The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-01-24


Mr. HALE. shall not interpose any objection to this
bill, but simply want IL understood BY the Senate |
understand the principle OF the bill 10 be this There is
a claim existing under the law OF 1887. Application is
made for the enforcement OF that claim under tie exist
ing law but falls through IN consequence OF the rules
established under the administration oil the department.
and therefore the claim fails TO be enforced The law rs
repealed and there is tribunal TO go To- But the SEN
ate IN that case determines TO give equitable relief That
is all.
A SENATOR We have done this before.
Mr.. HALE. We have done II in great many cases,
but think not in the case OF law which has been re-
Mr. NORRIS demanded the yeas. and nays; which
ordered and, being taken esulled-yeas 81 nays
s-as follows
YEAs-Messrs Badger, Bayayd, Bq5land, cass Clarke.
Of Iowa, Jones Tennessee. King, McRse, Mallory Man
gum. Miller, Sebastian Shields smith, Souie, Sprnance'
NAYS-Messrs Bell, Bradbury Dawson, Dodge OF Iowa.
Hamlin Norris. Underwood, and Whtcomb-S,
So the bill ordered be engrossed for third read
ing.
RELIEF OF JONATHAN KEARsLEY, ETC.
The Senate then proceeded, as in committee OF the
whole. TO the consideration OF the bill g. l6) TO provide
for the final settlement of the accounts OF Jonathan Kears
ley late receiver Of public moneys at Detroit and OF John
Bidde. late register of the land Office at that place
Mr.. BRADBURY called for the reading Of the report
The report accordingly read
Mr.. FELCH This is simply 10 enable the department
to pass upon some suspended items in the accounts OF
these individuals for money paid out by them under
exgencies OF The department, The rule of The department
had been pay such accounts but some technical point
started, and the department refused 10 pass upon
them thinking that they had not power to do but rec
commended the items, so far AZ justice was concerned
Since that time Congress have in several instances passed
bills in precisely the form OF this The object now is to
carry out the principle 10 these individuals
which has been applied in settling with others.
The bill was then reported to the Senate without
amendment and ordered 10 be engossed Tor third read
ing.
MASON ROUGE GRANT
Mr. DOWNS called attention to the fact that the bill TO
grant the right of prescription TO settlers on the public
land known the Maison Rouge grant had been passed
by II clearly private bill, for i applied 10 only
one claim although il embraced several persons.
The PRESIDENT replied that he entertained diff
eren opinion and j would be for the Senate 10 decide
whether it was private claim or not.
Mr. DOWNS said that he should consider il private
bill II the right of preempon were to be given TO one
individual, would clearly be private bill; aad It a
grant OF land should be made 10 individual il would
be private bill. Why extending il to two or three
made il public bill he could not understand. True, il
not for the payment OF money; il was not claim
general principle, but applied TO only grant II had
been referred 10 and reported by the Committee on Phi
waite Land Claims; and II It was not private bill, he
was utterly at n loss TO know what private bill was.
The PRESIDENT called attention 10 the fact that the
order referred to private claims.
Mr. DOWNS asked for the reading OF the order; which
was read as follows:
Reolped, That after the LIST day OF January Fridays
Of each week shall be set aside for the Of
private claims, and that these days private bills have
priority over all other business
Mr. D. said that this was private claim, although not
claim for money, and insisted that IT was private
The PRESIDENT stated that he should put the ques-
ton TO the Senate 10 decide and in order that they might
determine the matter, the bill would be read
The bill was accordingly read.
The question being then taken whether the above
mentioned bill should be considered private bill, il
decided in the negative
MIR. DOWNS, Gin his seat) submit II is clearly a
private bill, though lLaughter,l
ADJOURNMENT OVER.
Mr. BADGER moved that when the Senate djoum, il
be to meet on Monday next
Mr. HALE demanded the yeas and nays; which were
ordered.
The question being taken resulled-yeas 30, nays 10
follows
rien Borand, Bradbury, Clarke Davis Dawson, Felch,
MoRae Msngum, Miller, Norris, sebastian, shields,
Smith. Soule, spnance, Underwood. Upham. Wade, and
NAYs-Messrs. Cas-. Dodge OF Wisconsin, Dodge of
Iowa. Douglas Downs, Hale, Houston, Jones Of Iowa,
Mallory, and Walker-lo.
JOHN R. BRYAN
The next bill in order was the bill (S sly for the
lief OF John r. Bryan, administrator Of Isaac Gauetson.
deceased, late purser in The United States navy The
bill considered in committee oil the whole, and the
On motion by MIR. MANGUM, the bill was laid upon
the table,
CAPT. ERAsTus A. cAPRos.
The Senate then proceeded. as in committee OF the
whole to the consideration OF the bill Is ls) for the
relief OF the children OF Capt Erasus A. Capron.
Mr.. JONES, OF Iowa, moved to strike out The words
''lst OF January" and insert "20th OF August" that
the pension would commence the Goth oil August,
1884, the expiration oil the FIVE years pension already
granted
The amendment was agreed TO-
Mr. FELCH asked for the reading OF the report and
il was accordingly read
Mr. JONES, OF Iowa Here is a report which
made in favor OF the claim OF the widow al the last
sion. ! will only remark, further, that this bill was
unanimously reported from the Committee Pensions
at the last session. and that at this session similar
port has been made give the pension 10 the children
for five years. The widow prayed that pension might
be granted her for the balance oil her life but the com
mitee did think that Il would be proper 10 give Tor
more than five years There presidents for this bill
Three other bills Of similar nature have before been
passed. And this lady ~ in very INDECENT clrcum-
stances with chdren the eldest but eight years Of
age, hope the bill will be passed.
The report from the committee at the last session was
then read.
Mr. DAWSON Is il not in violation OF existing
make exception TO the law II now stands in refer
ence to this case
Mr. JONES, OF Iowa. Certainly not
Mr. DAWSON Then why can she not get the pen.
sion without this bill
Mr. JONES, of Iowa Il is proposed TO grant the pen.
OF the last session was in favor Of the widow This bill
is in favor OF the children and not OF the widow
Mr. DAWSON That brings up the exact question |
raised The question here IL whether we will pension
annual appropriations for them. Will the government
do this That is the question And II you do il in this
case what there 10 prevent its being done any other
where the father has been killed in battle And II
you put Il upon the ground Of poverty why, all sol
ders usually poor and leave families in INDECENT cir
c.rn In n "a ho .tx.l IL