicable only from and after its passage. There is one case, however, in which an enemys vessel was destroyed during this rebellion, anterior to the passage of the prize law, and the entire purpose ofthis amendment is to enable the accounting officers of the Treasury to include that case, and pay to the captors just what is paid by law to captures made since the enactment of this law. There is but one single case.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I cannot give the name of the vessel, but it is a case that occurred since the breaking out of the rebellion, but before the passage of the rifle law: and the whole object is to includet at vesse in the settlement that is authorized by law to apply to all captures made Since the law was glssed. I will state that this amendment was wn up by the 4th Auditor, and was made to fit the ease in question.
Mr. BRANDEGEE. Ihope this matter will not be tacked on to this bill; it does not legit imately belong here, and the subject has not been considered at all by the ComNavAffrs. It can be put in some of the bills now bein considered in that committee. I hope the House Wlll vote the amendment down because we do not understand it.
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I will yield to the chairman of the ComJudiciary to read the law on this subject.
Mr. WILSON, ofIowa. I send to the Clerk to be read the 11thsection of the prize law, to which the Gentfrom Massachusetts has referred.
The Clerk read, as follows: “SEC. 11. Abife: That abountyshall be paid by the U.S. for civehpersonon board anyship or vesselofwar belonging to anenemyat the commencementofan engagement. whichshall besunk or otherwise destroyed in such engagementbyanyship or vessel belonging to the U.S., or which it maybe necessaryto destroy in consequence of iiuuries sustainedin action. of $100ifthe enemysvesselwas of inferior force and of $200“of equalor superior force. to bedivided among the officers and crew in thesame manner as rize money: and when the actualnumberof men on card any such vesselcannot besatisfacto rily ascertained. it shall be estimated accordingto the complement llowodtovesselsofits class in the Navy of the U.S.: and tbere shall be paid asbounty to the captorsof any vmlofwar captured from an enemy. which they may be instructed to destroy or whioh shall be immetlinwly destroyed for the publin interest but not in consequenee ofimuriesrcceivedin action. 50 dollars for every person who shall heonboard at thotiuio of such capture. All ransommoney. salvage, bounty or proceeds of condemnedproperty no cruin or awarded to any vessel of the Navy shall be distributed and paid to the officersand men entitled theretoin the same manner as prime money. under the direction of the SecyNavy.”
Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I have only to add that this clause does not call for any additional appropriation. It is only to enable the accounting o cers of the Treasury to carry out the provisions of the existing law. Tellers were ordered on the amendment; and Messrs. Bnaxnnoniz and Ursoiv were appointed. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 66, noes36. So the amendment was agreed to. The last amendment reported by the ComWhole on the state of the Union was to add to the bill the following as an additional section: Sac. 3. Abife:. That no portion of the amounts herein appropriated shall be paid in violation of the provisions of the not entitled “An act to prescribean oath of othee, and for other purposes. "approvedJuly 2. 1862.
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. STEVENS demanded the previous question on the passage of the bill. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill WM passed.: Mr. STEVENS mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. ORDER OF PROCEEDING TOMOBROW.
Mr. STEVENS. I desire to propose that the House hold a session tomorrow for the purpose only of debate in ComWhole upon the Presidents annual message; and that it shall not sit later than 3 oclock, so as to give the Doorkeeper an opportunity to this Hall for the proceedings of next lspornedpaayre. No objection was made. D. H. BINGHAM.
Mr. DRIGGS. I desire to move that the ComClaims be discharged from the further consideration of the claim of Mr. D. H Bingham, of Alabama; and that the same be referred to the ComMilAffrs. The motion was agreed to. Some time subsequent thereto, Mr. DELANO said: I desire to make a motion to reconsider the vote by which the House has just ordered the ComClaims to be discarged from the further consideration of the claim of Mr. D. H. Bingham, of Alabama, and that the same be referred to the ComMilAffairs.
Mr. DRIG S. I understood the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. DELANO] to agree to that disposition of the matter on yesterday.
Mr. DELANO. I want to inform the House of the character of this claim. It is one that comes within the rule which the House has already adopted, to reject all claims for dam ages of any citizens of disloyal States. I have here a report prepared to show that fact, and recommendin that the claim of Mr. Bingham be rejected, which I was ready to make to the House when the committee was called. It is for the House to determine new whether they will reconsider the vote by which they referred the claim to the ComMilAffrs, or stand by the rule they have adopted.
Mr. DRIGGS. I desire to saya single word on this matter. Mr. Bin ham, of A abama called on me and said thatglie had had referred to the ComClaims some papers in reference to certain claims, but he had under stood that the matter properly belonged to the ComMilAffrs. He therefore requested me to make the necessary motion to set his papers before that committee. Before oing socalled upon the chairman of the ComClaims, [Mr. DsLsivo] and he stated to me that I might make the motion and he would not object; that he did not like to make it himself, stating substantially what he has stated here toda.
Mr. DELANO. Iyonly wish the House to understand the case, and that it comes within the rule the House has already adopted. The mtR agreed to. The question recurred upon the motion to discharge the ComClaims from the further consideration of the claim of D. H. Bingham, of Alabama, and to refer the same to the ComMilAffrs. The motion was not agreed to. CONTESTEDELECTION CASE.
Mr. MARSHALL. I was not in the House when the report of the ComElections was presented in the contested election case of Baldwin vs. Trowbridge, of Michigan. As I do not concur with the majority of the committee in that report I desire to present a mine irty report, and ask that it be printed. he report was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed. AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES. Mr BIDWELL. I move that House bill No. 60, in relation to agricultural colleges, which was reported from the ComAg, be recommitted to that committee. The motion was agreed to. riiiinn iiosrns EXTRA PAY.
Mr. ONEILL, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill extening the benefits of section 4 of the Army appropriation bill, approved March 8, 1865, so as to give all Officers of volunteers below the rank of brigadier general, who were mustered out of the service at their own request, or otherwise honorably discharged after the 19th ofApril, 1865, 3 months pay proper, the same as if they had been mustered out with their respective regiments; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComMilAffr.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. W. J. McDONAlD, its ChiefClerk, informed the House that the Senate had passed, without amendm ent, bill of the House No. 33, for the relief of Charlotte Beuce, widow of Philip H. Beuce, late captain of company F, 30th regiment Iowa volunteer infantry. BANKRUPT BILL. The House, agreeabl to order, resumed the consideration of the bil (H.R.No. 7) to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy through out the U.S. The followm section was ending when the House passed mm the consideration of the bill on yesterday: Sac. 10 and bet Abife: That the justices of the Supreme Court shall designate one of their number. who, with the assistanceof 5 commis slonors. to beappointedby said justice so designated, and subjectto the provisions of this act, shall frame general orders for the following purposes: For regulating the practice and procedureof the distriqtcourts in bankruptcy, and the several forms of petitions. orders and other proceedingsto beused in said courts in all mattersunder this act; Forregulating the duties of the various officersof said courts For reguiating the fees payable and the charges and costs to be allowed. except such as are established bythis act or by law, with respectto all proceedingsin bankruptcy beforesaid courts For regulating t a practice and procedure upon aplpeals: or regulating the filing, custody, and i nspection of records; and generally for carrying the provm ionsof this act into effect. After such general orders shall have been so framed, they or any of them may be rescindedpr varied and other general orders may be framed in manner aforesaid, and all such general orders so framed shall from time to time, when approved by the justice of the Supreme Court sodesignatedb. e reported to Congress with such suggestionsas said justice may approve. The districtjudges shall be eligible to act as such commmsioners.
Mr. HALE. I move to amend this section by adding the followmg: No pay or compensationshall be allowed to such commissionersfor servicesunder this section.
Mr. JENCKES. I have no objection to that. The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. I move to insert in line 42 of section 11 the word “to” before the word “send.” The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JENCKES. The committee had in view the object which the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. OTCHKXSS} states that he desires shall be attained and think that if the gentleman will consider the matter more attentively he will find that the system of proceedings proposed in the bill will have the advantage of being less expensive and more efficient than the system he proposes. There is certain business which must be done by somebody other than the bankrupt or petitioner. Notices must be made out; proper must be taken in charge for safe custody. ftegentleman will look at the close of the bill, age 67, he will find a revision that the wordp “marshal” shall inc ads o. marshals deputy; and when the petition is filed, the warrant authorizes some person, dep duty marshal, or some person acting as deputy marshal, to do this clerical labor. That is the ordinary proceeding upon voluntary petitions; and in proceedings in involuntary bankruptcy there may he need of a messenger to take possession of the bankrupts estate.
Mr. HOTCHKISS. This does not interfere with that.
Mr. JENCKES. If the gentleman will allow me. The official assignee residing in the count is a local officer, and the property may be a over the State, or in half a dozen States, and there must be some one to go and take charge of this property in the intermediate timdbefore the appointment of an assi nee. It does not increase the expense one dollar, because the marshal is only allowed the fee established by law. He simply goes and puts his seal upon the pro. erty where he finds it. Ano ther thing; one of the great objections to the bankrupt law of 1841 and of 1800, and one of the most serious objections to the French bankrupt law, and to the English bankrupt law of 1849, was this appointment of local assi nees. When they get property into their han s the creditors can never get it out of them. It was to prevent this waste of property that this proviSion was inserted. I will show where it was obtained. I got it from the bankrupt law of Scotland, one of the best that I have ever seen. It was adopted into the bankrupt law of Massachusetts, and is now adopted into the bankru t law of England. It as also been introuced into the bankrupt law of France. Having studied this subject carefully with the same object that the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. orciiiuss] 1866. 779 has in view, I say that the tory of this matter are in of proceeding.
Mr. HOTCHKISS. I do not see that the gentleman has answered my objection. My objection is to the intervention of the marshal when it is unnecessary. The assi ee can take possession of the property as wel as the mars.
Mr. JENCKES. There must be some time before the filin of the petition either of the creditor or the debtor, and before an assignee can be appointed. Now, who is to take possession in the mean time?
Mr. HOTCHKISS. In the outset the district judge appoints an assignee for the bankrupt property in his district. He is there always on and and performs the same duty that is required of the marshal. It is unnecessary that 2 Officers shall be appointed to do the same thing.
Mr. JENCKES. The marshal can go every where.
Mr. HOTCHKISS. The assi ee can go everywhere. He is the owner of the property. It vests in him. He can take possession of pm erty in any State of the Union. Mr. JENCKES. The proposition of the gentleman is for one of tare things, either to have a permanent official assignee, which in my mind, is one of the greatest objections, hr one in the intermediate time. It is better to have an executive “Officer.
Mr. HOTCHKISS. My object is to have a permanent official assignee to take possession of this property, who will act impartially between creditors and debtors. I object to special ones appointed by favoritism or superior vi lance on the part of the creditors. Mr. JENCKES. The object of this law is to extricate the debtor from the hands of the creditors. I would ratherhave an Officer of the court take charge of this matter than a favorite assi as selected by aportion of the creditors. the SPEAKER. he ten minutes allowed for discussion for and against the amendment have now exired.
Mr. Thayer. I move to strike out the last word of the amendment. The most efficient feature, in my judgment, in this bill is that which is assailed by the Gentfrom NewYork. If there is anyone feature in the bill which secures the judicious administration of bankrupt estates, it is that feature which gives to creditors the selection of the assignees. Eve one knows, who is at all conversant with such matters, that the ability of an assignee to manage a bankrupts estate depends necessaril often on the extent of his knowledgeof the usiness in which the bankrupt has been engaged. If you have an otheial usignee who is to take charge of the estate, you must deprive yourself of the advantage of having an assignee who is acquainted in articular with the business which is to come into his hands, because it is impossible you could appoint a man who is so completely a master of all kinds of business as to make a properas si nee in all cases of bankruptcy. f you have an official assignee he will in many localities be so overborne with the responsibilities and duties imposed upon him by this trust, that it will be impossible for him to discharge the duties of that position with that degree of efficiency which the interests of the creditor and the bankrupt alike demand. I hope, sir, the amendment of the Gentfrom NewYork will not prevail.
Mr. SLOAN. In answer to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Tnsvaa] I desire to say that I believe it will save a large amount of expense if the proposition of the Gentfrom NewYork is accepted. It will entirely obviate the expense of the marshal, acting as special messenger to take possession of the property of the bankrupt between the filing of the petitions and the final decree ofbankruptcy. An if selections are. properly made of as signees in each county, of men of character and integrity and there is no presumption that such precedentsand his avor of this course men will not be selectedthey will act not only ine bedience to law, but also in obedience to the rule which this commission, containing one justice of the Supreme Court, shall prescribe for the government of all these cases o bankruptcy. It will simplify these proceedings by reducing the expenses, and making them in all cases Uniform. Instead of having assignees selected, as the Gentfrom Pennsylvania suggests, by the creditors and in the interest of the creditor, you will have an officer appointed as as signee who shall stand indifferent between the creditors and the bankru t, who shall be responsible to the court, who shall govern his conduct entirely by the law and by the rule which this commisswn prescribes. twill simplify the proceedings, produce uniformity in their administration, and reduce the expenses, which I regard as a very important consideration in lacing this law within the reach of all that unortunate class who desire to obtain the advantage of it.
Mr. JENCKES. Will the gentleman yield a moment?
Mr. JENCKES. The gentleman has addressed the House upon a point that is not exactly before it. the question now is upon the appointment of a custodian of the property between the time of filing the petition, either by the debtor or creditor, and the appointment of an assignee by the court. This bill provides that the assignee may be nominated by the creditors, but the court may refuse to appoint that assignee and may appoint another man. This person has to do sim 1y executive duties. It is just what the marsha “now does if he is sent to attach propertynothing more. He has to give the notice, and he gets no more fees. It oes not increase the cost of the proceedings. But if the official were to intervene he would have to pay 3, 4,or 5 times as much as the law now allows to deputy marshals.
Mr. SLOAN. The Gentfrom RhdIsland misapprehcnds the object of thisamendment. It is to have, before any proceedings are taken underthis law, anassignee appointed for each county in the judicial districtan assignee for all cases of bankruptcy.
Mr. JENCKES. That is just the thing I desire to prevent and I wish to make one remark on that subject, quoting an eminent authoritya decision of the court that has led to the abolishment of all these evils under the English and Scotch system. Lord Eldon said in a case that required his particular investigation, that he discovered that where there were official assignees, official solicitors, and local commissioners, the bankru ts estate was simply something for them to have on just as they pleased; that the bankrupt never got his discharge and the creditors never ot a dividend.
Mr. SLOAN. With all de erence to that great authority, and in deference to the opinion of the Gentfrom RhdIsland, I still believe that in an American system of bankruptcy an assi nee who is resonsible to the court and to the law for the discarge of his duty would be preferable.
Mr. JENCKES. These marshals are thus resonsible; they give bonds. 1
Mr. SLOAN. If this officeris thiisa pointed before proceeding is commenced, it dispenses with the interposition of a marshal.
Mr. THAYER. I desire to ask the Gentfrom Wisconsin what security he would require such an assignee as he describes to give. For instance, an assignee located in the city of NewYork, where millions of property must pass through his handswhat security would the gentleman require?
Mr. SLOAN. he gentleman evidently did not hear the amendment read.
Mr. SLOAN. It provides that he shall give such security as the judge making the appomtment shall require.
Mr. THAYQER. The gentleman evidently does not understand my question. I ask what amount, in his opinion, would be adequate security, in the city of NewYork for instance. 4! judge.
Mr. HOTCHKISS. The same that you require from the collector of NewYork city.
Mr. SLOAN. The amount required by the The gentleman must be well aware that in administering judicial and financial affairs in this country, of necessit a muchlarger amount of money passes throug the hands of our ofli cers than can be reasonably provided for by bonds of security. Something is due to the character for integrity of the officers who are appointed, and it is, in my judgment, to be presumed that men will be appointed in those districts where large amounts may come into their hands whose character will be a far higher security than any money bond that can be taken and yet this provision requires that such an amount of security on a money bond shall be given, as the district judge, regarding all the circumstances may require.
Mr. THAYER. I Withdraw the amendment to the amendment. The question recurred on Mr. Horenirisss amendment.
Mr. CONKLING. I move to amend the amendment of my colleague by strikin out the last word. I do so for the purpose o making one or 2 remarks appliea ale to this amendment and to this portion of the bill. In the 1st place, I would ike to know from the Gentfrom RhdIsland about how many deputies he thinks it would be necessary in either of the large districts, for the marshal to appoint in order to act as messengers in these cases.
Mr. JENCKES. Well, I can tell him that the practice, under the English law, and under the law of Massachusetts, and under the law of Scotland, is to appoint a special deputy. When the petitioning creditor or the petitioning debtor goes to the clerks office with a petition there is a marshal present, or within immediate reach, for the purpose of protecting the property in the mean time. The party, creditor or debtor, as the case may he, makes application for the appointment of a special deputy to act in the intermediate time and to do the duties required by this act, which somebody must do, and it does not increase the number of standing dep duty marshals in any district, and it does not increase the compensation of the marshal of the district to an extent except for his certificate upon the has of the warrant that he has appointed A or B his deputy or messenger for a particular purpose.
Mr. CONKLING. I am very happy to have afforded the gentleman an opportunity to make a speech, although upon a point different to that which I put to him. He does not seem inclined to state the number of deputies, whether special or general that the marshal would appomt in any large district. I wish to state that it would be a multitude which no man could number in these large districts.
Mr. JENCKES. Will the gentleman allow me to answer his question by asking another? What device can he propose by which the property of a bankrupt can be taken care of in the intermediate time between the filing of the petition and the enterin of the decree? I am not particular y in favor of thisprovision, but it is the best I have found devised in any law and hence I adopted it.
Mr. CONKLING. Precisely the device contemplated by the amendment of m collca us,
Mr. HOTCHKISS; precisel the evice which has been propose in other illsin the bill of 1862, in sections 2 and 3 for example. Now, I want to make 2 or 3 practical suggestions. That there is no difficult in provitIing for the preliminary custody of the repertg, I suppose the Gentfrom RhdIsland oes not repose to question.
Mr. JENCKES. I certainly do propose to question serious] the whole of this device.
Mr. CONKLIN. Well if I have any of my 5 minutes remaining, I will try to answer the gentleman. I say that there is not the slightest difficulty in providing for it. There is no magic in having a special marshal who could give no security practically for this purpose.
Mr. CONKLING. There is no magic in having a person to take charge called:1 marshal rather than somebody else. All you have to do is to provide for an assignee early enough in the proceedings. My belief is that this section calls into exis tence an army of officeholders for no purpose under heaven. That is my 1st proposition. In the 2nd place, I believe that the practical operation of this section and of the next section will be, in 4 cases out of 5, to put into the hands of one or 2 fraudulent creditors the opportunity to manage the entire proceed in s.
Mr. JENCKES. Will the gentleman state yhat he means by the phrase “ fraudulent creditor
Mr. CONKLING. I will state it if I ever get the opportunity to do so. I was just oing to state, when the gentleman interrupte me, that if some debtor, residing in the interior of the State of NewYork, owed $100,000I will state a strong case for the benefit of the gentleman and all his creditors resided in the city of NewYork, and he was about to become bankrupt, the marshal publishes a notice in the papers. This bill does not provide that he shall have the politeness that the Chinese have, who, when they invite you to dinner, furnish you with a list of all the persons who are invited to meet you there. This does not provide that he shall furnish a list of the cre itors. suppose that I am a creditor residing in the city of NewYork, and a notice is sent to me. There are other creditors residin near me, but I do not know who they are. he notice is that a meetin of the creditors is to take place 150 miles from NewYork city. attend the meeting, and if anyone man has been omitted accidentally, or by desigp, that is a cause for postponing the meeting. ow, it is not likely that shall attend those meetin for the mere rpose of postponement, an the assignee t on comes into existence as the creature of the 2 or 3 creditors who may get the control of the matter in this way. I believe that this whole machinery is unnecessary; I believe it is vicious; I believe it is bringing into existence an army of officeholders for no necessary purpose whatever. Now, if assignees are uppointed, as suggested by my colleague, Mr. Igoronitissj it would be a protection in the 1st place against this unnecessary creation of officers, and in the 2nd place against a creditor having hold of the entire proceeding of the bankrupt, orand now Ianswer the question of the Gentfrom RhdIsland [Mr. Isxexss fraudulent colluding of ta creditor with the bankrupt, to have him discrged and his debtsponged out by some agreement that takes alace between them. That is what I call a fraudulent creditor.
Mr. JENCKES. This is entirely apractieal question. The committee in preparing this measure have not acted upon their oWn personal views upon the subject. The havetaken the experience of all the systems o bankruptcy in the world. Now, the objections made here are 2, if I understand them aright. One is that it will increase the expense of the proceedingiu bankruptcy. The other objection is that some fraud may be helped, or some collusion may be established, between guilt parties in the conduct of these proceedings. both gentlemen from NewYork, [Mr. COXRLING and Mr. Horeniriss] have failed to point out how the expense of the roccedin can be increased one dollar, and make the assertion, and I challenge those gentlemen to show it is not correct, that no such increase takes
Mr. CONKLplNacGe. Who is to pay these messengers?
Mr. CONKLING. Let me state what I wish the gentleman to answer. His bill provides that in every case an assi ee shall be appointed to begin with. Now want to know what the gentleman means by saing that it will not increase the number of o cers to bring into existence also in every case a special deputy, when you have an assi ee at any rate.
Mr. JENCKEte. The messenger is simply an intermediate agent, just as a receiver is in case of an attachment of property. The as signee is the person authorize by the court, upon the nomination of the creditors, to administer upon the insolvents estate.
Mr. CONKLING. As the gentleman is very technical with me in reference toterms, I must remind him that the messenger is not in the attitude of a receiver; far from it. The assignee is in the attitude of a receiver. The messenger is a mere preliminary gobetween, serving no pnr e under heaven, as I contend, except to perorm the ministerial business of giving no tice, 1st, that a warrant has been issued;sec end, that “the payment of any debts and the delivery of any 1prolpeity belonging to such debtor, to him or or is use, and the transfer of any property by him, are forbidden by law;” and 3rd, that a meeting of the creditors is going to take place. [say that the appointment of a marfor this purpose, if you must have an assignee at any rate, is mere surplusage.
Mr. JENCKES. One of the duties of the messenger is to take possession of the estate, real and personal, of the debtor. Here the hammer fell.] Mr. CONKLING. I withdraw my amendment.
Mr. THAYER. I move proforma to amend by strikin out the 1st 3 words of the section. I desire to make a suggestion in reply to the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. Corni LING] in addition to those presented by the Gentfrom RhdIslan. If the Gentfrom NewYork had examined this bill somewhat more carefully, he would have perceived that it contains a provision which destroys entirel the force of his objection founded upon the apprehension that, by some possible legerdemoin in practice, one creditor may, contrary to the rit and equities of the other creditors, assume the entire control of the debtors estate, or that some unfair advantage may possibly be taken by one creditor of an other. He would have seen in a subsequent part of the bill this provision for elections or uppointments. Mr. SLOAN. What section?
Mr. Sl. OA. Will the gentlemanyieldtomo?
Mr. SLOAN. I ask the gentleman whether he calls these trustees or assignees, if it be not true that the amendment proposes only one such Officer, while the bill proposes as many such officers as there may be estates of bonkrupts to be adjudicated on? That is the 1st question which I wish to ask the gentleman.
Mr. THAYER. Let me answer that before 1866. 781 you ask another. I will answer the gentlemans questions as he goes alon, one at a time. I answer the question which e has just asked by saying that the position of a trustee of a bankrupts estate who is selected by the creditors is in no respect analogous to the position of a public officer. [Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. ALLEY. I rise to oppose the amendm ent. Mr. Speaker, I hope this amendment will not prevail. It seems to me this is a very plain matter. The gentleman proposes the appointment of official asignees, and complains that this bill provides for an army of officeholders. That seems to be his chief objection on that oiut. I agree fully with the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Tani1:1] that the amendment of the Gentfrom NewYork itself increases rather than diminishes the number of officeholders. Every official assi nee which the amendment proposes is an office older, but no assignees which this bill proposes to appoint are officeholders in any true sense. They are merely custodians of the property of these creditors and these debtors. Now, Mr. Speaker, this provision has worked admirably in practice in the State of Massachusetts. We have had a bankrupt law there for many years, which I believe it is acknowl edged by all who have studied the subject is a better bankrupt law than has ever before been devised in this country or in Euro c. Most of the features Of this bil have been taken from the Massachusetts law, and there is no feature in the bill that commends it more to my judgment and approbation than this very feature that is now o posed by the Gentfrom NewYork. what is the appointment of these messengers? Is it the creation of office holders? Not exactly in a propersense. It is simply the appointment of individuals to take charge of this property during the intervening time between he petitiop being presented to the courts and the appointment of the assignee and that diliieulty cannot be obviated in any possible manner, except by the appointment of official assignees who shal 1st take possession of the propert. Isu posethe Gentfrom NewYork will concede that.
Mr. conKLING. Will the gentleman state whether he has read the section he is speaking upon?
Mr. CONKLING. I could not suppose you had when you said these marshals were not public officersmarshals of the U.S.
Mr. ALLEY. I was speaking of assignees if I said marshals. These marshals are merely to take possession of the property. In our State they are messengers sim ly. But these marshals that this bill provides, who are to take possession of the estate, simply act as custo dians of the property merely for a few days, and are what we call messengers. They have not the slightest jurisdiction Over the property of the creditors, so far as making any disposrtion of it is concerned.
Mr. HOTCHKISS. I would inquire of the gentleman whether in the law of Massachusetts there is such a provision as this: There shall beexcepted from the operation of this i section necessary household and kitchen furniture and such other articles necessaryto such bankrupt as the said assignce shall designateand set apart.
Mr. JENCKES. That is another subject 8nother section.
Mr. SPALDING. I move to strike out the 2nd line. I wish to say, in reply to the Gentfrom NewYork, that I do not think he intends to mislead the House when he says that in certain cases 2 of the creditors may appoint an as signee. When 2 make the assignee the would represent a majority in value of the cre itors. Is it not so?
Mr. CONKLING. Very likely; I do not know how it is; Isaid nothing to the contrary.
Mr. SPALDING. Under any circumstan ces it would be a majority of the property that would create the assignee. That is the intenvtion. Now, I only wish to remark in addition, that I do consider this as one of the most val uable features of this whole scheme, which is so abl compiled by the Gentfrom RhdIslan. I was conversant with the workings of the old act of 1842, and I know that nothing about it was more objectionable to the people than these county assignees. They felt no interest for those who really owned the Now, here the trustees are to hold antprmopaenratgye. it for the interest of the creditors and subject to their ratification and Iappeal to the good sense of this House if this is not a fairer way of treating them than by putting it into the hands of county assi ees, men appointed by this court. This bil proposes that the individual estate in insolvency shall pass into the hands of men who have an interest in protecting it.
Mr. conKLING. I rise to oppose the amendment.
Mr. McINDOE. If the gentleman will give way, I will move to adjourn.
Mr. CONKLING. I will yield for that purpose. MORNING HOUR or TUESDAY.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that there will be no legislative session till next Tucs da. On Monday morning, however, the House will meet and the Journal will be read, but there will be but a very few moments for proceeding in the morning. The Chair will suggest, therefore, whether Tuesday shall not be considered the same as Monday, and whether the House shall not then go on with the morning hour as if it were Monday.
Mr. HALE. I move that the morning hour of Tuesday he considered the same as that of Monday. No objection bein made, it was so ordered.
Mr. McINDOE. I now move that the House adjourn. The motion was agreed to, and thereupon (at 4 oclock and 30 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. SATURDAY, February 10, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.”
The SPEAKER. No business is in order in the House today except debate as in ComWhole on the state of the Union on the Presidents message, on which the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. heater] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. ECKLEY. I would inquire if an order has been made for an adjournment until Tues da.
The SPEAKER. It has not, because the House must be in session on Monday morning in accordance with the programme of the JtCommee.
Mr. PAINE. I would inquire of the Chair if the order of the House permits the filing of petitions today?
The SPEAKyER. It does; theymay be filed with the Clerk.
Mr. ECKLEY. I will yield the floor to the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. Wane] RECONSTRUCTION.
Mr. DELANQ next addressed the House. During his remarks his hour exired. On motion of Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio, the time of Mr. DELANO was extended.
The SPEAKER. It was the understandin of the House on yesterday that there would be time for 3 speeches today by 3 oclock. If there be no objection, the Chair will consider it proor to allow 3 speeches to be made, even should it extend the session till after 3 oclock. No objection was made.
Mr. DELANO. Now, Mr. Speaker, before noticing the gentlemans remarks any further, I will ask him because that will settle the question without attemptiii to interpret what he has said heretofore whether he believes that Congress has a right, under any provision of the Constitution, to exercise power over these States as Territories, or, in his own language, fto exercise local powers of the lost State governments" under the present state of facts, and as things nowexist? directly, will bring the gentleman to an issue, and I shall understand him.
Mr. SHELLABARGER.Mr. Speaker I reply to the gentlemans inquiry by sayingt at. I do hold, as I stated in that sentence, that there has occurred in the rebel States that state of things in which they have lost their “practical relations to the Government of the U.S., ” if Imay be permitted to adopt the language of our late and lamented President. hisquestion, if answered. I care not whether you call that being in the Union or out of the Union. There is no need of our falling out here about more dialectics. My proposition is that, where a loyal State government by rebellion has been utterly swept away, there oes revert to the U.S. during that hiatus in the State government (if on will pardon the expression) such amount of local control over the States as will enable the U.S. to render effectual the provision of the guarantee clause of the Constitution, and such as will enable the U.S. 1st, to take care of the people during that interim, and next, and as s eedily as practicable, to restore and reestabish a local State government, republican in form, within the State, which was never destroyed, and cannot be until the Constitution is overthrown.
