Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-12-30
Letter from Washington.
IrRoM OUR REGULAR CORRESPONDENCE
WASHINGTON, D. G., D5c, 90, 1872.


IN HASTE.
The members and senators were not long in
shaking the dust of the city from their feet, and
leaving il after the adjournment, many in fact,
notwithstanding seventeen days were allotted
them for merry making, lett the day before, and
the capital Is duller than before congress opened.
They left very
cREDITABLE RECORD
behind them, however, the time of the session
having been devoted 10 work. Three hundred
new bills were introduced in the house and one
hundred in The senate; of course but a small
number of these will become laws, but each
member will expect and work to pass his favor
lie bill.
Among the important bills which passed both
houses are that reducing the internal revenue
force, which takes effect on the first of July,
the army of assessors and assistant assessors
will then be disbauded, the appropriation oil
S500,0C0 for the purchase of the Boston post
office square, and authorizing the exchange OF
registered for coupon bonds, recommended by
Mr.. Boutwell,, in his report. a very convenient
change, which the business interests of the
country will appreciate.
APPROPRIATIONS
The house passed the Indian and deficiency
Appropriation bill. The new sloops-of-war bill,
upon which al animated debate arose over an
amendment offered by Mr.. Hale of Maine, and
providing that one half of them should be built
in private yards, which was carried by large
majority. The Boston relief bill, over which an
animated debate, lasting two days, was had
and fears are entertained of its 6naI defeat. The
soldiers's land bounty bill, which will not pass
the senate, or il would not have passed the
house. 1t is piece of dissracelul buncombe
A large proportion of these bills have been re-
lerred to committees. The debate in the senate
on the
FRENCH sPoLIATIoN CLAIMS
has been of special interest, as a determined
effort on the part of the friends of this measure
is being made to get action upon it during the
present session Of congress, and this discussion
looms up as the most interesting one likely 10
occupy the attention Of congress during the
session.
The liability of the government to pay these
claims has been subject of controversy for
more than fifty years. Webster, Calhoun, Ben
ton and Wright measured their strength in
controversy over them in '3j, and from that
time to the present they have been a fruitful
theme for denunciation OF the claims on the one
hand and OF the conduct of the government on
the other. The point in controversy upon
which the
GOOD FAITH OF THE GOVERNMENT
seems to hang. is whether in the treaty of 1900,
we did relinquish the claims held by our citizens
against France growing out of depredations
committed by her upon our commerce, for GER
tain considerations of value to the government.
1t is claimed by the supporters of the bill that
this was done and hence the presentation of
these claims to the government. The claimants
are debarred iiom relief from the French gov
eminent upon the ground of the REIMBURSEMENT
of the claims made in the treaty of 1850. It is
claimed that the injuries inflicted npon citizens
by the French government were the sole cause
of complaint AMI disagreements between the
governments, out of which the treaty of 1900
grew. We had pushed the disagreement TO the
very verge of war.
THE COMPLAINT MADE By FRANCE
against us was the failure TO comply with a
former treaty made between The governments,
the terms of which had become onerous TO the
United States. The complaint made by our
government against France was the spoliations
committed bv France upon our commerce when
friendly relations were supposed to exist be-
tween the governments. The results Of that
treaty were the mutual remuneration of the
respective pretentions which were the cause of
i;
the obligation to pay for the Expectations which
she did MOI claim she was not liable for, and re-
levine the United States from the onerous obi.
cations of the treaty OF IT'S.
1t is claimed by
THE OPPONENTS OF THE BILL
That the government is in no way TO be held
liable for these claims, either in law or equity;
that no lack of effort could be shown on the
part Of the Ulited States in collecting the
claims; that for them we had pushed our de-
mands to the very verge of war, and that in
failing to obtain settlement for them the claim
ants must accept the failure as an inevitable
result. There is no pretence made by the oppo-
nents Of the bill that the claims were NOT just
claims against the French government up to the
iNhhN"i9H"S"fN thNih " ihN iN"iJ VI AoVVg
except that Senator Sherman takes the position
that ibe depredatons were committed during a
state Of actual open hostllities, and must there
fore follow the fortunes Of war, neither govern
ment being held responsible for them.
The friends of the bill contend that state of
war cannot be shown, only a state OF restless,
endangered disturbance, aeitated peace, and the
extent Of our hostile action was TO issue proc
lamation Of non-inercourse and prepare for
war, all for the settlement of claims against
France growing Out Of spoliatons committed
during that time Of suspended relations, when
our commerce was a daily prey 10 the rapaeity
Of her cruisers.
The question of the
RIGHT OF INSURANCE COMPANIES
to relief under the bill, il discussed at length in
relation 10 tits subject and is point of especial
interest, as the same matter will arise In the
consideration of the distribution OF the Alabama
award, bills Tor the carrying ont of which are
pending now ~ both houses of congress.
IL Is desirable 10 obtain action uoon tbis
Geueya award commission as speedily as posi-
bic, as the transfer Of fifteen millions in gold
the premium and interest Of which win amount
to twenty millions, to this side Of the Atlantic