The New York herald., 1868-03-08

Department had also refused to recognize him. The
Secretary OF the Treasury had said there was no
shown that he had been In the Territory all the time
This was but shallow pretence as he Mr. Wiliams)
had with his own hands fled papers in the depart
After further discussion the papers were laid on
the table,
Mr.. MORRILL,, lrep) Of Me-, called up the Pension
Appropriation bill.
considerable debate ensued on an amendment
offered by the Committee on Appropriations for
striking out the provision for covering into the Trea
sury one-half the amount received as proceeds OF
prizes the interest OF which to constitute pension
iund The difference OF opinions turned on the pro-
priety OF keeping the fund separate.
Mr. SHERMAN lrep) Of Ohio, offered as q substi-
tute the following:-"The interest on the fund
known as the naval pension fund shall hereafter be
at the rate OF three per cent per annum in lawful
money and shall be applied exclusively to the pay
ment OF naval pensions according to existing lawsn
these propositions; He would avoid the appearance
OF any violation OF the national faith, while harm
could result from the law remaining as 1t Is now.
Mr. DAVIS, ldem.l OF Ky, made some remarks
sailors, who had themselves earned this prize
money
Mr.. FEssENDEN, trep.) Of Me-, reminded the sena-
tor that the pending question was whether the rate
OF interest TO be paid this fund shall be reduced
1t had been found that three per cent would more
than pay all the pensions required, and In view Of
the necessity OF reducing the present rate OF taxa
tion in the existing condition OF the country there
was no use In accumulatng a larger fund by higher
rate OF interest He denied that there any pledge
the part OF the government that the fund should
always bear six per cent interest.
Mr. SHERMAN's amendment was agreed to. The
bill was then passed.
THE DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. MORRILL, OF Me-, then called up the bill making
appropriations for the consular and diplomatic eX-
penses OF the government. The question was on
agreeing to the amendments Of the Committee on
Appropriations as passed by the House. An amend
ment striking out appropriation for the salary OF
the Minister to Portugal having been read,
Mr. FEssENDEN asked why the appropriation was
stricken out.
Mr. MORRILL, said the committee had followed the
bill of last year.
called, having understood that he had been in Wash
ingtOn this winter.
Chairman Of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to
have this appropriation withdrawn he had no OBJ
lection.
ton was made Minister could be sent without the
consent OF the Senate He thought 1t inadvisable to
take any backward step, Congress having already
Mr.. FEssENDEN thought it hardly worth while,
when the House had appropriated money for Mr..
Mr.. SUMNER suggested that the bill be laid on the
table until he could communicate with the State De-
mission If Mr.. Harvey was still Minister OF the
United States It would be question whether they
should make an appropriation In advance. II there
was vacancy he should be very glad to see the ap
preparation made.
Mr. HOWE, (rep.) Of wis.,, said that having refused
for two years past to make appropriation for this
Minister on the ground that he was unsatisfactory
the Senate should stand by the record until they
knew what had induced the House to make the ap-
preparation.
Mr.. JOHNSON, (dem.) OF Nd, did not know whether
Harvey had been recalled or was on leave. The
House last year had stricken out the appropriation
and the Senate had refused to at first but had
been forced to recede Now the House made 1t and
the Senate proposed to strike it out The only objec
ton to this necessary mission consisted of fault found
with the present incumbent. He thought 1t rather
small matter to strike out the Appropriation on per-
sOnal grounds, without any pretence that the Minis
ter was incompetent but simply because Of his
opinion In regard to political difficulties at home. He
dld not think the Senate should sanction the the
by acting upon 1t. He understood that the apprO-
priation was only for the coming year, not payment
thought the law might imply contract between the
United States and It's Ministers sent abroad to pay
them for their services for which they could recover
in the Court OF Claims Suppose the Executive
should recall Mr.. Harvey, there would be no pro-
vision to pay his successor, and probably nobody
would accept the Office lest he should be placed In
Mr.. SUMNER was not suniciently enlightened on
the subject. He thought 1t better to non-concur in
the amendment, and let 1t 60 to committee Of
conference until they could learn more about 1t.
MI. HENDRICKS (deml Of Ind, regarded this ques-
tatves to carry out treaty already made. He would
as soon refuse to pay q man working for him for
Ing. He condemned the course Congress had pur-
sued towards Mr.. Harvey in Furnishing him in
consequence Of private letter. and said they should
pay him his two years. salary They should legslate
on the presumption that Offices authorized by law
Mr. SUMNER said, 'Let the dead past bury its
dead"
Mr.. HENDRICKs-when a man owes 0 debt to the
past he cannot well say that.
Mr.. SUMNER said there was no debt contracted in
the past. This question had been sufficiently dis
cussed heretofore, when he had held that Congress
had power to stop supplies when 1t was dissatisfied
with foreign Minister and demanded his recall. It
had no control over the Executive directly II was
the Senator would not impale himself upon a de-
mand OF that principle. He inf. Sumner) had cited
authorities in the discussion Of that principle
former occasion, and there had been no reply There
could be none. The time would yet come when the
Senator would be glad to hold to that same principle
Mr. HESDRIcKs said he would never starve man
Mr. SUMNER reiterated that the Senator would If
the occasion were adequate He thought Congress
returned when the Secretary Of State communicated
to him copy Of the act Of Congress- He was in
against Congress- he carried on his back the secre
tary Of State, who was In contumacy Also He hoped
Congress would adhere to its original position.
friendly feelings for Mr.. Harvey, which had only
been increased on account Of that gentleman having
s however, % he ed did an act which did not Belong to him
the two Houses had said, under an undoubted right,
and the only IN which they could say that
attempted to starye him out. They had simply re-
fused to make the appropriation. Mr.. Harvey
proposition OF the House bill was to
give him his salary next year. manifestly
implying that he had remained until now entitled to
the place and to their action on the subject.
When another man was appointed to this position
Congress could very easily provide for his salary by
an appropriation in another appropriation bill or
deficiency BILL He (Mr. Conkling) could not forget
that this gentleman had gone out Of his way to do
act which the judges Of the two houses had pro-
nounced Objectionable, at time when the country
was involved in a political controversy There
were no new evidences or facts before them,
and until there were 1t was res ddjudicdtd.
Mr.. HENDRICs thought there was no precedent In
the country for Congress refusing to pay man his
salary. Mr. Harvey had done his full duty II
public officer In the discharge of his duty could be
cut Off payment because of his dissent from Congress
have cuto Off nj IN proc ho