Mr. DELANO. I thought, Mr. Speaker, that I did not misunderstand my colleague; I still think so. Ionce hiid an acquaintance, the president of a railroad company, of whom it was said that he had a peculiar faculty of deciding a instthose whom he wanted to decide agaiiistb: “letting them down easy.” Adopting thatillustration, I feel that my friend does come to the very conse uence s of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, alt ongh I admit he does not step off the preci ice into the abyss by one single leap, but, as lie explains himself here to ay, he “comes down easy.” He is, then, in favor of this Congress exercising local powers oflegislation for these States. He does believe (and that is the whole theory of his speech) that the powers of these States are overthrown and lost. If he is correct, then the Gentfrom Pennsylvania is right, and the States as politieal organizations are “dead.” They are without law, and chaos reigns, until Congress shall establish law for them. This places them in the power of Congress, subject to be governed asTerritories and insid iously opens tedoor to rule and govern, confiscate and destroy, as effectually as the Gentfrom Pennsylvania can desire.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. May I ask my colleague a sin 10 question I
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I am permitted, Mr. Speaker through the courtesy of my most excellent colleague, to ask him a question, for which privilege um obliged to him. I wish to as the gentleman whetherlie holds that in that very condition of things, which by sad history we know has existed in those States, during which loyal State overincnts have not in fact been in existence the U.S. can exercise no control locally for the purposes of protecting the loyal people there and restoring State governments as soon as possible I
Mr. STEVENS said he was absent from the Hall when the gentleinan made allusion to him, and he wishctlg now to observe that he never held the doctrine that the southern States were dead but had argued that it made no difference whether they were in or out of the Union as to the question of reconstruction. He held that those States were organized, but organized under another Government besidcs our own, but still States. The gentlenmn mistook his position as to confiscation. He did not advo cate a general sweep, but that the lands of a large number of the rebels ought to be confis cated, in order to meet the expenses incurred by putting down the rebellion and to increase the pensions of soldiers.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I desire to ask the gentleman a question, with his permission.
Mr. DELANO. The gentleman may propound his question. I will not say whether I will answer it or not.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. My colleague has defined very clearly what he conceives to be a State. He admits the right of the majority of the people in each State to change its form of government, and also the right and duty of the national Government to guaranty to each State a RFG. I wish to know whether he intends us to understand that when our armies marched into the South, we were, on the fall of the rebellion, to maintain the governments we found established by the people in each of said States, which were not, as I conceive, constitutional State governments; orwere we to maintain the old governments, which the people by their own not had abolished?
Mr. DELANO.Mr. Speaker, I do notelaim to be a very clear headed man; I do not make any such pretension. But if I have been so muddy as to lend anybody to believe that I was arguing that this Government should guaranty the authorities that the rebellion set up in the States, I am very sorry for my ignorance and for my incapacity to express myself. I was trying to show that the U.S. Government was bound to guaranty, as the Constitution uires, the chi governments which had been a mitted to be republican in form; that the Government went out there to take off this cursed incubus of secession, to lift it from the minorities, to allow those loyal minorities to rise up and become the power of the country, under the old governments and the old constitutions.
Mr. SPALDING. ill my colleague allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. DELANO. I will yield for a question.
Mr. SPALDING. My colleague has quoted Bishop. I would ask him if he has seen an essay by this same
Mr. Bishop, recently published in the papers, and called “The Right Way?”
Mr. SPALDING. Has my colleague seen that essa?
Mr. D liANO. I have seen it, but do not read it always. As for Mr. Bishop, I think a great deal of him as a criminal lawyer. As a constitutional lawyer I do not think so much of him. I have quoted him only because he has been referred to by others as authority.
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I would like to ask my collea e another question.
Mr. ASHLEY, of bio. If these 11 States had merely changed their form of governments, according to the prescribed rules of their constitutions, in such a way as to amount to practical secession, and the great body of the people had acquiesced in that change without making war upon the nation, how, under his theory, are we to guaranty the minority a RFG in said States, if the minority do not petition for it?
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. had not tired a gun.
Mr. DELANO. I do not know that I understand the qentleman.
Mr. ASHL Y, of Ohio. If the majority of the people in the 11 rebel States had, in pursuance of their organic State law, changed the forms of their State government, and the great body of the people had acquiesced in that change, and no war ad been made by them, no gun fired, how under the theory of my colleague, could the government guaranty to those States a RFG?
Mr. DELANO. If they had attempted such a thing as that without war, it would have been the duty of the national Government to do just what they have done in this instance; not to recognize those illegal acts, but to guaranty the old governments, as they did in the case of the State of RhdIsland. That would have been our duty, as I understand it,
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. But if there is no minority petition in for redress, no one claiming the existence O a constitutional State government and the interference of the national Government for their protection, under his theory, how is a RFG to be guarantied, how is the authority of this nation to be maintained over its own terrritory?
Mr. DELANO. The House will see that I have uo time in my hour to discuss mere abstractions, mere hypothetical cases, that never had an existence. I am now endeavoring to deal with facts as they are, with things as they have transpired, and not with hypothetical cases, cases which have not arisen and in I think that sometimes he No, sir; if they I the rebellion had sucq answer to my friendfrom Ohio [ML ASHLEY] he will allow me to quote the text, “Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I move that the time of my colleague be extended for 15 minutes, or until he concludes his remarks. No objection was made.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Moran, February 12, 1866. The followin prayerwas offered by the Chaplain, Rev. E. GanD. D.: o Supreme Ruler of the heavens and the earth, behold the nation prostrate at Th feet at the terrible calamity, the staggering low the great bereavement. The scenes connected with the death of our lamented Chief Magistrate come back to the memory today. O God, we bless Thee for such a man, for such a President, that his life was s ared so long, that he was permitted to accomplish so much, that when he died he fell covered with honors and glory, and not the nation only gathered about is bier, but messages of conoence were sent from all the nations of the earth. We pray that today we may be sufficiently humbled and chastened in view of our great afiiction, and that we may be led as a nation to depend less upon man and more upon God and wilt Thou sanctify to us all the afflictions, as individuals and as a people, that we are called to experience. oday, especially, would we commend to Th merciful regard the afilicted and be reave family of our departed chief. May they continue to be supported by Thy grace, be guided by Thy Spirit, and be preserved in Thy mercy, that these great afllictions be sanctified to their present and future good and bless our Government, the POTUS, the ministers of state, the members of Congress, the defenders of our land, and all the people. Bless us, we ra Thee, in our relations to each other an to Thee, our Maker and Preserver. Prepare us for the solemn services in which we are about to engage. Oh, grant that we may look up submissively to Thee, remembering that God does all things well and we pray that, being chastened by Thine afflictions, we may be better prepared as a nation for the great mission we have to perform in the world. Iake us a blessing and make us an example to the nations of the earth of righteousness and truth and freedom, and save us at last, for Christs sake. Amen.
The PRESIDENT protempore The 1st business in order is the reading of the Journal of the last days session.
Mr. CLARK. Unless some Senator desires to have it ad, I move that the reading of the Journal be dispensed with.
The PRESIDENT protempore The reading of the Journal can be dispensed with only by unanimous consent.
Mr. SHERMAN. I notice in the published order of proeeedinvs that provision is made for the reading of the Journal; and I do not know but that it was for the purpose of consuming some time to enable the necessary preparation to be made in the other House. I have no desire Ti to have the Journal read, but the programme ought to be observed.
Mr. CLARK. Iunderstand that the Journalof the other House is a very short one, and probably its reading has been concluded by this time, so that they are ready to receive as.
Mr. SHERMAN. With that understanding, I have no objection to the Senators motion. There bein no objection made, the reading of the Journa of last Fridays proceedings was dis ensed with.
The PRESIDENT protempore. In pursuance of previous arran eihent, the Senate will now proceed to the Ha l of the HoRep to oin in the services which have been assigned or this day. The Senate. headed by the
President Protemporeand the Chief Clerk, and preceded by the SergeantatArms, proceeded to the Hall of the HoRep. At the conclusion of the services there, the Senate returned to its Chamber. PRINTING OF Mr. BANGKOITS ADDRESS.
Mr. FOOT. I suggest to SenatorsI suppose there is no business to detain usthat in a few moments a concurrent resolution will be received from the HoRep, and Itrust Senators will remain until that resolution shall arrive; it will require our action in its concurrence. Meanwhile I movethe Secretary can put it in the proper form of a resolutionthat 10,000 copies of Mr. Bau crofts memorial address on the life and character of President Lincoln be printed for the use of the Senate. That resolution will go, under the rules. to the ComPrintg.
The PRESIDENT protempore No objection being made, such a resolution will be drawn, and referred to the ComPrintg.
Mr. FOOT. If there be no objection, that rule may be waived, and the resolution adopted at this time; and if there be no objection I trust the Chair will put the question on e adoptionof the resolution. e PRESIDENT protempera. Under the rule it is required that such a resolution should go to the ComPrintg; but by the common consent of the Senate the Chair will put the question to the Senate. The resolution was agreed to unanimously, as follows: Resolved, That10,000copiesof the memorial addresson the life and character of Abraham Lincoln, delivered at the request of both Housesof congress. bv Hon. GeorgeBaneroft, be printed for the use of the Senate. JOURNAL.
Mr. SHERMAN. We might as well have the Journal read now. It was not read this mornin.
The PRESIDENT protempore The reading of the Journal of Fridays proceedings is called for. It will be read if there be no objection.
Mr. MCDOUGALL. There is objection. It was dispensed with by unanimous consent this morning.
Mr. SHERMAN. We may as well have it read. It will fill up the time while we are wait in to receive the message from the House.
The PRESIDENT protampon. The reading of the Journal will7 he proceeded with, if there be no The JournoabjecotifonF. ridays proceedings was read and approved. PAPERS WITHDRAWN and REFERRED. On motion of
Mr. GRIMES, it was Ordered, That the petition and other papersin the case of Lieutenant ommnnderGreenlca Cilley be Withdrawn from the files of the Senate, and referred to the ComcClaims.
Mr. nssenorrs mnnnss. The following message was received from the HoRep, by Mr. McPnnusos, its Clerk: Mr. President, I am directed by the HoRep to communicate to the Senate a concurrent resolution presenting the thanks of Congress to Hon. George Baneroft for the appropriate memorial address delivered by him on the life and services of Abraham Lincoln, and reuesting a copy for publication.
Mr. OOT. I ask the unaniniaus consent of the Senate to consider that resolution at the presenttime, and move the concurrence of the Senate in it. The resolution was considered by unanimous consent. It is as follows: Resolved, (the Senateconcurring.) That the thanks of Congress be presentedto Hon. Gear o Banerofl: for the appropriate memorial address clivered by him on he life and services of Abraham Lincoln, lute POTUS in the RepresentativesHull, beforeboth Housesof Congress and their invited guests, on the 12thday of February. 1866 and that he be requested to furnish a copy for publication. Relolved. That the chairman of the JtCommee appointed to make the necessary arrangements to carry into effectthe resolution of that Congress in relation to the memorial exercises of Abraham Lincoln. be requestedto communicate to Mr. Baneroft the aforcgoing resolution. Receive his answer thereto and present the sameto both Houses of Conzress. The resolutions were concurred in.
Mr. FOOT. I move that the Senate do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. MONDAY, February 12, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer)y the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. Bonnor", as follows: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. We thank Thee that once more through the night watches we were safely guarded by Thee, and that our eyes have been opened in peace through Thy love to behold the coming of this gladly solemn day and now that we are to be called away from the usual public duties of the positions that are occupied here to hold converse awhile with death and with the memories of one whom we all honored and loved so. much, we beseech Thee, O God, that in Thine infinite mercy Thou wilt grant us all grace to profit as we should by the occasion. We turn away from all relations of a public nature, to country and to time, to think o those more solemn ones that we bear to eternity and to God. May every one be induced by Thy Holy Spirit to consider today what the tendency of life iswhether through faith in Jesus Christ it will end in everlasting life. O Lord, preare all for the properobservance of this solemn ay. May every one interested, and all who may participate in th is service, be guided of God, so that all being done decently and in order, this magnificentnnd solemn testimonial of the nation to the worth of our decried and murdered President may make a ue impression on the national heart and when all is over here, when all the pomp and the pride and the pageantries of earth have passed away, may we all be received into Thy heavenly kingdom, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. The Journal of Saturday last was then read and approved. CHRISTIAN COMMISSION.
The SPEAKER. called the HoRep to order. THANKS ro, HON. GEORGE BANonorr.
Mr., WASHBURNE, of Illnois, by unanimous consent, introduced the ollowipg conien rent resolutions; which wereread, considered, and agreed to:, Resolved, That the silhoile m. he" for the approprfiialtie illmteimmoifiriaiillfia. d)edrheishsddneillive elrlelidi by him on the life and sorvicesof Abraham Lincoln, late POTUS. in the Representativesl all, before 0th Housesof Congressand their invited nests. on the 12thdo. of Fcbriiary. 1866 and that he s repuestedto furnis acopy for publication. Reialved. hat thochairrnenoft e JtCommee appointed to make thence, arrangements to Fgapryintoafloattha;egplpt r, o$?lhu Conggesqn relation to the memorial exercisesin honor of Abraham Lincoln be requestedto connimnicate to Mr. Baneroft the nloregoingresolution. roccivoliis answer gthroesres. to and presentthesameto bothHousesofCon and then, on motion of Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, (at 3 oclock and 35 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Tunsnav, February 13, 1866. v Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. B., H. GRAY. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION. The President Protemporelaid before the Senate a report of the SecyWar, communicating, in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 5th offFebruary, the memorial of Brevet Brigadier General B. S. Roberts, setting forth his views of a Inn for reclaiming the swamps and waste land; of the basin of the lower Mississippi river; which was, on motion of Mr. Foor, ordered to, lie on the table, and be printed. SENATOR PROM ALABAMA.
Mr. MORGAN. I present the credentials of. Lewis B., Parsons, chosen a Senfrom the:State of. Alabama, for the term conimencing March 4 1865. As the state of Alabama is one of the States that. during a period of 4 yearshas been in rebellion against the U.S., and as Congress has not yet determined whetherlhe political condition of affairs in that Stateris such as to entitle the State to representation in the Senate, I do. not expect that Governor Parsons will be requested to come I forward and take the oath at this time; but I asktlwlfthe credentials be received and laid upon the table to. await the further action of the Senate.
The PRESIDENT protempore That order will be entered, if there be no objection.
Mr. WADE. I present a memorial, very numeronsly signed y colored soldiers in the Dept of the Mississippi, setting forth that they have faithfully serve their country in the Army, and assisted in defending the country against its enemies, and prayin for the right o suffrage to be extended to them and to all other colored persons. I ask the reference of this memorial to the JtComReconstruction.
The PRESIDENT protempore Does the Senfrom Ohio give way to the Senfrom Delaware?
Mr. SAULSBURY. I simply wish to ask the Senfrom Ohio one question, and it is in reference to a historic fact. He says the petition he presents is from “colored”persons. I want to know from him where he ets the origin of the term “colored, ” as a pied to the negro population. I am not muc of a student of history, sir, but yet sometimes I do mouse about in that Dept
The PRESIDENT protem ore. The Chair understood the Senfrom Delaware to propose to ask the Senfrom Ohio a question, and the Chair inquired if the Senfrom Ohio gave way.
Mr. SAULSBURY. The amiable Senfrom Ohio will answer my question. Where does he get the term “ colored?”
The PRESIDENT otcm ore. The Chair will reeat the question to e Senfrom Ohio whether he gives way to the Senfrom Delaware.
Mr. SAULSB RY. Then Iwishto ask the Senfrom Ohio where he gets the term colored, ” as applied to the negro population of the count I It is a term that has been used frequently in this Chamber; it is upon everybodys lips. Where does he get it? I know that term is used in the history of the West India islands; but the word “colored, ” as used in the history of sandomingo and Hayti, was applied to mulattoes, an never aplied to negroes. I am simply inquiring for information of the Senator, when he applies the term “colored” to negroes the origin of the term as applied to races. this so frequently used in this Chamber that I want the attention of the country brought to that question, how the term “ colored ” is used in reference to the negro population. The petition was referred to the JtComReconstruction. BILL RECOMMITTED. On motion of
Mr. WILSON, it was Ordered. That the hill (8. No. 67)to increase and tix the military peace establishment of the U.S. he recommittedto the ComMilAffrs . REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.R. COWAN, from the ComFinance, to whom was referred a petition of persons engaged in running coal to market down the Ohio river from Pittsburg, prayin for an approriation for the improvement of the Ohio river between Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, and Buflington Island, WestVirginia, asked to be discharged from its further consideration, and that it e referred to the ComCommerce; which was agreed to. He also, from the same committee, to whom were referred a petition of citizens of Pennsylvania, and a petition of citizens of Ohio, praying for an amendment of the act requiring the enrollment of boats, barges, scows, c., as will exempt from its provisions all coal boats, coal bar es, and conflats which are used exclusive y for running coal to market, and are not used for any other purpose whatever, asked to be discharged from their further consideration, and that they be referred to the ComCommerce; which was agreed to.
Mr. DIXON, from the ComPostOffices, to whom were referred the amendments of the HoRep to the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R.No. 61) to establish certain post roads, reported them with further amendments. Mr. HOWARD, from the ComPacificRR, to whom was referred the hill (S.No.20) granting lands to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the States of Missouriand Arkansasto the pacific coast, by the southern route, reported it with amendments. Mr. WILSON, from the ComMilAffrs , to whom the subject was referred, reported a bill (S.No.138) to increase and fix the military eace establishment of the U.S.; which was read, and passed to a 2nd reading. SECURITY OF RIGHTS. to liinIrq. Ui PreESinStoEtNheDeEoNnd. itionThoef tjoheinSt tactoemsmwihttieche formed the socalled confederate States have instructed me to report ajomt resolution propjosing an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. I move that for the present it lie upon the table, and be printed. The jomtresolution (S.No.an amendment to the constitution 30)fproposing of the U.S. was read the 1st time by its title.
Mr. SHERMAN. I should like to have it. read in full. The JtResolution was read the 2nd time at length. It is as follows: Resolved by Ike Senate and HoRep of the U.S.A. in Congress assembled, (2/3rds of both Houses concurrinz.) That the following article be proposed to the Legislntures of the several States as an amendmentto t 9 constitution of the U.S. which, when ratified by 3/4ths of the said Legislatures shall be valid as part of said constitution, namely: Auricni:. The Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper to secure to the citizens of each State all privileges and immunities of citizens in the scveral States; and to all persons in the several States equal protection in the rights of lilo, liberty, and property. The JtResolution was ordered to lie on the table, and be printed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. MOPHERSON, its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed abill (H.R.No. 122 making appro nations for the naval service for the year ening 30th June, 1867; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED. The message also announced that the Speaker of the HoRep had signed an enrolled hill (S.No. 60) to amend an act entitled “ An act to establish a Bureau for the Relief of Freedmen and Refugees, ” and for other purposes; which wasthercupon signed by the president protempore. 1866. BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. DIXON asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introuee a JtResolution (S.R. No. 29) for the transfer of funds a proriated for the payment of salaries in the ost tiice Dept to the general salary account of that Dept; which was read twice bv its title, and referred to the ComPostOffices. EXPLORATION OF THE YELLOWSTONE.
Mr. MORRILL submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved. That the SecyWar be directed to communicate to the Senatethe report of Major Rey nolds, U.S. engineer. may e in 1859and 1800, of his exploration of the Yellowstone and the country drained by that river. DANGBRS of TUBULAR BOILERS.
Mr. BROWN submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Remlued, Tha tthe ComCommerce be instructed to inquire what legislation is needed by congress to protect the lives of passengerson the western waters from the danger of explosion incident to the use of tubular beilers. PBESIDENTIAL APPROVAL OF LAWS.
Skip Skip A message from the POTUS, by Mr. WILLIAM G. Moons, his Secretary, announced that the POTUS had approved and si ned. on the 7th instant, aJtresolution (S.R. o. l7)dirccting the distribution of the writings of James Madison and that on the 10th instant he had approved and signed the following act and JtResolutions: An act (S.No.86) granting the franking privilege to Mary Lincoln A JtResolution (S.R. No. 20) extending the time for the completion of the Burlington and MissouriRiver railroad A oiut resolution (S.R. lie. 25) tenderin the thanks of Congress to Vice Admiral Davi G. Farragut, and whthe officers, petty officers, seamen, and marines under his command, for their gjillantry and good conduct in the action in Mo ile bay on the 6th Au st, 1864; and A JtResolution (S.R. o. 26) for the payment of expenses incurred by the Jtcommittee to inquire into the condition of the States which formed the socalled confederate States of America. HOUSE BILL REFERRED. The bill (H.R.No. 122) makingappropriations for the naval service for the year endin 30th June, 1867 was read twice by its title, an referred to the ComFinance. BONDED WAREHOUSES.
Mr. MORGAN. I move that the Senate proceed to reconsider the vote on the passage of House bill No. 135, which has been several times before the Senate. The motion was agreed to and the Senate resumed the consideration of the motion submitted by Mr. Srnaous on the 26th of Januar I last to reconsider the vote by which the bill (By; Mr. No. 135) to extend the time for the withdrawal of goods for consumption from public store and bonded warehouse and for other purposes, was passed.
The PRESIDENT protempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the special order, being House JtResolution No. 61 upon which the Senfrom Missouri is entitled to the floor.
Mr. MORGAN. I hope theSenfrom RhdIsland will be permit edto finish his argument. The bill which lie asiiioved to reconsider has passed both Houses otiCongress; it has been be era as nowbn 3 several days, and I think it is quite important that the question should be disposed of, and perhaps it is better to finishitat this time. here cannot be much further discussion. After the senators argument, I hope there will be a vote this mornin.,
Mr. MOREITILL. "Let the special order be laid aside informall. I
The PRESIDENT protempore. Does the Chair understand the Senfrom NewYork to move to st no the special order?
Mr. MORRILL. I should hope that the special order would by common consent be gill? aside while we take a vote on the pending i.
The PRESIDENT proieritpme. It is suggested that the special order for this hour, on which the Senfrom Missouriis entitled to the floor, be laid aside by common consent to enable the Senfrom RhdIsland to finish his remarks. Is there any objection to that course? “No objection bein " made, the special order will be laid aside, an the Senfrom RhdIsland willproceed.
Mr. It OItRILL. I am so desirous of having the vote taken on this subject that I do not propose to occupy the attention of the Senate beyond a single minute. This is no question oflinance; that suggestion strikes me as absurd. It isa question relating particularly and solely and exclusively to the bonded warehouse system, instituted for the benefit of commerce. That is all there is of it, and it is idle to send such a question to the ComFinance. The pnestion that my honorable friendfrom Rhode sland raises about the antagonism between the commercial and manufacturing interests is all misconceived, v does not arise on this bill by any possibility; and if it did it is the most ine ppor tnne discussion that could possibly be started at the present moment. I pray how does the question of protection or free trade arise? What is the precise point of the bill? Simply whether it is fit and proper to allow the goods, which under the warehousing system are provided to be deposited in the Government warehouses, to lie there one year or 2 years under certain rules and regulations. That is all there is ofit. This systemic provided for. This bill does not interfere withit. This simpl permits an extension of the time within who the parties may remove the goods by paying an additional sum of 10%. It is a very small matter any how, and can by no possibility “affect the question of free trade or protection. The SecyTreasury was ully consulted on this subject, and he said that no possible injury could come from it, either to the finances or the general interests of the country; and being lully of that opinion, the ComCommerce, who gave the subject careful consideration, reported the bill. ask that we may have a vote.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Is not the Senator mistaken? That 25%. law was repealed by a subsequent statute.
Mr. SHERMAN. I do not find it repealed in the law of 1862.
Mr. FESSENDEN. it is repealed substan tia.
Mr. SHERMAN. As I intimated before, the only objection I have to the bill is the question of the remission of the penalty or additional duty. If the law imposing that has been already repealed, theremaining question is one on which have formed no opinion.
Mr. MORRILL. That is repealed], according to the understanding of the committee, by the act of 1862.
Mr. FESSENDEN. This is the provision to which I referred, in the law of 1862: Provided, That all goodswhich now are or may be depositedin public store or bondedwarehouse. after this act takes effectand cos into operation. must be withdrawn therefromort edutiest ereon paid with in one year from the date of original importation. This is understood at the customhouse, I believe, as a repeal of the provision referred to by the Senfrom Ohio.
Mr. SHERMAN. Then I understand that the penalty of 25% is no longer imposed. Then the only question, it seems to me, between these 2 gent emen Mr. Srnsaus and Mr. MORRILL1it is a kind o friendly contest between commerce and domestic manufacturesis whether we shall extend the time within which imported goods may be taken from bonded warehouses and entered for consumption in the countr. This bill proposes to extend it 2 years teold law is one year. Upon that question fhave not an very definite opinion. I think that if the goo sare now entered for consumption we shall et the present rates of duty upon them. If they are notal lowed to be entered for consumption the may be exported, and in that case we should lose the duties that are now levied upon them. This is the only view I can take of the question; and in that view, as the goods are now here in our bonded warehouses, it would probably be better to have them entered for consumption; and if this bill will expedite that process, I see no very great objection to it. As a matter of course, the introduction into the market of the stock on hand in the bonded warehouses might tend to some extent to supply the market, and thus exclude domestic manufactures; but all importations do that to a greater or less extent; I and with us it is rather a question of revenue than of domestic industry. If, as I supposed when I rose, the additional duty of 25%. was still levied upon the goods in the onded warehouses, I should feel disposed to insist upon the payment of that penalty before the goods were withdrawn; but if that is not now the law, if under the law these parties have the right to export the goods, I see no great objection to our getting the duties fixed by law and allowing them to enter into the consumption of the country.
Mr. HENDERSON. Have you in your State any of the poor land spoken of by the Senfrom RhdIsland?
Mr. HENDRICKS. No, sir; Indiana in that respect is next to Missouri. With Missouriand Ohio, she has no poor land. There is a little wet land in one or 2 localities
Mr. HENDRICKS. Yes. Swamp land that, I believe, the State got under the law of 1850; but with that exception the land invites the people to its cultivation. The effect of legislation is apparent in regard to one interest in our country. I protested against it at the time, and was sorry to see a Senator, representing a neighboring State, giving his powerful influence in favor of the proposition that was made to impose a tax of 2 dollars on whisky. That is a tax on the corn produced by my constituents, and by his constituents and by the constituents of the Senfrom Illinois, who also represents nothing but good land, so far as he represents property at all. The people of those States and the people of Kentucky are largely interested in the production of corn. There was but one mode in which we could manufacture it and that was in the production of whisky. This bod deliberately said that we should not do it. I believe that the Senfrom Ohio really thought that 2 dollars a gallon would produce a large revenue to the Treasury, but it is a mistake; the interest today is dead; the production is as nothing and now, instead of getting one dollar a bushe for our corn, we are only able to get from 20 to 40 cents for it. AGentfrom Illiums told me the other day that on one farm which he owned last year his taxes were $400 and he got a dollar a bushel for his corn, an this year, because of the county bounties and township bounties 830., his taxes were $800 on that piece of land and he ot 20 cents a bushel for his corn, so that in fact his taxes are increased 1,00operccut., and thatin)art owingto the fact that you have prohibits the ossibility of manufacturing the corn. It is a envy and bulky article, which cannot hear transportation. But I did not intend to discuss any of these questions; I rose simply to say that I should support the proposition of the Senfrom RhoSe Island.
Mr. CLARK. I think this i question reaches much further than some gent emen seem to apprehend. Take asimple illuStration; suppose a very large manufacturinghouse in Euro e chooses to fill your bonded warehouse with goo for 3 years; you manufacture the same goods in your own country, and whenever your manufacturer comes upon the market to sell his articles, that large establishment empty that bonded warehouse upon the market at auction, and where is your, manufacturer? I state not. an imaginary case; I state an actual fact, what is known to be done. You thus give the men who import 3 years to play upon your manufacturers. This should not be done without consideration. I have always been opposed to an extension of the time allowed for goods to lie in bonded warehouse. I think one year is too long; I would not ive them one instant over 3 months for that purpose. When these men have 3 months in which to 10086 to put their goods upon the market or not, it seems to me they have all they ought to have. But now they have one year, and this bill proposes to give them 2 years more, or 3 years altogether in which to keep their goods in ware house, during which time to compete with your manufacturers and undersell them. No new manufactory in this country can live under that system. I hop on to know an instance where a large manufiiictory in this country was springiniup, and the only way they could compete with the German houses was to go into the markets at auction at a great sacrifice, and drive them out at a vast loss of their own capi tal. The result of this bill will. be to give the importers not only one year but 3 years during which to play this operation upon you. I thinkwe onght to consi or before we pass such a bill. think the Senfrom Maine does not mean any such result, but I fear he will have it I fear that what has been will be again, and I ask the Senate to let us consider for awhile.
Mr. MORRILL. If this measure is likely to involve a discussion which was not anticipated, it is hardly fair perhaps, to the Senfrom Missouri, and I call therefore for the order of the day. APPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATION.
The PRESIDENT protempore The JtResolution (H.R.No. 51) proposing an amendment to the constitution of the U.S., is before the Senate as in ComWhole, the pending question being on the amendment proposed by the Senfrom mis1866. 811 souri, [Mr. HENDERSON, ltO the amendment of the Senfrom Massac usetts [Mr. Susanna] On this question the Senfrom Missouriis entitled to the floor.
