The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1873-12-13
CONGRESSIONAL.
Yesterdays Proceedings.
FRIDAY, December II

H0use.-On motion of Mr.. Harris (Va.),
the House took up and passed Senate bill
relieving Thos. S. Bocock, G. j. Harvey,
and ID. Griggs, of Virginia, and John FL.
Reagan, of Texas, of their disabilities.
Mr.. Duell IN. W presented petitions
signed, he said, by LAYERS, merchants and
others, in twenty-seven states, asking for
the repeal of the bankrupt law. Referred
to committee on Judiciary.
THE REPORT OF GENERAL HOWARD.
The Speaker laid before the House
letter from the Secretary of War in rela-
ton to the management OF the bureau of
freedmen, refugees and abandoned lands,
which charge irregularities on the part of
General O. 0. Howard.
Mr.. Wood IN. " demanded the read
ing of the communication, and then offered
d resolution referring the communication
to the committee on military affairs, with
instructions to report resolution providing
for the trial by court-martial of General
Howagdlor any other officer of the army
who is implicated by said letter.
Mr.. Dawes (Mass.) moved to amend
so as to refer without instruction. He
thought that would be the best course to
pursue.
Mr.. Wood preferred his own notion
He had all confidence in the committee,
but he preferred they should be in
structed. He was proceeding. to discuss
the question, when
Mr.. Hale IN. " objected to debate.
On viva yOce vote the amendment was
agreed to by vote OF 90 to 73--a strict
party vote.
Mr.. Wood demanded the yeas and nays !;
and the resolution to commit without in
structions was agreed to-yeas ia, nays
89-a strict party vote with the exception
that Messrs Kasson, Killinger, Smith of
Va. and Todd, Republicans, voted in the
negative.
Mr.. Dawes then suggested that the word
alleged" be inserted before the word
''defalcation" in the resolution. He did
not think 1t proper to charge an absolute
defalcation.
Mr.. Wood said the Secretary of War,
a member of this administration, had
charged the defalcation. If the ether side
of the House would not stand by the adj
ADMINISTRATION on this question, he Wood
proposed to do so. lie wanted to know
if they proposed to shield this man. If
so, they would do it on their own re-
sponsibility.
Mr.. Dawes said he did not propose to
shield any one, but his side of the House
would not not agree to pass judgment un.
til after conviction.
The word alleged" was then inserted,
and it was then referred.
The House then resumed consideration
Of the salary bill.
DISCUSSION OF BACK PAY REPEAL.
Mr.. Comingo (Mo.) defended the in-
creased pay, and argued that, with mileage
and the franklng privilege abolished, the
pay of members was really less now than
ever before.
Mr.. Phillips (Kan.) advocated repeal, be-
cause it was demanded by the people, and,
in his opinion, they had right to demand
1t. 1t was case in which Congress was
standing at the bar of public opinion.
Mr.. Burchard Qll) said in his opinion
The great question was whether the bill
should be simply repealed or whether Con-
gress should also return the amount Of
increase received since March last. He
thought the people demanded such action,
for be believed they were as much opposed
to the great increase of salary as to the re-
troactive feature. They were not here to
try the last Congress, but were themselves
on trial before the people.
Mr.. Ortiz Qnd.) then advocated his
amendment, which made an absolute re-
peal, but he would like to insert an amend
ment exempting the judges of the supreme
court.
Mr.. Tremaine IN. W inquired whether
there was any provision for covering back
pay into the Treasury.
Mr. Orth said there was not. He did
not propose to make the bill retroactive,
but to have it take effect from and after
its passage for he could not, by his vote,
admit that he had since last March taken
money to which he was not Justly entitled.
He thought his instructions were the
fairest that had been submitted, and that
his proposition would give general satisfac-
ton.
Mr.. Monroe Ohio said he was opposed
to back pay and to forward pay, and
would vote cheerfully for repeal. and he
also wanted early action as the best way of
settling the vexed question.
Mr.. Ortiz demanded the previous ques-
ton on his instruction. which was, direct
ing the committee to repeal the whole sal
AIRY act, except with reference to Judges
OF the supreme court, SO far as it could be
eonstitutionally done, and to ascertain the
average amount Of salary, mileage, and all
other allOwancaa favcIu oua Of ouv ocx:-.