The New York herald., 1868-03-17

suped the consideration Of the conference report on
ths bin spproprstns $4,000 for the benefit OF Ars'
me merits q the bin were discussed at some iscgth
by Messrs 6chenck Ward ana Holman In favor OF ~
and by Messrs. Cobb and washburn, OF wisconaann,,
mittee was agreed to on Friday ,Ssf
as report Was .ssssa g by y yeas 5
rRScEDRScE TO sE GIVEN 70 MATTERS COW EcrED
-, WITH THE IMPBACHMENT.
rr1a My aurES repl Of Mass, moved =, suspend the the
during tire trial of the impeachment Of the President
and until Its conclusion II shall be In order on any
connected with or growing out Of the question Of i'm.
peachment Agreed to-yeas los, nays 81.
The rules having been suspended Mr.. BUTLER Of
fered the following resolution
Resved That except during the morning hour Of Mon
day the rule. be suspended during the pending q the
sny g s he aan
| on the part Of the House Of Representatives.
that that was not the resolution which the House
had suspended the rules to have offered The irst
motion had been restricted to matter connected with
impeachment, but the resolution contained no sucn
restriction.
The SPEAKER sustained the point Of order.
Mr.. BUTLER then offered the second resolution aS
| an amendment to the first.
Mr.. Ross, (dem.l Of H. moved to lay the resolution
The House refused to lay the resolution on the
| tabIe-yeas 81, nays ITO. The amendment was then
agreed to, and the resolution as amended was
Mr.. BINGHAM, (rep.) OF Ohio, from the Committee
on Resolutions reported back the bill for the relief
OF certain persons from disabilities imposed upon
them or either Of them, by the laws Of the United
States.
The bill names az the persons so to be relieved the
following:-Wm. W. Holden, c. J. Rogers, VIM; A.
Smith, Calvin J. Cowes, Thomas Settle, Rufus Bar
ringer, Victor @. Barrnger, Luke Blackmer, OF North
Carolina; James L. AlcOrn, BENJAMIN b. NelgnDOls,
Of Mississippi; Robert W. Fournoy, Joshua Morris,
James X. Berry, Of Arkansas; James Longstreet OF
Louisiana; Robert B. Kingsbury, Of Texas; Thomas
J. Mackey, James L. Orr, OF South Carolina Joseph
| J. Brown, Of Georgia
MT fae o. pa Of Sare
giving as reason therefor that Mr.. Gilmer had op-
posed the Lecompton swindle, and had only become
able to embrace the first opportunity to throw his
| weight against the rebellion.
as 81 Hal moUeS sS Sor
| lima.
Mr.. LAyLM, trep.l Of N. ", moved to insert the
name OF w. B. R0dman, OF North Carolina whose
| loyalty he could personally vOuch for.
MT: WOOD suggested that In that case the man
/ Mr.. FARNswORTH agreed to include W. B. Rodman
Mr. ELDRIpoE ldeml Of Wis, suggested the name
OF Governor Worth Of North Carolina who had been
an,. MT MULLINS - sg q Tenn remarked that Mosoy
near him reminded him that Mosby had already been
pardOned
Mr spAIDrso, trep) of Ohio, moved to lay the bill
and amendments on the table. Negatived-ycas co.
Mr. ASHLEY, Of Ohio, inquired whether this bill re-
eved the persons OF the disabilities imposed under
the constitutional amendment known as the four
teenth artices
Mr.. BINGHAM replied that 1t did not.
Mr.. SPALDING inquired whether majority vote
was sufficient to pass this bl9
Mr.. BINGHAM replied that it was.
Mr. MAYNARD rep.) OF Tenn. opposed the amend
ment In reference to John A. Gilmer OF North Caro-
lima, saying that he had wrought more mischiefto
the cause OF the Union by throwing his weight and
influence the other side than he could have done il
he had been original secessionst; besides he had
done nothing TO aid reconstruction In North Caro-
lima.
Mr.. BINGHAM, in reply to remark of Mr.. Price,
repeated that the bill had relation to the amend
ment OF the constitution known as the fourteenth
article 1t was DrotGnto repeal OF the existing acts
OF Congress imposing disabilities those parties,
and there was no colorado excuse for raising ques
ton OF constitutional power about 1t.
Mr.. BECK, tdem.I OF KY, stated that, rs member
OF the Reconstruction Committee, he had declined
the terms Of the general amnesty proclamation those
persons were already relieved OF political disabilities
He referred as his authority for this opinion TO the
decision OF the Supreme Court In the Garland case.
Mr.. BINGHAM argued that the Supreme Court
could only decide the cases that came before It,
but could make no decision In the premises which
would operate either on the House OF Representatives
or the senate
Mr. WILLIAMS, (rep) OF Pa promising that the
tclc part OF the constitution, inquired whether he
entertained the opinion that the fundamental law OF
the land WAS no law at all and did not come within
the provisions OF this bill
Mr.. BINGHAM answered-Not at all; but no law OF
Congress had been he'd TO apply to the text OF
the constitution.
Mr.. ScnENcK, rep.) OF Ohio, said he had supposed
in fourteenth M article OF as the constution BY two
thirds vote. lie inquired what was to be the effect
OF this bill Would IL restore the persons named u
II TO the privilege OF holding office, civil and mill
Mr.. BINGHAM replied that 1t would not; it would
simply relieve them from the disabilities imposed by
Reconstruction
tration and the right OF voting.
Mr.. sCHEScK declared that while he was in favor
OF removing disabilities nom some, at least, OF the
persons to whom the bill applied, he would never
vote for such a bill unless it came in through the
door provided In the fourteenth article OF the
stituton, which required two-thirds vote.
Members ON the republican side-"Goodi That Is
sound"
Mr. BINGHAM said that his colleague was welcome
TO his vote and to his speech. lie had anticipated
| this very difficulty and had drawn up provision
extending the fourteenth article OF the constitution
to the bi but on the suggestion that that could be
| done at another step he had wthdrawnit. While he
believed that the fourteenth article operative by
the votes Of threefourhs of the organized States,
yet every one knew that 1t was not and could not be
operative until by the law making power Il was SO
Mr.. SCnENcK remarked that he would wait TIL
| that was done before he would vote for any such
| bill.
Mr.. FARSswoRrH thought there was evidently
some MISUNDERSTANDING with reference TO the object
OF the bill. II was his understanding, as member
| Of the Reconstruction Crmmittee, that the purpose
OF this bin to relieve persons from disabilities in
pursuance OF the fourteenth article OF the constu-
| ton, with the understanding that II would require
| two-.hirds vote TO pass the bi That certainly was
his understanding, and, he thought, the understand
| ing OF the committee.
| Mr.. BINGHAM declared there was not q word Of
the sort said In the committee and f opposition OF
ths kind was To be made he would withdraw oil par
! tclpaon In the natter
Mr.. DAWES, trep) Of Mass, inquired whether this
bil would relieve the person named In IL or the ob
cation of taking the test oath II any OF them should
| be elected 10 CongressS
| Mr.. BINGHAM supposed that II would.
! Mr.. DAWES could not see how that could be the
case when the bill did not mention the act OF July .
| 1852, Imposing the test oath.
4 Mr.. BINGHAM had no doubt Il relieved them OF all
| disabilities imposed by act Of Congress.
Mr.. WILSON. trepl OF Iowa. said that "a he under
stood the bill ts effect would be to relieve the per-
sons named In IL OF disabilities imposed by the fifth
and sixth sections OF the act OF March 2 1867, which
disabilities affected them only citizens OF the
several states In which they resided. That was the
| length and breadth OF the bill.