Mr. SUMNER. With the indulgence of m friend I desire to submit an amendment which will be in order before we can be called upon to act upon his amendment. I propose to add words to the proviso recommended by the committee. Of course it is in order to perfect the original proposition before we come to the question of striking out. My ob“ect now isto amend the original proposition of the committee by adding these words, ” and they shall be exempt from taxation of all kinds;” so as to make e phrase read, “all persons therein of such race or color shall be excluded from the basis of representation, and they shall be exempt from taxation of all kinds.”
The PRESIDENT protempore In the opinion of the Chair, the proposed amendment of the Senfrom Massachusetts is not in order. It is not to perfect an amendment before action is had upon it. The Senator before offered an amendment to strike out the whole of the resolution and insert something else, and to that amendment an amendment was proposed. Now the Senfrom Massachusetts desires to amend the original resolution, which is not in order at this time.?
Mr. SUMNER. The question is on striking out the original resolution of the committee, and I submit, with deference to the Chair, that before we come to the question of striking out, it is in order to add to the proposition of the committee or to subtract from it; in short, to amend it in any way, and that must be considered before we come to the main proposition of strikin out. The PRESIDENT protempore. Then the Senfrom Massachusetts proposes to with draw the amendment heretofore otfered by him I
The PRESIDENT protempore “hat is in order. The Senator can withdraw his amendment for the purpose of proposing to modify or perfect the orinal resoution.
Mr. SUMNER. Very well, then letit stand so. I wish to have a vote on this as a prelim inary question.
The PRESIDENT protempore That is in order, and the question is on the amendment now offered byt eSenfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. HENDERSON addressed the Senate, and without concluding gave we to Mr. DOOLITTLE, who move that the senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. EThe publication of Mr. Hasnsasoss speech is eferred until it shall have been concluded]
Mr. FESSENDEN. I do not see the necessity of having an ekecutive session at this hour. We can sit until 5 oclock. We shall never get through in this way.
Mr. DOLITTLE. We have some Indian treaties that ought to be acted upon.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senfrom Wisconsin moves that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of executive business. The motion was agreed to; and after some time spent in executive session, the doors were reopened, and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tucson, February 13, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock m. Prayer by Rev. B. F. Mosais. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.
Skip Skip LEAVE of ABSENCE. Mr. ORTH moved that His colleague, Mr. STILWELL, have leave of absence for one week from Thursday next. There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly. ORDER or BUSINESS.
The SPEAKER. fly the order of the House on Friday, the morninhour business of Mou day was transferredto is day. Committeeswill be called for reports, not to be brought back by a motion to reconsider. The committees were called, but no reports were submitted.
The SPEAKER stated the next business in order to be the call of States for resolutions, commencing with the State of California, where the call was arrested on last Monday. CLERK TO COMMITTEE ON MINES, ETC.
Mr. HIGBY submitted the following resolution, on which he demanded the previous question: Resolved. That the ComMining be allowed to have a clerk. who shall receive the usual compensation fixed by the House for clerks of committees. On 2nding the demand for the previous question the House divided; and there were ayes 30, noes 13 no quorum voting.
Mr. ROSS. I suggest to the gentleman to allow me to move an amendment, for a clerk to be allowed to each member.
Mr. HIGBY. I want the resolution to pass and not to be defeated.
Skip Skip The SPEAKER, (no quorum having voted) ordered tellers; and appointed Messrs. HIGBY and LEBnoxn. The House again divided; and the tellers recitedayes 48, noes 43. The SPEAKER voted in the affirmative to make a quorum. So the call for the previous question was 2nded. The main question was ordered. The House divided on the adoption of the resolution; and there wereayes 54 noes 49. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, demanded the fleas&nays. T o yeas&nays were ordered. The question was taken; and it was deckled in the aflirmativeyeas 67. nays 64, not voting 61; So the resolution was adopted. Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio, mtRtv the resolution was adopted; upon the table. Agreed to.
Mr. NIBLACK. I ask whether this resolution authorizes the payment of a salary to this clerk from the commencement of this Congress, or from the present time.
The SPEAKER. The resolution is not before the House, having been passed under the previous question. IMPROVEMENT or ZUMBRO RIVER, MINNESOTA.
Mr. DONNELLY introduced a lands to the State of Minnesota, tboillagilranintintghe improvement of Zumbro river, in said State; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands. MEXICO.
Mr. WHALEY submitted the following preamble and resolutions, on which he demanded the previous question: Whereas this House at its last session. inte rating the sciitimentiof the American people. passe a resolution indorsing the traditiona policy of this Government toward the republics of the continent, and reprobating in unmistakable language the erection of a monarchy upon the ruins of the neighboring republic of Monico: and whereas the flagrant infraction of this American continental policy occurredwhile this nation was in a conflict for its own unity, which conflict is now happily ended: Therefore, Resolved. 1. That this House do herebyreaffirm the resolution of last session and declarethat the establishment of a political protectorateby France in be half of an Austrian prince, over the republic of Mexice and the iptroduction of a schemeof policy which carries with it a right to interfere with our own as well as in the afiairsofnll the republics of this contincnt is a measure to which this country can never submit and which should beresistedby all the means in our power. 2. That to the end of making good this resolution, the President solicit the alliance chill the republic of this continent, and the useof all the moansat their command.
Mr. BANKS. I move to refer these resolutions to the ComForAffrs.
Skip Skip The SPEAKER. The previous question has been moved. Mr. BANKS. I ask the gentleman to yield to me to make that motion. Mr. WHALEY. I decline to yield. The question bein taken on 2nding the deman for the previous question, it was not 2nded. Mr. BANKS. I now move to refer it to the ComForAffrs, and on that I demand the)revious question. Mr. ROGERS. I moveto lay the whole subject on the table. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. debate the resolution. The SPEAKER. If debate arises it goes over. Mr. ROGERS. I withdraw the motion to lay the subject on the table. The question recurring on 2nding the demand for the previous question on the motion to refer, it was 2nded. The main question was then ordered, and under the operation thereof the motion to refer to the ComForAffrs was agreed to. Mr. BINGHAM. mtRtv the resolution was referred, on the table. Agreed to. ESCUTCHEONS OF WESTVIRGINIA and NEVADA.
Mr. WHALEY. I ask unanimous consent to otfer another resolution.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the ComrPubBldg be directed to cause to be painted in the square panels of glassin the ceiling of the HoRep the cscutchconsof the Statesof West ir Rlfllfl and Nevada and that the necessaryappropnations be madetherefor.
Skip Skip Mr. ELDRIDGE. I object. Mr. LATHAM. I offer the same resolution, and demand the previous question thereon. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered.
Mr. ICHOLSON. Can the resolution be divided 7
The SPEAKER. It cannot; it must be so framed that the 2 parts will stand independently by themselves in order to be divided.
Skip Skip The resolution was agreed to. Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. mtRtv the resolution was adopted; on the table. Agreed to. INDIAN TRIBES.
Mr. CHAVES submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the ComIndAffrs be directed to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for placina upon suitable sites of reservation I want to seat or not, the House gm followin tribes of. Indians. namely, the several and s of tall Indians. Jicnrtlla Apaches, Comanchos, Kiowas, and Prairie Apaches. LAND OFFICES IN WASHINGTON TERRITORY.
Mr. DENNY introduced a bill for the relief of land offices in Washington Territory; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPubLands. WflGON ROAD IN COLORADO.
Mr. BRADFORD introduced a bill for the construction of a wagon road from Denver city, Coloradopterritory, via Pueblo, to Fort Garland, in the SanLouis Park; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComTerritories.
The SPEAKER. vThe next business in order is taking up resolutions which were offered underthe rule, debate having arisen thereon.
Mr.SCOFIELD. I rise to a question of privilege.
The SPEAKER. No nestion of privilege can be called up today during the morning hour, it being the same as on Monday.
Mr. KASSON. As I understand it, last Monday morning the State of Iowa was not includedin the call of the States. I have a resolution. in my hand, supposing that Iowa wouldbe the 1st State called in order to conclude the call.
The SPEAKER. Iowa was called, and also Wisconsin which succeeded it.
Mr. KASSON. I thought Wisconsin came before Iowa.
The SPEAKER. In the printed list Iowa comes 1st and Wisconsin afterward. Both wore called last Monday week.
Skip Skip unsssor: FROm; SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. FOBNEY, its Secretary, announced that the Senate had concurred in the resolution of the House tend ering thanks to Hon. George Baneroft for the appropriate memorial address delivered by him on the life and services of Abraham Lincoln, late POTUS ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.
mr COBB,from the ComEnrolledBills, reported that the committee had examined an found truly enrolled an act to amend an not entitled “ An act to establish a Bureau. for the Relief ofFreedmen and Refugees, and for other purposes;” when the Speaker signed the same. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR.
The SPEAKER stated that the next business in order was the consideration of the following resolution, offered on the 21st of December last by Mr. SMITH, of Kentucky and which laid over under the rule, debate arising thereon: Itsmired. That Jumesilli. Johnson. claiming to be amcmberelect o thelhirtyIhnth Congressfrom the 3rd district, State of Arkansas, be admitted to the privileges of the floorof the houseduring the pond eacy of his claim as a memberthereof.
Mr. SMITH. I merely wish to remark in regard to this Gentfrom Arkansas, colonel Johnson, that he was an applicant for a seat upon this floor in the 38th congress; his credentials were referred to the comof Elections, and while that committee was considering whether he was entitled to ated him the privileges of the floor. He is agentlemnnv known, to the majority of this House, and one recognized as entirely worthy in every respect at least. I to the privileges of the floor. He was one of the original loyalists in the State of Arkansas and one who never for a moment surreude a single opinion or a single thoughtior feelin to the rebellion. He enlisted in our Army and served for over 3 years with distinction to himself, commandinga rement on various occasions; and he feels, and has so exressed himself to me, that if he were donie at this time the same privilege that he received from the House belore, which was merel one of courtesy, it would be a reflection on his loyalty which was so evidently manifested all the time during the war in a very rebellious State. I therefore hope the House will udopttbis resolution and grant him this privilege., iSo far as his eredentials are concerned, they have been referred to the JtComReconstruction, and that committee can discuss the propriety of admitting him as. a member just as wellrwith this courtee extended to him as though it were denied. tis unnecessary to debate this question as the remarks I have made show the House precisely what the factsare.I call for the previous nestion.
Mr. STEVENS. hope the gentleman will withdraw the previous question for 5 minutes. I want to say a single, wordn u it.
Mr. SMITH. I wish to may (e a further statement, und I. withdraw the previous question for that purpose. At telast session of Congress, Colonel Johnson was paid his mileage and salary during the pendency of his claim here, by areaolution of the House, and during 3 years and a half, as I have already suggested, be commanded a regiment in the U.S Army. While I am upon the floor, I will allow the Gentfrom . Pennsylvania [ML STEVENS] to make his remarks.
Mr. STEVENS. I observe that this resolution proposes to admit some gentleman in the character of a claimant for a seat from a State which we have not yet admitted to be entitled to representation. I made, some time since, perhaps not every fortunate motion to admit 5 or 6 gentlemen without naming where they were from, orjn what character they were here. I had known some of them here and elsewhere, but I did not venture to statorthnt they were claimants for seats from any State. If I had I shouldhave considered it a very badlprecedent. It seems, however, to have been found out that some of them are claimants from Tennessee, and hence that unfortunate precedent has led to this resolution, aggravated by calling this gentleman a claimant tor a seat from the State of Arkansas. Now, I think it is premature to admit any of these gentlemen. The idea of admitting claimants as claimants from anyone of these defunct States is monstrous, in my judgment, while the matter is still before the JtCommee for investigation. If the Gentfrom Kentucky desires to call the previous question I have no objection, but I desire to move to lay the resolution upon the table.
Mr. SMITH. Iwill, presently; and here I may be permittedto. say that when we wanted men from Arkansas and Louisiana and Ale. bamaI remember it well, and so does the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Sjrsvsns none were lender in their. raises of the e votion of these men to the nion than was the distinguished Gentfrom Pennsylvania and others who sit upon that side of the House, and also those 11 on this side of the House, because there is no ivision upon that subject in referenceto the edgraphyof this House. Wealllove to hear of those men from theSonth and our generals and soldiers from the N ortb wrote letters back to us that we readat our deskshow those men were coming from their homes, from their mountain fastnesses and valleys, and ral 1ing around the flag of the ir country and giving their aid to our side of the question. But now when the war is over, the monstrous idea has been. promulgated inthis House that wherever you find a white man. in the South there on find an enemy of the Government; and wherever you find a black man there you find a friend of the Government. That is a slander upon loyal men likeMr. Johnson; a slander thatI throw back with indignation and contempt. I now yield for a short time to the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. KASSON]
Mr. KASSON. As I intend to vote for a proposition like this in the case of loyal men from Arkansas, I desire two or 3 minutes to state the reasons that will control my action. The 1st of all is that we shall be entirely unable to convince the people of this country that we have heard both sides of this question as long as we keep loyal men at arms length from our presence, and so distant that we cannot have any interchange of views in regard to the“ interests they represent. For myself, I stand committed to the admission of Representatives fromvno one State of this Union lately in rebellion except one that stands in an exceptional relation, and which was regarded as a State of this Union at the national Republican convention last held at Baltimore. I refer to the State of Tennessee. Touching the other States I am at perfect liberty to vote for or against their representation here just as my own convictions may prompt me.
Mr. HIGBY.Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment?
Mr. SMITH. Mr. Speaker, Idld notintend to make a speech on this question; and as I desire the resolution to be acted on at once, I call the previous question.
Mr. SIEVENS. I move that the resolution be laid on the table.
Mr. LeBloND. On that motion Iaskfor the ass&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered.
Skip Skip The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmativeyeas 78, nays 69, not voting 88; So the resolution was laid on the table. Mr. BOUTWELL mtRtv just taken; on the table. Agreed to. PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF CITIZENS.
Mr. BINGHAM reported from the joint oommttoe on reconstruction a JtResolution proposing an amendment to the Constiitution of the U.S.;whichwas read, as follows: Resolved by the Senate and HoRep of the U.S.A. in Congress Marital). d. (2/3rds of both I Houses concurring.) That the followinirarticle be proposedto the Legislatures of the several States as an naineudment to the constitution of the U.S. which. when ratified bytlrrce 4ths of the raid Legislatures shall buvandas part of said constitution. namely: Airmen:. The Congreas shall have power to make all lawswhich shall benecessary and proper to securo to the citizens of each State all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states: and to allpersonsin the several States equal protection in the rights of life liberty, and property. The JtResolution wastread a 1st and sec 0nd time, and the question wason ordering it to he engrossed and reada 3rd time.
Mr. LLDRIDGE. I rise to dquestion of order. Can this JtResolution be presented and considered at the present, time without unanimous consent?
The SPEAKER. The JtComReconstruction is authorized to report at any time, and the report comes up for consideration at once, to be disposed of by the action of the House.
Mr. BINGHAM. the jtresolution having now been read a 1st and 2nd time, I ask that it be dated and bermade the special order for next h onday, after theniorning hour, and from day today until disposed of.
The SPEAKER. Theream now 2 special orders, the bankrupt bill and the loan bill, which antedate this. vAu special orders must be taken upinthe order of pniority, this JtResolution may not be reached at the time named.
Mr. BROOKS. Irisetoa question of order. Has the ComReconstruction the right not only to report at all times, but the right also, under that power given to them by order of the House, to make special orders at all times T
Mr. BROOKS. It then requires unanimous consent?
The SPEAKER. On ordering the JtResolutionto be engrossed and read a 3rd time.
Mr. BROOKS. It may be done as well to ds if it is to be done at all.
Mr. STEVENS. I suggest to my colleague on the committee to move that the JtResolutionbe recommitted, and we can consider it whenever it may be desired.
Mr. BINGHAM. Imove that the Jtresolution be recommitted to the JtComReconstruction and that it be ordered to be printed; and on that motion I demand the previous question.
Mr. BROOKS. What is the use of reporting from a committee, and on the same day moving that the same subject he recommitted to the same committee? Why recommit to a committee which has already made up its mind 2
Mr. BINGHAM. The gentleman ought to understand the use ofit. If there had been no objection on the gentlemans part, we would have made it a special order for Monda next, after the morning hour. If recommittetf to the JtComreconstruction, this being a privileged matter, and the committee being authorized to report at any time, the committee may designate the day on which they will report it back and aslr for its consideration and the action of the House.
Mr. BROOKS. I understand; the committee can reportit back and put it through at any time.
Mr. BINGHAM. We do not propose to put it through at any time without a fair hearing. The gentleman is not to prejudice this matter by any remark like that he has just made.
Mr. BROOKS. IWmnt the country to understand how these things are manage.
Mr. BINGHAM and Iwant it to understand who are o posed to enforcing the writ ten guarantees of the constitution.
Mr. BROOKS. Iwautittounderstand that the committee can report at any time. when nobody knows, and then pass it under the provioust questiona; system: of gag law.
Mr. BINGHAM. Therehns been no proposition of that kind made, and the gentleman’ s remark is wholly gratuitous; Mr. 8800 Eli. HiIEfBEtS are known, and the country willjudge between us.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereot the jtResolution was recominitted to the pointComReconstruction, and ordere to be printed. LINCOLN EULOGIES.
Mr. STEI ENS submitted the following JtResolution: Be it resolved. That 1000copiesof the memorial recordsof the nations tribute to Abraham Lincoln. published by W. ll. 8: o. H. Morrison, and compiled by B. F. Morris. containing the historical and official facts ofhis nomination and obstqmes the inauguration of AndrewJohnson as President the U.S.; the action of membersof Congress in the capital on the 17thday of April. 1865;the official orders of the iarious Depts ot the Government. including thoseof the Army and lii. ry. on his death; the tributes of citizens of various Statesrop presented at Washington; of the courts of the DistCol, of foreign nations, and of American citizens abroad; and the orntions of Hon. George Baneroft. at NewYork of Hon. Schuyler Coliax, Speaker oftho HoRep at GIULLHIO, Illine w: and of ltcv. Bishop Matthew Simpson. D. l). tit Springfield. Illinois. on the death and services of President Lincoln; together with the memorial services HOIQIHI honor of his memory by the Congress of the U.S.; on the 12th day of February, 1866 and the oration of Hon. George Bniiorotl doliv cred on that occasion. be published tor the use of Congress.
The SPEAKER stated that the resolution would be referred to the ComPrintg, under the law. PAY op ASST ABBBSBORB.
Mr. SMITH, by unanimous consent, presented the petition of the asst assessors of the 6th district of Kentucky, asking for increase of pay, and moved that it be referred to the ComWays&Means. The motion was agreed to.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT. A message was received from the POTUS, by Colonel WinniAn G. Moons, his Private Secretary, notifying the House that he had approved and signed bills of the following titles, namely: An not (H. Mr. No. 143) for the relief of Charles F. anderson; An not (H.R.No. 36) making appropriations for the payment of invalid and other pensions of the U.S. for the year ending the 30th of June, 1867, and additional appropriations fortheyear ending the 30th of June, 1866; and An act (H.R.No. 204) to regulate the regis tering of vessels. BREVET APPOINTMENTS.
Mr. SCHENCK, by unanimous consent, introduced a JtResolution in relation to hrevot appointments and commissions in the U.S. Army; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The JtResolution was read. It provides tha thereafter every brevet appointmentor commission conferred upon an officer of the Army shall state for what distinguished act of gal lantry or meritorious conduct the same was conferred, and that the annual Army Register shall contain herenfter, appended to the name of each otheer so brevetted, such particular act of gallantry or meritorious conduct for which his brevet was granted. Mr. SCHENCK moved that the JtResolution be referred to the ComMilAffrs, and ordered to be printed. ELLEN BAXDEKSON. Mr. SHELLABARGER, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the relief of Ellen Sanderson, widow of Colonel John P. Sander son, the provost marshal general of Missouri; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, referred to the Committee on Military Main, and ordered to be printed. DAVID DBEXLEB.
Mr. PAIN E asked leave to withdraw from the files of the House certain papers in the case of the claim of David Dr exlcr, of Louisiana, for losses incurred from military operations, co ice of the same to be left on file. o objection being made, leave was granted. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the SecyState, transmitting, in compliance with the acts of congrass of August 16, 1842, and August 18, 1856, a report on the commercial relations of the U.S. with foreign nations for the year ending September 30 1866.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. 1 move that the report be laid on the table and printed, and that 5,000 extra copies thereof be printed. The motion was referred, under the law, to the ComPrintg. MICHIGAN CONTESTED ELECTION.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I rise to a question of privilege. I call up the majority and minority reports of the select committee on the Michigan contested seats. The Gentfrom Michigan Mr. BEAMAN] and the Gentfrom Illinois Mr. MARSHALL] wish to be heard on the subject, after which the contestants will be heard if they choose.
Mr. MARSHALL. I wish to state that the contestant, Mr. Baldwin, isquite unwell, and not able to speak.
Mr. SCOFlELD. When we reach that point, after these other gentlemen are heard, that question may be considered.
Mr. MARSHALL. I would like to know whether Mr. Baldwin will be permitted to have his speech printed without deliveringjt?
Mr. SCOFIELD. I resume there will be no objection; but it will e time enough to raise that question when Mr. Baldwin gets the floor.
Mr. MARSHALL. If he is noterniitted that privilege, he would prefer that the House should postpone the subject until he is able to speak. He is not able this morning to do so.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I shall make no objection. l
Mr. MARSHALL. I ask that the minority report, which I had the honor to submit, be now read.
Mr. SCOFI LD. If the gentleman will allow me, I will ask him if the law of the State did not prescribe the place of voting for the soldier in the military service of the L U.S. at the military headquarters; and if he was not required to be personally present at the place prescribed by law?
Mr. MARSHALL. I will come to that in a moment. I am aring upon the supposition, which I take to be orne out by the authorities submitted to the House, that the constitution of the State of Michi a does require that the elector shall vote in the township in which he resides.
Mr. SCOFIELD. The act of the Legislature provides that he may vote in another place. The only question is whether the Levis ature or the constitutional convention ha a right to prescribe the place of voting for Representatives in congress.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I wish to inquire of the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. MARSHALL] if the supreme court of the State of Michigan ha under consideration at all the point that this case presents here; whether they were not deciding that the law of Michigan was unconstitutional so far as their State officers were concerned; leaving the construction to be given to the constitution of the U.S., that provides that the State Legislatures shall prescribe the place of holding elections for Representatives in Congress, entirely untouched by their decision I
Mr. MARSHALL. As a matter of course this case was not before the supreme court of Michigan. It was another and a different case and o course they could not have decided, and they have no right to decide, the case now before this House.
Mr. SCOFIELD. That is not the question I put. I asked the gentleman whether the supreme court of Michigan had that point of constitutional law which rules this case under consideration at all.
Mr. BEAMAN. I desire to ask the gentle man whether, in the Convention that rained the constitution, there was not adistinct proposition made to give the power to elect Senators to the people of the State instead of the Legislature, on whether that proposition was not voted down.
Mr. MARSHALL. That question, sir, does not affect at all the argument which I am making; and if the gentleman will listen to me he will see in a moment that it does not. I contend that the people of any State may provide that an assemblage of the representatives of the people, to be called a “ convention, ” shall assemble periodically, so every 2nd car, that it sha l he constitute of but one be y, that the whole legislative power of the State shall be vested in that body, and that, under the Federal constitution, that body may elect Senators, for it would be the only Legislature of the State, under the other clause, although it should be called a convention of the people merely, and nobody should calI it a “Legislature. The question before the Convention at the time to which the gentleman refers was simpl whether Senators, members of the other brauc of this Congress, should be elected by the people directly or by the Legislatures but that oes not answer the argument which I am making. I say that a convention is, in the 1st place, the great Legislature of a State; the convention which is called for the purpose of framing the constitution of a Stateits organic law that is the sovereign Legislature. It is the only Legislature of the State that has sovereign power. The subordinate body, popularly called a Legislature, constituted by such a convention in the organic law, is a body that exercises but the residuum, a moiety of the legislative powers of a State. The Legislature properof the State is the convention of theState, exercising the only sovereign power in the State. It is called for the purpose of legislating in regard to the organic an fundamental principles of the government of the State, an of dele ting to another body, popularly called a “ legislature, ” certain subordinate powers which this convention may at any time take away.
Mr. SCOFIELD. Will the gentleman allow me to interru t him for one moment?
Mr. SCOFIELD. If the word “Legislature” in the constitution of the U.S. is broad enough in its meaning to include a constitutiona convention of the State, I wish to inquire of the gentleman whether, in hisjudgment, such a convention can exhaust the power which the constitution has conferred upon the continuing legislative power of the State. Suppose that the convention meets, acts upon the question, and is dissolved forever; is the power which the constitution of the U.S. confers upon the Legislature, and which, from its very nature, is a continuing power, exhausted forever, because the convention that exercised it once has adjourned?
Mr. UPSON. I would ask the gentlemen whether the Legislature of the State of Oregon had passed any act in reference to the election of a representative in Congress?
Mr. ARSHALL. The constitutio of the State had fixed the time for holding the election, and the decision was placed distinctly upon the ground that the constitution of the State did govern as to the time, place, and manner Of holdin the election. 1
Mr. JOHNSON. Allow me to answer the gentlemans question. The constitution of the State of Oregon provided that the laws enacted by the Territoria Legislature should be in force untilrepealed by the State Legislature. The Territorial legislaure provided for the election of a Delegate to Congress. It was on that authority the decision was made.
Mr. UPSON. Does the constitution of the U.S. recognize a Territorial Legisla; tnre in this connection7
Mr. JOHNSON. I was speaking of the constitution of the State of Oregon.
Mr. JOHNSON. I would like to inquire of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Sco FIELD] if he intends to have a vote upon this question this afternoon.
Mr. SCOFIELD. If it can be reached to night I wished to have the vote. I will not determine anything about it, only I do not believe it will be reached.
Mr. ARSHALL. I would like to hear the chairman of the committee, but I would a little rather et through.
Mr. LAWES. I desire to say, as I agree with the committee in the conclusion to which they have arrived, land as I still adhere to the position assumed i that report which the gentleman has quoted from, that I would consider it a privilege if the gentleman would let me have a minute or 2 or the purpose of stating the ounds upon which I arrived at that conclusion, and e reason whyI am still of the opinion exressed in that report.
Mr. may SHALL. Mr. pecker, howmuch time have I got remaining?
Mr. MARSHALL. I will yield if it is not taken out of my time. No objection being made, Mr. DAWES was allowed to proceed as follows:
Mr. UPSON. I wish to ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] a nestion in relation to a restriction upon the Legislature by the constitutional convention of a State. If the convention should prohibit the Legislature from choosing n Governor of the State to the U.S. Senate, would the Legislature of a State be bound by that prohibition?
Mr. DAWES. lfI 1m erstand the question of the gentleman, it is this: can the constitution of a State impose any additional qualifications upon a member of this body, or of the other branch of Congress, than those prescribed in the constitution of the U.S.? certainly not; for the constitution of the U.S. is the supreme law. of the land. That constitution has prescribed those qualifications, and they can neither be added to nor taken from by the Legislature of a State. But if the constitution of the U.S. had said that such and such qualifications shall exist, and then had further said, and such other qualifications as the Legislatures of the State shall severally prescribe, then if the Legislatures should act at all they would be obliged to act under the iaw prescribed by their own State constitution s.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I wish to ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Dawns] a question. I do not quarrel with him at all because he comes to the same conclusion to which I have come by a different mode of reasoning. I would a great deal rather have any position which I take supported by 2 propositions than by only one. Therefore I have no conflict of logic with the Gentfrom Massachusetts for coming to the same conclusion with myself, and I am not goin to dispose of any of the arguments advance by him. at I wish to ask him this question: taking the Oregon case, for instance, is there in his judgment anything in the conclusions to which the committee came in that case that is at all in conflict with the 10 ic used by the majority of the Committee of Iilections in this case?
Mr. DAWES. I have already stated, in replyto the Gentfrom Illinois. [Mr. Man SHALL] that I did not think the Oregon case of itself, beyond some remarks made in the report, was at all in conflict with the positions assumed by the committee in this case. I do admit that there were some remarks in the report itself which are in conflict with the report of the committee now under consideration. I have to sayfurther only that I heartily support the resolutions which have been reported y the majority of the committee in this case, in which I join, and I desire merely to put upon record this explanation of the Oregon case, which has been cited as authority against that repoIrr. t. SCOFIELD. I asked the question only that the gentleman might state it more distinctly than I thought he had stated it, that the House might not come to the conclusion that the majority of the committee were overriding all precedents.
Mr. DAWES. I think the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SCOFIELD} is right, that the Oregon case is not a precedent against him. All there is in the Oregon case that can be used against the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, is the unfortunate reasoning of the chairman of the committee in that case. The chairman of th! committee undertook to use arguments, unnecesssarily as it turned out, to support a position which stood well enough without that reasoning.
Mr. MARSHALL. I would like to ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mia Dawns] a question. If there is a conflict between the constitution of a State and the act of its Legislature in regard to the place of holdin elections, must not the act of the Legislature tall and the constitution of the State stand?
Mr. DAWES. can come to no other conclusion than this: if there is aconflict between the law of the State of Michigan and the constitution of the State of Michigan, the law made by the Legislature, which was itself created by the constitution, must yield to the constitution.
Mr. MARSHALL. Then I wish to put this further question: whether, if there is a conflict between the constitution of the State of Michigan and the act of the Legislature referred to, Mr. Baldwin is not entitled to his seat?
