The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-01-18
CONGRESSIONAL NOTES.


A Washington correspondent writing on the
10Th inst. says "From his remarkable condi-
tion of reticence, General Grant seems to have
passed to that Of man WHO has his own views,
and we know human na ure we'll enough to be
aware Of the fact that a man having views is
very ant to express them. Within the last
four DAYS I have met three prominent gen.
tlemep who have had talks with General
Grant and each one, without even giving me
the topics of his discourse, say that he spoke
freely and at length. The President elect has
certain work on hand that he cannot accomplish
without consultation, and, being sensible man,
he proposes to take the necessary steps to ac-
complish his work. Keeping this fact in view,
and looking back over his career so as to
get cIew to his advisers, and hearing calmly
| the current of talk and comparing notes, Ihaye
satisfied myself that can name four out OF
seven Of tho Cabinethe will announce, after the
4th of March next. Now, I 10 not pretend to
have gained particle of information from the
great Mogul himself. 1 only give you the gen
eral belief of the shrewder set, sifted through
my own opinion, and at the presen: writing the
Cabinet stands MS follows: Stanton as Secretary
of State Wells, Secretary Of the Treasury !;
Washburne. Secretary Of the Interior; Scho-
field, Secretary of War; Schenck, Secretary OF
the Navy; Greeley Postmaster General; Ed
| wards Perrepont Attorney General"
SENATOR SAWYER AND SOUTHERN LoYALIsTs.
During the debate on the Sue Murphy case
in the United States Senate on Thurday, Sena-
tor Sawyer, of South Carolina, read an argu-
ment in favor of the bill.
He was not quite satisfied Of the loyalty OF
Miss Murphy previous to toe arrival or the
United States army IN Decatur, and as she
was then only sixteen years old, he thought 1t
very doubtful that she had formed any Opinions
on the subject OF loyalty or disloyalty; but On
7 the general question OF the Eght OF loyal
Sout6efners to be compensated for their prop
erty taken and used as hers had been, ne felt
yery strongly, and he had been surprised and
shocked by the ground taken by the opponents
of this bill. He would not undertake to con,
trovert the legal propositions or arguments OF
| the senator from Massachusetts, Mr. SunnerJ,
or the senator from Oregon, Mr.. Williams: J
The LOYAL Iaen OF the South might be proved,
| to the satisfaction of those who desired such
prook to have been public enemies during the
war, but he had entertained different opinion
of their position aud character. The senator
from Michigan Mr.. Howard had spoken
sightingly Of the Southern loyalists, their suf-
ferines and their sacrifices; but if he had hap
pened to live for awhile during tie war in
rebel State, he would undoubtedly have come
/ to a different conclusion.
MIR. Howard said he had not intended to cast
any slur upon the loyal men OF the South
nothing could have been further from his
thought.
Mr. SAWYER was glad of it; but the language
of the senator had given him the impression
that he valued lightly the sacrifices of South
ern loyalists, and, indeed, rather envied them
for the advantages Of their position.
The argument of the senator from Massa-
chusetts MIR. Sumnerl that loyal men at the
South during the war werc public enemies,
might be uuanswerable; put. he appealed to
that senator to say whether the conclusion to
which his legal logic had led him was not re.
voting to his sense Of justice? II the loyal
| people OF the SuaCh we're now, and had been all
along, public enemies, why had the govern
ment made distinction between them and the
disloyal during the war? Tho government
during the war did not determine VINO 10 were tt iss
| friends Lv law. The Union m n OF the Soutn,
who adhered to tho government, did not hesl-
tate about their duty until they could consult
Puffendorf. The Union prisoners at.the South
had not found it necessary to read Vattel In Or
der to ascertain who we're their friends. The
policy advocated by the opponents Of this bill
was most unjust and unwise, and he hoped 1t
would not be adopted by the government.
VIRGINIA.
After many conferences between the Virginia
committee and it's individual members with
the Judiciary Committee of the Senate and
| members OF the Senate and House, it seems to
| be pretty vel. understood that the following
definite arrangement has been substantially
agreed to: Following the precedent ID the
~. 4hn YarSn FL
ings upon the admission of Oregon, Kan
sas and Nebraska, q bill VIII be prepar-
ed authorizing the admission of Virginia
upon the adoption Of the proposed constl-
tuition, with the obnoxious clauses III regard
to disfranchisement, test oath and probably
some other Objectionable features stricken
out. When this bill shall be passed, 1t ls be-
lieyed it will be followed by an amnesty bill,
either universal or with very few EXCEPTIONS, to
take effect on the ratification Of the constitu-
ton. 1t is said that thus adjustment meets the
appreciation OF General Grant, Secretary
Schotield and q large number of the most
prominent members OF both Houses OF Con-
gress.
The action Of the Senate in rccommlttiug
the Sue Murphy claim 20 its committee Is re-
oarded as final decision OF The claim upon
the merits so far as the present congress Is
concerned. Before submitting the bill to
vote there was quiet canvass which disclosed
the fact that senator's were not willing to abso-
lutely reject Miss Murphys claim, which has
unouestionably justice IN it, and yet there was
SO sol much behi.d' it, the aggregate of claims q
that character, running into hundreds OF MIL
lions, possibly, that the majority OF the Re
publican senators were opposed at this juno
ture to establishing the costly precedent In
yolyed in the case under discussion. Therefor
it was deemed best TO make sort OF ron-com
dicpooitiOn Of tho nueStlON. and hence
the vote to recomn'it.
Works TO A CHARM.-"Your machine works
To a charm Il does the work silently but ef