Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1870-07-01
HOUSE.
Cur Indian Policy

L OeNA WHY'S
Tho House resumed the consideration of
| the Senate amendment and the appropria-
| ton bill report of the Committee on Ap-
| preparations.
Mr., Ferry asked separate vote on the
amendment, in which the committee re-
commended non concurrence in the
appropriation of $50, 753 for the payment
to Indians in Michigan for the difference
between coin and currency paid TO them
in 1868 and 1864 under treaty stipulations,
with five per cent. interest added thereto.
He argued in favor of the amendment.
Mr.. Sergeant opposed it as establishing a
most dangerous and costly precedent, which
would apply to all soldiers and pensioners
and other creditors of the Government.
On count by tellers there we're but 81 yeas.
No further count.
Mr.. - asked for separate vote on
the amendments, on which the Committee
OF Appropriations recommended non-con-
currence making large appropriations IN
der the Indian treaties of 1867 and 1868,
which treaties the Fo-tieth Congress had
refused to ratify. BE said there were if
teen or twenty OF these amendments aggre.
eating million and five hundred thousand
dallars, and he wished to have a vote of
the House on them, as instructions to the
Committee of Conference, to which the
bill be referred. If made, If would run
thirty years, and cost the Government be-
tween fifty TO sixty millions.
MIR. Paine hoped the recommendation of
the COMMITTEES of Appropriations would be
adhered to, and expressed disapproval of
the entire system of Indian treaties
The ernenduIents were all nonScon-
CURED in.
Mr.. Axtell asked for q separate vote on
the amendment increasing the appropria-
ton for incidental expenses in service
in Colorado from $750.00O to $1,000
000. He opposed the amendment as in
tended for the removal of peaceful, indus
trious, civilized mission Indians, who are
citizens and voters to a reservation in
San Diego county. He represented the
movement as a speculative one to secure
the farms of those mission Indians.
Mr.. Sergeant endorsed the remarks of
his colleague.
The Senate amendment was not concur
red in.
Mr.. Degenier asked separate vote on
the amendment, in which the Committee
on Appropriations recommended concur
renee, forbidding deductions from Indian
annuities on account of depredations. He
argued against the amendment, taking
ground that the principle thus abrogated
was correct, and the only common sense
way of dealing with Indian depredations.
Mr.. Wilkinson argued In the same di-
rection.
MIR. Sargent argued in support of the
amendment, contending the existence of
such a system stimulated the getting up OF
claims for Indian depredations, and illus
trating by citing the case ola Texas graZeI,
who not finding good market for cattle,
drove them through the Indian country,
tempting the Indians to drive them off, and
then came to Washington and made claim
before the Indian Department.
Mr. Paine argued the support of the
Senate amendment so as to avoid an allow
ance Of unjust and fraudulent claims. The
amendment was concurred in, and the
Committee of Conference ordered on disa-
greeting votes.
Evansville and Southern Illinois.
Mr. Conger reported bill granting tho
Evansville and Southern Illinois Railroad
Company the right to build bridge across
the Big Wabash river.
Contested Election.
Mr.. Butler, from the Committee of Eloc-
tions, reported in the Kentucky election
case thatRice, the sitting member, was dis
qualified by the fourteenth amendment,
and that the Governor be notified of the
vacancy, and that Leigler, the contestant,
be allowed the expenses of the contest.
Mr.. Burr presented the views of the mi
nority, declaring Rice justly entitled to the
seat.
Resolutions viii be called up on Friday
of next week.
The Consolidation Scheme.
The House, at 2:15, proceeded to the
consideration of the bill for refunding and
consolidating the national debt.
On motion of Mr.. Scheuck, q verbal
amendment was m&de, striking out at the
end of section 4 the words, lat any time
before the end of the notice provided for
in the second section" He expressed the
opinion that the Government should offer
| O four per cent. loan at par.
Mr. Blair moved to amend the LIST section
by inserting the words ''The amount of in
/ terest in each coupon shall BIZ expressed in
dollars, and the equivalent thereof in Eng
| lish sterling and the currency in France. !"
Mr. Davis, of New York, moved to amend
the amendment by adding the proviso that
the Secretary of the Treasury shall have
| power in his discretion TO make the inter-
est on coupons on part OF the bonds not
exceeding five. hundred million, payable in
any foreign country he may deem advisa-
BILE. Murmurs of disapproval
MIR. Blair advocated his proposition,
showing the advantage resulting from it,
from inducing foreign Investment.
Mr. Wood opposed the bill, because he
sawkn it danger, disturbing injuriously the
| business interests and stability of trade,
| without effecting the negotiation as pro-
| posed by the rate, and for other reasons.
Mr.. Butler, of Mass, opposed Mr..
Blair's amendment. He did not desire
bonds to be sold abroad, or to offer induce
ments for such thing.
Mr.. Brooks, of N. Y, advocated the bill
/ in the belief that the loan would be effect
ed at a reduced rate.
Mr.. Kelley opposed Dir. Blair's amend
ment as unbecoming in great nation
Mr.. Judd argued that the amendment
was unnecessary, as bondholders purchas-
ed through brokers thoroughly familiar
| with the value of an American dollar.
Mr.. Sehenck took the same ground, and
remarked that the general rate OF interest
paid by the people would fall when the
| government reduced its rate. --s -a
! Mr. Coburn also advocated Mr. Blair .
q