Mr. DAWES. If I entertained any doubt that the law of the State of Michigan, the “ soldiers voting act, ” as it is called, was constitutional, I should be led by the reasoning which I have just offered to the House, to vote for the resolution reported by the minority. But I am not of that opinion, and therefore I shall not vote for that resolution.
Mr. MARSHALL. I wish to ask the gentleman this further question: what is the right ful authority to determine the proper construction of the constitution of a State! Is not the decision of the supreme court of a State in regard to the proper construction of the constitution of a State binding upon all the tribu nals?
Mr. DAWES. I agree with the Gentfrom Illinois that, as to every matter within its jurisdiction, the supreme court of Michigan is the final arbiter, subject to the up ellate authority of the Supreme ourt of the U.S.
Mr. MARSHALL. That isallthat is necessar. lfir. DAWES. But upon the point now submitted to this House, tesupreme court of Michigan, as I doubt not the Gentfrom Illinois will admit had no jurisdiction.
Mr. MARSHALL. Thislcase of course was not before the supreme courtofMichigan, butthe question as to the proper construction of their constitution was; and the honorable chairman of the ComElections says that if there is a conflict between the constitution of the State of Michigan and an act of the Legislature of that State, the constitution must stand and the act must fall; and that the supreme court of the State of Michigan is the authoritative body to determine the proper construction of that constitution. That trlbunal, Mr. Speaker, has determined the question as to whether there is a conflict between the constitution of that State and the act of the Legislature of that State.
Mr. DAWES. If the gentleman will allow me, I will say one word more. My opinion is that if there are 2 bodies
Mr. MARSHALL. I would prefer not to yield any furtheras my time is nearly exhausted. The honorable chairman of the committee has, it seems to me, if there is anythingin logic, admitted away this whole case. He tells the House that, if there is a conflict between the constitution of the State of Michigan and an act of the Legislature of that State, the constitution must stand and the act of the Legislature must fall, and that the supreme court of that State is the proper tribunal to determine the correct construction of that constitution. That tribunal has determined it, and has declared that there is a direct conflict between the State constitution and the act of the Legislature. Therefore, according to the premises of the gentleman himself, he cannot, it seems to me, do otherwise than sustain the claims of Mr. Baldwin to a seat upon this floor. All the essential points of the case the gentleman admits to be in favor of the contestant. It is true that the majority of the committee hold that, notwithstanding that conflict which they admit, the Legislature under the constitution of the U.S. had power independent of the constitution of the State. But that is not the position which the honorable chair man of the committee takes; and I insist that there is nothing left for the majority of the committee to stand upon. Now, sir, I do not agree with the honorable chairman in regard to the case from Oregon. I insist that is a case directly in point. But that is not the only case. In the case of Far lee vs. Bank, a case from NewJersey, in the 1st session of the 29th Congress, a question arose as to the validity of the votes of certain students at Princeton college, NewJersey. The nestion was whether the place ofvotingjixedqby the constitution of the State or that prescribed by an act of the Legislature was the properplace. The committee decided, that the constitution must govern, and that it overrode the provision of the act of the Legislature on that subject.
Mr. MARSHALL. Yes, sir, asto where the voter should cast his vote.
Mr. BEA IAN. I wish to say these places they have fixed in Michigair comprise whole counties. They have not fixed precise places at which the election shall be he d.
Mr. MARSHALL. I suppose they have not fixed the house, but they have fixed the place.
Mr. BEAMAN. The place is fixed y the township clerk by law.
Mr. ll: ARSHALL. I have read the act. I ask gentlemen to say whether that is fixing the place for voting? Is that prescribing the place? s that writing down the ace of voting according to the language of t a constitution? The act does not prescribe the place or places for voting, and does not conform to this provision of the constitution. Would it be in conformity to this provision to have a commission go out to all places in Euro e or America and take the votes of citizens o Michigan in the place or places in which they may happen to be ound on the day of election? It seems to me to be a most monstrous positionfor gentlemen to take for the purpose of maintaining the title of the claimant in this case to a seat. No place is fixed. It is as if you should go out with 1 your ballotbox, wander over the country, and take the vote of every citizen of the State, wherever he happened to be on the day of election. I say that that is not prescribing or fixing a place at all. It is not namin it. It is in no sense actin in conformity with the constitution of the U.S. Mr. Speaker, I have now said all I propose to sayin regard to this matter. As a matter of course, I expect every gentleman to act in conformity with his own judgment. If there were no constitutional objection in the way, I should care but little as to which of the gentlemeu claiming the seat should be preferre. I have no feeling whatever in this case, but I do think it is a matter of importance that we, sitting as judges here, should decide this question rightly, an in accordance with the constitution and laws of the
Mr. SMITheo. unty. Mr. Speaker, I understand that Mr. Baldwin, the contestant, says it is impossible for him to be here tomorrow. I would like to ask him how long he desires to speak.
Mr. BALDWIN, (the contestant.) Haviu been confined to my bed for 3 days past, I feel quite unable to proceed now. This is a matter in which I of course feel some interest, and I would like to have permission to print the argument I have prepared. The Hibuse may then dispose of the case this afternoon or tomorrow morning, as they please.
Mr. SMITH. Imove that the House adjourn.
The SPEAKER. Does the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SCOFIELD] desire that this business shall come up after or before the morning hour tomorrow?
Mr. SCOFIELD. I desire to have it hold its place.
The SPEAKER. Then it will come up immediately after the reading of the Journal, to the exclusion of all other business.
Skip Skip LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Mr. TAYLOR. I ask indefinite leave of absence for my colleague, Mr. HUBBBLL. No objection being made. leave was granted. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.
Mr. GLOSSBRENNER, from the ComEnrollBill, reported that the committee had examined and lound truly enrolled an act (H.R.No. 33) for the relief of Charlotte Bence, widow of Phili H. Bence, late captain of company F, thirtict regiment Iowa volunteer infantry; when the Speaker signed the same. DISCONTINUANCE or EVENING snssrons.
Mr. STEVENS. As I do not learn that any bod wishes to speak tonight I ask the consent of teHouse that the evening sessions for the remainder of this week be dispensed with, or until further ordered.
The SPEAKER. The Chair has asked several gentlemen on the listif they wish to speak, and he has found none that desire to do so this evening. No objection being made, evening sessions were discontinued until further order. LAND TITLES IN StLouis.
Mr. THAYER, from the ComPrivLandClms, asked leave to report back House bill No. 15, authorizin documentary evidence of titles to be furnished to the owners of certain lands in the city of StLouis, with an accompanyin report, and to have the bill recommitted tot e same committee, and the report printed. oojection being made, it was so ordered.
Mr. SMITH. I now renew the motion to adjourn. he question was taken; and there were upon a diviSionayes 44, noes Q7. Before the result of the vote was announced, Mr. SMITH called for tellers. Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. SMITH and Scorrsnn were appointed. The House again divided; and the tellers reportedayes 52, noes 44. So the motion was a ced to; and accordingly (at 4 oclock an 20 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned. 1866. 82
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. WEDNESDAY, February 14, 1866. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. E. H. GRAY. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS.
The PRESIDENT protempore laid before the Senate a message from the POTUS transmitting, for the consideration of Congress, a correspondence between the SecyState and the minister of France accredited to this Government, and also other papers, relative to a proposed international conference at Constantine ple upon the subject of cholera; which, on motion of
Mr. SUMNER, was referred to the ComForRel, and ordered to be printed. The President Protemporealso laid before the Senate a communication from the SecyState, transmitting, in obedience to law, a report on the commercial relations of the U.S. with foreign nations for the year ending september 30, 1865; which was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. HENDERSON, from the ComClaims, to whom was referred the petition of John Ahern, praying to be indemnified for loss on his contract with the acting asst provost marshal general of the northern division of NewYork, for board and rations furnished to soldiers and recruits for the U.S. Army at the city of Albany, submitted an adverse report; which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. ARRIS, from the ComPrivLandClms, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.110) for the relief of Samuel D. Lecompte, reported adversely thereon. PRINTING OF A BILL. On motion of
Mr. DIXON, it was Ordered, That the JtResolution (S.R. No. 29) for the transfer of funds aparoprmted for the pag ineut of salariesIn the Post diceDept to to general salary account of that Deptbeprinted. for the useof the Senate. BILLS INTRODUCED.
Mr. RAMSEY asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.139) to provide for surveys of the upperMissis sippi and the Minnesota rivers; which was read twice by its title, referred to the ComCommerce, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. NYE asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce abill (S.No.140) to granhthe right of way to the Humboldt Canal Company through the public lands of the U.S.; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComPubLands.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep, by Mr. McPunasos, its Clerk, announced that the House had passed the bill (S.No.96) authorizing an increase of the clerical force in the postoffice Dept. Themessagefurtherannounced that the hoRep had passed aJtResolution (H. No. 57) authorizin the Secretaries of War and Navy to place hul s and vessels at the disposal of commissioners ofquarantine or other properauthorities at ports of the U.S.; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. ENROLLED BILL SIGNED. The message further announced that the Speaker of the HoRep had signed an enrolled bill (H.R.No. 33) for the relief of Charlotte Bence, widow of Philip H. Bence, late captain of company F, 30th regiment Iowa volunteer infantry; which there upon received the sigiiature of
The PRESIDENT protempore METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY.
Mr. WILLEY. I move to amend the amendment in section 3, lines 16 and 17. by striking out after the word “ corporation” the words “ and 2/3rds of the incor porators herein named; ” so that it will read: Said mortgages. notes. bonds and stocks to be approvedin writing by the directors of said corporation and said cororation shall have at all times a lien upon the stoc. iize. I think the object is sufficiently secured without repeating tiiose words. The amendment to the amendment was agreed to. The amendment as amended was adopted.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate as amended and the amendment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be enwossed for a 3rd reading; was read the 3rd time, and passed.
Skip Skip MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the HoRep. by Mr. MCPllHRSON. its Clerk, announced that the HoRep had passed a JtResolution (H.R.No. 00) relative to the courts and postoffice of NewYork city, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. STURGEON BAY SHIPEANAL.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I should like to know something about the bill. Where does it come from, an what are the peculiar reasons for making a grant of land to a State for the purpose of building a canal and breakwater? It seems to be rather a new thing.
Mr. HOWE. No, Mr. President, it is not a new thing, not a new thing either to the Senate or to Congress. A bill passed this body making an appropriation of land for this identical work at the last session, and during the last session another bill passed making a grant of lands to the State of Michigan for precisely such a work at the Portage near Lake sufferior. Sturgeon bay, which makps out of reen bay, at its head comes within about a mile and a quarter of Lake Michigan. A cut of a mile and a quarter in length will enable vessels to pass from the waters of Green bay to lake Michigan, and it will save to the commerce between those 2 sheets of water a distance of about 100 miles. Besides that, it will make a harbor of refuge for all the commerce on the lake and the bay both, where such a harbor is very much needed, at a point where there is not a barber within 80 or 90 miles. The ComPubLands have unanimously recommended this measure at this session as they did the last session, and the Senate then a eed to it. It did not, however, get through the other House, but both Houses of Congress agreed to just such a grant for just such a work in the state of michigan. The committee were entirely satisfied of the importance of this work and the propriety of it, and the bill appropriates land and not money, and it requires the work to be completed within 3 years. It appropriates land which you have, instead of money which you have not. Land we have and can spare; money we are a little short of. It ctTects the double purpose ofbuilding a canal between these 2 sheets of water and furnishing a barber.
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. HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. The JtResolution (H.R.No. 57) authorizing the Secretaries of War and Navy to place hulks and vessels at the disposal o commissioners of quarantine or other properauthor ities at ports of the U.S., was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComCommerce. The JtResolution (H.R.No. 66) relative to the courts and postoffice of NewYork city, was read twice by its title, and referred to the ComPostOfiiccs. JANE W. NHTHAWAY.
Mr. HARRIS. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate bill No. 115. The motion was agreed to; and the bill (S.No.115 for the relief of Jane W. Nethaway was res the 2nd time, and considered as in ComWhole. It directs the SecyInterior to panes; n on the pension rolls the name of Janc. the Herkimer, and State of NewYork, widow of David Nethawa, late of the eighty1st regiment NewYorkvolunteers; the pension to begin on the 29th day of Septemper, 1864, and to continue during her widowhood, at the rate allowed by law to the widow of a 1st lieutenant. It a so proposes to direct the proper accountin officers of the Treasury to settle and adjust this accounts of David Nethawa, late of the 81st regiment NewYork volunteers, as a 2nd lieutenant, from June 8, 1864, to August 11, 1864, inclusive, and as a 1st lieu tenant from August 12, 1864, to September 29, 1864, inclusive.
Skip Skip The bill was reported to the Senate, orderengross or a 3rd reading, read the 3rd time, and passed. APPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATION.
The PRESIDENT protrmporc. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday, which is the JtResolution (H.R.No. 51) proposing to amend the Constitution of the [T U.S., upon which the Senfrom Missouriis entitled to the floor. The Chair would correct an error into which he fell yesterday in deciding that the amendment proposed by the Senfrom Massachusetts, Mr. SUMNER] at the time he proposed it, was not in order. In the opinion o? the Chair, on consideration, it was in order; and that is the pending question the speech which he began yesterday. [It will be published in the Appendix.]
Mr. WADE. I believe the Senator has not exactly got my words. I think I did not say “preferable.” I think that I said he went much further in requirin guarantees than Mr. Lincoln had done; an I do not know but that that mivht be considered referable.
Mr. HENDERSON. I did not design to misstate the position of the Senfrom Ohio. It matters not what may be the merit of the two plans. If the circumstances be considered, Lincolns plan was preferable, for the circumstances were then such that none but loyal men would participate. Under Johnsons plan the circumstances were such that disloyal men! could and did participate.
Mr. WADE. If the Senator will oppose them, that is all I ask. [Laughter.
Mr. TRUMBULL. I be e my friendfrom Missouri did not understan me as saying that he had been a slaveholder, by way of reproach. Certainly. I meant no such thing.
Mr. HENDERSON. I was afraid such might be the inference from the remarks of the Sena tor.
Mr. WADE. Will the Senator permit me to ask him a question?.
Mr. HENDERSON. Certainly; I am seeking light. 7 v.
Mr. WADE. How, practically, can 1/10th of the people of a State rule that State on republican principles?
Mr. HENDERSON. lam not speaking about the theoretical idea of republicanism. I am speaking of republicanism accordingto the constitution of the U.S., and I know of no other republicanism in a legal point of view; that is, in all my conduct hereI must be guided by that Constitution. Iain sworn to be so uided. Ifa majority in a State, opposed to the federal Government, have a right to rule, they can secede legally. I admit the theor that all men should vote in the Stateif it can e carried out. But even on the subject of republicanism in a State does the Senator not now that for a niimher of years, the majority of the people of SCarolina have been slaves, who had no part, lot or share in the Government? Does he not know that a majority of the people of SCarolina and Mississippi I mean the slaves were always debaired of any right in the Government, either national or State? am considerin the Constitution as it is, not a he and I would have it.
Mr. WADE. I said upon republican principles, not aristocratical principles, forl know that one man could govern a State on those principles.
Mr. HENDERSON. SCarolina was one of the original 13. Let me ask the senator if SCarolina had not a republican constitution. in the eye of the supreme law, the Constitution of the U.S.?
Mr. HENDERSON. Then was there an error in the understandin of our forefathers; they certainly must have beceived themselves when they made the instrument.
Mr. HENDERSOI. That may be. Ourfore fathers may have made many mistakes. I have no doubt they did. One of them I would correct, and that is what we are considering. They made a mistake in leaving slavery to exist at all. But they did leave it, and it brought war. I think if we leave wrong to fester, again, some v time in the future, we 5 all have another war.
Mr. HENDERSON. I hope you will be with me in many things. But all this is outside oi the question. I submit to the Senator, have the disloyal men in a State the right to govern, if they are in a majority?
Mr. HENDERSON. Then have not the loyal minorit the right to erect a State government?
Mr. WADE. My opinion is that where only one 10th of the population of any State are loyal, that that State is in such a condition that it cannot govern itself upon republican princples.
Mr. HENDERSON. Suppose there are 500 only, less than half in the State of tennessee or the State of NCarolina, whoard loyal; will the Senator govern that State for all time by military authority as a province O. the Government of the U.S. rathei] than let the loyal minority make a State ov ernment for themselves? If we were to do t at, we might pervert and overturn our whole re nblican system. We cannot afford to keep arge standing armies for such a purpose, unless i we intend to destroy our own liberties. Then let us permit the loyal minority to govern. In Missouri 1/3rd, if not more, oi our entire population, has been disfranchised by the new constitution of the State, and some say that a majority have been disfranchised by it if enforced. Will he turn away Missouri from representation here, if it be ascertained that a majority of her people are disfranchised? The people have vote on it and have made it the law of the State; and any man who cannot take the Oath prescribed in it, of course cannot vote, and if it should turn out that a.majorit of the people have been disfranchised, the Senfrom Ohio must drive me from the Senate because Missouri is not a republican State.
Mr. WADE. I apprehend that the rebels will try to drive you out.
Mr. HENDERSON. It is the duty of the Government of the U.S. to recognize the loyal people of a State; let them form a constitution and when that is done, admit them here, and when you have admitted them, protect them, if necessary, by the military authority of the country. Did you not protect RhdIsland a few years ago in the very same way? There is no doubt that a majorit of the people of l RhdIsland were in favor of the Dorr government. Nobody doubted it, and yet this Government maintained the minority there, because it was the established government.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Let me ask the Senator whether a military force would not be necessary in order to protect and sustain the government of a minority?
Mr. WILSON. Allowme to ask the Senator if this Mr. Baldwin is the Mr. Baldwin who was a member of the confederate congress.
Mr. HENDERSON. I think so. Of course it is the same.
Mr. WILSON. I should like to know if it is the same Mr. Baldwin who nominated general Lee the other day, as the next Governor of that State. in the Virrrinia Legislature.
Mr. SUMNER and he has been addressing the POTUS!
Mr. SUMNER. What is the meaning of that? I do not understand it.,
Mr. HENDERSON. I do not know that I understand it, but if I do, it means the rebels and the radicals have played see saw, and he intends to stop it. That is the whole of it. I tence, however, and then perhaps the Senator can understand it for himself. he President says: “I do not intend to sayanything personal.but you, know aswell as I do that at the beginning and in deed. beforethe beginning of thg recent gigantic struggle between the differentsectionsof the country. there were extrememen South, and there were extreme men North." The Senator is one of the extremest I ever, knew; but the President proceeds: “I might make use of a homely figure (which is spmctimcsusgoodas any other.cyan in theillustration of great and important questionsnndsaythat it has beenhammerat oneend of the line and anvil at the other; and this great Government, the best the world eversaw. was cpt upon the anvil and ham mered before the rebellion.andithasbeenhammered since the rebellion; and there seemsto be a disposition to continue the hammeringuntil the Government shall bedestroyed. I haveopposedthat system always, and I oppose it now." The Senator will now understand that he is hammering at the other end of the line and he may get hammered soon. [Laughterj
Mr. SUMNER. I do not understand any such thing.
Mr. SUMNER. Allow me to ask my friend if the President did not probably refer to the Democrats as hammering at the other end of the line.
Mr. HENDERSON. My impression is from all the circumstances surrounding the case, that the Senfrom Massachusetts is one of the men alluded to. I think I can say to him as Nathan said unto David, “ Thou art the man.” [Laughter] The Senator certainly did make an imprudent speech when the reporton the (.OD dition of the southern States came in. The President should know that the Senfrom Massachusetts makes many imprudentspecchcs. It is utterly impossible to keep him straight unless some more conservative man, like myself can whisper him right. [Lou Met] if I could have reached him in time fiam satisfied, he would never have used the term “white washing.” [Laughter] I am fearful the President attaches too much importance to this imprudent speech. We ay no attention to it here. Again, has not GenlSickles issued an order at Charleston, with 23 sections, making up an entire civil code for the government of SCarolina, the Legislature being in session?
Mr. WILSON. The most comprehensive ever made.
Mr. HENDRICKS. If the Senatorwill allow me, I should like to askhim one question: whether he reads these orders of the military commanders for the purpose ofapproving them, or for the purpose of condemning them, or simnljr for the information of the Senate?
Mr. HENDERSON. I do not know that the Senator has any right to catechise me as to the purpose with which I read a paper to the Son ate. But he certainly cannot misunderstand my object.
Mr. HENDRICKS. I disclaim the right; but when so able:1 Senator is addressing the body, of course we would like to know what he means by the evidences that he brings before us.
Mr. HENDERSON. I am glad of it. Many others have said it and do now daily say it.
Mr. HENDRICKS. My position with re spect to the POTUS is just this: I am not under that sort of obligation which is known as party obligation. I expeet to indorse and approve in his conduct everything that my judgment and conscience approve. The Senator would not ask me to do less, and I think he would not ask me to do more.
Mr. HENDRICKS. M modesty would prevent my appearing before his bod as the peculiar champion of the President did not help to make him President; but what is right in his Administration I shall support and I think I may say now that perhaps I will find something in his conduct to approve which some of the Senators about me may disapprove.
Mr. HENDERSON. l was aware of the modesty of in friend. [Laughter] and I am aware of another thin;I am aware of his distinguished ability an his sagacity in seizing upon anything, anything fair and legitimate, of course, that may be necessary to build up the par with which he thinks the best interests of the country are connected. His modesty will also prevent his tellin us whether be approves these acts of the resident or not.Mr. President, I now repeat my regrets that the President has seen fit to exact at the hands of Congress a strict compliance with his policy on the subject of reconstruction: I say compgiance, for I cannot interpret his speech to the irginia delegation in any other way. I regret it, because this is no time for party excitement. The best interests of this great country cannot now be safely connected with party success. To solve our difficulties needs true patriotism, and true patriotism is too often c oked out by he ran selfishness of party politics. It
Mr. WILSON. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question?.
Mr. WILSON. I want to ask him, as he is giving his opinions pretty freely, if he has an anxiety whatever in regard to the opinions of this Mr. Baldwin, or any man of that class, or any men in the country who sympathize with them, that the will be able to influence affairs in any of the States that in 1864 voted for Mr. Lincoln for President. I ask him if he does not believe that those States, by a most decisive majority, a.majority larger than they gave in 1864, are today opposed to the admission of any of the States that have been in rebellion into these Chambers until they are so adjusted as to give proper security for the future?
Mr. HENDERSON. I have answered so many questions that I have scarcely been able to keep the true question in view. Injustific and wrong often triumph. Our only consolation is, that such triumphs cannot be permanent. I do not know how far the people will be deceived. nor how long the deception will last. The Union must be restored and this Congress must do it. It must be cemented in the everlasting principles of justice, but I want it cemented immediately.
Mr. HENDERSON. The Senator says itis. An expostfacto law is one that prescribes a punishment for the commission or doing of an act, to which no penalty or forfeiture was at“ Nib“! of attainder or expostfacto law shall be attached at the time of doing it, or which increases the punishment after the commission of the offense. The question which I aimed to put, is, can Congress, in the exercise of its power for the safety of the nation, the preservation of the public welfare, take away the rights of citizenship for any cause whatever? We have before us a question now, the decision of which will involve the solution of this. congress hereto fore have the right of suffrage to; e people of this district in their own municipal government. Can Congress pass an act to takeaway that right of suffrage and put the city or district government here in the hands of a board of commissioners, to be appointed by the President or by congress?
Mr. HENDRICKS. The Constitution of the U.S. places the government of the DistCol entirely under the control of Congress, and therefore we may do for the DistCol, I presume, whatever a legislative body may properly do for the people an der its jurisdiction. But, with the permission of the Senator, I wish to suggest further, that if the POTUS, as we all know he has done, has pardoned a very large portion of the people of the South upon a condition with which they have complied, they then, in in judgment, so far as the penalty of the law stan s, are free from its penalties, and that to take away the right of citizenship is a penalty which we cannot impose as a punishment after the President has pardoned the parties.
Mr. HENDERSON. The Senator persists in misunderstandin me. I am not speakin now of crimes, nor the effect of the ardon. I have answered man questions, an, perhaps, not very satisfactori y. The Senator will permit me to ask him one question, as it may convey to him the best posmble answer to the question he has asked me. In the State of Indiana, today the uneducated are entitled to the right of so rage. Does the Senator believe that a constitutional convention of the State of Indiana, if now in session, could de rive every man in that State who cannot r and write of the right of suff e?
Mr. HENDRICK. I have no doubt that the constitution of the State mightbe soamended l as to limit the right of suffrage according to the pleasure of the convention, if that action should e approved by the people. But, sir, the question suggested to the Senator was this: can on, after an act is done, impose a penalty not mom; to the law at the time the act was done? Can we, according to the sentiments which govern legislative bodies in these modern times, enact an expostfacto law, and punish a party for an act done in a manner not provided for by the law at the time the act was done, and especially after the President, or any other party having the power to pardon, has exercised that power.
Mr. HEt DEltSON. The Senator will re member the Federal Constitution provides that no State “shall pass any bill of attainder, expostfacto law, or low impairing the obligations of contracts.” He says that the State of Indiana may pass such a law, and it will not be subject to the objection that it is expostfacto. How, then, is it that a similar not passed by congress conflicts with a provision in the same words? The limitation is no stronger upon Congress than upon the States. The Senator might deny that the power claimed is a dele gated power, bnt his admission esto s him from calling such a law an expostfact law. ButI will discuss this subject no further. Irefer to it as a way or means of legally securing loyal governments, provided the present organizations in the seceding States be rejected by congress.
Mr. CLARK. If the Senfrom Missouri will pardon me one moment, I wish to ask the Senfrom Indiana a question.
Mr. HENDRICKS. do not care about being drawn into this debate.
Mr. CLARK. I do not wish to draw the Senfrom Indiana into the debate, but I desire to put this question: whether, ifa State finds it is necessary for its own protection not for the punishment of rebels, but to guard itself, and for its own protection miay it not exclude these men from voting? Would that be an expostfacto law I
Mr. HENDRICKS. That is not the question that I was discussing with the Senfrom Missouri. I have no doubt of the entire control of the States over the question of the right of suffrage, and it may be exercised according to the pleasure of the State. The Senfrom Missouri is advocating now, as a punishment upon the pardoned rebels, the withdrawal of the right and character of citizenship. As a penalty, as a punishment, I do not think it can e imposed:1 er the President has pardoned.
Mr. SHERMAN. What was the date of that speech?
Mr. SUMNER. I will remind the Senator that Otis claimed representation for each individual. He did not claim it merely for the community.
Mr. HENDERSON. I did not know that he went to that extent in the speech alluded to. It only makes the case stronger.
Mr. SUMNER. He did, as I shall show at the proper time.
Mr. SUMNER. Allow me to remind my friend that the argument of Otis and ofonr revolutiouary fathers was, that there should be no taxation, direct or indirect. where there was no representation.
Mr. FESSENDEN. The Senator misapprehended me. What I said was, not thatI was willing to attach that instead of the re viso, but that something like that, which re peated, would suit me very much better if I supposed it could be adopte; that I would prefer a clean proposition abopliesrhsionngally al distinctions; and I presume all the Senators around me would.
Mr. YATES. Will the Senator allow me to interru t him?
Mr. YATES. I am trespassing upon the gentlemans time.
Mr. HENDEJtSON. I think I understand the Senator, and I only rose to ask him a question which I think will furnish an answer to all of his questions, for they all bearon the same I ask him if there is any slavery or involuntary servitude in the State of Illinois? Is it not a free State?
Mr. YATES. There is not at the present time an slavery there, and cannot be, I believe.
Mr. HENDERSON. Was there slavery or involuntary servitude in that State before the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery?
Mr. YATES. There cannot be slavery under the amendment of the Constitution. It is impossible.
Mr. HENDERSON. There is, then, no slavery now and there was no slavery before the amendment. I so understand the Senator; he assents to the proposition. Now, how is it that Illinois does not permit her negroes to vote? She did not before, and does not now, allow them to vote. Then Illinois is not a free State.
Mr. YATES. That is the reason that I propose by a bill which shall aply to every State, not on y to Missouri but to l line is, to declare that these men shall have the rights secured to them by the amendment of the constitution.
Mr. HENDERSON. I am left to infer, then, that slavery exists where the ballot does not exist? I Will ask the Senator another question. Are the women of Illinois free or slave?
Mr. YATES. I notice that when gentlemen are driven to the point and to the wall upon this question, they invariably ask, why do you not.let women vote?
Mr. HENDERSON. Not at all. The question of woman suffrage is not before us. My remark springs naturally from the Senators position. I have neither condemned nor aproved such suffrage. The Senator saysslavery has been abolishe, and to abolish slavery is to confer the suffrage; in other words, he assumes that the denial of suffrage is slavery. I thought not. The suffrage may be the best means to preserve freedom; I think it is. But if the person denied the suffrage, in one of the States is a slave, then slavery exists in all the States, for women and mine rs do not vote in anyone of them, I would perpetuate the negros freedom; but I would do it in such manner as to be effectual.
Mr. YATES. I will answer that at the propertinie. h
Mr. HENDERSON. I am only discussing a question of power. The Senator seems to think I am combatting his desires. I am not disuting his proposition that the negro ought to are the suffrage, but I am speaking of the way in which it may be legally done and the extent to which the ballot may be safely carried. The Senfrom Massachusetts proposes to do by an act of Congress what I think can only be done by a constitutional amendment. That is the difference now between the Senfrom Illinois and in self. I think the amendment can be adopto. Indeed, I feel confident of it.
Mr. HENDERSON. An amendment to he Constitution preventing any discrimination against the negro in the right of suffrage because of color.
