The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1858-12-16
CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONGRESS- SECOND SESSION.
SENATE.

WASHINGTON, Dec 10
The CHAIR presented a communication from the
Postmaster General showing the amount of stock
held by foreigners in Ocean Mail Steamers
Mr.. CAMERON, Of Pennsylvania presented a pcti-
ton from citizens Of Pennsylvania, PRAYING an in
creased duty an foreign iron. He accompanied it
with few remarks in favor of specific and in oppO-
sItion to I'D r0jorcIn duties on iron.
Ne. CLINGMAN moved to take up his resolution
relating to the CIayton-Bulwer treaty, ich was
not carried, n against 25.
Mr.. STUART, of Michigan, proposed to take up
the bill donating lands for the support of Agricutu
raj Schools and Colleges but the motion was lost
by Il tie vote.
The Senate then, motion of Mr.. Mason, of
Virginia, went into Executive session with the
understanding that the Pacific Railroad bill should
come up tomorrow. Adjourned
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Mr.. CoMINs, of Mass, gave notice of bill for a
modification of the tariff.
The WatrouS case was taken up and Mr.. STE
PHENS, of Ga, proceeded to defend Judge Watrous
He contcnded that the Judge had never become in
tereSted in that land secretly or for the purpose of
litigating it in his Court. He would not believe
man on oath who had sworn as Spencer had done
that WatrOus had conceded his interest in this case
for four years when there was not a shadow of
truth in the statement. Mr.. STEPHENS examined
the evidence in detail and contended with great
force that not single point had been proved
against him. Hcwas frequently interrupted by ex-
plantations from Mr.. Reagan and others in regard
to matters of fact and evidence. Mr. STEPHENS con-
fenced that every ruling of Judge WatrOus and the
Court in New Orleans were correct. and if they
not, why did not Mussina take an appcal to
the Supreme COurt7
Mr.. REAGAN replied showing how under the cir
cumstances the appeal could not be taken.
Mr.. STEPHENS said this only pretext on the
part of Mussna, and proceeding to arnue the
case further when his hour expired.
Mr.. HoUsTON, of Alabama, moved the previous
question and was sustained.
Mr.. ll0uSTON now proceeded to close the debate
lie said it was utterly impossible for any man to 90
this case in an hour, and he would, therefore
examine only the more important points They
were not trying Judge Watrous here but simply
finding whether there was ground for sending him
to the Senate for trial. Judge Watrous was not
here defending himself from the charges against
him. but endeavoring to prevent his trial before the
Senate. II he was innocent, there was the only
place where his character could be relieved of
all stain. He charged Mr.. Stephens with incOn-
sistcncy in his argument upon the impeachment.
The only protection the country had against a
corrupt Judge, was in the power to mpeach upon
the production of evidence showing probability of
guilt. If positive and cOnvicing proof were re-
quired, no impeachments could be made. He re-
ferred to the of Judge Pickering, of New
Hampshire, who indicted by the House upon a
simple charge OF intemperance, and convicted bv
the Senate. In the of the Impeachment of
Judge Beck, convicting testimony was not required
and by unanimous consent it was agreed that the
House occupied the position of a Grand jury. IL
the House must have cOnyicting testimony and must
should
the Senate try it at all? 1t would be only a work
of supererOgatiOn. Mr.. Houston made legal ar
gument upon these points, and begged the House
not to turn a Judge loose upon the community
against whom such serious charges had been pre-
terred He then went into the evidence at length,
and argued that all the charges against the Judge
had been sustained by the testimony.
The resolution proposing TO impeach Judge Wat
rous, of high crimes and miSdemeanors and the
amendment declaring that there was not sufficient
testimony to impeach the Judge were not reported
to the House. The vote taken by yeas and
nays on the amendment and was adopted by yeas,
Ill. nays, 81; as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Abbott Anderson Andrews, Avcry
Bocock, BOnham, Boyce Bavic, Branch Brayton Bufn-
ton, Burlngame Burns, Caruthers, Case, Cavanaugh.
Eyra Clark, II. F. Clark, John b. Clark Clawson C. r.
