The New York herald., 1868-05-16


Mr.. GARFIELD demand the regular order of
| business.
Mr.. LOAN, (rep) of MOI desire to say that all the
! communications had by the members OF the House
from the State Of Missouri with the Senator from
that State were had at his special instance and re-
quest and that that paper was signed at his instance
and request.
/ dr. ELDRIDGE-SO much the worse-ten times the
| worse.
| The SPEAKER-The question is not debatable
| The gentleman from Pennsylvania has modified his
resolution by striking out that part referring to the
infringement OF the privileges Of the Senate. The
Chair is OF the eopinion still that it i
i at he oe can see g found on
1856 OF the Digest-that of alleged corrupt
! combination. 1t does not appear from the resolu
tion That any corrupt combination Is charged upon
members OF the House as to intercourse between
them and their colleagues In the Senate The Chair
cannot assume that In order to make 1t question OF
Mr. WoopwARD-Then | ask the unanimous con-
| sent OF tine House to offer the resolution.
Mr. UPsON, (rep.) OF Mich, and other members OBJ
| jected.
REGULAR ORDER OF BusINEss-RELIEF OF WILLIAM
M'GARRAHAN.
me House then proceeded, as the regular order Of
business to the consideration OF the bill FOR the
lief of VIM. McGarralIan. After some minutes the
proceedings were interrupted by Mr.. WOoowARD
VINO was understood TO ask what the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Ple) meant by max ing gest uia
tiOns and grnlaces In manner more WORTHY of the
r.ng than OF the House of Representatives.
| . IThe reporter d3 not witness the incident, and
therefore cannot state from his own knowledge what
| the offence consisted OIL
| The SPEAKER ntmated to Mr.. Woodward that his
| remark was not parliamentary. If the gentleman
nad charge to make against q member OF the
House he would have to make it in the usual form.
TIE Chair did not see what the gentleman CON-
| Mr.. PILE (who had walked to another part of the
nall) sald-l Intended no insult griince or any,
thing Of the kind to the gentleman from Pennsyl-
| vania.
Mr. WoODwARD-The gentleman stood here max
ing caDalisuc signs (Laughter) AS he belongs 10 a
party That claims to have all the moral OF de-
w nnf hn nl.und
standing on this floor in presence OF the speaker ami
making these grimaces at meP
Inc SPEAKER-f the gentleman presents q Ques-
| ton OF privilege the Chair will rule on it.
Mr. ONEILL, Qep) OF Pa.-Do such remarks go
INTO tne Glooe as part of the transactions ol this
The SPEAKER-They do. The gentleman from
PENNSYLVANIA rose claiming to have been Improperly
treated by the gentleman from Missouri, and the
gentleman from pennsylvania used language, as the
Chair thought that was out Of order applied TO a
| fellow member If he has cause of Complaint he
snOuld submit the matter for the action OF the
House.
No further notice was taken of the incident, and
tne House resumed the consideration OF the bill for
the relief OF VIM. McGarrahan, reported last Saiur
day from the Judiciary Committee. The bill con-
nrls the Title or McGarrahan TO tract OF nineteen
hundred acres of land in California, embracing the
New idra quicksilver nine The bill was explained
ana G advocated by Mr. wilson, OF Iowa, as Chairman
Of Mr.. Boutwell,.
Mr.. BOUTWELL,, (rep.) of Mass, stated the grounds
on which he had opposed the bill In the comlittee
and on which he thought it should be defeated IN
the House.
Mr.. wAsHBuRNE, (rep) of H., inquired whether
the title OF the property not in the United States
to-day.
MIR. WILSON replied that it was
Mr. WAsHBURNE then wanted to know what JUS
tice there was in giving this property worth two or
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 wYok, rep.) of N. Y, opposed the bill,
forgery, and had been propped up by perjury.
Mr.. JOHNSON, (dem.) Of CAL, expressed his belief
that Mr.. McGarrahans claim was just, and said that
le would vote for the bill, although he should nave
preferred not having the responsibility imposed upon
him. Another reason for his vote he assigned as be-
ing the frauds OF the New ldra Company
Mr.. WILSON rected the facts in the controversy
sustaining the claim OF Mr. McGarrahan, and arguing
against the claim Of the New Idra Mining Company,
stating that II the bill was not passed quicksilver
monopoly in California would control the produce
and price OF quicksilver.
Mr.. HIGBY, Fep.) Of CAL, remarked that he under
stood that the committee had found that the title to
the property was in the government Of the United
MIR. WILSON admitted that II was.
Mr.. HIGBY then asked why, II the property was so
valuable, the government should not Keep the con-
Mr.. WILSON explained that under the Mining act
Of 1855 the several stockholders in the new Idra
5000 feet Of the lode and embracing 600 acres Of
land. This would produce to he government at the
sE 5 ne no an Ieaxs
the matter had been In the Supreme Court the COM
mtee affirmed that the case had not been there ON
States government would observe Its duty under the
treaty without attempting to reverse the Judgment
Mr.. WARD, (rep) OF N. Y, suggested that there
FORE thus was mode Of reviewing the decision Of the
Mr.. WILSON disclaimcd that expressly, and said
that the bill was reported for the purpose OF avoid
Ing the appearance OF any such thing.
Mr.. HIuBY opposed the b arguing at length to
show that the claim was, and had been adjudgeL by
the Supreme Court to be- fraudulent, and declaring
that al these Mexican claims had done incalculable
injury to the people Of California.
Mr.. WARD inquired OF Mr. Wilson whether this was
not controversy between private parties, and II
so, why the parties were not left to their remedy at
Mr. WILSON said that the government was some-
what involved in the controversy. Mr.. McGarrahin
claimed that his rights had not been protected under
the treaty with Mexico, and that the government
had failed to carry out its obligations under that
treaty.
Mr.. MARSHALL, (dem) of ILL.,, another member of
the Judiciary Committee, advocated the claim OF Mr.
McGarrahan as that Of an honest and mertorious
He said that the legal title had been decided against
him on technicaities
Mr. BOUTWELL,, conceiving that remark OF Mr..
Marshall conveyed an insinultiOn against members
VINO opposed the bill, challenged Il, and remarked
inS tnat the matter might he recommittcd and that
two gentlemen outside the committee room had
spoken to him on the subject but that he had de-
views OF the New Idra Company. lie had been gov
erned solely by his convictions OF duty based the
testimony taken by the committee.
Mr. MARSHALL dscaimed most positively the idea
of intending to convey such an impression, or even
having IL on his mind
Mr. WILSON stated in conclusion that he was salts
fed that every member Of the committee and vi the
House had endeavOred to treat the case fairly and
i'm accordance with its merits. The question simply
resolved itself into this: whether the government
would observe its treaty obligations and protect the
rights of property involved under the grant IN this
Inv e.
duced from aiiuence TO poverty In the light t. get
what belonged to him, whether II would permit The
valuable property to pass from the claimant to the
hands OF a monopoly. That the title was a good one
he lid not doubt and the members OF the committee
who had concurred In the report did not doubt.
Mr. HIGBY inquired Of the speaker whether mo-
tlon to recomlnlt the bill was In order
The SPEAKER said 1t was not, as the main question
had been ordered. -
MIR. WAsnBuRSE, OF Ill., moved TO reconsider the
vote ordering the main question, in order that he
might move to recomInit the Dlll, win instructions