Mr. HENDERSON. I thought, in the bright lexiconof the Senfrom Massachusetts there was no such word as “fail.”
Mr. SUMNER. I thought the Senatormeant that this proposition of the reconstruction committee could be adopted.
Mr. HENDERSOL. Oh no, Inever thought that.
Mr. SUMNER. I believe that the Senators reposition can be adopted, gratefully adopted by the country but the other cannot be.
Mr. YATEFS. I only put in question for the purpose of showin that no. er the Constitution as it now is, under the new Constitution, so far as the freedmen are concerned, all distinctions on account of color are abolished, and all thatit requires is appropriatelervislation to carry into effect that provision of the constitution. It is made our duty to do it; it is thrown into our hands by the people.
Mr. HENDERSON. Iwas speaking of the power to pass this bill under the arautec clause. an not of the power under the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery, at the particular moment when the Senator interrupted me, for which interruption I am quite grateful, because I am always glad to hear rim. was speaking of the guarantee (denseand was resisting the position assumed by the Senfrom Massac nsetts, [Mr. SUMNER] in claiming the power to pass his bill under the nor nntee clause. Now the Senfrom Illinois thinks that the constitutional amendment and not the guarantee clause gives the power. I understand him to say that the guarantee clause does not give it; that is, he admits that before the adoption of the constitutional amendment there was no power in Congress to comel 21 State to admit its negroes to the right of suffrage.
Mr. YATES. I will explain. I think that under the decisions of the Supreme Court, before the adoption of the constitutional amendment, a State had the right to exclude the colored man from voting, because he was considered a slave, and not one of the sovereign people. But now the case is altered undert e amended Constitution; he is one of the people.
Mr. SUMNER. Do I understand my friend as insisting that the denial of the franchise is consistent with a republican government? For instance, take the State of SCarolina, which denies the franchise tomore than half its population.,
Mr. HENDERSON. In theory it is not. Under the Constitution it was r rded as a republican State at the time of the adoption of the instrument.
Mr. SUMNER. It did not deny the franchise tomore than half its citizens then; they were slaves.
Mr. HENDERSON. It then had on] 140,000 whites, an had 100 and 7,000 slaves. It also had 1800 free negroes. I think it more nearly a republican State now than then. Practically, the question of suffrage was left to the States
Mr. SUMNER. But that is the question, whether they were left to don the suffrage to an freeman on account of color. E
Mr. HENDERSON. If that be the question, then the point is against my fricn, for both SCarolina and Virginia did deny the suffrage to the free negroes on account of color only, at. the time when the Constitution was made, and when it was adopted. Virginia had upward of 12,000 free negroes thus denied.
Mr. SUMNER. But the question is I cannot anticipate my friends conclusion on that pointp
Mr. HENDERSON. My conclusion is, that a mistake was made in recognizing a constitution as republican that permitted slavery. I knew of no way to get rid of it except by constitutional amendment. I think another mistake was committed in leaving each State to so far abridge the right of suffrage as to change, in theory, the republican form. But such is the Constitution and you cannot change it by act of Congress. That is my conclusion.
Mr. SUMNER. You are wrong; it is a question of theory, and I saythat our fathers so held.
Mr. HENDERSON. But our fathers did not deal with it in the Constitution as a question of theory, but as a question of fact. Whatever may have been their theories, I mean only to say that the text of the Constitution does not carry them out
Mr. SUMNER. Now, the practical point is, did our fathers concede to any State the power of disfranchising citizens on account of color? I utterly deny it, and I challenge my friend to show any authority for it.
Mr. HENDERSON. I by, Mr. President if I have alread failed to show iIt, must fail in the future. have shown that the suffrage was left to the States, and that they did exclu e their negroes; that they held in slavery in Virginia almost half of their poulation, and that Virginia was called a republican State. Indeed, she was most prominent in making the very provisions we are discussing. She excluded the slaves and
Mr. SUMNER. Ah! slaves. That is another thing. The question.is whether you are allowed to disfranc ise freemeu on account of color, whether you are allowed to deny them their rights as citizens. That I utterly deny. The exception was with regard to slaves who were not regarded as members of the body politic. They were in that respect treated as mine rs or as women, represented by their masters; but every freeman, no matter what his color was, was recognized as entitled to all the privileges of citizenship. He was one of the sovereigns. The proposition cannot be met, if my friend will consult the history of his country.
Mr. HENDERSON. It was not slaves on y that were disfranchised, but I have shown that free negroes were also disfranchised. But I have no controversy with the Senator in what we mutuall aim at.
Mr. SUMNER. Iknow that, and I concede to my excellent friend, of course, all that I claim for myself. We are in search of the best that can be done on this occasion. I applaud his zeal and thank him for his courtesy.
Mr. HENDERSON. I am certainly very much obliged to the Senfrom Massachusetts. I feel now ten times better than I did before. [Laughterg I cannot longer etain the Senate in presenting objections to the exercise of legislative power under the guarantee clause. It is sufficient to control my own action, that I believe by the letter, and even spirit of the Constitution, the suffrage was place exclusively under the control of State action. I think that the error of so placing it is as clear as the error made in tolerating slavery. To rid ourselves of the evil, however, we must amend the Constitution.
Mr. SUMNER. Do Iunderstnnd my friend to say that a State might adopt a rule, for in stance, founded on the color of the hair, so that all men with light hair should be excluded from the right of suffrage “I I insist that a State is not, under the Constitution of the U.S., authorized to make any exclusion on account of color.
Mr. HENDERSON. It ought notto be, you mean.
Mr. SUMNER. No; it cannot be. Color cannot be a qualification. There may be a qualification founded on age or residence or knowledge or crime.
Mr. HENDERSON. You are now coming in conflict with the committee of 15, who declare by their resolution that the States now have the power, and may yet exclude everybody of a particular race or color.
Mr. SUMNER. I understand that the committee repose to place thatiu the Constitution of the U.S., and that is one reason why I object to their report. I say that they propose to do what our fathers never did.
Mr. HENDERSON. The Senfrom Massachusetts is in theory perhaps correct. He is speaking, however, O an ideal constitution. The true republican principle requires that as lar c a portion of the people, as is consistent witi the public good, shall be permitted to vote. All I contend or is that our fathers supposed the States would preserve the true theory and in that beIiefleft the control of the subjectwith them. They have abused the power. It is true that but few of the original 13 denied suffrage to free blacks. But if any of them de nied it, my friends theory is u set, for all the States were claimed as repubican States by the fathers.
Mr. FESSENDEN. The western States have always denied it.
Mr. WADE. I wish to put a question if the Senator is willing.
Mr. WADE. Before he passes from this gzrt of the subject, I wish to suggest to the Senator that I am not quite clear in my mind that we have not the power to legislate under the amended Constitution.
Mr. WADE. To legislate suffrage by an act of Congress. Slavery is abolished by the constitutional amendment, and the 2nd clause is that congress may enforce that by appropriate legisfation.
Mr. HENDERSON. The meaning of that, then, is that nobody is free or can be free in the States unless he has the suffrage.
Mr. WADE. I only want to state it, and as the Senator has thought much on the subject, l I wish him to answer this: I understau the construction that the courts have put upon the Constitution is that when a power is granted in the Constitution, the means to accomplish it are given with it, and that Congress is not re stricted to any particular mode of indicating the constitutional proposition unless the constitution itself has prescribed the means. Now, we are to free the slaves. Suppose a majority of Congress believe that the only way to secure that freedom and make it effectual is by granting the franchise to the whole population there, have we no right to do it? We are to enforce or guaranty their freedom. Now, suppose that a majority of us come to the conclusion that the only way to do that and make it secure is by giving the franchise to all, have we not the power to do it? We are to effect it in some way, and the Constitution does not prescribe or restrict us to any particular mode. I should like to hear that position answered.
Mr. HENDERSON. That is the whole subject I have been discussing. It seems the senator disagrees with me. I cannot help it. I wish we could think alike. Perhaps I had better think with him than he with me. It might be better for the country, because his thoughts are generally better than mine; but his question involves the whole subject at issue, and to answer it would be to go over all I have said. Our Constitution is a written instrument. congess can exercise no powers unless they are delegated. If implied powers are as bread as our discretion, our discretion may be as unlim ited as the caprices of tyranny itself. Implied powers must be necessary to accomplish the end. The Senator talks about free cm and defines the word for himself. I might possibly define it a little differently; but the word freedom is not used in the constitutional amendment abolishing slavery. The Constitution is, that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except for crime, shall exist in the U.S.; and the 2nd clause of it is, that Congress shall have power by appropriate legislation to enforce the provision. There is not the word “freedom” in it. Now, I think that persons may be neither in slavery nor involuntary servitude, who are yet denied the suffrage, in the respective States. If that be not true, every mine r and every woman under 21 years of age in the State of Ohio is a slave. The ne gro is now free. To exercise implied powers to clothe that freedom with certain advantages, in myjudgment, is a different thing.
Mr. WADE. One moment. Iperceivethat some of those who have argued this matter have considered that the franchise was freedom. They are synonymous terms in the minds of many. I do not understand them to be so. Undoubtedly a man may be free and not have the right to vote; but can that freedom be guarantied; and secured and enforced in a hostile communit unless you give him that right?
Mr. HENDERSON. I will admit the Senators position for the arguments sake, but then the question recurs, how shall the suffrage be secured? The suffrage may, in my judgment and in his, be the est means of securing independence, education, and other bless in s belong in to a state of freedom.Mr. SUhv N “R. Then have we not the power?
Mr. HENDERSON. I am talking about the power. I do not doubt that we have the power to propose a constitutional amendment, and if adopted the object will be accomplished. Believing that 4 and a half million people cannot be kept in peace without a voice in the making of the laws to govern them, I am seeking to give them that voice. The Senfrom Massachusetts thinks it can be done in a certain way. I think it cannot. This is all of it. If his bill be adopted the courts may say, it is void; I think they will; and we shall be where we commenced. If the amendment be adopted, it will be an assured advance in civilization, as well as in governmental reform.
Mr. SUMNER. May I remind my friend of the decision of the Supreme Court on two most solemn occasions in two of the best considered judgments that you find in our reports? They have laid down the rule to govern this very case. they have conceded to Congress the full discretion with regard to the means to be employed in carrying out any of its powers. here is no court, there is no branch of the Government, that can sit in judgment on congress, when, in its discretion, it thinks best to exercise a power.
Mr. HENDERSON. You allude, of course, to the MeCulloch case.
Mr. SUMNER. The McCulloch case and the case of Hunter vs. Martin.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I would have the senator not misapprehcnd me. He speaks as if I disapproved of the action of the committee.
Mr. HENDERSON. That is an inference of mine from the course of the Senators speech to which I listened with pleasure.
Mr. FESSENDEN. do not disa prove it in any sha e or form. While I took the liberty to state what I preferred if it could be had, I did not undertake to say that under the circumstances it would be wise to do it.
Mr. HENDERSON. I understand the Senator. He admits the correctness of my views, but thinks them inexpedient.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I spoke of my own particular views in relation to that matter; but a man cannot always press his views against what may be his sense of propriety or prospect of success. A legislator must legislate for something that he can accomplish.
Mr. HENDERSON. When I remarked that “the Senator admits the correctness of my views, " I re rded his views, as expressed in the proviso have read, and my own views, as almost identical. At least they are substan tially so and I cannot be mistaken that the distinguished SenatOrs speech clearly indicated a preference by him for a lain, pesitive statement that the suffrage should be ranted, over one permitting the States to exclu e whole races of men in defiance of every principle of republicantheor.
Mr. KIRKWOOD. Will the Senfrom Missouri allow me to ask him a question? I want to understand him ifI can. Do I understand him to say that Congress by this amendment confers 0n the States a power that they do not now have?
Mr. HENDERSON. Certainly not. I did not say so.
Mr. HENDERSON. tor is aiming at, I think. He intrenches himself behind the provisions of the present constitution when he needs its shelter. It is good when it answers the purpose of his argument, but bad when it does not. He asks me if the States cannot now exclude the negro from the ballot. I answer, yes. But I thought we were amending the Constitution. Iowa refuses ne gro suffrage, and can do so after this committee amendment shall have been adopted without losinga member in Congress. NO southern State can do so. The Senator seems more anxious to destroy the political power of certain States than to do Justice to an oppressed race. It is true, under the Constitution as it now is. the States may exclude the negro from suffrage, but they may exclude him without loss of political power in Congress. He is willing to let the States continue to exclude the negro because, forsooth, it is the present Constitution. If so, why not stand by the Constitution throughout, and still let them retain their representation? If the existing Constitution is good against my argument, it is good against his.
Mr. KIRKWOOD. Not according to my view. I understand the Senator to argue that we are about conferring on these States a privilege understood him to I see what the Sena they have not had before. I do not so regard it. If the Senator argues that under the Constitution there is no such power now, but that we are granting them a power, he is correct; but if they have that power, we are simply not interfering with that provision of the Constitution. That is all.
Mr. CONNESS. The President tells you that he is afraid that would bring about a war of races.
{End of Mr. Henderson speech from appendix.}
Mr. POMEROY. With the consent of the Mr. HENDERSON resumed and concluded away, of the town of Ohio, county of Senfrom Oregon, I move that the further consideration of this subject be postponed until tomorrow. M Mr. SUMNER. Let us go into executive sesswn.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Ihopenot. We never shall get through at this rate. 2 or 3 days of this wee have been s ient already. If my friendfrom Oregon would rather speak in the morning, the Senfrom NewHampshire, [Mr. CLAWL] who rose at the same moment, is perfectl ready to go on this evening. If my friendfrom Oregon will give way, or prefers speakingin the morning, the SenfromNewHampsliire will go on now. It is of no sort of use to kee going on in this way.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I am willin to give way to the Senfrom NewHampsfiire to go on this afternoon.
Mr. POMEROY. Then I withdraw the motion.
Mr. WADE. What proposition does the Senator say I assented to?
Mr. CLARK. I will state it again, because I desired to call that Senators attention to it, for I thought the expression was unguarded if he meant to make it. I say the honorable Senfrom Nevada the other day asserted in this Chamber that if we granted the negroes the privilege of voting it would be a boon from as to them, a gift which we conferred, and not a right which belonged to them; and I under stood the Senfrom Ohio to assent to that posmon.
Mr. WADE. If I did, I did not understand it. I
Mr. CLARK. think the Globe will so how him, but I think he did not understand the proposition, and it is for that reason that I call is attention so particularly to it.
Mr. WADE. I entirely deny any such inference as being a sentiment of mine.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President Mr. HENDRICKS. With the consent of the Senfrom Oregon, I move that the Senate do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.
###HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Wednesday. February 14, 1866. The House met at 12 oclock in. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. QUARANTISE AT NEWYORK.
Mr. DARLING. I ask unanimous consent at this time to considera point resolution authorizing the SecyVar and the SecyNavy to place at the disposal of the commissioners of uarantine at the ort of NewYork such hul s and vessels ast ey have no use for. It is in anticipation of the cholera. No objection was made.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I send to the Clerks table the JtResolution which was referred to the ComCommerce, with certain amendments, which the committee unanimously recommend, in the nature of a substitute. The substitute was read, as follows: Be it resolved That the Senate and HoRep, 460., That the SecyWar and to SecyNavy be, and they are hereby. respectively authorized in their discretionto place gratuitously at the disposal of the commissionersOf quarantine or the proper authorities, to be used by them temporarily for quarantine purposes, such vessels or hii ks belonging to the U.S. as are not requiredfor other useof the national GOefnmo llt, flubJOCI such restrictions and regulations as the said Secretaries may respectively deem necessary to impose for the preservation thereof.
Skip Skip The JtResolution was ordered to be engrosse and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, mtRtv the jomt resolution was passed; upon the table. The latter motion was agree to. PETITION OF CITIZENS OF ALABAMA.
Mr. BOUTWELL, by unanimous consent, presented a memorial o people of Alabama; which was referred to the ComReconstruction, and ordered to be printed. NATIONAL BUREAU OF EDUCATION.
Mr. GARFIELD, by unanimous consent, presented the memorial of the convention of school superintendents lately held in this city, asking the establishment of a national Bureau of Education.
Mr. GARFIELD also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill, which accompanied the above mentioned memorial, to establish a national Bureau of Education;
Skip Skip which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The bill, with the memorial, was referred, on motion of Mr. GARFIE!. D, to a select committee of 7, and ordered to be printed. Mr. GARFIELD mtRtv the bill was referred; upon the table. Agreed to. assume LAW.
Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts, by unan, iine us consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the Committee on Currency and Bank nindging be instructed to consider the expediencyof the bankru t legaltender act so that interestbearing notesshe [not be included as part of the lawful money required to be. hcl dby national banks for the redemption of their liabilities. PENSION LAW.
Mr. MILLER, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill supplementary to an act to grant pensions, approved July 14, 1862; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComInvalidPens. AGRICULTURAL REPORT.
Mr. MILLER. I ask unanimous consent of the House to offer the following resolution: Whereas the Agricultural Reports have beensoably conducted, and t in subjectmatter therein contained deemed very valuable by the farming community and others, that the number of copies heretofore printed nre inadequate tomcottho increasing demand: Therefore, Resolved, That 300,000 extra copies be, and are hereby, ordered to be printed lor eachof the years 1863. 18M and 1865, (including the extra copies heretofore ordered.)the same to be for the use of the membersof this House for distribution.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I must certainly object to that resolution in any shape.
Mr. DAWES. I would like the permission of the Gentfrom Illinois to make an inquiryin reference to this matter.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. tleman has in permission.
Mr. DAW S. I would like to know if any response has been received to a resolution passed by the House with reference to the expenditures of the Agricultural Dept? Mr. MOULTON. I am opposed to the resolution as it now stands. It seems to me that it should be in the nature of an inquiry. I wish to say that some 3 weeks ago a resolution was submitted by me in reference to the condition of the Agricultural Bureau. No information has been received upon that subject, and I hope the resolution will not pass in the form it now is or until we receive that information., Mr. DAWES. I desire to call attention to a defect in the resolution.
Mr. SPALDING. I object to the resolution. TAX 0N TOBACCO.
Mr. SCHENCK, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to: Resolved, That the ComWays&Means be instructedtoinguireinto the expediency of amending the law imposing 11tax on tobacco. so asto grad uate such tax with referenceto the relative value of cigars or other manufacturedformsof the article or itno makethesameno advnlorem tax, and thustoequal and apportion the burden and the protection more equitably and justly: and that the committee report by bill or other mse. ORGANIZATION OF THE PENSION OFFICE.
Mr. EGGLESTON, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to amend the several acts relatin to the organization of the Pension Othee; which was read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComInvalidPens. ORDER OF BUSINESS.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois, called for the reular order of business.
The SPEAKER. The regular order of business is the consideration of the contestedelection case from the State of Michigan.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I would like to inquire of the Chair, if I allow this case to go over until after the mornin hour, whether any business can arise during temorning hour that Will take precedence of it?
The SPEAKER. The Chair cannot definitely answer the inquiry of the gentleman, because during the morning hour toHouse may go into ComWhole on some special order, in which case the election case would The General F be superseded. If the morning hour is eufirely occupied by its appropriate business, the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Scorinui] can call up that case. It being a privileged question, it can be calle up by the gentleman at any time when the House is not engaged in the consideration of other business.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I will let the case go over until after the morning hour, and take myrisk of the House going into ComWhole.
The SPEAKER. The next business in or der is calling committees for reports of a General nature, commencing with the ComPostOffice. CLIRKB IOB postoffice DEPT.
Mr. ALLEY. the comPostOffice have authorized me to report a bill to increase the clerical force of the Post Odice Dept. The Senate have already passed a bill of the same character, which was referred to our committee and in order to save time I ask that the Senate bill be considered in the House at this time instead of the bill of a similar character from our committee. No objection being made, the House proceeded to the consideration of Senate bill TWO. 96, to authorize an increase of the clerical force of the postoffice dept. The bill was read at lengt. It provides that the PostMGenl may appoint, in addition to the clerical force now employed in the postoffice Dept, 4 cleigrs of the 1st class, 7 clerks of the 2nd class, 14 clerks of the 3rd class, and 4 clerks of the 4th class; the same to be paid until the 30th of June, 1866, out of any money in the Trees ur not otherwise appropriated.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Ihope the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] will give the House some reasons for this large increase of the clerical force of the postoffice Dept, and the corresponding increase of the expenditures of the Government.
Mr. ALLEY I will state, for the information of this House, that this increase was recommended by the Post Othee Dept. the comPostOffice went into a very thorough and full investigation of the subject; and they were unanimously of the opinion, after several conferences with the Dept, that their request should be anted and for the further information of the House I will send to the Clerks desk a communication to me from the PostMGenl, which I ask to have read.
The Clerk read, as follows: Posr Orricii Dnnmnmir. WAsnisoiou. January 19. l Sin: I have the honor to transmit herewith foryour approval the draft of a bill authorizingan addition to the chancelforce of this Dept. The great increaseof clerical labor incident to the restoration of the postalservwethroughoutthesouthern States, addedto the largely increasedp stal bus iness in the northern States, as shown b5tarecent annual report of the operations of this opartinent, has rendered the additional clerical force called for by this bill necessaryto the prom t and satisfactory transactionof the business of this Dept. he number and classification of the additional clerkship sr uired, have beencarefully arrangedby the her 1 0H wrespecuyeburenur. anerconsuliation with each other and With myself and I am satisfied that a less number than those askedfor in this bill would not besudicientfor the propermanagement of the businessof the Dept. As the servicesof theseadditional clerks aregreatly neededntithistiine. I trust that the bill may be noted union with as little delay as practicable shall b9 happy to mnkefurtherexplanations to your committee, if desired. either by letter or inperson. asmay be most recable. I am, very respectffily, your obedient servant, W. DEN Nison. H J B A “a Poatmaaler on. on. LLIY, iman ConmiuteGmraeig(go. but (Mice and Port Reade. HoRep.
Mr. STEVENS. I do not like to be captions in matters of this kind. Yet, on the other hand, I do not like to see appropriation bills considered out of ComWhole. If I understand this bill aright, there is an appropriation in it.
Mr. STEVENS. Then I shall be obligedto ask that the rule be enforced, and ask that this bill be considered in ComWhole.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Was not the bill read merely for information?
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] asked to have the bill considered y the House at this time, and no objection was made.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to refer this bill to the ComWhole on the state of the Union.
The SPEAKER. The Chair decides that the objection of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. Sisvsxs] and his point of order come too late.
Mr. ALLEY. If the Gentfrom Pennsylvaiiia will give me his attention for a moment
Mr. STEVENS. I think that is a pretty sharppoint of order.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will state to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Srn vsxs] who appears to object to the ruling of the Chair, that it was made under the same rule under which the gentleman himself has at different times reported appropriation hills, which have not been read at the Clerks desk, and in regard to which he has claimed that the point of order could not subsequent] he made. The gentleman knows that very we I, because he has often insisted upon that ruling himself. The Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] asked that the bill be considered in the House, and at this time. The Chair repeated the request audibly to the House, and there was no objection made. v
Mr. HARDING, ofIllinois. Ihope the gentleman will permit us to consider this bi l in ComWhole.
Mr. ROSS. I desireto inquire what number of clerks the bill provides for, and what additional expense will be incurred by their employment.
Mr. ALLEY. The number that will be act ually put in service, in addition to those already employed in the manner I have stated, will be something like 16; and the additional expense will be perhaps 20 or 25,000 dollars.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. Will the gentleman accept an amendment that the apointeea of this dept shall be apportione union the severa congressional districts of the U.S. as near] as practicable?
Mr. ALLE. I could not accept such an amendment as that.
Mr. HARDING, ” Illinois. I think that is fair. I shall vote against the bill unless such a principle be introduced into it, orbe enforced by that dept.
Mr.al EY. I think that my friendfrom Illinois, if he will consider a moment will not persist in asking for the adoption of such an amendment. He certainly cannot be in earnest, as there are not positions enough to allow one to each congressional district; and certainly he would not be in favor of turning out the officers now emplo edin that Dept and substituting to sue an extent new and inex perienced persons. Certainly such an amendm ent, as every one will see, is utterly imprac ticuble. I now call the previous question.
Skip Skip On 2nding tecall for the previous question the House was divided; and )there were aybs 67, noes 18; no quorum voting. The SPEAKER ordered tellers; and a pointed Messrs. ALLEY, and Human of 11 nois. The House was again divided; and the tellers reportedayes 80 4,noes not counted. So the previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. The bil was ordered to he engrossed and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time. Mr. HARDING, of Illinois, moved that the bill be laid upon the table. The motion was not agreed to. Mr. KUYKENDALL demanded the pre vious question on the passage of the bill. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill was passed. Mr. ALLEY mtRtv the bill was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. NEWYORK postoffice.
Mr. ALLEY from the comPostOffice, reported a JtResolution relative to the courts and post othee of NewYork city; which was read a 1st and 2nd time. The JtResolution was read at length.
Mr. ALLEY. Mr. Speaker, I will state for the information of the House that the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Rsvnoxn] introduced a bill which was referred to Our oorrr Lees. 837 mittee, providing for the purchase of a site, and the erection of a new postoffice in the city of NewYork. The committee, on inquiry, learned that a new ost office, in the judgment of everybody whose attention had been called to the subject, was required. The committee did not feel authorized to report back the bill as referred to them, but conc uded, on consultation with the depts and some eminent citizens of NewYork, to report this ioint resolution, which provides for the appointment of a commission to select a site and report the price to the PostMGenl and the SecyInterior. We combine the 2 things. We thought, on consultation and examination of the suliject, that the 2 could be combined very economicallythe 2 propesitions for the erection of a building for a 0st office and also for the accommodation of the U.S. courts in NewYork cit. On the unanimous consent of all concerne it was concluded to put it in this form. This commission is only authorized to report to the PostMGenl and the SecyInterior. Then, in their judgment, if the price is right, and the site such as they can recommen, they are authorized and directed to report to Congress. Certainly this prelimi naiy action cannot be objected to.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. What provisiop is made for the payment of this commission
Mr. ALLEY. They are U.S. odi cers, with the exception of 2 individuals, one of whom is mayor of NewYork city. N othing is said about a
Mr. DARLINY G. I will say to the Gentfrom Illinois, the gentlemen named in the point resolution are but too happy to serve wi out compensation.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I do not know that there is any objection to the resolution, as Congress is not committed in any way, and the matter has to come back here.
Mr. CHANLER. I understand the Gentfrom Massachusetts to state that this has been required by citizens of NewYork city that they ask for the removal of the present site.
Mr. ALLEY. No, sir, I did not say that. The gentleman has misapprehended me. This is merely a commission to inquire into the matter. We found great difference of opinion. I would say, so far as the present edifice is concerned, that the majority were in favor of the present siteif it can be adopted with propriety and will furnish the requisite accommodations.
Mr. CHANLER. will ask one more question. The present NewYork postoffice is in what was an old church. I do not oppose the construction of a new building; bu) I would call the gentlemans attention to the fact that a commission to select a site for a new postoffice in NewYork is entirely distinct from the question of erectin properaccommodations Or a postoffice. 1 a present location is central, and there could not possibly be selected one more advantageous to the whole community. They have stations scattered through the city, and a central office is all that is required for the reception and distribution of letters. I hope the gentleman will so far modify his commission as to limit them in their action on this sulnect. A site was chosen and purchased under Mr. Buchanans administration, if I am not mistaken. It cost the Government, I think, about 70,000 dollars. The same property today would bring a great deal more. this impossible at the present price of land in the city of NewYork for the Government to procure any place equal in availability at anything like that price; and I would an gest that the proposition looks more like a scieme for going in to buy lands than one to arrange for the site of a new postoffice. I believe econ Omfi is in favor of the present site. Mr. ALLEY. I must as to the Gentfrom NewYork that what e says now seems to me entirely irrelevant to the question under Consideration.
Mr. CHANLER. I beg ardon, I did not mean to be irrelevant. I on y wished to draw attention to the fact that the question should be divided.
Mr. ALLEY. If the gentleman will hear me for a moment I think he will be convinced that his remarks are entirely unnecessary. A great difference of opinion existed in regard to the site. It was With reference to that difference more than anything else, perhaps, that it was finally agreed upon unanimously that this commission shonld be a pointed, and it is the understanding most distinctly of all the parties in interest who have been conferred with, that that question is not to be prejudged at all, but is to be open to the fullest and amplest consideration, examination, and investigation with regard to all the sites proposed. I think as the question now stands, so or as those are concerned who have been consulted, that the majority of opinion and feeling is that the present site is the best and most economical that could be selected; and it is not by any means certain, if a new building is erected, that it will not be erected on the present site.
Mr. HANLER. I would ask the gentlemans permission one moment to state that it is exactly on that point that [was speaking. If you have the best site why not leave the best alone? You cannot do better than the best. If a commission is to be appointed for the erection of a properbuilding or properaccommo dations for the postoffice, why go and look for another site when you have a most appropriate one, on a most valuable iece of land, in the very heart of the commercial center of the city? I certainly think that suggestion is relevant.
Mr. ONEILL. I desire to make o. am; estion to the Gentfrom Massachusetts [ll Mr. A1LEY] which is pertinent to the general subject of preperaccommodations for Government officials and the convenience of the businesscom munity. We have in Philadelphia what is known as the Pennsylvania Bank building, which cost the Government of the U.S. a large sum of money, having been purchased some years egg) for one of its depts. In that city we have no accommoations belongingto the Government for the U.S. apprais ers. I would like to ask the Gentfrom Massachusetts if he would not o willing to in corporate in his resolution a nest that the commission named by him should confer with the PostMGenl and SecyTreasury, if necessary, in regard to the expedicncy of fittingup the Pennsyllvania Bank building for the appraisers? Dept, and also of improving an enlarging it for the reception of bonded goods, so as to save the large expense of renting private warehouses for this purpose?
