The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-04-17
Monday April IA, 1856.
SENATE

VI hauodS, 10 Wnlcn was appended an ar1QaVlt
from the memorialist, setting forth the genuine
ness of that document
Mr. Il. addressed the Senate at great length,
giving history of the services of Col. i. in the
Mexican war and to the Democratic party.
The debate was then continued by Messrs.
Douglas, Butler, Wade, Pugh, Hale, Jones of
tennessee, Rusk, Toucey, Wilson, and others,
when
Mr.. Stuart, after addressing the Senate at
length, concluded by moving to lay the motion
to receive the petition on the table.
MIR. Sumner demanded the yeas and nays,
which were ordered, and the question was de.
cided in the affirmative, as follows:
YEAS = Messrs. Adams, Allen, Benjamin,
Biggs, Bigler, Bright, Brown, Butler, Cass, Clay
ton, Dodge, Douglas, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Hun
ter, lverson, James, Jones of Iowa, Jones of
Tennessee, Pugh, Reid. Rusk, Sebastian, Sill
dell, Stuart, Toombs, Toucey, Weller, Wright,
and Yulee-30.
NAYs-Messrs. Collamer, Durkee, Foot, Hale,
Hamlin, Harlan, Seward, Sumner, Trumbull,
Wade, and Wilson-ll.
And the Senate adjourned.
HOUSE
Mr.. Washburn, of Maine from the Com
mittee of Elections, submitted a report in the
case of Mr.. Albert Fabre, claiming the seat
occupied by Mr.. Eustis, of Louisiana, to the
effect that no appearance having been made
before the committee, by or in behalf of Mr.
Fabre, and no testimony in support of his me-
mortal having been submitted to them, they
report the following resolution:
Resolred, That the Committee of Elections
be discharged from the further consideration
of the memorial of Albert Fabre. ESQ.,, claim
ing seat as Representative in Congress from
the State of Louisiana.
The question was taken, and the resolution
was adopted.
MIR. Cobb, of Georgia, asked consent to sub
NIT the following resolution.
Lfesotced, 1.-THE Senate concurring,) That the
President pro tempore of the Senate and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives ad-
journ their respective Houses for the present
session on Monday, the l4th day of July next,
at II o'clock, NJ.
Mr.. Wakeman, of New York, objected.
Mr. Cobb moved suspension of the rules,
so as to enable him to submit his resolution
which motion was disagreed to, two-thirds not
voting in favor thereof.
Mr.. Ball, of Ohio, asked consent to submit
the following resolution:
Res0loed, That the Committee on the Judi
ciary be instructed to inquire into the propriety
Of the enactment by Congress of law pro-
hibiting, under appropriate penalties, any per.
son who may have been married. and who, al
the time, shall have husband or wife living,
from intermarrying or cohabitiDg with another
within any of the Territories of the United
States, anything in any law, regulation, or usage
in such Territory, to the contrary notwithstand
ing; and, if the same committee shall deem
such legislation expedient, that they prepare
and report to this House bill to that effect
with as little delay as may be convenient.
Mr.. Orr, of South Carolina. / object to the
resolution for the benefit of my neighbor, Mr.
Bernhisel] Laughter.
Mr.. Ball moved a suspension of the rules ;
which motion was disagreed to--yeas sc, nays
aO-two-thirds not voting in favor thereof.
Mr.. Phelps, of Missouri, moved that the
House go into Committee of the Whole on the
state of the Union; which motion was agreed
tp--yeas 81, nays 81.
The House accordingly went into Committee
(Mr. Stanton, of Ohio, in the chair,) and re-
sumed the consideration of the bill to supply
DEFICIENCIES in the appropriations for the service
of the year ending June 30, 1856, the question
being On the amendment of Mr.. Crawford, OF
Georgia, 10 the amendment of the Senate ap
propriating 100000 for continuing the work
on the Washington aqueduct, viz:
a"Proride6, That the same together with the
amount heretofore paid by Congress, shall moi
exceed the relative proportion of the value Of
Government property, as compared with that
belonging to private citizens within the corpo
rate limits of Georgetown and Washington
cities"
Mr.. Irippe, of Georgia, moved to amend the
amendment of his colleague by substituting, in
lieu thereof, "the citizens of Washington and
Georgetown to subscribe and pay an equal
amount to that appropriated by the Govern
ment"
Mr.. Walker, of Alabama, understood that the
appropriations, which had been heretofore made
for the construction of this aqueduct, were
based upon estimates presented to Congress by
gentleman in all respects qualified, from his
scientific attairments, to present such estimates
as would secure confidence in their corre"t-;aess
and in the face of his declsr.si.on that OOC
:. Su.l oe necessary to place this work in state
of completion, they had already made an ap-
preparation of S350,000 towards Its construc
ton. He took it for granted that not mem.
Der gave his vote for these appropriations with.
out being cognizant Of the estimates upon
vhioh they were founded; and it seemed to
him that oppositioa to a further appropriation
which was still within the limit of the estimates
of the competent officer to whom he had oil"
ded, was a correct exemplifcation 80 tho old
maxim of penny wise and! pound foolish
The question was then taken on the amend
men: OF Mr.. Trippe, and it wss agreed to-yeas
%, nays Al.
~. hicMullin, of Virginia, fully concurred in
the remarks which had been submitted by the
gentleman from Georgia, Mr.. TrippeI In
his opinion, the work could be constructed far
more cheaply by contract than under the man
agement of the present engineer.
Mr. Covode, of Pennsylvania, being fully sat
isted that the work had been enormously under
taken, and that so far it had progressed wrong
thought it would be better to sink the $3.50, O0O
already appropriated, and commence right
Mr.. Florence, of Pennsylvania, replied to the
remarks of Mr.. McMullin. He had always been
opposed to the contract system, and though,
that the experience Of the Government would
Justify the House in refusing any connection
with it.
MIR. Stewart of Maryland, was not satisfied
that the House could justify itself in voting
against the amendment of the Senate. If this
work was necessary, the Government should
not hesitate moment in making the requisite
appropriations to supply the city with water.
Mr.. Sapp, of Ohio was opposed to the appro
priation, and considered the estimated cost o.
! the aqueduct as enormous.
Mr.. Barksdale, of Mississippi, observed that
if this were q new question, he would not be pre-
pared to say that he should vote for it; but be
regarded it as settled. The Government had
coumitted itself to it; and it seemed to him
fthat now they could only examine into the plan
of the work.
Mr.. Cox, of Kentucky, could not preceive that
any principle of public duty required him tc
vote for this appropriation.
Mr.. Davis, of Maryland, was opposed to pay
ing for all the local improvements of Washing
ton out of the public treasury.
Mr.. Peck, of Michigan, was in favor of the
construction of this work to supply this capita