The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-05-05

yots wayeAs - nays ri that twas ruled Of
M. BILL What i he date ofthAiy
Mr. HUNTER March 3 1874 That Is sutfcisnt for
Mr. rooABs Read Ii. names.
Mr. SEBASTIAN. Was il not previously decided other
Mr. HUNTER 1 hnd it stated Otherwise in the Globe
hnd that the senator from Delaware Mr. BAyARD stated
that had been decided Otherwise but when The vote
referred il found that twenty for ruling
Of order and sixteen in favor of IL On the debate after
wars Ii suggested By gentlemen that u rested
upon the question whether member Of the committee had
the right 70 offer il witboat instructions from The commit
tee whether il from the COMMITTEES itself
have not examined that decision In ordes 70 see bow
stood the senator however who referred 90 said Inst
the the question Of order oni ], enough
for that the subject before 1853 this dis
nc question, and that the Senate decided by vote Of e
10 ls that Of order So far the action Of the
Committee Finance Is concerned submit TO the se1A
TOR that that oomiioe vade mistake in regard to the
rule that moi 70 etop the Senate from applying " The
Senate is 10 be governed BY them in regard to that
and wi also suggest TO him that be somewhat too
that amendment II be viii look a, the amendment TO
which be has referred be will find thai il is the result OF
appropriation last year Il only making up for an oinis
sion Of in the appropriation Of last year IL
has been discovered since the appropriation OF 5lsi Au
gust 1854 for this purpose made that the name OF
John Stedhan omitted in such claims by mistake
Here is clerical in carrying out the appropriation
made in the Lam Of 1852 but suppose the COMMITTEES
Finance should have made mistake or thai had made
mistake that certainly does not bind the Senate II not
bound by my mistake The question is what the rule
and here is the decision Of the Senate upon il
Mr.. BELL ! would like 70 inquire OF the honorable
from Virginia whether be considers the decision OF
the Senate upon such question this precedent and
binding parliamentary law 2
Mr. HUNTER need not say to the senator from Ten
neseehe is certainly familiar with question Of that
sortthat decisions upon points Of order are always re-
garded presidents and they have persuasive force
viii say that they rrepealahle that they cannot
he changed thai they like the laws Of the Aedes and
Persians.
\ Mr. BELL That il the answer which expected from
the honorable From the reports Of the proceed
ings Of the Senate IT appears that this claim Of citizens
Indians brought forward in the Senate Sd Of
March 1853 the last day Of the session and suspect
viii be asce.ained that il was towards the close Of the
proceedings Of that day which terminated the session Of
Congress- when friend Of the claim thought il was prop
10 urge it They that il debated and any
opton taken to it, ii WAS likely that ii would be killed
for the purpose Of getting it out Of way think have
an impression myself that advised the friends Of the
proposition not 70 urge il upon such an occasion when
merely 10 get it out Of the OF business Of i'm
por,Anee Ihey Aoquesced IN u and the question was
made and the decision as to the point Of order was ar
rived At upon very little debate
But Mr. President ask the attention Of the honorable
senator from Virginia 10 the fact which state that
this question settled after great deiberationperhaps
after entire days debateaf the preceding session
tmo sessions preceding when had ample time
consider when there hurry Of the business before
Congress when il at the close of the session. and
the debate the honorable win refer il viii be
found TO have been ful the whole question The
by the rule which relied upon reject the claim
Now ought precedent established the very heel of
session not only the last day but very probably within
the last three hours Of the session when friend
Of the bah would think seriously Of debating the question:
or insisting upon i a, such an hour TO be considered
cverrsing she aeiibers ssisna exPressoo OF tho os
the Senate af the preceding session
Mr.. HUNTER If the senator win allow me, win
that referring TO the Globe he viii find that there
debate upon il st the last session
Mr.. BELL Blu; say IL very slight debate The
senator viii find however that there was more fall and
,1,.
the impression nay mind thai advised the friends Of it
press il the last session
NL FITZPATRICK IL was proposed At ten O'Clock st
night ssn
Mr. BELL The honorabls senator from Aisbams says
that IL proposed al ten O'Clock at night and how
many appropriation bills had yet be acted upcn7 The
Of them and the important of them 70
Iwoud hzre regarded impruden have pressed
such a claim AT such an hour.
But what By pressing consideration Of the fact
that there delit~rae solemn Of the Senate
ding tins much controversial question at former session
10 show that decided not 10 be excluded by the rule
which 10 relied upon by the from Virginia that
former debate when the Senate took il up and all
sdes presented the niercourse law relied upon BY the
from Georgia viii be found have been relied
bur noe sfrcnnous'y Tie sct joint resolution Of
1891 relied upon What shat bat existing
Of the country which had bs complied with By
Son' resolution act paseed By thr bouses the
osers TO 20 into The country Where they eoua have a.
20 the yisnesses where ty could he the spot where
they woaid be able to evsose the truth connected with
country believe there shr~e commissioner and
hey there and, after most iaborious Investigation
% the of Chains that presented 70 them they
reported the facts which each separately found
ed ard tbev reported balance do remember what
thst bssnce n nv recollection i right upon the
suhec; there large amount Of claims struck out al
together Ha
Mr ToONBs Seven hundred thousand dollxrs
Mr.. BELL Nearly $Ioooo0. J mean thatof The claims
for damages S60oeO0 $s0oo0o stricken
bad idea that they greatly beyond the present
amount VIII snv gentleman say that that Is
sting Law of the lsudi Congress in 1881 felt the
of obligation mposed BY the intercourse act of 1884 and
the only question how Congress could be satisfied
whs, the amount that Ought really to be allowed 70
the claimants They rcsori the method Of appointing
into the territory, and WHIST really
could be honestly claimed By The daimsnts They rsPor
amount which was claimed and the sole act left on the
part of Congress f6i the obligation under which the
government lay in respect to the claims make the
appropriation
claims recognised by the executive sufbority
The report transmitted by the executive in compliance
viih the resolution of 1897. 1t submitted 70
congress-for what For appropriation pay the
amount found due by the Was that
existing obligation and Law, complete any other
II is and indefinite claim upon the government
II h claim settled br the government offcers-by the
who stood in the rssce Of the Auditor of
the Treasury. They special auditors. They went
them Congress Cor fa6meut o the obligation Of the
rovernmeut for their payment say that il an obsa-
ton on part of Congress The claims were sudited
and tbe balance struck and presented A large
oS claims which regularly presented were
and balance presented which they