Mr. ALLEY. In reply to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. niLL] I will say that that matter did not come before the committee in connection with this subject; and as the mouthpiece of that committee, I should hardly be warranted in traveling out of the record so far as to comply with that renest.
Mr. ONEILL. One wor further. I cannot see why there should be an difficulty in the ComPostoffice including this proposition in the one submitted by its chairman. Now, I simply suggest that this is the very opportunity to bring up a question in which I mayhere say the merchants o Philadelphia are deeply interested, especially where the Government itself would be largely benefited by takin the building at the price set upon it by the 0st Office Dept. It comes in here, in in opinion, most pertinently as a matter about which this commission could inquire, the disposition of the buildin being still to a great extent under the control; of the postoffice dept.
Mr. DARLING. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts yield?
Mr. DARLING. Mr. Speaker, I take issue with my colleague [Mr. Canvass] in regard to the location of the postoffice in our city. I do not think that it would be necessary to spend a large sum of money, if any, for a new site, provided it be an eligible one. I think the city of NewYork, with its accustomed liberality, would be willing to donate to the U.S. Government sufficient land for the erection of a postoffice which would be acredit to the Gov;ernment and commensurate with its importance and with the accommodations requisite for the convenience of the people, embracing, also, accommodations for the U.S. courts. The present locality, it is well known, is contracted, illy ventilated, dark, and very difficult of approach. It is true the Government has paid a large sum of money there, but the land would sell at any time for more than you have paid for it. It is also true that private contriutions were appealed to for e purpose of securing that site.
Mr. ALLEY. I must remind the gentleman that that has nothing to do with the propositionnow before the House.
Mr. DARLING. I merely wish to say further, in reply to my colleague, that the present site is not, in my judgment, such as is calcu lated for the accommodation of the postoffice in the great city of NewYork, whose people have to fall into line like voters at avotin precinct, and stand up to their ankles in mud and water before they can be served with their letters. I think it a disgrace to the nation that we should have such a place for the postoffice in the city of NewYork) as exists there today.
Skip Skip Mr. ALLEY. I will now call the previous question. The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. The point resolution was ordered tobe engrosse and read a 3rd time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the 3rd time, and passed. Mr. ALLEY mtRtv the joiiit resolution was passed; upon the table. Agreed to. POSTAGE STAMPS and STAMPED ENVELOPES.
Mr. ALLEY, from the comPostOffice, reported a bill relative to the sale of postage stamps and envelopes on credit; which was reada 1st and 2ndtime.
Mr. ALLEY. This bill has passed the senate precisely in the form in which I now report it, as Senate bill No. 71, which is now upon the Speakers table. I propose to substitute that bill for the bill reported the committee.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I think we had better consider the House bill 1st and see what it is.
Mr. ALLEY. It is precisely the same bill word for word, and there is no approprintion in it.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I think we had better hold back the Senate bill for a little while until we see what. this bill is.
Mr. ALLEY. Do I understand the gentleman to object to taking up the Senate bill?
Mr. WASHBURNL, of Illinois. I think I am 05posed to this whole measure, and if so, I would not desire to give the gentleman the advantage of getting up the Senate bill. That is frankly my reason.
Mr. ALLEY. Then I call for the readin of the bill I have reported. The bill was rea. It authorizes the PostMGenl, up to June 30, 1868, when ever, in his opinion, the public service shall require it, to deposit postage stamps and stamped envelopes with such persons as he may select for sale. It provides, further, that the person with whom the ostage stamps and stamped envelopes are so ell shall engage to sell and circulate the same under thei structions of the PostMGenl, and shall give bonds for the faithful kccpin of such and stamped envelopes, and or payments ttaomps the PostMGenl of the moneys received for the sale thereof. The bill further provides that the PostMGenl may allow to such depositaries a commission not exceeding 5%. on all such sales of stamps and stamped envelopes the accounts of the parties to)e audited an settled by the Auditor of the Treasury for the postoffice Dept, such parties to be deemed receivers and custodians of the public money, and be subject to all the pains and penlaties, fines and forfeitures now provided by law in the case of receivers and custodians of the public moue.
Mr. ALLEY. This bill was originally reported to the Senate by the ComPostOffices of that body. It was reeommitted to that committee and subsequently reported back in a little different shape, precisel in the same form in which we have it now. Iii. underwent a very rigid discussion in the Senate. The o position was very marked and determined to the passage of the 1st bill, but afterward, when it was presented to the Senate in its present form, it received. after a thorough and full discussion, I think almost a unanimous vote. I am not quite certain, because the yeas&nays were not called. It comes to us in this form. I will send now to the Clerks desk, to be read, a letter from the PostMGenl, stating the reason why he desires the passage of this bill.
The Clerk read, as follows: Posr Office DEPT, WASHINGTON, D. o., January 11, 1866. Sin: I inclose a draft of a law authorizing the postMGen to sell stampson credit. The object of the law is to enable the Dept to circulate its stamps through the States lately in rebellion. This cannot now be done to any considerable extent for the reason that the law only authorizes the sale of stampsto postmasters or for cash. There are many places in the southern Stateswhere there are neither personswho can take the oath required bylaw for the qualification of postmasters nor persons of sufficient means to enable them to purchase stamps for cash. I am advisedthat the demand for stamps is so great in those statesthat there maybe found many persons of responsibility and integrity who, thoughunableto take the test oath. are able to give good bonds, and would cheerfully become responsible for the stamps intrusted to them and sell them for the accommodation of the community where they reside. it is my intention to appoint, so far as practicable, as receiversand vendorsof stamps persons who have aircud been appointed assessors. collectors, the and have t orefore received the indorsement of the Government. The compensation proposed is very light, but the penalties provided for are assevere as are now provided by law in all cases of receiversand custodians of public funds is believed that a measure of the character proposed will not only produce considerable revenue to the Dept. but will tend to promote a feeling of contentmen tand subordination among the people of the southern States and at the same time protect the dept against loss. eryrespectfully, the W. DENNISON, PostMGenl. Hon. JAMES DIXON Chairman ComPostOffice. U.S. Senate.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] yield to me for a moment?
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I notice that it is statell in the letter which has just been read that the asst assessors and collectors in the southern States are persons who haveal ready “received the indorsement of the Government.” I wish the chairman of the ComPostOffice to state to this House in what manner these officers have received that indorsement, and whether those persons have taken the oath required by law; whether they have not, instead of that, sent on oaths, now filed in the Depts, that are unknown to the law; and whether, in at least one case, the officer has not omitted in his oath to state that he will an port the constitution of the U.S. t occurs to me that this bill is another departure from the general polic of the Government for the benefit of those who have been in rebellion against the Government, and I think it is time that this House should sto these departures. They have been made lheretofore without the sanction of Congress, and it does seem to me that this is not the time for us to indorse, by this or any similar bill, these deartures from the obligations imposed by the law upon the heads of our Depts, those departures being for the benefit of those who have been in rebellion against the Government. Let this subject he considered fully in all its bearings before we attempt in this exceptional way to relieve all those persons who have been engaged in rebellion from the obligations which rest upon themequally with men who have been true to this government throughout all the late struggle. I am opposed to special Legislation for t ie benefit of rebels. Laws good enough for loyal men are good enough fort ose who are not loyal. I should like to have some explanation from the gentleman as to the character of the qualifications possessed by these officers, who are, in that letter, stated to “ have received the indorsement of the Government."
Mr. ALLEY. I have no information in regard to these Officers that the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. WILSON] or any other member of this House does not possess. I can only say that this bill does not provide, neither is it designed, that any of these officers shall be the custodians of these stamps unless they have the qualifications required by the laws of the U.S.
Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I will suggest to the Gentfrom Massachusetts [Mr. ALLEY] that the letter which has been read does state that these officers may be selected.
Mr. ALLEY. I Will state to the gentleman that this letter was read in the Senate and has been published in the Globe, from which I have had it read. The original letter was sent to the chairman of the postoffice Committee of the Senate [Mr. DIXON] and was there read, at the time the bill was 1st reported. The same objection was made there, and the same discussion arose. The bill was then reeommitted and finally reported back in an amended form, and after a very thorough and searchin investigation and a full discussion of the who equestion, the bill was passed, as I stated before, by the Senate unanimously. I know that the bill received the support by word and vote of some of the most radical members of that body, as being a measure not in favor of the rebels, but one imperatively demanded by the public interest.
Mr. KASSON. Will the Gentfrom Massachusetts [ML ALLEY] allow me a word upon this bill?
Mr. ALLEY. If I yield to all who desire to say anything upon this bill, my time will be all ta on up, and the gentleman must excuse me now.
Mr. STEVENS. I think this bill ought to be printed. We ought not to act upon such a bill as this in this way in the dark.
Mr. ALLEY. I will yield in a moment. I desire to say a word in reply to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. STEVENS.] of course I have no desire whatever to an press information, and I am willing to give the House every opportunity to investigate this subject most fully. But this is a matter which has been before the Senate for some time, and was thoroughly discussed there, and the discussions have been published in the Globe, and I supposed that ale most every member of this House had had his attention drawn to this subject and knew something about it. But if it is the case that the House is not well informed upon this subject, then I am quite willing, of course, thatitshould go over, and be printed. But, under the circumstances, I think I must insist upon its consideration now. I now yield to the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. Kassox] for 5 minutes.
Mr. BANKS. Iho e allow me to say a wordi than one minute.
Mr. BANKS. Mr. Speaker, the facilities of the postoffice rank among the highest privileges enjoyed by the people of this country. There is nothing so important to the people short of the protective power of the judiciary. Now, aIunderstand, this bill proposes to give to the States that are not in amicable relations with this Government the privileges of the postoffice, and to give them these privileges on credit, an advantage which no other part of this country enjoys. Iy opinion is that this privilege ought not to be given to those States, at leastuutil they have settled their political atfairs in a manner satisfactory to us.
Mr. ALLEY. My colleague will allow me to correct him by saying that this bill does not provide that any stain s shall be sold on credit. The bill 1st offered in the Senate did allow them to he sold in that we, but this does not.
Mr. BANKS. I certain y obtained thatidea This question, I submit, ought not to be decided upon a debate which has taken place elsewhere. It ought to be decided upon debate here, with the proosition in print before us, so that we can understand it and let me say to my colleague that, in my view, there is no question before this congress more important than the principle invoied in this bill.
Mr. ALLEY. The Gentfrom Iowa says he is opposed to the bill in its present that my colleague will I will not occupy more 1866. 839 shape; that he would have a bill which should require these stamps to be placed in the hands of U.S. officers, and in the hands of none others. Did I understand him correctly?
Mr. KASSON. Not quite. Inggested some such thing, not having examined the bill; but some such mode which would not be attended with such serious reduction of the revenue of the Government.
Mr. ALLEY. His objection is that it takes from the Treasury half a million dollars.
Mr. ALLEY. More than half a million dollars if this provision is carried out! I think the gentleman is entirely incorrect in his judment. I think the cost to the Government will be triflin indeed, and the revenueswill be much increased by the adoption of this bill. A great many stamps will then be sold that are not now sold. The Government will lose 5%., or rather it will have to pay, for the sale of the stamps, 5%., but it will gain 95%. on every stamp sold. The sale of the stamps in this manner will be so restricted in quantity thatin my opinion the amount which will be paid out in commissions in this way will not reach the sum of $20,000, instead of $500,000, as the gentleman suggests. I think, therefore, so far as that objection goes, it has to my mind little force. In regard to depositing these stamps in the hands of U.S. officers, I am o posed to that very thing, and there consists the real difficulty. I think that U.S. officers should not receive these stamps for sale unless they are of that description of officers which the PostMGenl has been careful thus far to appoint, men who can subscribe to the oath which the laws of the U.S. require. If the Gentfrom Iowa wishes to have these stamps placed in the hands of those who are acting as U.S. officers, by whomsoever appointed, who are unable to take the oath which the laws of the U.S. prescribe, I am ersuaded it would be unsafe.
Mr. KASSOL. Let me say, right here, that I am opposed to reairing the oath from any such men. I am or shopkeepers or others being allowed to sell them as any other mer chandise, without requiring them to take an oath, letting them have them at par and sell in them at ar. nMr. ALL Y. The Gentfrom Iowa knows that Officers of the U.S. are required to take an oath. He knows that some have not taken the oath. They were appointed under what were believed to be the necessities of the case which, in my judgment, have never existed. such officers have been appointed; and for one, if left to me, I should be o posed to lacing these stamps in their hands. Tam willing to grant this privilege to the Union men of the South, and everybody else, if thereby it develOps the resources of the country and increases the revenues of the Government, and does no possible harm, as in this case I do not think it would, to any interest or just cause. I defy any gentleman upon this floor to show that the Government, or any individual, is harmed in the slightest degree by this provision. To be sure it will accommodate and benefit the people of the South of all classes. Mr. BOUTWELL. Let me ask my colleague a question. Why has not a postmaster been appointed in every village, town, and city of the South?
Mr. ALLEY. The reason is because the PostMGenl is so particular, and justly so, that he will not allow any man to serve in that Dept who does not subscribe to the oath prescribed by the laws of the U.S.
Mr. BOUTWELL. Does the chairman of the comPostOffice inform the House that there is not at least one loyal man in each postoffice district of the South?
Mr. ALLEY. I mean to say there is not or at least the PostMGenl has not found them. The PostMGenl has been only able to find something like 2000, only one 4th of the whole, who could take the oath which the laws prescribe.
Mr. STEVENS. Why are we to have 0st ofices in such places? Why not withhold them until we can nd men to fill them?
Mr. SPALDING. Has the morning hour expired?
Mr. ALLEY. I move that the billbe printed, as we will not have time to vote on it today, so that it may be upon members desks tomor row morning. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. FINCK. I ask my colleague on the committee to yield to me.
Mr. FINCK. I am unable, sir, to comreheud this determined opposition to this bill. What is it now pending before the House? A simple reposition to authorize the PostMGenl to a point agents, wherever he may think the public interest requires it, for the purpose of disposing of postage stamps of the U.S.; and now gentlemen propose that the citizens of southern States sha 1 not be appointed unless they can take the oath prescribed y Congress in July, 1862. It is a fact, sir, known to gentlemen on this floor, that the postoffice Dept has been unable to obtain postmasters in the southern States, or contract ors for carrying the mails, in order to afford all the necessary mail facilities required in those tales. We are told by the distinguished Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SrnVENS] that the people ought not to have the facilities of the 0st Office Dept if they are unable to take this oath and another distinguished Gentfrom Massachusetts tells us substantially the same thing. Sir, I say that the continuance of this oath is most unwise and unjust. Why, sir, this is a mere bill for the purpose of carrying out the business of one of pthe Depts of the Government. It is true that one of the objects of the hill is to allow the apointment of men who cannot take the oath of pl862, but it is a necessity, an absolute necessity, in order to carry on the business of this branch of the Government that such a bill should bepassed, or that the test oath of 1862 be swept from the statutebook. Sir, I believe we should afford all the necessary mail facilities to the people of the southern States. I believe such a course will create a better feeling between the 2 sections, and tend to harmonize the country.
The SPEAKER. The morning hour having expired, the bill goes over till tomorrow, an the House resumes the contestedelection case in the State of Michigan. MICHIGAN CONTESTED ELECTION. The House resumed the consideration of the contestedelection case of Baldwin vs. Trow bridge of the 5th congressional district of the State of Michigan. The majority of the ComElections reported the following resolution: Ruolued. That Rowland E. Trowbridge is entitled to p seat in this House as a Representative in the 39th Congressfrom the 5th congressional district in Michigan. The pending question was 11 on the following resolutions, moved by Mr. L unsusm. on the part of the minority of the ComElections, as a substitute for the resolution of the majority: Resolved, That Hon. Rowland E. Trowbridge is not entitled to hold the seatnow occupiedby him in this HouseasaRe Representative from the state of Michigan. Resolved, That Augustus o. Baldwin has beenduly electedas a Representativefrom the State of Michigan to the 39th Congress, and is entitled to a seatin this House.
Mr. TROWBRIDGE was entitled to the floor.
Mr. COFIELD. I rise now to call the previous question, as I think this debate has gone far enough.
Mr. ROGERS. Will the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SCOFIELD] yield to me a few minutes?
Mr. SCOFIELD. I will yield to the Gentfrom NewJersey, [Mr. 1100235] the leader of the Opposition, for 5 minutes, though I desire to retain the floor so that I may call the previous question when the gentleman gets through.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. SCOFIELD] can move the previous question now, and if it shall be 2nded and temain question ordered, the gentleman will then be entitled to one hour for the purpose of closing the debate.
Mr. SCOFIELD. Then I will move the previous question now, and yield to the Gentfrom NewJersey [Mr. Rootms] after it shall have been 2nde.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I now yield to the Gentfrom NewJersey for ten minutes.
Mr. ROGERS. I thank the gentleman for the courtesy which he has extended to me in allowing me an opportunity to make a few remarks upon this question. But at the same time I do not exactl like the insinuation he has thrown out that claim to be the leader of this side of the House.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I know the gentleman is too modestto make the claim;I merely assigned the position to him. If he likes it betteriwill 4 say the misleader of the House. ”
Mr. SCOFIELD. The constitution of the U.S. gives to each State the right to prescribe the places of holding elections, and it gives to the people of the State the right to prescribe the qualifications of voters; and age is one of the qualifications.
Mr. ROGERS. Is not residence one of the qualifications, too?
Mr. SCOFIELD. Well, if that is to be called a qualification, it is also fixing the place of holding the election, and that must govern. You cannot say that because the constitution gives them the right of fixing the qualification of voters, therefore they have not a right to fix the place of holding the election. this just equal to the stale aneedote of the doctor who converted all diseases into fits because his med icines were applicable only to that disease. The gentleman claims that because the State convention of Michigan could fix the qualitications of voters, they could, therefore. fix the place of holding the election as aqualification.
Mr. ROGERS. The gentleman does not an swer my point at all. I will put it in a stronger light. Suppose the organic law of the State should say that no man should vote unless he has resided personally for ten days in the township where the election is to be held, and comes personally to the ballotbox on the day of election and uts his vote in the ballotbox, could the Legis ture of the State, in defiance of that organic provision, pass a law that a citizen should not be required at all to come to the ballotbox and vet!, but mightvote by proxy, or in some other State, or Territory, or in some foreign count, wherever he might please?
The SPEAKER. The ten minutes allowed to the Gentfrom NewJersey have expired.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I will answer the gentlemans question out of my time. It is just the puestion I answered before, and the Gentfrom NewJersey has not understood my an swer. The Legislature, by the constitution of the U.S., fixes the place where the ballotbox shall be kept; that is, where the election shall be held. The State fixes the qualification of voters, and among those qualifications requires a ten days residence in the township and 3 months residence in the State, and that the voter shall be 21 years of age. Now, the voter having these gualifications deposits his ballot at the place xed by the Legislature.
Mr. ROGERS. Still the gentleman does not answer my question. Suppose the organic law of the State of Michigan prescribed as a qualification that an elector should reside ten days in the township before the election, and that when the day 01 election comes, the elector shall o in person to the ballotbox and deposit his baglot, would that be a qualification?
Mr. SCOFIELD. The depositing the ballot would not be a qualification; the residence of ten days would.
Mr. ROGERS. Suppose the State provided in its organic law as a qualification that the elector should not vote unless he went person ally to the ballotbox and put his bal ot into the box would not that be a qualification?
Mr. SCOFIELD. That is just what they did do in this case, only the baflotbox was to be in the cam where the soldiers were.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I cannot give the gentleman all my time.
Mr. ROGERS. The gentleman has not answered my question.
Mr. SCOF LD. Well, if the thinks so, it is because he does not question he at. I did not Wish to give the gentleman an opportunity to make aseech for I knew that, as he is a leader of the pposition, “one blast upon his buglehorn” is good for 40 votes. I believe that is at present the number of the votes on the other side. They are diminishing so ra idly that it is difficult for one to keep him so f rightly informed in reference to the matter. gentleman now the
Mr. ROGERS. Will not the gentleman yield to me for a question?
Mr. SCOFIELD. I yield for the present to the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. Coon.) Mr. ROGERS. Will the Gentfrom Illinois yield to me for a question?
Mr. COOK. I must decline to yield, as I hold the floor by consent of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania. I desire, Mr. Speaker, to propound a question to my colleague, [Mr. MARSHALL] I list ened to his argument yesterda with great attention. I wish now to ask him whether at the election at which he was 1st chosen a member of this House every vote polled for him was not void by the constitution of Illinois?
Mr. MARSHALL. No, sir. The constitution of Illinois of 1848attemted to add to the (Eialifications prescribed in the constitution of teU. S. for Representatives and senators of the U.S. In 1854, Mr. Taun suu and myself, who had both been upon the bench as judges, were elected to seats in this House. Before taking his seat, Mr. Tnuxsuu. was elected to the U.S. Senate. Both Houses of Congress held that the provision of the constitution of Illinois, which attempted to add to the qualifications of Sens&Reps in Congress, was entirely in conflict with the Federal constitution, and consequently void. hat is my answer to the question of my colleague. If he sees any analogy whatever between that case and this, he can see much further than I can. I was very unfortunate in my argument yesterday, if my colleague understood me as maintaining that a State constitution could override the Federal constitution. I certainly took no such position, and I do not now.
Mr. COOK. Let me ask my colleague one other question. Whether the Legislature of the State of Michigan, which met 2 years ago, was not empowered by the constitution of the U.S. to fix the place of holding elections for members of Congress.
Mr. MARSHALL. I endeavored yesterday to answer that question. I sought to prove that that Legislature had no such power if their act was in conflict with the constitution of the State. I do not think it necessary to reeat my argument on that point, for I imagine that the House would not hear it with much patience.
Mr. COOK. Then, as I understand, Mr. Speaker, the position is assumed that the constitution of the State may limit the Legislaturein its power to fix the place for holding elections, but may not limit the people by saying for whom they shall vote. It seems to me that the cases are exactly parallel. If the people of the State of Illinois, in their constitutional convention, transcended their power when they enacted the provision which, i valid, would have rendered void all the votes cast for my colleague, then the people of Michigan, in their constitutional convention, transcended their power when they provided that the Legislature, which met 2 years after, should not fix the place of holding elections. The principle is precisely the same in both cases. I desire to add a single word more. I have here an authority which may be entitled to some weight upon this question. The ComJudiciary in the Senate have had before them a question in reference to the election of a Senfrom NewJersey. In reporting upon that question the committee use this anguage: "The constitution of NewJerscydoes not prescribe the manner of choosin U.S. Senators; as indeed, it could not, the constitution of the U.S. having vested that power, in the absenceof any law of Congress, exclusively in the Legislature.” The power of the Legislature to provide the places or holdingelections for representatives rests on precisely the same authority as the power to elect Senators. If the constitution of vewJersey could not prescribe the manner of choosing Senators, it could not prescribe the manner of electing Representatives. So far as the authority goes it is precisely in point.
Mr. ROGERS. With reference to the choice of Senators, the Federal constitution itself declares that Senators shall be elected by the State Legislatures.
Mr. COOK. Yes, sir; and the constitution itself declares that the Legislature shall prescribe the places of holding elections. The an guage of the constitution with reference to the 2 cases is precisely similar.
Mr. SCO ELD. Mr. Speaker, I now want 5 minutes myself. The constitution of the U.S. says that the Legislature of a State shall escribe the place Of holdin an election. In i Michigan the legislature of that State did prescribe the place where the soldiers should vote; they prescribed the camp where they happened to be in the field as the place. Now, why is not that constitutional? Tife constitution gives this duty as clear as language can give it to the legisliiture, and the Eegislature clearly performs at ut. 1 he Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Msssnsuf] told as yesterday that the reason why the Legislature of Michigan could not perform that duty was because it was the creature of the constitutionof michigan. Suppose the constitution of the U.S. had used the word “ creat ure, ” if he wants it so, could they not have prescribed the place of holding elections just as well as if they were called by the more dig nified word of Legislature? Again, he tells us that the constitution of the U.S. did not mean the Legislature, but meant the people of the U.S.
Mr. SCOFIELD. Not now. I am talking to the Gentfrom Illinois. [Mr. LIARSHALL] The constitution of the U.S. says, in one place, that the electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for the most numerous branch of the State Legislature. Take the gentlemans reading, and it will be, shall have the qualifications of the most nu merous branch of the people, not of the Legislature of a State. Which is the most numerous branch of the people? I suppose they should be divided into sexes. If so, in NewEngland the ladies would be the most numerous branch, and in the gentlemans State the gentlemen.
Mr. MARSHALL. The gentleman will allow me a word. He does not intend to misrepresent me, I know, although in fact he is doing so. I said that the term Legislature, in its broadest sense, meant the people, who, in the 1st place, held the legislaive power which they elegated to the conventions assembled to form the State constitution s; and those conventions, in the organic laws, delegated it to the ordinary Legislatures.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I will give the gentle man another example if he thinks his denition is accurate. Last session we passed a law submitting an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. to the different States, and the legislatures of 3/4ths of them have adopt it. The language of the constitution is that when the Legislatures of 3/4ths of the States shall adopt it, it shall be a part of the constitution. Now, according to the logic of the Gentfrom Illinois, the Legislature means the people, and it must be submitted to 3/4ths of the people of the States. Mr. Seward has announcedt at the amendment has been adopted, but accordingto his theory, as it has been only sanctioned by 3/4ths of the Legislatures of the States, and not. of the people, it is not part of the constitution of the U.S. The constitution of the U.S. in another place says that Congress may submit these amendments either to the legislaures of the States orto conventions. Under the constitution the State of Michigan might sa they should not have any convention and the egislature should not act upon it, and the constitution of the U.S. would be nullified. That, sir, is evidence that the framers of the constitution knew what they were about when they used the word Legislature. They used it in the same sense that we do. It is enough to say there were 13 States then in existence, and each one had a Legislature at the same State constitution is so sovereign time this Convention was in session, and all those States either had it constitution or a charter in existence at that time, and if they had meant something besides a Legislature eo nom sne, would they not have been liltely to have said so? You may go through the constitution of the U.S and on will find the word legislature used some ozan or 15 times, an every time indicating it meant the same as we mean in the history of this country, the Legislature that originates under the Constitution.
Mr. ROGERS. Suppose the Legislature of the State of Michigan should refuse to elect sentors, how can we compel it to do so?
Mr. SCOFIELD. I do not know. My friendfrom NewJersey might issue a mandamus on them. It has nothing to do with this question.
Mr. SPALDHT G. I want to ask a question. I desire to know if there be any objection to the votes cast for the sitting member other than those which appertain to their being soldiers in camp away from home.
Mr. SPALDING. Would they have been lefil voters if at home? th
Mr. SCOFIELD. Yes, sir, every one of em.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I desire to ask aingle question. I wish to know whether, if the proposition the gentleman maintains be true, it does not involve the question that the constitution of Michigan is itself unconstitutional so far as the constitution of the U.S. is concerned?
Mr. SCOFIELD. It involves the question, then, whether the constitution of the U.S. says that the Legislature shall fix the places of holding elections. Now, if the constitution of Michigan says it shall not do it, then these 2 constitutions are in conflict and I suppose nobody, since the war, will saythat the that it over rides the constitution of the U.S. As to the question to be settled, whether it is in conflict or not, I refer the gentleman to my colleague on the committee, [Mr. Dawn who said yesterday that they were not in conlet. I think they are, and, of course, I think the constitution of the U.S. is supreme, and that that of Michigan must ield.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. Will the gentleman allow me one further question on this subject? supposing the State constitution had existed at the time when this provision of the constitution of the U.S. was adopted, would that provision of the Federal constitution annul the provision of the Michigan constitution? Take the ease, for instance, of NewJersey, referred to by our friendfrom that State, [Mr. Room] which had a constitution in existence prior to the adoption of the constitution of the U.S. Now, does it follow that the Constitution of the U.S., subsequently adopted, abdicates or annuls the constitution of the State of NewJersev?
Mr. SCOFIELD. I take it that all State constitutions are subordinate to the Constitution of the U.S. without regard to age.
Mr. ELDRXDGE] answer me this question?. he constitution of Michigan prohibits the Legislature from electing a Governor to the U.S. Senate, and declares any such vote void? Does the gentleman conider that as one of the nalificutions that the Constitution of the U.S. was intended to reg ulate?
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I do not think that question is involved in this discussion. The question which I put to the Gentfrom Pennsylvanin [Mr. ScorilcLnl I think he has not undertaken to answer. But I wish to inquire further, whether the Gentfrom Pennsylvania does hold that the adoption of the constitution of the U.S. may, by its progisions, annul a prior existing constitution of a State.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I believe I have already answered that it does not make any difference how old the State mustitution is.
Mr. DAVIS. I ask the Gentfrom Pennsylvania to ield to me 5 minutes.
