The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-07-02
e. d n q R IL q = .
Senate.


Continued from, Secoad Edition.
Mr.. johnson argued that our country was mainly
indebted for its present size, wealth. and population
to the foreign clement; that our greatness had re-
ceived its great impulse from that force. But for
the foreign element we would have been where we
were in 1925 or 1880. We would have had no
Pacific Railroad nor other great enterprises
Continued from, the Second Edition.
Mr.. Myers withdrew the motion for the present.
with the understanding that he would renew il on
another occasion hereafter.
Mr.. Jenckes, from the conference committee on
the bill to revise, consolidate, and amend the Patent
and Copyright laws, made report which was
The Speaker informed the House that the Indian
Appropriation bill had been returned from the
Senate, with request for further conference, the
conferees of the two houses having failed TO agree
Mr.. Sawyer, one of the House cOnferees, stated
the grounds OF difference between the two houses.
The Senate, he SAID, insisted upon specific appro-
priatons under the treaties made since July, 1861,
and that these treaties be recognized the supreme
law OF the land 1t claimed the exclusive right of
determining the pIopriety OF making treaty, the
terms OF such treaty, and with whom 1t might pro-
pery be made, and that its action was not open to
the criticism or control Of the legislative power.
The Senate conferees however, had offered to put
a clause in the bill authorizing the President 10 use
the money for any other purpose than those named
in treaties in his discretion but with the consent of
the IGdians. The House conferees had refused to
insert in the Dill any thing which could be taken as
ratification OF consent to any Indian treaty made
since July co. 1867, contending that the rowing rres
ponsible bands of Indians are not independent
nations with whom treaties can possibly be made.
" hat the practlCe OF SO regarding treating Jnem
had been fruitful OF frauds on the Government and
Injurious to the Indians.
That the new treaties for which the House had
steady refused appropriations involved an eXpendi-
ture OF $40 900 at least and that to concede the
demand OF the Senate conferences would be to, ad-
nit that that sum, and any amount whatever, could
be taken from the Treasury without the consent OF
the peoples representatives, either to the amount
or TO the use TO which it should applied that the
objects for which the money was 10 be used under
the treaties were in great measure fantastic and
useless; that the recent Indian delegation
had npal a a fran g1r-
prise on the Indians, and that the Government had
paid respect to them so far as they conferred or
confirmed hunting privileges on the Indians as a
last hope OF agreement and with the desire OF pre-
venting an Indian war; and securing the comfort
and civilization OF the Indians The House confer
! ence had proposed to appropriate the fun amount
| which the Senate had inserted in a
great hurry and TO leave 10 tne Executive
| This offer OF compromise was made because the
! conference considered the question one not OF
money but OF principle. The Senate conference, how
ever refused to agree to this proposition Mr.. Beck
insisted on the right OF the house to say whether t
would appropriate money TO carry out treaties, and
| declared that he never would consent to any such
| proposition as that the senate had
| any one of whom might be hung for stealing cow,
| ana pay them hundred millions for the Territory
| OF Colorado.
ment the House was not bound TO carry out the ln-
dian treaties made in pursuance OF the act OF Jnly'
First Because by the express terms OF ChaC act Con-
gress reserved itself the right 20 determine what
lands shOnld be set apart for reservations 10 Une
| Indians, ana therefore no treaty coulo De ludue
binding Congress TO appropriate money until these
reservations had been expressly approved by Con-
gress.
! Second That money cannot be appropriated from
the Treasury except in pursuance OF law, that is,
| law eI acted 10y both houses, and approved by the
| Pre- esfdent and that a treaty is no such law.
Third. That the Indian tribes are not independent
nations in the Of international law, capable
OF making treaties that can bind them or the United
| - ates.
! Mr Washburn WIS., asked Mr.. Lawrence whe-
ther the House had any right to refuse making ap-
! propTiatiOns To carry out these treaties.