COchrane, Craige, Cragin, Curtis II. W Davis Havis
OF Massachusetts,, PAWS Of Iowa, Durfee EdmundSon
Elliott. English Fransworth. Fenton, Giddings, Gilman,
Harris IIaskn Horton Howard Hughes Jackson Jewctt
kem, Kellogg, kilgore Knapp, Lamar Leach, Luer
Iovcioy, McClay, Marshall Of Illinois, Maynard, Miller
Millson Montgomery Morgan. Morrill,, Morris of Penn
sylyania, Morris Of Illinois, Morse of Maine Morse of
New York. Murray, Nhlack, olin, Parker. Pendeton,
Petit Potter Purvance Ready. Ricaud, Robbins Royce
Rufiin Savage Scales Scott, Seward, Shaw, Sherman
Smith of Illinois, Smith of Virginia Stanton, Stephens
Stewart, Tappan Thompson, Tompkins, Tippe, Under
wood, Vance Wode, c. c. Washburne, +. B. Washburn
J. Washbume, Watkins Winslow, Wood, Woodsen
Waterdyke, Wright, Zollikofer-ll1.
Nays.-Messrs. Adreon, Ali, Barksdae, Bennett Bill
nghurst Bingham, Bishop Blair, Bliss Bryan Burnett
Chafee Chapman. Clay, Jno. Cochrane, Cockr Cofax,
Comis Corning. Cox Craig, Curry, Davidson Davis of
Ind, Dawes, Dean, Dimmick, Dodd, Dowdell, Eustis,
Faulkner, Florence Foley, Foster, Garnett GarttelI
GoOch, Goodwin Greenwood GrOesheck, Hall, Hatch,
Hawkins. Hickman Hoard, Hopkins, Houston, IIuger
jenkins, Jones of Tenn Jones Of Pa, Keitt Kelley
Mason, Miles. Moore Palmer, Peyton, Phelps of Mo-.
Phelps of Mimi, Pote, Reagan, Rchie. Russell San
dige, Soaring, Shaw Sherman, Shorter Singleton Spin
ner, Stevenson. Stewart Of Pa Talbot. Taylor of n
Taylor of La, Thayer, Vallandigham, Walbridge Wad-
ron, Ward, Warren, White, Whitley and Wright-91.
The vote then recurring upon the resolution as
I,l Il H., I
SO the House refused to find articles of impeach-
ment against Judge Watrous.
Mr.. BoYCE, of s. c.. called up the MARYLAND con-
tested election case involving the right OF the Hon.
j. Morrison Harris to his seat as member from
the Sd Congressional district Mr.. Boyce offered
a resolution declaring the seat of the member from
the Sd Congressional district of MARYLAND vacant
account of the riot, tumult and disorder which
prevailed at the election held in that district on
the Sd day of November, 1885, in contempt of laws
and in violation of the freedom of election. Mr.
Boyce said he had urged this matter during the
last session and had felt at that time great interest
in the matter. The term Of the member had now
however nearly expired and he merely discharged
his duty i'll Offering the resolution and the accompa
nying report of the Committee on Elections
Mr.. EuSrIs, OF La, moved to lay the whole sub
ect on the table.
Mr.. SMITH, of Tenn, moved to adjourn. Lost hy
73 to 81.
Mr.. SMITH hoped it was not designed to press
vote in this hasty manner. He hoped there would
be full discussion and that the contestant Mr.
Whyte, would be heard.
Mr.. HARRIS, of Md, said he but a passive
party in this matter, but if Mr.. Whyte desired to
be heard, he hoped the privilege would be granted
him. He desired for himself nothing but a fair
hearing and the candid judgment of the House.
Mr.. BoYCE offered a resolution that VIM. Pinkney
Whyte be admitted to the privileges of the floor
and a seat in the House, while this case was under
consideration with permission to speak the sub
ject.
Mr.. SrAuNToN, Of Ohio, opposed the resolution on
the ground that Mr.. Whyte was not the contestant
of Mr.. HARRIS seat and had right to be affected
by the resolution before the House. Without
coming to a vote any of the propositions
The House adjourned