The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1870-06-24

overrideRpractca law and refuse TO receive the
worthy representative OF fitting constituency.
should the amendment or the gentleman from ILL
nois be adopted many OF his objections TO the in
crease OF the number OF representatives TO three
hundred would be obviated.
Mr. LAFLIN, uep.) or N. Y. opposed the amend
ment AZ one involving the most important rights OF
the people, and as having not been considered by
committee but sprung on the House as the PROPOSE.
tion OF one member. He also opposed the increased
representation provided for In the Senate amend
ments.
Mr.. SMITH, tdem.) OF Oregon sustained the amend
ment and mentioned as Q practical illustration Of
the principle The fact that In the late election OF ~
select onethrd OF the number.
Mr. Cox mentioned as further Illustration OF 1t
at large to the recent New York consti,utional Con-
vention each voter allowed 70 vote for only six
teen delegates That was at least an approximation
Mr.. WARD. (rep) of N. Y. suggested that the best
ana easiest thing 10 be done In the matter was to
whole subject 20 to good conference committee.
Mr.. JUDD was opposed to the ENGRAVING OF the
principle on this bill ana advocated the propriety
Der OF members, as proposed In the Senate bill
msn oa ~ UsS CpSseS s amn
grounds, the people OF each State having full control
OF the matter, without intlmating that 1t would not
be wise for the people to adopt that very plan.
the people Of the States to carry out the teenth
consutYgopal amendment daughter on the demo-
cratic side.)
Mr.. BNGHAM-The gentleman might as well say
why not leave 10 the people OF the several States to
carry out every grant In the constitution. Mr.. Blng
MN went on TO argue on the necessity or reapporton
hundred thousand colored people who were allowed
representation, by the abolition Of the three.ffths
claues.
Mr.. MAYNARD trep.l OF Tenn. opposed the amend
ment as proposing system which would more than
once be controlled by political machinery II would
be TO give king caucus power he never had before.
After further discussion by Messrs Allison, Hoar,
and Beck and other members, MIR. JUDD moved the
previous question and rejected all appeals to with
draw II, but the House again refused TO second It,
Mr. SCOFIELD (rep.) OF Pa, then moved 20 refer
the bill and amendments TO the judiciary Commit
tee. The real question, he said seemed TO be lost
sight Of, ana that was whether there should be an
apportonment oftener than once in ten years. The
bill proposed reappOrtiOnnient in eight years.
That was one question which he wished To have con-
sldered by the judiciary Committee. Another ques-
uoh was wnetner Ihe apportonment should NOT oe
agent-the Secretary of the lnterior-as this bill
proposed. Another question TO be considered was
that embodied IN the amendment offered by the gen.
tleman from Illinois fr Marshalll. AS To the argu-
ment OF Mr.. Bingham, that this bill required TO
do justice TO the black voter OF the SOUTH he said
that instead OF giving them poYer for selfproection
and real representation, it would only enlarge the
power OF the men VINO wronged and oppressed
them. He remembered that at the close OF the war,
whenever any great wrong was TO be done In the
House, 1t was done In the aame Of the soldiers. and
now, that that was played out whenever any fraud
was to he perpetrated 1t was TO be done in the
name OF tie blacks.
Mr.. HALE. repD Of Me-, argued in favor OF the
Mr.. LAFLIN inquired OF Mr.. Judd whether the
House did not on June Is, 1870, after full discus
sion and In fun House. defeat bill OF character
wards, In thin House, without notice, without dis
cussion, after the same had been privately en-
crossed, contrary to all precedent, pass such bill
by vote OF sc to "a; and did he call that proper
deliberate, manly legislation
Mr.. JUDD replied that the first vote was on an in
dependent bill, and was taken at u time when the
House knew the same question was contained in the
census bill then pending. Subsequently the sections
TO the census bill, to which the questions applied,
were stricken out which made 1t necessary for him
to Introduce similar bill which was discussed and
passed by the House.. lie argued that reference Of
the BILL at this period OF the session, was tanam0unt
to its defeat.
