The weekly pioneer and Democrat., 1864-04-29


Nays-Meesrs. Anthony, Brown, Clark Con-
Of Kansas, Morgan, Morrill,, Pomeroy. Ramsey.
sprague, Sumner, Wilkinson, Wilson
Mr.. Oonness, (Rep. of California, said
he could not vote for the bill as amended,
and, as he could not explain his views
now, he moved to lay the bill on the
table.
His motion was rejected9 yeas, 81
nays
A motion of Mr.. Daviss, (Opp) of KY,
to ad jOurn, was lOst--27 to 13.
Mr.. Foster, (Rep } OF Conn, desired to
discuss the bin, and was willing to do so
this evening.
For few moments he gave way on a
motion Of MIR. McDougall, (Opp) Of Cal !,
to adjourn, which was carried
Continuation of the Debate ON the
Repeal OF the Fugitive slave Law.
WASHINGTON, April 20.
The Senate then proceeded to the considera-
ton of the bsl repeating the Fugitive Slave
Law.
Mr.. Foster, (Rep., said that in bis opinion the
law of 1850 was a most iniQnitous one and he
would cheerfully vote for its repeal 1t was
passed at period of high political excitement.
He voted for the amendment Of MIR. Sherman
yesterday, because he had high authority for
doing so. He contended that Roger Sherman
and Oliver Ellsworth were, in 1898, in favor of
the rendition of fugitive slaves, and read long
extracts from the records of the Congress Of
1898 to prove it. Though he could not show
the aye and noe vote in which their names were
recorded, the brief record showed their
nm
uce OF the law. The Senate and House
at that time voted for it. In the House
but seven votes were recorded against it.
GEORGE WASHINGTON was the President.
Shall we, after seventy years have passed, deny
to these men that intelligence which We claim
to possess? Who are we in this day to say
that wisdom has come to as unknown to our
tatherS4 Who OF us in this Senate are willing
to institute comparison between ourselves
and the men of 1898? He for one would
shrink from comparison with such men as
Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth and their
compeers. Was it an argument raised that
foreign nations would be pleased by the pas
sage of this bill in its original form? That was
not an argument at any time, and much less at
the present time. 1t was useless for Us to shut
our eyes to the fact that the great com nercial
nations of Europe had for years past been look
ing upon our country with disfayOr. The sem
atOr said slavery was the cause. Does not sla.
very exist in the South, and have not several of
the foreign powers Indirectly aided the South
In her unhOly rebellion The manner in which
we have been treated by protessedly neutral
governments, makes the blood of every Amer
lean citizen boil in his veins, and will cause us
one day TO call tor a balancing account that it
may be closed.
Mr.. Sumner, of Massachusetts, (Union,) said
he wished to secnre the good opinion Of our
friends abroad while the Senator seemed to be
willing to Tepel it.
Mr.. Brown, OF Wisconsin, (Uni0n.) con-
tended that the amendment OF Mr. Sherman
made the bill tantamOunt to the act Of 1888 1t
was virtual restatement of that act as far as
the Senate could reState It lie did not be-
Heve it was the duty of Congress to pass any
such act, sor go beyond the plain letter of the
Constitution, but stand by that great bulwarlk
OF freedom which secured 10 all q trial by
Jury. Alter seventy years Of struggle for free
dom, We were now about to return 10 the
starting-point.
Mr.. Wiley, OF West Virginia, Uuion,) OBJ
tainCd the 1io0r.
WASHINGTON, April 26, 1864.
SENATE The bill relating to trankea mat
ter was passed,
insisted on its amendment 10 the bill essab-
fishing . Bureau of Military Justice, and
agreed to committee OF conference
The Senate next proceeded to the considera-
tion or the House blu to provide for q national
currency.
An amendment 10 the bill offered 10y Mr.
Sherman was adopted, in effect to adm the
Bank OF Commerce OF New YORK into the pro-
visions of the ill, making shareholders respon-
sible to the extent of their shares so long as the
surplus fund Of 20 per cent. shall remain IN
diminished.
HoUsE.-1ir. Franz. of N. T.. offered All
amendment providing that on incomes exceed
ing 5000 and not more than $4,000 tax of 5
per cent. shall be imposed; on incomes OF $40
o00 and not exceeding So, 600, Il tax OF ~ per
cent; over $25, 600 10 per cent
In support of this Ny. Frank said the Com
mittee or Ways and Means have themselves
graduated taxation in this BILL which in effect
was an argument in support of his proposition
Mr.. Stevens said the amendment would levy
s tax az punishment GA men because they
We're rich.
After debate Mr.. Franks amendment was
adopted, 73 To IS.
Mr.. Stevens moved. as an amendment. to
tax the salaries Of members Cf Congress % per
cent, which was voted down by larg. ma
jOrity.
Many other amendments were offered and
rejected, among them one excluding the divi-
dend OF savings banks from taxation.