Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1868-05-16
CONGRESSIONAL
WASHINGTON, May Is.

Mr.. WOODWARD offered a preamble
relative to the letter addressed to Senator
henderson by Missouri members, stating
| that such communications addressed to
Senator sitting in judgment on the Presi-
dent OF the Uniteu States. is gross breach
OF privilege on the Senate, calculated to
degrade the House and obStruct the course
of public Justice, and concluding with a
| resolution that q select committee of seven
he appointed to inquire if said communities
ton was received by Mr.. Henderson, what
is the legal character of the offense, and
what penalty. If any, the House ought. iul
vindication of its own dignity, to nflict.
as well as to what provisions of law are
necessary to prevent the recurrence of the
same wrongs, with power to send for per-
sous and papers and report by bill or other
wise. it D. - ti.2'.
/ MIR. GARFIELD objected to its recep-
| tion. -,l t--., --,rr
The, ,SPEAKER-The Chair is about to
decide the question as to whether the reso-
tion is or is not question ofprivilege. In
the opinion of the chair it is not question
of privilege. The wording of the resolu-
| ton expressly shows that it is not. The
charge is that the matter alleged is an in.
| fringment of the privilege of the Senate
1t has not yet occurred in the recollection
of the chair that the House of Representa-
tives has been recognized by the Senate as
having charge of the protection of its priv
| ileges. If the privilege of Senator be
assailed, that body is competent to protect
its own privilege; nor would the House
consent that the Senate of the United States
should assume to protect the privileges of
the House.. The chair therefore does not
| think the resolution, in its language, pre-
sents question of privilege.
Mr.. ELDRIDGE-Is there not another
allegation in the resolution which does
present a question of privilege?
| The SPEA X ER-Tf tho Upntlpp, from,
| Wisconsin appeals from the decision of the
Chair the Chair will put the question to the
| House.
Mr.. ELDRIDGE-l do not appeal, but
wish to call the attention of the Speaker
to the fact that there is another clause il
the resolution which does present ques-
tion of privilege, and that the resolution
can be modified by striking out that part
OF it referring to privileges of the Senate.
The SPEAKER-The Chair rules that
this is not question of privilege.
Mr.: GARFIELD demand the regular
order of business. That is the only way
to stop 1t.
Mr.. WOODWARD-I consent to modifi-
cation by striking out that part in refer
ence to privileges of the Senate 1t is not
| at all essential. If that be the only reason
why the resolution is not a question of
privilege. will strike out that part of it.
Mr.. GARFIELD L demand the regular
order of business.
Mr.. LOAN-I desire to say that all the
communications had by the members of the
House from the State of Missouri with the
Senator of that State were had at his spe-
cial instance and request, and the paper
was signed at his instance.
Mr.. ELDRIDGE-So much the worse;
ten times worse.
The SPEAKER-The question: is not de-
bateable. The gentleman from Pennsylva-
MIA has modified his resolution by striking
out that part referring to the Infringement
of the privileges of the Senate. The chair
is of the opinion still that it is not ques-
tion of privilege. The nearest point to it
that he can see is found on page l55 of the
digest. that of alleged corrupt combination.
1t does not appear from the resolution that
any corrupt combination is charged upon
members of the House as to intercourse be-
tween them and their colleagues in the
Senate. The chair cannot assume that it
is in order to make question of privilege.
Mr.. WOODWARD then asked the unani-
nous consent of the House TO offer the res
olution.
Mr.. UPSON and others objected.
The House resumed the consideration of
.he bill for the relief of VIM. McGarrahan,
reported last Saturday from the Judiciary
committee, which confirmed his title to
1000 acres of land in California, embracing
the New Idra quicksilver mine.
The bill was explained and advocated by
Mr.. WILSON, of Iowa. as chairman of the
Judiciary committee, who said in the COM
mittee there was but one dissenting voice,
that of Mr. Boutwell,.
Mr.. BOUTWELL, stated the grounds on
which he opposed the bill in committee, and
on which he thought it should be defeated
in the House.
Mr.. WASHBURNE inquired whether
the title of the property was not in the Uni
ted States to-day?
Mr.. WILSON replied that it was.
Mr.. .WASHBURNEt then wanted to know
what justice there was in giving this prop
erty, worth two or three millions of dol
lars, to McGarrahan, or any other man, and
why the law allowing mineral lands to be
occupied and taken out of the possession of
the Government, should not be repealed.
! Mr.. WILSON said he would answer
those questions in his argument.
Mr.. VAN WICK opposed the bill, ar
guing that the claim had originated in
fraud and forgery, and had been propped
up by perjury.
Mr.. JOHNSON expressed the belief that
Mr.. Mctiarrahan's claim was just.
Mr.. WILSON recited the facts in contro-
versy, sustaining the claims of McGarra-
han and arguing against the claims of the
New Idria Mining Company stating that il
the bill was not passed, the quicksilver
monopoly in California would control the
product and price OF quicksilver.
| After further debate,
| Mr.. HIGBY moved to table the bill. Re-
| jected.
The bill then passed.
The House went into committee of the
whole on the state OF the Union, Mr.. Law
renee, of Ohio, in the Chair, with the un-
derstanding that no further business would
be done to-day, the Speaker, however, no.
tifying the House that it was possible the
attendance of the House might he desired