Mr. VAN wYcK lrep) Of n. Y, spoke in opposition
TO the bill and in favor Of its,reference
Mr. LOGAN. frepl or H., spoke In support OF the
Dill anu attributed the opposition TO IL to cOmbna-
ton between the protectiOnsls and the democrats
the former believing that the additional members To
which the Northwest would be entitled would not
vote for taxing pins and needles, and the latter
knowing that these additional members would be
republicans.
Mr. POLAND, trep.) OF vt, denied that there was
any such combination as that alleged by the gentle
man from Illinois (Mr. Logan who put 80 much
rainbow into he constitution as well as everything
else. Why shOud this bill be passed now-because
It was said there was an inequality In representa-
ti0nf Ii had been so beOre there has always beer
an inequality, particularly towards the end Of eaci
decade. lie believed that the constitution neve
| contemplated that there should ever be an appor
'ttonInent until after the census TAKEN and tina
| it-shculd be made by Congress 80
providing that the representation OF any State soult
not be diminished In the F0rty-second Congress-
The discussion having closed. the vote was taker
on referring the bill and amendments to the Judi
cary Committee, and they were SO rererred-yeas
49, nays o.. This is regarded equivalent TO the
defeat OF the BILL the judiciary Committee standing
No. 10 on the list OF committees to be called and
being unlikely that It viii be reached this session
the vote was sectional, not party one, the mem
beers from the West and South voting against refer
ence, and those from the Middle and Eastern States
for reference. There were some lew exceptions tC
Mr. MAYNARD moved to reconsider the vote.
The motion was agreed t0-yeas 81, nays 81.
TIE GEORGIA BILL.
Mr. BUTLER, tep.) Of Mass. from the Reconstruc-
ton Committee, reported back the Senate amend
ment to the Georgia bill with substitute. He ex
planned that the substitute was the same as the bills
addlon OF giving those four states the right to Or
game the militia He proposed to have 1t debated
for the rest OF the day and In an evening session
and to let the vote be taken tomorrow morning.
Mr.. DAWES, Nep.) OF Mass, referred to the diver
sty OF opinion on the subject OF Georgia 10 the Re
the House and Senate, and asked what at no on.
| there was to raise that state out OF its presen
| position. He hoped tnat Congress might b,
able to devise some measure, even though
| it be concession, which would end the con
trOverBy. He did not want TO have 1t said that Con
gress was In session for eight MONTHS and yet could
not agree upon an act in relation to Georgia Hs
had therefore prepared substitute, recognizing tho
fact that Georgia had ratified the amendments to the
authorized to organize military for her defence
The substitute having been read from the Clerks
desk,
| Mr. BUTLER said he would not antagonize the sub
sttute OF his colleague, but would allow IL to be
offered.
Mr. CESSNA, (rep.) OF Pa, offered substitute de-
caring that the State OF Georgia having complied
with the reconstruction acts, and the fourteenth and
fifteenth amendments to the constitution OF the
United States having been ratified In good faith by
legal Legislature OF SAID State, IL hereby declared
That the State OF Georgia is entitled to representation
| In the Congress Of the United states.
Mr. FARNswORTH, (rep.) Of ILL.,, objected to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Butler yielding Ia
have amendments offered unless he surrendered the
floor, and claimed that when he did surrender the
floor he (Farnsw0rth) entitled to it, for In fact
he represented the majority Of the Reconstruction
IDCommittee.
The SPEAKER remarked that in that case the gen.
teman QFarnsw0rth) ought to have reported the
bill.
Mr.. FARNswoRTH stated that he was authorized
by the majority Of the committee to report amend
ment
Mr.. WOODWARD, (dem.) Of Pa. stated that a ma
j0rity OF the committee had authorized Mr.. Farms.
worth TO present report and that the before
the chair was the case OF the majority trying to get
before the House the report Of that Majority
The SPEAKER stated that he understood the gen.
tlean from Massachusetts, TO be authorized to make
the report which he had made, and asked whether