Mr. DAVIS. The question seems to have arisen here as to the intention of the people of this country in adopting the Federal constitution, which is the organic law of the land, whether they intended, in adopting tlw constitution of the U.S., to detract from the power of any State constitution. I am surprised that in this day thatquestion should be addressed to any member upon this floor. What was the very purpose of the adoption of our Federal constitution? The Confederation had been tried, and it had failed. It was found that there was not power enough in the Confederacy to carry on the operations of the Government; that the Legislatures of all the States held all powers except those that had been delegated through the Articles of Confederation to the Government created by those articles; and when they came to adopt the constitution of the U.S., the people of all the States, every where throu hout whole country, made that the supreme w, and tookaway from everyState constitution any power which conflicted in any wise with the provisions of the Federal constitution. Therefore, when they said that the Legislatures of each State should prescribethe times, places, and manner of holding elections of Sens&Reps, they meant that that power should be exercised by the State Legislature. It was a power given to them by the constitution of the country, a power conferred upon the State, to prescribet e manner, the time, and the place in which those elections should be held. The Gentfrom NewJersey Mr. Rho nas] as s whether it would be possible to compel a State to cause this election? Perhaps not. The southern States have already assumed the ground that they ought not to be compelled to do this. If they fail to do it they must suffer the consequence. But their failure does not alter the operation of the law.
Mr. KELL Y. Will the gentleman yield for a single statement?
Mr. KELLEY. I rise simply to exress my surprise at the intimation which has enthrown out here, that if the Legislature of any State should fail to make provision for the election of Representatives to this House Congress has no power to remedy the default. such an idea utterly ignores a vitall important provision of the 4th section of the 1st article of the constitution, which declares that “The times. places and manner of holdin elections for Sens&Reps shall a prescribed in eachState by the Legislature thereof; but the Congressmay at any time y law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.” Now, sir, the proceedings of the Convention that framed the constitution, the discussions in the various State conventions which ratified that instrument, and the action of the 1st. Congress of the U.S., in 1789, when an effort was made to restrict and practically destroy, by constitutional amendment, this supervisory power of Congress, combine to show that the ultimate control of the congress of the U.S. over the elections for the p Representatives in the various States was deemed by the great men who framed the Constitution as of vital consequence, in order to enable Congress to protect the peoples right of suffrage and representation, and in an extreme contingency to prevent the dissolution of the Government. e proceedings to which I have referred show clearly that the great object in authorizing Congressto “make or alter the regulations” in regard to the election of Representatives was that, if any State or States, by improperaction or by refusal to act, should attempt to deprive the people of their rightful representation in this House, the Congress of the U.S., acting in this respect as the ultimate guardian of the citizen, should interpose with controlling, power to secure to the people the right of sulffage and a just and equal representation in. the national councils.
Mr. DAVIS. It was not my purpose to bring up that point for discussion today. The Gentfrom Pennsylvania the other day made an argument on that subject, and I am content with that. I use it by. All I have to say is, that the legislaure of each State has a duty to perform under the constitution and that is, to prescribe the time, places, an manner in which elections shall he held for Senators and Representatives in Congress. ow, I hold that if any conflict arises between the Federal constitution and any State constitution, the State constitution is null and void, for, if we have a nation in this country, the constitution of the Federal Government is an reme. What has been done in this case? the constitution of the State of Michigan, as I understand, has not prescribed the time and places and manner of holding elections in that State, but it allows the Legislature to do it, and the Legislature has done it. There is no conflict. The Legislature of the State, in entire subordination to their own constitution, and without conflict with it, prescribed the mode, time, and places in which the election for Sens&Reps of the U.S. should take place. They fixed the place of election in the field, where I think they had the constitutional wer to do it. I think it is right to exercise berality in our judgment in cases of this nature. By whom was this right of franchise to be exercised? By the soldier who had lefl his home and fireside to fight the battles of the Union, and he had led behind him too many men who were op edto the interests and au premac of this nion. I will not consent, unless am compelled to it by convictions of duty, to withhol from any soldier in the field the right to protect his Government by his ballot as well as his bat onet.
Mr. SCO IELD. I will now yield to my colleague on the committee from Ohio [Mr. Snsnmsaonn] for 5 minutes.
Mr. SHELLABABGER. Mr. Speaker, as a member (if the ComElections I thought, perhaps, it would not be amiss, even after all the discussion that has occurred, for me to allude to one or 2 propositions madeb my excellent colleague on the Committee of lections, [Mr. Manama] One was this: he holds that where an act of the Legislature fixes the camp as the place of holding the election that it is not a fixation of the place within the meanin of the Constitution of the U.S. ow, I suggest to my friend that if he is right in that, then all the laws of the several Statesand there have been quite a number of them doin this same thingare worthless, are void. y own State, the great State of Pennsylvania, I believe the State of NewYork, and quite a number of other States, have done reeisely that thing, to wit, fixed the camp as the place of voting, and that was the only thing that could be done from the very nature of the case. If, therefore, this House should give significance and force to the suggestion of my learned friend, they would be simply decidin that all these laws fixing the places of soldiers voting are unconstitutional, and that not only now, but in all the future, we can. never make it constitutional for a soldier to vote, because we cannot fix the place of voting. That is one point.
Mr. MARSHALL. Will the gentlemanal low me one moment?.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. If it is not an intrusion on the House, I certainl will.
Mr. MARSHALL. Well, I as the gentleman to state, if a law providing that any citizen of a State might vote at any place where he might happen to be on the day of election, would be a law prescribing a Iplace at all?
Mr. MARSHALL. Well, then. let me ask the gentleman another question: if any number of men, say a dozen or 100, in a regiment shall vote at one place where they may happen to be on the day of election, is that fixing the place of elootionatall? 1866. was 845
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I will answer that question in a way perfectly satisfactory, [think even to my friend. Suppose that the law should provide that the place of election in a given county should be t 10courthouse, of course the courthouse may be moved, here today, there tomorrow, and in another place the next da. It is an old axiom in law that that is certain which can be made certain. The fixing of the courthouse is a fixation of the place, because it can be made certain; and so here, when you fix the camp of a given regiment as a place of voting, it is a fixed place.
Mr. MARSHALL. Another question, then. If an act was passed providing or taking the vote of an elector at any place in the world, where he might happen to be on the day of election, is not that a fixing of the place just as much as the other?
Mr. SHELLABARGER. We might get our selves into a maze of difficulties by supposing unimaginable cases.
Mr. MARSHALL. Does not the gentleman get himself into just such a trouble?
Mr. JOHNSON. Will the gentleman allow me to make a correction of his statement inard to the laws of the State of Pennsylvania?
Mr. SHELLABARGER. I shall do rive myself of the opportunity of stating what rose to state, if I am not permitted to finish my statement.
Mr. JOHNSON. Very well, go on and make misstatements.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. There is no importance anyhow in what I said about Pennsylvania.
Mr. JOHNSON. Then the gentleman ought not to have said it.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. It is said, in addition, as an objection to the majority report of this committee, that by the position we take we override the constitutions of the several States, and we thereby nullify the constitutions of the States. Now, I submit, in reply to that. suggestion, that any position we can possibly take upon this subject will result in precisely the same thing, because the constitution of the U.S. itself prescribes, in this same clause, that the place that is fixed, whether it be fixed by the State Legislature or the State constitutional convention, may be altered by act of Congress; so that a worse dilemma may arise on the other side. They might rise hero and ask me, can you override the constitutions of the States by an act of Congress? Why, certainly you can.
Mr. DAWES. If the ntleman will allow me, it is not a question o overriding the constitution of a State by act of Congress, but of overriding the constitution of the State by the Legislature of the State.
Mr. SCOFIELD. The legislation of the State was in pursuance of the constitution of the U.S., and therefore it is an effort to override the constitution of the U.S.
Mr. DAWES. That is begging the whole question.
Mr. SHELLABARGER. Now, I do not know, nor is it necessary that I should know, that I fully comprehend the suggestion made by the chairman of the committee, [Mr. Dawns; but I will answer any suggestion upon that point by saying this: suppose the constitution of my State should fix the county seat of my county as the place of holding elections within that county in all coming time. Isit not. obvious to every one that although that provision was in the constitution of Ohio, yet it could be altered by not of consee, under the last. part of the clause in the Cgornstitutionof the U.S. providing that Congress may alter the times, places, and manner of holdin elections 7 who will get u here and say that that cannot be done? An yet the argument made on the other side, that we are unertaking to override the constitution of the State, is exactly as defective in the view I have no. but as it is in the other view; indeed, more so, because it might be said with much more force that you shall not be permitted by act of Congress to over ride the terms of the State constitution when it might be overcome by the higher, the supreme provisions of the constitution of the U.S. Then these are the only 2 points that I rose to notice: 1st, that the place of voting is fixed when you fix the camp where the regiment or the soldier may be, as much as it can be fixed in the nature of the case and ifyou hold that a more definite fixation of the place is requisite, then you can never have a valid soldiers voting law under the constitution of the U.S. The other point is, that you do not override the constitution of any State by providing that the Legislature may change the places ofvoting fixed by that. constitutional law of the State; because the provision of the Federal Constitution names tcLegislatures of the States simply as the mere instrumentality for fixing the places for elections of Federal Officers.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I think we have had debate enough on this subject, and I now call for a vote upon it. The question was upon the amendment of M“r. Mausnsm. to strike out all after the word resolved, ” in the following resolution, reported by the ComElections: Resolved, That Rowland E. Trowbridgo is entitled to a seat in this House as a Representative l n the 39th Congressfrom the 5th congressional district in Michigan and to insert the following: That.lion. Rowland)3. Twwbridgo is not entitled to hold the scat now occupiedby himin this Houseas n. Representative from the State of Michigan. Resolved, ThatAugustus C. Baldwin has beenduly electedas a reresontativefrom the State of Michigan to the 39th Congress, and is entitled to a seat. in this House.
Mr. MARSHALL. I call for the yeas and na 5. lhe yeas&nays were ordered.
Skip Skip The question was taken; and it was decided in the uerrativeyeas 30, nays 108, not voting 44; So the amendment was rejected. During the call of the roll, Mr. DAWSON stated that he had aired with Mr. Asnuzv, of Ohio, and that. Ascoru had paired with Mr. MOORHEAD. Mr. RADFORD stated that Mr. WINHELD was absent on account of sickness in his family. Mr. COBB stated that Mr. MCINDOE was detained from the House by indisposition. Mr. BOYER. stated that Mr. ANCONA was absent on account of his continued illness. The result was then anounced as above stated. The question then recurred on agreeing to the resolution reported by the commwteo. The resolution e agreed to. Mr. SCOFIELD mtRtv the resolution was agreed to; on the table. Agreed to.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I ask unanimous consent to report from the ComElections the following resolution: Resolved, That there be paid out of the contingent fund of this House to Hon. A. C. Baldwin, contestant of thorihtofllon. Mr. E. Trowbridge to asoat in this House the sum of $l, 500, in full, for time expended and expensesincurred in said contest. There was no objection.
Mr. SCOFIELD. I will only say that the sum named in this resolution was unanimously agreed upon by the committee as the amount that should be properl paid to this contestant.
Mr. STEVhNS. I should like to know whether this sum is the amount of the regular perdiem and mileage. I
Mr. SCOFIELD. The mileage and monthly pay would be $1,506. We have fixed an even sum.
Mr. STEVENS. I see no objection to that.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. Does this amount include the monthly pay from the commencement of the congressional term, or only for the session of Congress?
Mr. SCOFIELD. Only for the session. It includes 3 months pay and mileage. I now call the previous question.
Mr. ARSHA L. I ask the gentleman to yield to me for a moment, that I may offer an amendment. I desire to move to adafter the words “ $1, 600” the words “ and mileage. ”
Mr. SCOFIELD. I will ield to allow the amendment to be offered, i it will be under stood, by unanimous consent, that the yeas and as s shall not be called upon it.
Mr. SPALDING. I Will call the yeas and as s.
Mr. SCOFIELD. Then I cannot yield. I am confident that the amendment would not prevail
Mr. WARD. I give notice that I shall demand the yeas&nays on the adoption of the resolution. I am Opposed to the whole principle of a in contestants.
Mr. SCOFlELD. I insist on the call for the previous question.
Skip Skip The previous question was 2nded, and the main question ordered. Mr. WARD. I call for the yeas&nays on the adoption of the resolution. The yeas&nays were not. ordered. The resolution was then adopted. Mr. SCOFIELD mtRtv the resolution was adopted; on the table. Agreed to. WILLIAM EAWYER and others, OF OHIO.
Mr. LeBloND. I ask the unanimous consent of the House to introduce a JtResolution that it may be taken up and acted on at the present time. It provides that the SecyInterior shall be authorized to appoint a commissioner to repraise the lands described in an not entitled “ 1lact for the relief of William Sawyer and others, of Ohio, ” approved July 2, 1864, provided, however, that the occupants of said lands shall pay the expenses of res praisoment. ll
Mr. LeBloND. I ask my colleague to with draw his objection, inasmuch as this is a matter peculiar to our own Stat/c. If it is desirableto imI will have it. referred to the ComPrivLandClms.
Mr. LeBloND. I ask that the resolution b. but on its passage. bjection was made. The JtResolution was then read a 1st and 2nd time, and referred to the ComPrivLandClms. CHOLIBA.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a message from the POTUS transmitting, for the consideration of Congress, correspondence between the SecyState and the minister of France accredited to this Government, and also other papers, relative to an international conference at Constantine ple on the subject of cholera; which was referred to the ComForAffrs, and or dered to be printed. SELECT COMMITTEE.
The SPEAKER also appointed the following as the select committee on aBureau of Education ordered by the House: Messrs. Guam11. o of Ohio PATTERSON of NewHampshire, Bourwau. of Massachusetts, Runsu. of pennsylvania, Dosrvnunr of minnesota, Mooney of Illinois, and GOODYEAR of NewYork. TAX 0N DISTILLED SPIRITS.
Mr. STEVENS. I ask the unanimous consent of the House to introduce the following resolution: Resolved, That. in theiudgment of this House. the internal duty or tax on distilled spirits ought not to be reduced.
Mr. JENCKES. I call for the regular order of business.
The SPEAKER stated that the regular order of business was the consideration of the bill (H.R.No. 7) to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the U.S. The 11thsection was ending when the House passed from the consideration of the bill on Friay last. The pending amendment, moved by Mr. Horcuxiss, was as follows: Strike nut in lines 36 and 37 of section 11 the words “marshal of sai district;" in line 37 the words "as mcssenger;" in lines 40 and 41 the words “until the apointment of an asst nee:" and insert at the end of inc 36the foIlowing: Genera assignee in bankruptcy residing in the count wheresuch bankrupt resided at the time of filing is petition; and thereupon the estate of such bankrupt shall vest absolutely in such assigneefor the purposesof this act;and the districtjndge of each district shall appoint a general assigneein bankruptcy for eachcounty within his district. who shall be it resident of the county forwhichhcis apointed, and shall give such bond as shall be require bysuch judge and shall be an officerof the court and subject to its rules and orders.
The SPEAKER. The Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Cousuuo] is entitled to the floor on a proorma amendment to the amendment.
The SPEAKER. Debate is now exhausted on the amendment to strike out the last line, and that amendment, the Chair understands, is withdrawn.
Mr. JENCKES. I move to strike out the last 2 lines, for the purpose of relying to the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. oxxuxej It seems to me, and I think it will to every one who reflects upon this subject, that the objection of the Gentfrom NewYork is based upon a misapprehension of the duties of this person called a messenger. There must be an intermediate time between the filing of a petition in bankruptcy, whether a voluntary petition or a petition in invitem, by the credit ors before adjudication, by consent, by a regis ter, or by the court upon caring, and the
Mr. HOTCHKISS. Will the gentlemanyield while I correct a statement he is makin? The section under consideration provides that the filing of the ctition shall be an act of bankruptcy in an ofitself, and that, therefore, the party shall be declared bankru t. When that petition is filed the judge is obiged to decree rim:1 bankru t.
Mr. JENC ES. I yield no further. The gentleman convinces me more and more that he is mistaken. The person who files the pe tition may be adjudicated a bankrupt, it is true; but what is to become of his property between that time and the time of the appointment of the assi nee?
Mr. OTCHKISS. The assignee is appointed in advance.
Mr. HOTCHKISS. If the gentleman will read my amendment and say that it is not so, I will withdraw it.
Mr. JENCKES. I understand that. The principal merit of this bill, in the opinion of the committee. if there is any merit in it, is this: that the debtor and creditors may act together and that the creditors appoint the assignee and not the debtor, subject to the approval of the court; and the business of these messengers is simpl to perform the reliminary business re(ture to take custo y of the property, give tenotices, and see that the meeting of the creditors is held.
Mr. CONKLING. Why should not the court apoint the assignee?
Mr. JENCKES. Because insolvency is a matter between debtor and creditor, and if they can arrange it, the court should simply indorse what they agree to. If they cannot, then it is for the court to interfere. Now, the duties of messengers are to take possession of the books, papers, and property of the bankrupt. The next step is to ca 1 the creditors to ether, and as soon as they meet the duties of temessenger are at an end; because the 1st duty of the creditors when they assemble is to nominate an assignce who will be confirmed by the court, if a properperson, if not, the court will appoint an assignee. Now, the gentleman says that this appoints new officers. Not a single one. supposing there is an official assignee; he would have to send the clerk or messenger or some one in his employment to take possession of the property.
Mr. CONKLING. Will the gentleman allow me to state what I am talking 9. out? I am not advocatin an official assignec.
Mr. conKLING. What does the gentleman mean by telling this House that this does not provide for the creation of new Officers?
Mr. JENCKES. Not one. There mustbe some person to do this duty, must there not? I ask the gentleman the question as a lawyer.
Mr. CONKLING. (if the assignec is to do it no one else is required to do it.
Mr. JENCKES. But the assignee cannot be appointed till nominated by the creditors.
Mr. conKLING. That is begging the whole question. He can be, and should be.
Mr. JENCKES. That isanother question. If the gentleman wishes the court to a point an official assignee, let him say so. hat is the precise objection to all previous systems of hen ru tcy.
Mr. (IONKLING. Does the gentleman mean to say, as a lawyer, that if the court designates an assignee, that of itselfmakcs him the official assi nee? Mr. JENCKES. No; but if, when the creditors meet, they remove that assignee, if the creditors have the power to do that, the person the gentleman calls an assignee is but a tem porary assignee, and performs simply the duties of a messenger.
Mr. conLING. Well, that obviates the necessity of all these public officers.
Mr. JENCKES. The reason for calling him a deputy marshal is to get the advantage of the marshals bond and not to intrust the property of the debtor to a person who is not responsiblefor it. Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. STEVENS. I rise to o ese the amendment of the Gentfrom RhdIsland. I do not want anythinlg stricken out or put in, or anything to pass. think the most unpopular law the conrose of the U.S. ever passed was the ast bankrupt bill. It killed a party, and I do not want a party, a good respectable party, to be killed by another such law. [ aughter.] I do not think you could find any law ever passed or that could be passed so unpopular in. an agricultural community as a bankrupt law. I should not have much objection to one applyingto the cities, although, Generally speaking, an honest insolvent there can always gets liberal arrangement and compound with his creditors.
Mr. STEVENS. But this is not the time, when all rebeldom is in debt to us, to pass a law to free them from their debts. It is the last day on earth.
Mr. JENCKES. I call the Gentfrom Pennsylvania to order. He is not speaking to my amendment or to the subject he ore the House.
Mr. STEVENS. I thought the gentleman had moved to strike out the last 3 lines and I was opposing that. The Chair sustains the point of order.
Mr. JENCKES. The gentleman is taking an opportunity to make remarks to which no reply can be made.
Mr. STEVENS. I am speaking against strike in anything out.
The SPEAKER. The Chair sustains the point of order, but at the same time the Chair state that the Gentfrom RhdIsland did not confine is remarks very closely to his amendment.
Mr. STEVENS. I did not understand what he was talkin about. [Laughter]
Mr. STEVENS. The gentleman did not talk about his amendment, I am sure“, however, if the Chair thinks I am out of order, of course I will not persist.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman must confine himself to the amendment, which is to strike out the last 3 lines.
Mr. STEVENS. Well, sir, I do not think the House ought to strike out these lines, because the Gentfrom RhdIsland thinks that would improve the bill, and I do not think the bill ought to be improved. [Laughter]
Mr. JENCKES. Then I withdraw the amendment to the amendment. The question recurred on Mr. amendment, and being put, there were ayes 81 noes 31; no quorum vote in. Tellers were ordered; and addressers. The House divided; and the tellers reported ayes 32, noes 60. So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. HALE. I move further to amend this 11thsection, by inserting after the close of the 49th line the words, “and statin the names and residences of the creditors, an the amounts of their respective debts, so far as the same are stated in the petition or schedule of the debtor; " so that that portion of the section will read, as follows: Send written or printed notice. by mail or otherwise. to all creditors upon the debtor: and stating the names and residence s of the creditors and the amountsof their respectivedebts. so far as the sameare stated in the petition or scheduleof the debtor. Mr. Speaker, I think the purpose of this amendment will at once he manifest to an gentleman who is acquainted with this bill. this in effect requiring that when the notices in bankruptcy are served, each creditor shall be informed of the names and residences of those who stand in the same relation with himself to the estate of the debtor. It was, I think, a material defect in the former bankrupt bill that it omitted to give such information. It seems to me that it is in the highest deree proper and desirable that whenever a bankrupt issues no tices, or whenever notices are issued upon the finding of the commissioner of bankruptcy, each creditor should be informed of the parties who are situated as he himself is, and of the amount due each. These creditors occupy a common position in regard to the estate of the bankrupt, and they should have some means of information as to who are the parties interested, in order that they may have an opportunity of consultation. Is the amendment I have offered acceptableto the chairman of the committee, [lid JENCKES?
Mr. JENCKES. Upon a voluntary petition that might be so. But the gentleman will see, by turning back, that that is a portion of the proceeding to be regulated by the commissioner upon an involuntary petition.
Mr. HALE. I do not understand that to be so. This is the 1st step to bring the parties to other.
Mr. JENCKES. If the gentleman willal low mc, I will show that it is unnecessary because the duty of the messenger is to send notice to every creditor, and nothing is done until the creditors meet. When the petition is a voluntary one. the schedule must be filed, and Well, I call the gentleman it shows who the creditors are and as soon as the creditors meet they know each other.
Mr. HALE. I think the gentleman fails to understand my point.
Mr. JENCK S. I do not. But I think it onght not to be in the law, but left to the code to e prescribed.
Mr. ALE. I think it should be in the law. The law prescribes the contents of the notices to be issued by the messenger and I say that the notice, the thing that gives the creditors information, ought to advise him who are the parties interested in the matterin like mannerwnh himself, so that he may have an opportunity for consultation and comparison oi views with them, before he decides that he will ever appear or take any steps whatever. Take, for instance, the city of NewYork, which is perhaps the great creditor city of the country. A merchant of NewYork receives notice of the filing of a petition of his debtor. By this bill, as it stands, he is to have no other information. Now, if in that same notice he can be told what can be told very briefly and readily, and with very little additional expense, who the other creditors are, and what are the amounts due them, he will have information which will be of great importance to him.
Mr. JENCKES. With the permissmn of the gentleman I will suggest an amendment to ariother portion of the section, which think will accomplish the purpose he has in view: to insert after the words “creditors of the debtor” the words “their names and the amounts of their debts so far as the same may be known.” That portion of the section will then read: Sendwritten or printednoticc. by mail or otherwise, to all creditors upon the schedulefiled with the debt ors petition, or whose names may be given t him in dition. by the debtor and to give such pe sonal or other notice to any persons concernedas the war rant s ccifics: which notice shall state: 1. that a warrant in bankruptcy has been issued against the estate of the debtor. 2. That the payment of any debtsand the delivery of any property belonging to such debtor to him or for his use and the transfer of any property by him, are forbidden by law. 3. Thatamoetingof the creditorsof the debtor, their names and the amountsof their debts, so far as the samemay be known, to prove their debtsand choose one or more assignees o his estate, will be held at a court of bankruptcy. to beholden ata time and place designatedin the warrant. not lessthan ten nor more than 90 daysafter the issuing of the same.
Mr. JENCKES. I will accc t the one I have indicated, if the gentleman wi move it.
Mr. HALE. I am satisfied with that, and will accept it. The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. HALE. I desire to offer 2 other but merely verbal amendments, in lines 42 and 43. It now reads, “send written or printed notice, by mail or otherwise, to all cre itors, ” die. I move to amend by striking out the word “send” and insert the word “serve;” also to strike out the words “or otherwise to” and insert the words “or personally on, ” so that it will read, “serve written or printed notice, by mail or personally on all creditors upon the schedule, ” dtc.
Mr. JENCKE. I have noobjection tothat. The amendments were agreed to.
Mr. POMEROY. I move to amend the 11thsection by strikin out after the word “ bankrupt, ” in the 31st line, the following words: and the judge of the district court, or if there be no opposmg party. any register of said court. to be designatedby the judge shall forthwith. if he hesat isfie that the debts due from the petitioner exceed. issue a warrant, to be signed y such judge or register and inserting in lieu thereof the following: and the clerk of the district court shall forthwith. ifhe be satisfied from such petition that the debts duo from the petitioner exceed8500. issuea warrant signedby him. under the sealof the court, and tested in the name of the districtjudge; and Mr. Speaker, I think that the chairman of the committee will consent to this amendment when he understands its effect. In all cases in the district court, when the proper paper giving the court jurisdiction is placed on Is, the war rant or attachment, whatever the process may be, is issued by the clerk as a matter of course; and it is issued here as a matter of course, whenever a petition is filed showing more than $500 worth of property on the part of the bank ru 1:. low, in order to make the proceeding under this bill harmonize with other proceedings of a like character in the district court, this warrant should be issued by the clerk under seal, and tested, as every other recess is tested, in the name of the district judge. I do not see why a distinction should be made here, and the power given to a judge or to a reister, such register being, perhaps, 500 miles away from the clerks office, to issuea warrant, when the seal is of necessity in the clerks office.
Mr. JENCKES. If the proceedings were voluntary only, the amendment of the Gentfrom NewYork [Mr. Pousnov] would be proper; but he will see at once that the subject which he wishes to cover by his amendment is one that must be embraced within the code of practice. In all cases of voluntary aplication, the course indicated by him won (I lie pursued; but in cases of involuntary proceedings, there must be the act of a judge or a reister.
Mr. POMEROY. This section relates to voluntary proceedings only.
Mr. JEIECKES. But the gentleman, if he looks further, will see that the section relating to involuntary bankruptcy adopts all the proceedings prescribed for voluntary bankruptcy, so as to avoid having 2 codesin the same act. But the rules to be prescribed will meet the case which the gentleman desires to cover. The method of proceeding which he proposes could not be adopted and onght not to be adopted in proceedings a inst a ebtor.
Mr. PO. IE toY. Then the section should provide that in cases of involuntary assignment the warrant shall issue only upon the direction of the judge or the register, while it should also provide that in all other cases the warrant shall be issued by the clerk.
Mr. JENCKES. The gentleman will readily see that in the cases for which he proposes to provide the warrant could be issued under a standing order of the court, without making a special provision in the law. The judge may delegate his authority to that extent, if there be no opposing party. But, in involuntary proceedings, there is necessarily an opposing party whosecase requires the consideration and action of the judge. The phraseology of the bill in reference to this matter was adopted for the sake of simplicity, in order to cover both classes of proceedings leaving it to the discretion of the judge to make a standing order with reference to volunta proceedings. I think that the gentleman will see the propriety of withdrawing his amendment.
Mr. POMEROY. I have no objection to doin so if the gentleman will consent to a provision in the bill that the warrant shall be issued under the rules and regulations to be established by the court.
Mr. JENCKES. The bill already contains such a provision. The 10th section provides that a judge of the Supreme Court, with the assistance of 5 commissioners, shall frame general orders for the regulation of the pradtice and rocedure in all cases.
Mr. PSMEROY. Exactly. But they cannot relate proceedings which are specifically provided for in the act. They cannot disense with anvthing that the act requires to be one.
Mr. JENCKES. The provisions of this bill correspond with the provisions of our present statutes with reference to other proceeings in the district court. In a case in admiralty the clerk issues his warrant by virtue of the rules established by the SCOTUS "he law requires the judge to is sue the warrant. The law also authorizes the judges of the Supreme Court to establish the rules of practice. Under the rules which will doubtless be adopted in these cases of bankruptcy the clerk will issue the warrant, as a matter of course. where there is no opposing party.
Mr. POMEROY. If the gentleman thinks that that end can be effected, it is all I ask.
Mr. ROGERS. I move to amend “by striking out in line 12, page 17, the words “ within 6 months next preceding, ” and insert “any time after. ”
Mr. JENCKES. There are several amendments to be proposed to this section, and as they ought to c consrdered in a full House, I will let members give notice of them, and then I shall move that the House adjourn.
Mr. SLOAN gave notice of the following amendment: In section 14, line ftecn, striko out all from and including the words “ this necessaryhousehold” down toand including the words “of thesaid court" in line 2ntyninc, and insert in plate thereof, "all reporty. renl, personal and mixed, which is exempt in attachment ereature, and saleon execution by the laws of the State in which the Judicial district in which such proceedingsare pending is situate: proeided, That the foregoing exception shall operate as a limitation upon the conveyance of the property of the bankrupt to assigneo, and in no case shall the property hereb excepted pass to the ussignce or the title of the ban ru t thereto be impaired or affected by any of the provions of this not.
Mr. KASSON gave notice of the following amendment: Add to the section: and provided furilier, That the real property which, in any State and in accordance with the laws there of, shall at the time of the act of bankruptcy, be owned and usedby any bankrupt as his homestead, exempt from execution in such State, shall be exempted from seizure and disposition by the msignoe and, shall not be embraced within the operation of the law, Mr. HALE gave notice of the following amendment: After “detention of.” in line 42, insert “ or injury to. ”
Mr. HUBBARD of Iowa, gave notice of the following amendment: Strike out all of line 11 after the word "and" u said line and lines 12 and 13, up to and including the word “ proceedings. "in line 13.
