The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-04-01
IN CONGRESS- OF THE U. STATES
SENATE.
CREEK iKplAs DEpaEpATIoss.


as The senator from Wisconsin Mr.. WALKER has yield
ed upon claim quite as menlofous as this ~ any as
pect of IL 10 an appeal TO withdraw II, and present an
single bill when il wou receive The far consideration
az The Senate should be very glad. ! will ask my
friend from Texas 10 withdraw The amendment upon the
same ground upoH which the senator from Wisconsin
withdrew his do not wish 10 take up the time oil ihe
Senate, but yet strong my conviction on thus subject
that shall feel bound II the amendment be persisted in
10 state length the grounds oil my opposition 10
Mr. RJJSK If the amendment offered by myself
~ an individual would yield /, ~ moment TO the
pressure of circumstances; but offered IT the
Of the Committee Indian Affairs, and have no tight
AR. BAYARD. wish to call The attention Of the
Senate 10 the recod-io the lournas-upon the decision
Of The subject OF order the last session Al page $50 OF
the journal OF the last session find
Nh. CHARLTON call the senator from Delaware
TO ordsr The question has been decided. and II Is too
meat is out OF order
Mr. RAYARD. ! want to refer to a single decision
on the very poin; Inv inyo!yed ts,, y This case
discuss the point unless an appeal be taken.
Mr.. BAYARD. Then, take an appeal from the dc.
cision Of the Chair.
Mr.. BAYARD. think am not TOO late appeal
from the decision OF the Chair ruling The amendment IN
0s PRbS SsipS s15F cFFcER The 0e Chair .
to hear the proceedings upon this case
Mr. BAYARD. find on the journal Of the l2.h Of
August, 1852. the following
:" On motion by Mr. CLEMENS 10 amend tae LiI Dy III
For payment TO the citizens of Alabama and Georgia
for depredaons committed by the Creek indians on their
property and ior o,heT properly aken by me troops OF ne
United S'a,ss and The friendly Greeks In the years 1886 and
Iroved March 3, 1887.
the President ienyo't submitted the question for the
determination OF the Senate whether the amendment was
in order and it was determined in the ncgauve-yeas i6
nays 70.
Mr. BADGER. On what day that
Mr.. BAYARD, On the 18th Of August.
Mr.. RUSK. On the 18th OF May the committee re.
ported in favor Of the claim
Mr.. BAYARD Yes, sir. That was on an amend
men the deficiency bill and then the claim voted
down, and il was afterwards proposed as an amendment
TO the Indian appropriation bill. The question of order
was then raised and settled according TO the Journal in
the manner have s,ated-hat is TO say, it was decided
MIR. BADGER. should like 10 hear The yeas and
Mr BAYARD The yeas were:
"Messs Atchi.on, Badger Bell, Borland, Brooke, But
smish. Stockton, Upham, and WeIlef"IS
.NAYs-Messrs Bradbury, Bright Brodhead, Chase,
Hamn, Hun,ei Jones of Iowa. Mallory, Meriwether r,
Miller. Norris, Psarce, Pfau, spraanoe Underwood. and
/ did moi vote on that occasion. presume was no,
Mr. DAWSON presume the senator from Delaware
has brought up record for the purpose OF creating the
impression that what said not according 10 the
facs but sir. the record supports my statement stated
that the senator from Alabama, [ Mr, CLEMENsl upon
his owa responsibility, presented the claim amend
ment and il then decided be Of order; but that
when presented by the chairman OF the Committee on In
dian Affairs, i vas decided 10 be 10 order.
MIR. BADGER That is the true distinction.
MIR. DAWSON. And such is the fact
IlMr. BAYARD. II the honorable senator will allow
me- will that there question OF order raised
the first presentation OF the claim the deficiency bill
in the month OF May. The question OF order raised
when il was presented amendment TO the Indian
appropriation bill in August; and when the question
was rased the Senate decided the amendment 10 be out
OF order.
Mr. DAWSON. Because it had been presented by an
individual and not in accordance with the instructions
OF any committee
Mr.. BADGER. want to understand on what pnnci
pie j, is that this amendment being moved by direction
OF standing committee of this body supposed 10 be
out Of older. II, is reported by standing committee Of
the Senate Il is not private claim. Il never has been
understood TO be private claim and the explanation
given b5 my friend from Georgia. of the ruling Of the
Senate upon former occasion, completely explains what
was then decided and makes u entirely consistent with
the proposition offered being in order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER The question is on
the amehdmen the Chair having decided il TO be in
Mr.. BRIGHT. Has the Chair decided tha, com
mlttee OF his body, under the rule, have right 10
report private claim az an amendment TO an appropr
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair has made
no such decision, but he has decided that this amend
Mr BRIGHT Then, the Chair has decided ,ba,
the present amendment is not to provide for private
claim
Mr. BADGER | call the senator TO order The
question has been decided, and appeal has been
taken.
Mr. BRIGHT. Bat il is not too late to take appeal
II the decision OF the Chair is wrong desire TO under
stand the true nature OF the question. have been
cessary abeent the business OF the Senate COM
mee OF conference, and desire 10 understand the mat
ter. The Committee Indian Affairs propose an amend
ment 10 the Indian appropriation BILL appropratlng 1884,
900 Tor the payment OF certain claims aud the Chair de-
c'dss that amendment 10 be in ordeI
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair made the
decision upon hs own impression OF the proceedings
arising ont OF this very at the last session Accord
ing to the recollection Of the Chair. the proposition
entertained, and very protracied discussion followed
upon i n,cs =, come period Of the last session.
Mr BRIGHT. MT Presdeni---
Mr. BADGER. II is too late TO discuss the question OF
order, for appeal has been taken.
Mr. BRIGHT. understood the senator from Delaware
10 appeal Am right in that .
" Mr.. BAYARD, did take an appeal but while am
up wish 10 make single remark II this be not pri
yaie claim in consequence OF The number OF claimants
lhe Freach spolaton bil from moving that amend
msns'o this or any other appropriation bull Yet IN my
t'non mat N private clam, because the number oil
ansoe cannot alter the character OF the claim. can
ny a',uungosh- The object OF The rule was to keep
49, .",nks apart from laws OF a general nature ne
.~., "ms ordinary business transactions OF the gov
"'"sn' s"1 'ot The purpose OF carrying it on. Tbese
sre clearly cslms agans, the soyernment wish 10 be
vSIc" Know nothing OF the merits of this claim
!. 20 nW osleet 10 II on that ground, but simply on
hs flound That II is not in order as an amendment TO
The PRESIDING OFFICER tn. c,.;, in .,.,.
the Quseiion The Char has decided ,ha, ~; amsnd
menf ~ ordtI From that decision an anne al i. ,aL
MIR BADIkk Does lhe Char enter,ain ,bs aansa,p
The ePkESIplNG OFFICER The Cha, do doss appe'''