Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-04-27
CONGRESSIONAL.
House Passes the Howard Resolution.
Notable Speech Of n. 2. Banks.
SENATE.

SENATE.
WASHINGTON, April 26.-At the expira-
ton of the morning hour the deficiency
bill was resumed. The pending question
was on concurTing in the amendment made
in the Committee of the Whole to equalize
the pay of men employed in the Govern
ment workshops under
The Eight Hour Law.
Mr.. Wilson advocated the amendment.
He denied that the eight hour law expert
ment had proved failure, and insisted that
it should have fair trial.
Mr.. Casserly favored the amendment.
He denied that the eight hour experiment
had failed, and said that the reduction of
hours of labor had been going on for the
the last $50 years, and that it had been at
tended not by diminished but by in
creased production.
Mr.. MOrill, of Vermont. said the attempt
of the Government to regulate the hours of
labor was an insult to the workingmen of
the country; that instead of being a sign Of
progress it was going back to the fifteenth
century.
Mr.. Sumner said that the question of the
wisdom of the eight hour law was not in
volved liz the pending proposition, which
was necessary as an act of Justice to work
men against whom a discrimination had
been made.
After further discussion, the committees
amendment was rejected, and the section
was passed substantially as it came from
the House, providing that the proper ac-
counting officers be, and they are hereby
authorized and required in the settlement
Of all accounts for services of laborers,
workmen and mechanics employed on be-
half of the Government of the United
States from the 25th of June, 1868, to the
10Th of May, 1869, to settle and pay the
same without reduction on account of the
reduction Of the hours of labor by the eight
hour law, when it shall be made to appear
that that was the sole cause of the reduction
of wages.
The Court Of Claims.
The question was also taken on concur
ring in the amendment offered by Mr.. Nor
riil, Of Vermont, restricting jurisdiction of
the Court of Claims in suits for the value
of captured and abandoned property, TO
cases which were commenced within two
years after the suppression Of the rebellion,
and in which it appears as a proven fact
that claimants have never given aid or COM
lOlG " JilC 1CDCllOIs dLll II W - ulSdGT6Ou
to by yeas %, nays 26.
she Kentucky Claims.
Mr.. Stevenson moved an amendment ap-
propriating $525, ,25S to Kentucky for ex-
penses in equipping troops during the re-
bellion, and made argument for its adop-
ton.
Mr.. Sawyer offered a substitute providing
for the payment Of Kentucky for arming,
equipping and maintaining troops for the
service Of the United States during the re-
bellion, but providing that no account
should be zen Of troops employed after
the first of May, 1865.
Mr.. Stevenson objected to this as unjust,
and read a statement by Gen. JnO. NJ.
Palmer, showing that the State troops were
employed and were necessary to keep the
peace in Kentucky in the latter part of 1865
and in 1866.
Mr.. Morton said he believed Kentucky
ought to be compensated for her outlay so
far as she could make her claims good, and
as he feared the adoption of the substitute
might work injustice, he moved to lay the
substitute and the original amendment on
the table. Agreed to.
Mr.. FTelinghuysen moved to reconsider
the vote by which MoTill'S amendment, re-
stricting the jurisdiction of the Court of
Claims, was rejected.
The Senate went into Executive session
and soon after adjourned.