Mr. HOLMES. I move the following amendment to section 11: After the word “district” in line 37, page 13. insert the following: Or to one of the creditors of said bankrn t, to be designated by said judge and residing in the sumo county wiih said bankrupt. whosedebt shall not be lessthan $300.
The SPEAKER. It is not in order to go back unless by unanimous consent.
Mr. THAYER. I object and then, on motion of Mr. JENCKES, the House (at 4 oclock and 15 minutes p.m.) adjourned.
@@@IN SENATE SENATE. Tnuaspn, February 15, 1866. Prayer by Rev. Brnor Suspznmuo, D. D. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. sxeoUrIvs COMMUNICATION. The President Protempore laid before the Senate a communication from the SecyWar, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 13th instant, callin for the report of Major Reynolds of the exp oration of the Yel lowstone river, transmitting a letter from the chief of the engineer Dept, from which it appears that tglie report called for is not yet completed.
The PRESIDENT protempore If there be no objection, this communication will be laid upon the table.
The PRESIDENT protempore It merely shows why the information cannot be sent.
Mr. MORRILL. Very well; I withdraw the motion. The communicationwas laid upon the table.
The PRESIDENT protempore That order will be made.
Mr. SUMNER and I am about to add that during my long service here, and the many pertitions l have presented, I have never before asked to have a petition printed; but it seems to me, considering the c aracter of these me morialists, the importance of the subject, and that it is bearing upon a proposition now directly before the Senate, that it ought to be printed. Itherefore move that it be printed for the use of the Senate. The motion was agreed to. REPORTS or Comrrsss.
Mr. WADE, from the ComTerritor, to whom the subject was referred, reported a bill (S.No.141) to provide for the erection of public buildings in the Territory of Dakota; which was read, and passed to a 2nd reading.
Mr. RAMSEY, from the ComPostOffices, to whom was referred a bill (S.No.38) to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi iiver at the city of StLouis, State of Missouri, and at the cit of East StLouis, State of Illinois, reiorte it with an amendment.
Mr. ROWN from the ComMilAffrs , to whom was referred a bill (S.No.31) to reimburse the State of Missourifor moneys expended for the U.S. in enrolling, c nipping, and profit! ioninv militia forces to in in suppressing the rebellion, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report; which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. HARRIS, from the ComPrivLandClms, to whom was referred the petition of James Bawden, praying for relief, reported a bill (S.No.142) for the relief of James Bawden; which was read, and passed to a 2nd reading. postoffice BALANCES.
Mr. DIXON. I am directed by the ComPostOffices, to whom was referred a JtResolution (S.No.29) for the transfer of funds a ipropriated for the payment of salaries in the ost Office Dept to the general salary account of that Dept, to report it back with an amendment. I am also instructed to ask that the JtResolution be considered at this time. It is a matter of considerable public interest. By unanimous consent the JtResolution was considered as in ComWhole. It propOses that the unexpended balances on the books of the Treasury Dept, from the respective sums of money appropriated by congress. as er different sets of Congress, for the salaries o PostMGenl, Assts PostMGenl, clerks, temporary clerks, additional clerks, messengers, watchmen, laborers, and superintendent and clerks of the money order system, including the amounts appropriated for the payment of 20%. increase of certain salariesall of the same being appropriations made by Congress for the Post o ce Deptmay be transferred on the books of the lreasur Dept, from the respective headings under which they are now placed, to the credit of the postoffice Dept, to the general salary account of funds placed to the credit of the postoffice Dept. The amendment proposed by the ComPostOffices was in line 5 to strike outthe words “ Congress, as per, ” so as to read: That the unexpended balances on the books of the Treasury Dept. from the respective sums of moneyappropriated by different actsof Congress.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I have no objection to the amendment, but I shall move, then, to refer the resolution to the ComFinance. It needs some consideration.
Mr. DIXON. I ask thutaletter be read from the PostMGenl explaining the necessity for this bill.
The Secretary read, as follows: Post Orrics Dept Wssmxoros. D. o. February 12. 1866. SIR: The moneys appropriated for the payment of salaries in this Dept are creditedon the books of the Treasury Dept. under different headings. correspondingto the respectiveactsof Congress by which such appropriations were made. The disbursin clerks of this Dept have not drawn from all thesediflcront classesof salary funds; hence large balances remain under certain hears. while under others there remain but small amounts, notsufficienttomeet the current expensesof the The transfers asked for will enable the present office. disBursing clerk to draw from the general salary account, under which hecan make settlement; and such transfer will neither increasenor diminish the amount of approriutions. nor divert funds from the obJects intende by Congress. namely. the payment of salaries. hor exnmple, none of the appropriation for the payment of “ superintendent and elerks" of the money order system" has ever been drawn. they having been paid from the “General palary account;” and the transfer requestedwill be. intact, reimbursement of those accounts that have been exhaustedin the payment of other s.” he necessity for the adoption oflthe “resolution” is immediate. to enable the disbursing clerk to draw for the payment of the salaries of the current month. I have, therefore. to respectfullyaskthat the inclosed “resolution” be at once adopted. a request I would have earlier made had I been aware of the embarratsments rcfetpriiil to. “ery respec u y w. DENNISON. PostMGen. Hon. JAMES DIXON. U.S. Senate.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Let the resolution lie over. The policy has always been against transferring from one account to another. I do not know but that this resolution is well enough, but I should like to examine it further before it is passed. I move that the resolution lie on the table for the present.
Mr. DIXON. I move that the JtResolution be referred to the ComFinance. The Senator then will have an Opportunity to examine it.
The PRESIDENT protempore The Chair will regard the motion to lay on the table as withdrawn, and the question is on the motion to refer the JtResolution to the ComFinance. The motion was agreed to. BILLS IQITRODUCED.
Mr. POMEROY asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.143) to revive and extend the provisions of an act granting the right of way and making a grant of land to the States of Arkansas and Missourito aid in the construction of a railroad from a point upon the Mississippi opposite the mouth of the Ohio river, via Little Rock, to the Texas boundary, near Fulton, in the State of Arkansas, with branches to Fort Smith and the Mississippi river, approved February 9, 1853, and for other purposes; which was read. twice by its title, reerred to the ComPubLands and ordered to be printed.
Mr. BROWN asked, and by unanimous consent obtained. leave to introduce a bill (S.No.144) to provide for the improvement of the RockIsland or upper rapi s and the Lower or Des Moiiics rapi s of the Mississippi river; which was read twice by its title, referred to the ComCommerce, and ordered to be printed. He also asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S.No.145) for a grant of lands to the State of Kansas to aid in the construction of the Northern Kansas railroad and telegraph; which was read twice by its title. referred to the ComPubLands, and ordered to be printed. ORDER OF BUSINESS.
Mr. WILSON. I move that the Senate take up for consideration the bill (S.No.138) to increase and fix the military petlee establishment of the U.S.,
Mr. STEWART. thut bill will take considerable time and occupy the morning hour for many days. I have been waitin for an opportunity to call up the Colorado bill, but I have been postpone repeatedly. I think we ought to act upon it very soon, and I am opppsed to taking up the bill of the Senfrom assacliusetts until the Colorado bill has had a hearing.
Mr. WILSON. I suggest to the Senator that I do not think the Colorado bill can be very well acted upon in the mornin hour, and I think he had better let that bill e a few days until after we dispose of the constitutional amendment. As to the bill which I now propose to call up, I think we can have it read this morning and work upon it in the morning hour, so that we may be ready to dispose of it soon.
Mr. STEWART. If we putoff the Colorado bill until we get done with the constitutional amendment we may wait for 2 months; in deed, I do not know that we shall ever see the day when that will be disposed of. If we can have the morning hour for a few days I think we can soon dispose ofit; but (his bill of the Senfrom Massachusetts will oceupy a great deal of time.
Mr. WILSON. I think we can make some progress in it this morning, and I hope there will be no objection to proceeding witi it.
Mr. CONLESS. I hope this bill willnot be thrust into the morning hour. I do not know of any bill that can better afford postponement than the bill to reorganize the Army of the U.S. Not only is it moreimportant to decide promptly 0n the bill concerning the admission of Colorado, but there are other questions pending that have been partly considered which are of great consequence, and which I think ought to have preceence.
Mr. WILSON. l differ from the Senfrom California. I think the military bill ought to have been passed a month ago. There are several regiments of volunteers in the service today who say their time is out, who want to go home, who allege that they are held in the service in violation of the contracts made with them now that we have peace. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction in some localities.
Mr. CONNESS and others who wished to remain in the service have been dismissed.
Mr. WILSON. I think we should go on with the bill. I do not wish to press it unreasona bly; but I want it worked along with as far as reasonably can be done. I think we can have it read this morning, and that will call attention to it. I do not think there can be much opposition to the bill now.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. What is the motion before the Senate?
The PRESIDENT proiempore. The motion is that the Senate proceed with the consideration of the bill indicated by the Senfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I am merely desir ous to have a vote of the Senate as to whether the will ive preference to the Colorado bill an with t iat vote we shall be content. I shculd like very much to have a vote.
The PRESIDENT protempore The Chair will put the question as soon as the debate shall have terminated.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I want to antago nize this motion, if I can, by another motion, so as to get the sense of the Senate as to the question of taking u the Colorado bill.
Mr. SUMNER. I have no desire to interpose any delay to the consideration of the CO10 rado bill: but the Senate must see thatthat is a bill which will cause a certain amount of discussion; itremains to be seen how much. To take it up now, when we have but 20 minutes before the morning hour exires, it seems to me would not be an economica arrangement of our business. Now, as Iunderstand. my colleague proposes to take up his bill, which is a very important one, and to have it read. It must be read; and it will then be launched before the Senate; and } presume he does not excct to go any further with it today. We real y cannot make much headway with the Colorado bill between now and one oclock.
Mr. STEWART. We can get the question before the Senate. I have deferred calling it up owing to suggestions from different quarters and have yielded the preference to matters of which it had precedence for over 2 months. The ComTerritor reported the bill over 2 months ago, and recommended its passage; it. has been lying on our tables. The memberselect are waiting to know what action is to be taken. They desire action. If we do not get it before the Senate now, if we wait unti the military bill shall have been considered in the mornin7 hour for several days, the rest of the session being occu ied by the constitutional amendment, it wil? be a long time before we get the colorado bill up. I think it is due to the parties who have been elected to seats to havea decision on the question. It is every simple proposition and ought to take but little time; it can be well understood in a few minutes; but if we are to have a discussion on it I think it due to the subject and to the parties who are waiting that that discussion should be commenced. If the bill of the Senfrom Massachusetts was a bill that was to occupy but a few moments I should not be so tena cious, but to take up abill which is to consume the morning hour lor several days I consider unfair. This bill has precedence in point of time, and Ihope the motion of the Senfrom Massachusetts will be voted down.
Mr. LANE, ” Kansas. Will the Senfrom Massachusetts allow the friends of the Colorado bill to get the sense of the Senate on taking it up? Will he withdraw his motion and allow the Senfrom Nevada to make his motion to take up the Colorado bill, so that we can get at the sense of the Senate?
Mr. GRIMES. The Senators who are in favor ofimmediate action on the bill for the admission of Colorado can vote against the motion of the Senfrom Massachusetts, and that will be a test vote.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I do not wish to place myself, nor do the friends of the colorado bil wish to place themselves, in a position of antagonism to the bill of the Senfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. WILSON. I express the opinion to the Senfrom Kansas that the Colorado bill. from what I hear, will lead to quite an extended debate. I thought that the hill to which I called attention could be taken up this morning and read. There are only a very few sections as to which there will be any debate. I do not expect that the debatable portions will be reached his morning. I want to have the attention of the Senate directed to the bill. I shall not press it today or tomorrow, or make a speech on it.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. The Senfrom Massachusetts is aware that Congress almost unanimously passed an enabling act for Colorado. The people of that State have formed a constitution and elected their Sens&Reps, and they are here. The only question is as to their excluding 100 negroes from the right of suffrage. That question, the question oe negro suffrage, isbeing discussed on other bills. It seems to me that the my constituents for 11 long years. Colorado bill can be settled by a vote of the senate without a great deal of discussion, but if we are to have discussion, the sooner we take up the bill the better. It is true, as the Senfrom Massachusetts is aware, that the Colorado bill “as 1st introduced, 1st reported by the committee, 1st before the Senate, and ought to be disposed of before the bill moved by the Senfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. WILSON] We have unanimously decided to admit their Senators on the floor of the Senate; they are here; and it partakes somewhat of a question of privilege. I again repeatthat I would like to have the Senfrom Massachusetts permit the motion to be made so that we can have a vote on it.
Mr. SUMNER. It seems to me that my friendfrom Kansas does not appreciate all the questions involved in what he calls the colorado bill. He says that it is simply a little questionlittle to him, perhaps Of whether 100 colored persons shall vote. A great question that, sir, whether 100 persons on account of their color shall be shut out from the exercise of the elective franchise not a little question as the Senator suggests. But that is not all. The Senator assumes that Colorado has come here under an enabling act. When the Senate enter upon the discussion they will see very clearly that she does not come here under the enabling act; thatslie has called together a convention on her own motion, the operation of the enabling not passed by Congress having expired. I douot pretend to say at this stage of the discussion what will be the value of that conduct, to what extent it should affect our conclusions; but Senators will see that there is clearly a question involved beyond that great one to which the Senfrom Kansas has alluded. There is then also another question, whether the State of Colorado at this moment has a population such as, would justify our receiving 2 Senators on this floor. utting her on an equality with NewYork and lEentisylveniia. On that I express no opinion now. I merely open that question, that the Senate may see what is involved in what is called, compendiously, the Colorado bill. Now, sir, with ten months before as I think we had not better enter upon it.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I expressed no such idea as that this was a little question, and it does not come with a very good grace from the Senfrom Massachusetts to say to me
Mr. SUMNER. I understood the senator to say so. If he did not, of course I stand corrected.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. that one who has devoted 11 years of his life to the cause of freedom should be secure from such an imputation as that from the Senfrom Massachusetts.
Mr. SUMNER. I only intended to quote the Senators words. If I did not hear him correctly. of course I stand corrected.
Mr. LANE, ofKansas. I used no such language.
Mr. SUMNER. Very well; then I was mistaken.
Mr. LANE, of Kansas. I said that the only question was as to granting the sulfriwc to 100 blacks in Colorado, and that flint question was being discussed day by day upon other measures that are pending before the Senate. Let me say to the Senfrom Massachusetts that the question of negro suffrage is as important to me as to him. It occupies and absorbs me as much as it does him, or any Senator, and that, and other questions connected with the freedom of the black man, has occupied the and We may differ, and I presume we will, as to the manner and time of granting that right; but as to the great question of giving every man over 21 years of age the right of suffrage in this Union, who is qualified to exercise it, that question is as important to me as to him. Nor did I sayt at Colorado came here under an enabling act. An enabling act was granted by Congress when Colorado had a less population than she has now. Nebraska is taking the same steps toward organizing a State govern I undertake to sayment, and under the same theory as Colorado is organized. What the friends of Colorado ask is, that we may have the sense of the senate upon the proposition to admit her. it is but just to Colorado and important to Nebraska that such a vote should be had at an early day. The Senfrom Massachusetts [Mr. Winsoxl is not in his seat. I was oing again to reques him to withdraw his motion so that the question may come up on the naked proposition of the Senfrom Nevada.
Mr. SPRAGUE. As one of the members of the Military Committee, I desire to draw the attention of the Senate to the fact that the volunteers of our Army are, as the war is now over, unwilling to serve as such any longer. The Lieutenant General is einbifrrassed day by day with constant complaints from officers and men, and by desertions from those volunteer regiments, and he is earnestly anxious that whatever is done by Congress in relation to this bill shall be done quickly. It is to me far more important that the matters connected with the States lately in rebellion should be attended to 1st, rather than those in the far West yet in their unorganized condition. I trust that the Senate will realize and understand the position of the LieutenantGeneral, the military authorities, and the people throughout the country who are anxious to have their military affairs stron thened in every possible way. I trust the bill indicated by the Senfrom Massachusetts will be taken up, will be read, will be discussed, and will be acted upon finally and iiickly, so that the country will have some tiing before them upon which they may feel secure.
Mr. STEWART. I hope the Senfrom Massachusetts will withdraw his motion and let us take the sense of the Senate on taking up the Colorado bill.
Mr. WILSON. The Senator can have the sense of the Senate just as well on my motion to take u the Army bill. The Senate will decide which it prefers to take up 1st.
Mr. STEWART. That is not fair, because aportion of the committee who reported that bI i will have to sustain the chairman of the committee in calling it up, although they are favorable to the Colorado bill and it is putting the Colorado bill under a disadvantage. If he will exonerate his committee, so as to let ever man express his opinion, I do not know that would object.
Mr. WILSON. I cannot withdraw the motion.
Mr. STEWART. Then I call for the yea:&nays upon it. The veas and an s were ordered.
Mr. FESSEND "N. I think the Senfrom Massachusetts had better withdraw his motion, as it will take more than the residue of the morning hour to call the yeas and uays, and of course his bill cannot then be considered, as we have a special order at one oclock.
Mr. CLARK. But ifhe withdraw his motion, the question will come up on the motion of the Senfrom Nevada.
Mr. FESSENDEN. Very well. I only made the motion to save time.
Mr. GRIMES. I hope the Senfrom Massachusetts will not withdraw his motion. think it vastly more important that we should carry out the suggestions that have been made by the chairman of the Military Committee and the Senfrom RhdIsland, and do somethingtoward disbanding the dissatisfied menwho have volunteered into the service and been kept over what they claim to be the time for which they enlisted than that we should take up this Colorado bill, which can be disposed of at any time.
Mr. STEWART. I withdraw the coil for the yeas&nays.
The PRESIDENT protempore It can only be withdrawn by unanimous consent, the yes!&nays having been ordered. No objection bein made, the call for the yeas&nays is with rawn. The nestion is on the motion of the Senfrom assachusetts. The motion was agreed to. 1866. 851 MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT. The bill (S.No.138) to increase and fix the military peace establishment of the U.S. was read the 2nd time, and considered as in ComWholc.
The PRESIDENT protempore The unfinished business of yesterday is now before the Senate, being the JtResolution (H.R.No. 51) proposing to amend the constitution of the U.S. The ending question is on the amendment proposed) by the Senfrom Massachusetts [din SUMNER] to the JtResolution reported by the committee; and upon thatqnestion the Senfrom Oregon [Mr. Wuuuis] is entitled to the floor.
Mr. STEWART. Taking the Senators rule that these States are not in the Union, or are not entitled to all the rights of States, I should like him to make it a little more specific, and I ask him if he thinks Tennessee is in the Union and entitled to be represented?
Mr. HENDERSON. I hope that the senator will permit me to suggest, just atthis point, that he is clearly mistaken in the statement that he now makes. I thought that he did me great injustice a moment ago, but I did not choose to interfere. Now, certainly he does me great injustice in supposing that I have offered an amend which would force California, Minnesota, and other States to permit Indians to vote. As I understand, California provides in her constitution todav that a man to vote must be a citizen of the U.S.; nearly all the States so provide. A man to vote in the Senators State must be a citizen of the U.S. Apportionment of Representation Mr. Williams. SENATE. The other day we declared that certain persons were citizens of the U.S.; but he knows perfectly well that all Indians not taxed were excluded by that bill which we propose to pass; and unless the Indians referred to are separated from the tribal authority, unless they have become indeed citizens of the State and of the U.S. by virtue of the law which we propose now to pass, the cannot vote under this constitutional amendment. The States need not say that they exclude the Indians in consequence of the fact that they are of a different race or color, but they may simply say that no man shall vote unless he isacitizen of the U.S., and that surely will exclude every Indian to whom the Senator refers. He is certainl doing me very great injustice.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, this is a constitutional amendment, and is to endure. The law to which the gentleman refers, in the 1st place is not alaw; it has passed the Senate but has not yet passed the HoRep; but if this constitutional amendment is adopted by Congress and ratified by the States taking the law as it now stands, Iysay it will make the wild and untamed savages of the wilderness and the desert voters in the U.S.
Mr. HENDERSON. These Indians are not now citizens, and if that law is passed or re pealed they would still not be citizens. They never were citizens, and no matter what our legislation is here, any State of the Union that wants to prevent her Indians from voting can do so. he Senator certainly must see the prosition.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I may misunderstand this proposed amendment, but it declares that no State shall make any discrimination on account of race or color. Now, if the State of Oregon provides that Indians within that State shall not vote it would be adiscrimination on account of race.
Mr. HENDERSON. Butthe Senator does not understand me. I see now clearly he does not. suppose that Oregon declares that no man shal vote unless he be a citizen of the U.S., will that not exclude all the Indians in his State that he speaks of, because they are not now citizens, they are not proposed to be declared citizens by the law which we are proposing to pass, they never have been citizens, and whether wepassthis law or not they will not be. Therefore Oregon need say nothing in regard to color or race, but simpl say that no man who is not a citizen of the UyU.S shall vote. That is the law of Oregon today; hence all the Indians he speaks of are excluded.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Citizenship in the U.S., as I understand it, depends upon the will of Congress; and if the Views the honor able Senator expressed the other day when he favored making all these Indians citizens should obtain in Congress, then it would follow that underthis constitutionalamendment theywould be voters.
Mr. HENDERSON. Permit me to ask the Senator whether, ifan Indian separates himself from the tribal authority, and teState taxes him, he does not believe that Indian ought to vote?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I do, and that was the position I took the other day, but the honor able Senator took the position that no such distinction should be made, as I understood him.
Mr. HENDERSON. Surely not. The Sanator misunderstood me. I did not propose, unless the Indian separated himself from his tribal authority, that he should ever be a citizen of the U.S.
Mr. ENDERS ON. If the Senator will permit me, I should like to ask him a question here. He says, as to the proposition of the Senfrom Wisconsin to base representation on voters, that it is very unjust to exclude women and the mine rs in the northern States who can be permitted to vote by their respective Legislatures or by the people in the formation of their constitutions. I should like to ask him, if that be unjust, how he makes it just that the negroes who cultivate the soil in the southern States, and who are loyal men and have been loyal men, shall be excluded from representation, for he says it is more desirable that they be excluded. a great deal more than that the negroes shall vote.
Mr. whLIAMS. I am not surprised tha the Senator is very much troubled about the rights of women
Mr. HENDERSON. I only noted the language of the Senator. He sai that it would be very unjust to exclude the women from representation. I onlyquoted hisown language.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Will the Senator allow me to explain?
Mr. GUTHRIE. The Senator has fallen into error, and like many other Senators misunder stood what I snid on that subject. I said that by the passage of the Freedmens Bureau bill and the bill No. 61, and the other measures that were on foot, you gentlemen would accomplish or brinfl about what the rebellion had notdoue, a dissolution of the Union. It was an expression of apprehension as to the effect of your measures, which I had a right to express. It was no threat. I am sorry the gentleman has gone back to the Chicago convention. The expression in the resolution reported there was that the administration had failed hitherto, or during the war, to bring about a restoration of the inion by war; not that the war was a failure, but only that there had been a failure up to that time to restore the Union.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not desire to do the honorable Senator any injustice, but my attention was called to this matter yesterday by seeingin a Richmond newspaper reference madeto his remark and the pay er seemed to regard that expression as some ind of authority, and alleged that it"the President signed the bill organizing the Freedmens Bureau it. would greatly tend to fulfill the prediction of the Seu ator, and dissolve the Union. Sir, it is in vain totalk about dissolution. Let the man who dare, strike a blow at the integrity of the Union and ten 100,000 war worn veterans, fresh from the fields of their fame and glory, would ring to its defense. Sir, one blast upon the buglb horn of Grant, or Sherman, or Sheri dan, would make every guilty traitor in this land turn pale and tremble. [Applause in the gal leries.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. HimBRICKS.) Orderl
Mr. WILLIAMS. Sir, it is worse than idle to intimate that dissolution can ever occur. To admit the possibility of such a thing here is to profane the sanctuary of a nations hope and trust, and I want to say to that Senator what I should think he would know by this time, that secession in any sha e or form is dead, and damned, and buried beyond the power or the pope (if resurrection. [Applause in the galleries.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I have taxed the patience of the Senate too long. I will now conclude. I have to say that the way before us is not as clear as I wish it was, but the day is not so dark or the obstacles so insur mountable as they seemed to be when the fate of the nation hung in the doubtful scale of war. Patriotism, firmness, and union then, among Union men rescued the nation from the hands of the spoilers and saved it, and if the same spirit controls now in the councils of the nation that governed our soldiers in the field, their triumph will be crowned by our success. Sir, this nation is to live and not die. God has written it among the shining decrees of des tiny. Inspired by this hope and animated by this faith, we will take this country through all its present troubles and perils to the promised Inn of perfect unity and peace, where freedom, epnality, and justice, the tribune and tutelar deity of the American Republic, will rule with right eousuess a nation “whose walls shall be savation, and whose gates praise.”{Speech of Williams patched in from Appendix.}
The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. Hsx BRICKS in the chair.) Is the Senate ready for the question on the amendment proposed by the Senfrom Massachusetts?
The Secretary read the amendment, which was to add at the end of the JtResolution the words, “and they shall be exempt from taxation of all kinds;" so as to make the proviso read: Provided, That whenever the elective franchise shall bedenied or abridged in any State on account of race or color. all persons therein of such race or color shall be excluded from the basis of representation and they shall be exempt from taxation of all kinds. I
Mr. SUMNER. I withdraw that amendment for the present, in order that the 1st vote may be taken on the general proposition, and I shall offer it at a subsequent sta e of the question.
The PRESIDIN G OFFI Elt, (Mi. Ponsnov in the chair.) The Senfrom Massachusetts withdraws his proposition, and the question now before the Senate is on the amendment of the Senfrom Missouri[Mr. Hernansox] to the substitute offered by the Senfrom Massachusetts, [Mr. SUMNRBJ
Mr. HENDRICKS. I desired to submit some remarks to the Senate upon this proposition, but did not expect to do it this evening; and I forgot to bring with me the notes I intended to use. I do not like to ask a postponement of the vote, but I know that another senator, who could not be here this afternoon, desires to speak, and I suppose what I shall desire to say, and also his remarks, may be made tomorrow. I know, also, that the Senfrom Illinois [Mr. Yarns] desires to be heard, but is not in a condition of health to speak either today or perhaps tomorrow. e was very desirous that the final vote should not be taken until Monday evening, so that he could be heard on Monday. I presume we could have a vote on Monday evening, if that would be agreeable to the Senfrom Maine.
Mr. FESSENDEN. I have no interest in this matter other than that which I share in common with every other Senator. I am desirous, of course, to have this question disposed of as soon as it can be with propriety, giving every gentleman a chance to beheard upon the subject. It has dragged along now for nearl 2 weeks. It is not for me, simply because have charge of this JtResolution, to insist upon ushing the matter beyond what is reasonnble and proper. I do not desire to place myselfin that position.
Mr. HENDRJICKS. I do not think the senator has done that.
Mr. FESSENDEN. But I wish to say to all gentlemen that this question has taken up a great deal of time, an it is important to finish it as soon as possible, as many of the State Legislatures are now in session; and I feel that if members desire to address the Senate they must be prepared to go on and do so without a postponement from day today for the purpose ofal owing every gentleman to make his speech in the morning, and then adjourning early every evenin". We shall never get through in that way. t has not been customary, after a question has been under debate as long as this resolution has been, to extend that in ulgence. I desire to st along with this measure as fast as I can without nppearin discourteous; but I submit the matter entire y to the Senate.
Mr. CLARK. If the Senfrom Indiana does not desire to go on now, and the Senate is not disposed to insist on further discussion now, I Will move that the further consideration of this JtResolution be postponed, and that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate bill No. 132, to prevent and punish kidnaping.
Mr. 4ESSENDEN. I should like to have this JtResolution made the special order for tomorrow at one oclock.
Mr. CLARK. I move that it be postponed to, and made the special order of the day for, tomorrow at one oclock.
Mr. FESSENDEN and I give notice to gentlemen that I shall begin to be a little more quarrelsomeI do not know that it will do any goodafter today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion of the Senfrom NewHampshire. The motion was agreed to. PREVENTION OF KIDNAPPING.
Mr. CLARK. I now move that the Senate proceed to consider the bill (S.No.132) to prevent and punish kidnapping. The motion was agree to, and the bill was read a 2nd time, and considered as in ComWhole. It provides that ifany person shall kidnzip or carry away any otherperson, whether negro, mnlatto, or otherwise, with the intent that such other person shall be sold or carried into involuntary servitude, or held as a slave; or if any person shall entice, persuade, or knowingly induce any other person to go on board any vessel or to any other place, with the intent that he or she shall be made or held as a slave, or sent out of the country to be so made or held, or shall in any way aid in causing any other person to be hkenlodw, insogly d or carried away, to be held or sold as a slave, he or she shall be punished, on conviction, by a fine of not less than $300 nor more than $5,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding live years, or by both. If the master or owners, or person having charge of any vessel, shall receive on boar any other person, whether negro, mulatto, or otherwise, with the knowledge or intent that such person shall be carried from any State, Territory, or dietrict of the U.S., to a foreign country, State, or place, to be bold or sold as a slave, or shall car away from any State, Territory, ordistrict of the U.S., any such person, with the intent that he or she shall beso held or sold as a slave, such master, owner, or other person olfending is to be punished by a fine not exceeding $5,000 nor less than $500, or bimprisonment not exccedin 5 years, or hyiboth and the vessel on board which the person was received to be carried away is to be forfeited to the U.S.