New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1866-04-27
ap Orleans daily crsseen faas saug, ApriI az, 1885


without the suspension of the habeas corpus. he
also believed that the President had the right to
suspena it, but in this belief he differed from the
chief Justice. He held that Congress alone could
SUSPEND it. Referring to the trial of citizens by
military commissions he said he maintained now, |
as lie maintained before the commission which |
tried the assassns Of the President, that they were
Illegal and unconstitutional. He cited the case of !
an English officer, who caused the whipping to
death of q soldier by court martial, for the crime
of mutiny, and was hung twenty years afterwards
for doing so. The decision by which this officer
was executed had never been reversed in Eng
land.
Mr.. Doolttle's amendment was disagreed to.
The question was next taken on Mr.. Saulsbury's
amendment to strike out the fourth section. The
amendment was disagreed to.
Mr.. Edmunds moved to amend the first section
by providing that in all suits against officers, re-
ferred to in the act, the government of the United
States shall pay all the damages and costs.
This was disagreed to.
duty of the attorney general and the district attor
neys TO defend all officers in the United States
Courts sued in the cases alluded to in the bill.
This was disagreed to.
clause of the first section: But no such order
shall be defense to any suit action for any act
done or omitted to be done after the passage of
this act,n by adding the words g nor any act done
with malice, cruelty or unnecessary severity"
Adopted-yeas Is, nays 16.
Mr.. Doolitte offered an amendment to the first
section, to the effect that the order of superior
officer shall constitute in those States and Terri
tories where martial law has not been declared, or
where the administration Of civil law has not been
interrupted, prinaa facie defense, and in case it
shall be made to appear that such person acted
under such order, not maliciously or oppressively
such defense shall be conclusive.
Mr.. Doolittle subsequently withdrew his amend
ment.
Mr.. Salisbury demanded the yeas and nays on
the passage of the bill, The bill passed-yeas 80
nays 4-Messrs. Buckalew, Guthrie, Hendricks and
Salisbury.
Mr.. Clark moved that when the Senate adjourn
it be to meet on Monday.
The Senate then adjourned at $50 P. N.
HOUSE.
WASHINGTON, Friday April 2O.-The first bust
ness in order to-day being Friday, was the cali Of
committees for reports of private nature
| Mr. Ward, from the Committee on Claims, re-
ported q bill giving Ishmael Day, of Baltimore
| county, Maryland, an annuity of 1921 3d. as a re-
cogntion of his heroism in defending the national
| flag from Gimores rebel raiders, on the 18th OF
july 1864, and for his loss of property on that oc-
| casion..
| According to the report which was read, MI.
| Davis is patrfarchal patriot, II years of age,
| and when two OF Gilmore's raiders attempted to
| haul down the national flag over his dwelling, he
shot one of them dead and put the other to flight.
The consequence was his property was destroyed
| by large party of rebels.
Mr.. Ward made an appeal to the House in sup
| port of the bill.
! Mr.. Epson wanted to know on what principle
! of law the bill could be sustained.
| Mr.. Ward replied-Oh, it is on the great prin-
ciple that we sustain every man who sustained the
! flag in that way.
Several members here exclaimed good, you
| are 1ight.h
Mr.. Delano, chairman of the committee, ex-
| planned the question. He said the rule in the
committee was to reject all claims for damages,
the result ofthe rayages of war. Ishmael Day was
a loser to the amount of seven or eight thousand
dollars, but the committee felt it could do nothing
to compensate him for that loss. Still the cirCum-
stances were so peculiar, the act SO noble, that
the committee agreed to submit to the House the
| question of giving TO the old man for the few
remaining years Of his life in the last of which he
exhibited this high degree of gallautry and
patriotism, o small pension. If four hundred
dollars a year was too much the House might
reduce it.
Mr.. Washburne of Illinois-We understood from
the reading Of the report that the bill was putupon
| the ground of loss of property.
Mr.. Delano said he knew that the question had
not been understood, and therefore he had made
| the explanation.
The question was then taken on the passage of
the bill andresulted as follows Yeas lO6, nays l3-
| so the bill was passed.
| Mr.. Washburne of Illinois, offered resolution
which was adopted, directing the secretary Of war
to communicate TO the House the report Of the
mixed board Of engineers and naval officers, of
| which Commander Latemer was president, and
Majors Chase, Barnard and Beanregard were mem
| bers in 1851 and 1852 and the report of Major
Beauregard in 1852 or 1868 relative to the success
of the operations Of the Law Company in deepen
| ing OF the Southwest Pass, as per contract.
| The House then, on motion Of Mr. Stevens, went
into committee of the whole, with Mr. Smith in the
chair, to consider the bill reported yesterday APP
propriatng 600 for deficiencies in the public
printing, $ljO,O0D for paper and $95, 900 for bind
ing. The committee then rose and reported the
bill to the House, which passed it.
The House then proceeded to the consideration
of the bill to reorganize and establish the army of
the United States, the pending question being on
relative to the adjutant generals department
Mr. Schenck moved to amend the section by
adding to it the following provso:
PrOUided, That nothing in this section shall be
construed to vacate the commission of any officer
now commissioned as assistant adiutant general,
but only to change the title to adjutant in the case
of those who rank rs lieutenant colonel or ma or,
without affecting in any way their relative posi-
| tons or the time from which they take rank.
| Mr.. Blaine spoke against the proposition of the
military committee to change the nomenclature of
assistant adjuant generals to adiutants, arguing
that there was good reason for the distinction that
| adjutant generals department who had remained
| in Washington during the war; saying that many
of them had applied again and again to be sent to
active service, and been refused. L..
The debate was continued at considerable
| length by Mr.. Thayer and Mr.. Davis, against the
section as reported by the committee, and by Mr..
Schenck in support of it. -
Mr.. Davis commented upon the remarks of Mr..
| Scheuck yesterday rejecting on officers in the
adjutant generals department. f-.,t ....,.I. -.
| Mr.. Schenck challenged him to point to single
| phrase or sentence in his remarks rejecting upon
| the officers of any department. IN. .. a. '-
Mr.. Davis suggested that he had accused them
of Sinking the responsibility of active service
during the war. . I-,.t o.. ~
| Mr.. sohenck denied that he had used any such
language but he would now say that while the
greater number of these officers employed in
! Washington would have preferred to be on active
duty in the field, he believed there were others
who were here because they preferred to have
places in the department rather than active SER
vice in the field. ~ r..r
Mr.. Davis retorted by saying that some officers
OF the veteran reserve corps, for which Mr..
Schenck showed so much anxiety, were men who
got into that corps when they could have gone to
the front He knew officers IN the army who
looked with distrust on many persons who had
entered that corps.
Mr. Schenck's amendment was agreed to-.
Another amendment offered by Mr.. Schenck
striking out the words " after the first appoint
ments made under the provisions of this section
was also agreed to.
MIR. Stevens regarded the question as simplifed
to this, whether q man should be called John
Jack or simply Jack;h whether an officer should
be called assistant adjutant general" or simply
" adJutant." German bar0ns could show titles
much longer than any of these titles, but he did
not see why the title "adjutant y was not as good
as that of :" assistant adiutant general"
The debate was closed by the "previous ques
tlOl,'' and the H0nse WAS brOupht to vote on