Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1873-03-01
CONCRE ESSlONAL.
Proceedings of the Second Session Of the
Forty. Second Congress.
- WAsHINGTON, Feb. 2S.

80 SENATE.
The Senate, at half past o'clock this
morning, tabled the bill reported by the
committee of Privileges and Elections for
q new election in Louisiana. There were
some wonderful scenes. Carpenter aban-
dOned his report about o'clock, then Car
penter, MqEton and Conkling drew their
chairs close together, almost hugged each
other and the three giggled gleefully,
while Trumbull was delivering a tremen-
dous denunciation of Carpenter for boiling
the majority report.
At this stage the amendment continu-
ing Kellog in power during the election,
passed, Carpenter voting aye. Carpenter
made rather touching defence that it was
better to endure the usurpation for four
weeks than for four years, and it was evil
dent to him that all hope was lost for any
thing better. Upon the final vote to table
the bill, which leaves Louisiana statue quo,
Carpenter voted nay, when the issue be-
came evident the Democrats gave full
vent to their views.
The lovers of pure Democracy should
read the Globe of to-day.
In the Senate to-day the credentials of
Patterson, of South Carolina, and Howe,
of Wisconsin, were presented and laid on
the table.
The Vice-President submitted resolu-
tions exonorating Senator Bogy, of Mis-
souri,, from all charges in connection with
his election, which was ordered printed.
The sundry civil appropriation bill was
discussed.
HOUSE:
The Senate Morrill, amendment that no
part of the appropriations for judgments of
the Court of Claims shall be paid to claim
ants who have not proved their loyalty
without being first submitted to Congress
came up in the legislative BILL The
amendment was sustained by Hale, of
Maine, and opposed by Beck, of Georgia,
Young, of Georgia, Shellabarger, of Ohio,
Perce, of Mississippi, Keer, of Indiana,
and Garfield, of Ohio.
Garfield stated that the committee ON
appropriations was divided on the ques-
ton, but the majority was in favor of non
concurrence. This amendment was an
old foe with a new face. Why did the
Senate ask that this class of judgments of
the Court of Claims should not be paid as
others were paid? The disguise was SO
thin that nobody could be deceived. Man
ifestly it was that Congress might refuse to
appropriate, when judgments in this class
OF cases were referred to it. He liked a
direct better than an indirect action. Ii
this class of claims were not to be paid, let
Congress say it. In all the various phases
whlch the question presented, he preferred
that Hamlet's advice to the players should
be followed: Leave off your damnable
faces and begin.n
If Congress meant to say that certain
awards of the court should not be paid,
why not say SO in words and let the issue
be met? This amendment of the Senate
was mere subterfuge. If Congress pro-
posed now to throttle the courts, to crush the
Judiciary, to make itself the Courisof APP.
peals from the decisions of the Supreme
Court, then in that case the independence
ofthe judiciary was for ever at an end and
the only reason for was that men had once
been rebels and must, therefore, not be
heard, and because they are heard the Jul
dietary must be stricken down.
Banks, of Massachusetts, also opposed
Ihe amendment as an unworthy subter'
iuge and evasion of law. Smith, of New
york, sustained the amendment. After
iurther discussion the Senate amendment
was referred. #.t+