The New York herald., 1868-03-15

and receivable foy cmtoms duti9 and that they
might be reissuea IL paymsns % sne demsnds
against the government 70 such persons az desire
returned TO specie payment and that would involve
practically the return Of the banks 70 specie pay.
ments 1t was the restoration OF confidence that was
would give that
Mr.. JONES (dem.) OF Ky., addressed the House on
the subject OF Impeachment arguing that the i'm
peachment OF the President and the charges made
the President had scted in oonscientious discharge
OF duty. His impeachment was simply to remove an
obstacle from the path Of designing men, and to
crafty their hatred and malgnity.
THE JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME C0URT-SHARP
PRACTICE OF THE RADICALS
the House, and particularly Of the Country to the
mode In which most important measure had passed
through the House on Thursday last solely, he said
deceive and to lul suspicion He proceeded to read
nom the GlOoe the report OF the proceedings In con-
which amendment deprives the Supreme Court Of its
jurisdiction.
Mr. MAYNARD called attention to the fact that Mr..
Schenck, who had taken q principal part In those
Mr. BOYER could not help that; and he proceeded
with quotations from the Globe. While he was
speaking Mr. Schenck entered the hall and took his
seat) Mr.. Boyer went on to say that the object OF
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa
Court OF jurisdiction In the McCardle case. It was
very obvious he said that the object OF the gentleman
Supreme Court in such cases, and 1t was intended
doubtless to operate on the very case which now is
pending before the Supreme Court because It refers
In terms to the past well as to the future. The
House, and particularly the minority, was disarmed
by the remarks which prefaced the introduction OF
the amendment. The House was told by the gentle
man from Ohio (Mr. Schenck) that there could be
possible objection to the bill, and the House was
asked as matter of courtesy to allow II to be passed
at that time without explanations; that the gentle
man from Ohio would accept as an amendment to the
bill that which was not germane to the subject which
tab
the gentleman must have known. II he had under
stood the nature Of the amendment It would never
ha & se or Il Sa auss
had not been disarmed by the remarks OF the gentle
man from Ohio, that II was matter which related
entirely to appeals the Supreme Court the
OF collectors and that it was not intended for
Mr.. BLAINE, (rep.) of Me--was the gentleman from
Pennsylvania In bis seat when the amendment was
oneredp
Mr. BoYER-I was in my seat.
Mr.. BLAINE-If the amendment was not germane,
why did not the gentleman from Pennsylvania object
to itS
transpired that any amendment which would not be
in order, and which would be entirely different from
the spirit and meaning of the bill ITSELF would come
from such source as the honorable Chairman OF the
Judiciary Committee, who enjoys to a very high de-
gree the respect OF thisHouse as well Of the minority
as OF the majority.
Mr. BLAINE-I appreciate the gentlefhan's position
1t Is simply that the side Of the House Of which he is
prominent member did not comprehend, did not
the point and bearing OF the amendment
Mr.. BoYER-I am glad that the gentleman has said
what he did. I had said that the minority was dis
armed by the manner in which the subject was intro
duced admit that, occupied by other matters and
trusting to the gentleman who introduced this biz
that way the majority would attempt to effect their
escape from what they must believe to be pending
Judgment Of condemnation against them at the hands
of the highest judicial tribunal Of the land. II must
be because they fear that their acts unconstu-
tionait must be because they are afraid to submit
Vt n
covert way, by dlsguises not easily seen through
at the time, measure was introduced which,
il II produces the effect for which 1t is Intended will
prevent the constitutonalty OF the Reconstruction
act perhaps from being tested In the manner which
tine they nreme are therefore,
a consciousness on the part Of the majority that
those acts illegal and outside OF the constitution
that they resort to the passage OF this measure But
II they about to pass such an act that they
should have passed it openly. It should have been
met objected to and fairly discussed; and then il
by overwhelming numbers they were enabled In
that way to pass an act for the purpose OF
obstructing the course OF justice, It could not be
avoided But what | especially complain Of is the
manner In which II was done, by dsarming the sus-
minority, which was not confess-using the Ian
guage Of the gentleman from Maine-wide enough
such course and In such manner 30 entirely diff
ferent from what It had been led to expect by the
nature OF the introduction Of the bill and the remarks
by which 1t was accompanied.
Mr. BIAINE-:Another question The gentleman
TINS as % an Illegal Gee nne gen
am not lawyer at ALL to ask him question The
Supreme Court obtained Jurisdiction by an act OF
Congress about year ago. Was that illegalS
Mr.. BOYER--The gentleman entirely misunder-
stands and interprets me when he says that said 1t
was an illegal transaction. admit that whatever
fraud there may be in the case 1t is not punishable
at law. admit that the act, although passed II
has BEEN cannot be therefore yitated as an act OF
manner In which twas foisted upon us, and IN
which 1t was therefore allowed 10 become a law
without debate; and said that s not characteristic
OF the usual courage displayed by the gentleman from
Maine and the members from Iowa and Ohio. What
is done In the House should be done conrageor sly,
Overwhelming enough. Can you not rely on them,
and not resort to devices OF this descriptions
Mr.. MAYNARD-The gentleman the word
fraud. VIII he please explain wherein he imagines
there has been any lraudf
Mr.. BoYER--I have no further explanation to offer
on that point than what have already said.
Mr.. WILLIAMS, rep1 OF Pal understand my
colleague to say In reference to the Chairman OF the
Judiciary Committee who was not, however, acting
in that capacity the presentation OF the amend
ment that be acted In bad faith, and that he intro
duced the amendment In manner to deceive the
House2
Mr.. BoYER-what have said have ssid and in
the manner in which have said IL am willing to let
II remain. The matter in which we were misled
have already explained, and II Is not necessary for
me to go over the ground again.
Mr.. WILLIAMs-The gentleman states that he was
misled by the way In which the amendment was In
troduccd. MY recollection is that there nothing
said on its M BY the gentleman sa who M
gentleman from Ohio In reference to the bill as IL
came nom the Speakers table without the amend
ment.
Mr. BoyER-Exactly; but ask the gentleman
whether II he had prefaced II with the remark made
by the gentlemen rom ohio, and had afterwards
knowingly accepted an amendment which was
not germane to the bill and which was Of a
character which he knew to be most obnoxious to
the minority Of the House, he would have allowed
his remarks to stand introduced to the bill and the
amendments Recoect, do not charge the gentleman
from Ohio with knowingly admitting an amendment
OF that character TO be oeredthaf is with Knowing
its chafacter-but do say that IL would be contrary
TO all experience we have ever had OF that gentle
mans asuteness and OF his business character to
suppose that he would allow an important amend
ment 10 be offered 20 an important bill which fe had
In charge Of which he knew nothing beforehand.
Mr. WILLIAMs-Then, " | understand the gentle
man. he shifts the charge from the shoulders OF the
gentleman from Iowa Mr. WILSON,, who is not here,
TO the shoulders Of the gentleman from Ohio (Hr.
Schenck, who IL here, and can take care OF himself
Mr.. BoyER-The gentleman cannot put words In
my mouth. What have said | am responsible for.
have said II without any personal malice towards
any onc-certainly without any feeling towards the
gentleman from Ohio tMr. Schenck), for whom I