The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1867-11-22

I Vi HlEGlluus he COHREhluldlGu Tue
country on this wonderful conversion
He trusted Mr.. Brooks would continue
his journey until he saw more clearly
even than the members on the Repub-
lican side what did constitute loyalty
and dtsloyalty- The gentleman had
also taken ground, to-day, that IL was
proper for the House 10 look into the
eide whether it is Republican or not.
He was happy for once TO be able to
stand with the gentleman from New
York and vote with him. He well
coined him as new convert, and eX-
pected him, like all repentants, to take
the lead aud do works meet for re-
pentance.
Mr.. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, OPP
posed all motions looking to the ex-
clusion of any Tennessee member, and
eulogized the character and services of
Mr.. Stokes. He wished the members
of the South to know It was the party
on the floor which did not acknowledge
any place or time for repentance, which
could not relieve them of disfran-
chisement not for rebellion, but for the
holding of opinions in '6l, which they
held to-day, on the subject of States
rights and the degradation of the col
ored people.
After some further remarks byMessrs.
Dawes aud Chandler, of New York, Mr..
Marshall, OF Illinois, expressed his
conviction that the qualifications pre-
scribed in the Constitution were only
test, that could rightfully apply to
members, but since the House has es-
tablished different law tor it's own
acts IL should be governed by 1t. He
described the State Government of
Tennessee as a disgrace to the country
and to civilization, and said it was a
notorious fact that the Union soldiers in
had hann 61RfFanOhiaa1 N NJ
der Brownlow' g government, simply be-
cause they would not put their hands to
their mouths, and their mouths in the
dust, and kneel suppliant to the negro
government there, which lord 1t over
white American freemen.
The amendment of Mr.. Dawes TO re-
fer the credentials of Mr., Butler to the
Committee on Elections, was agreed to-.
This was substitute for the original
motion of Mr.. Eldridge, the effect of it
being to refer Mr.. Buffers case, not
that of Mr.. Stokes. The democrats
generally voted no in agreeing to the
resolution.
received with laughter, and remarks
that he would have to be converted
again.
Messrs. Highly, Axtell and johnson,
of California, and Washburne, of ILL
nois, appeared and were sworn in.
Mr.. Eldridge then renewed his mo-
ton that the credentials of Mr.. Stokes
be referred to the Committee on Elec-
tons.
MIR. Schenck said he wanted no more
of this sort of thing. The member from
New York has just shown by his vote
that he had been triting with the House,
proving his object 10 be 10 set some
party trap, which. however, sprung
and caught himself, than for the pur-
pose of grave inquiry into his right to
seat. He was glad the House, in the
case OF Mr.. Mullins, had carried out the
precedent established in the Kentucky
case, giving credit to the statement of
member, Mr.. Brooks, his own con-
duct showed him as not entitled, as he
had, by his own proposition, shown
that he was opposed to the reference OF
Stokes credentials, as this gentleman
had shown his loyalty by fighting I'M
der the flag.
MIR. Morgan INQUIRED II the fact that
Stokes had fought valliantly under the
flag entitled him to take the test oath.
Mr.. Schenck replied that he VAS not
and that it was "A matter entirely for
himself.
Mr.. Randall contrasted the action
of the Republicans members in the
Kentucky case with their present ac-
tIon, and asked how they could recon-
Gle their present practical inconsis-
tenGies.
Mr.. Dawes closed the debate by NOV
ing the previous question, which WAS
seconded; the resolution of Eldridge re-
iected; so Stokes credentials were not
refused.
Mr.. Brooks then submitted resolu-
ton to refer the credentials OF Mr.. Null
Inns to the Committee on Elections, and
sent TO the Clerks desk letter from u
lieutenant in the 18th U. s. Infantry,
supporting the statement made in re-
spect to that case. Referring to the
remarks of Mr.. Logan, he said the only
difference between Logan and himself
was that at the beginning of the war
Logan was a terrible Copperhead, and
terrible disunion man, and Jacobin
and himself still Union men.
Asto the remarks of Mr.. Schenck,
that gentleman was not very amiable
person. He had not that suavity of
manner which, as "a student of Chester
field, he ought to have.
Mr.. Brooks defended his course in
regard to the subject before the House.
Mr.. Shellabarger said he would not
discuss the proposition whether the
House might disregard the require.
ments of the test oath law. The House
would be doing most dangerous thing
II it let alone the high and important
requirements of the test oath for mem-
bers on either side, and it should hold
up in its utmost good faith the stand
ard to where the law had fixed 1t and
require that vigilance shall be brought
to bear upon it to see that no one shall
be sworn in who could not properly
take the test oath, and he would not
consent TO his colleague, Mr.. SGhenck's
proposition that Stokes should judge
for himself whether he could take the
test oath.
Mr.. Schenck explained and justified
his remark, and having referred to the
case of Senator Patterson, he said he
would have permitted him to take the
oath but would have the next moment
moved to expel him for manifest
perjury.
Mr.. Sellabarger resuming argued that
the resolution to refer Mr.. Mullins ere
dentials should be adopted
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts, opposed
the resolution, on the ground, princi-
pally, that the charge against Mr.. Null
Inns was made simply on an unsworn
statement.
Mr.. Mullins entered full and COM
plete denial by that gentleman, of all
matters alleged in the letter submitted
to the House. The resolution was
rejected unanimously. The Tennessee
members, except Butler, were called in
front of the Speakers chair, and had
thetest oath solemnly administered to
them.
The Speaker laid before the House a
letter from the Secretary OF the Terri
tory of New Mexico, stating that he was
forced to sign the certificate of the cleo
ton OF Mr.. Cleaver, as a delegate, but his
apparent majority was made up by
frauds. Mr.. Cleaver was fairly elected
by a majority of i, JOB votes. The pa
pers were referred 10 the Committee on
elections, and neither Of the claimants