Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1873-12-20

in the matter, because they were waiting for
NJ Gov nropoSed TO amend the bill so as TO
make colOred persons hableto tie penalties OF
the bill.
not necessary, as the law applied 10 every
natural person, and negro WAS a very hAluT-
Nr- Reck opposed the bill. He declared that
moi a man on mis- side of the house wanted to
see the negro oppressed or deprlNed OF any
/ right but they objected TO this bill because
congress was usurping authority over matters
/ thar belonged exclusively 10 the states. They
were approaching consolidation last enough
/ They we're drifting into centrsiisn 50 steadily
mat before long the states would bear the
same relation 10 the general government aS
the counties now had 10 the States. he OBJ
jected to this bill because such coereiye !egis-
lation as WouId force cOiored children into the
same schools with white children would not
operate TO the benefit of the cOlored people,
but to their positive lnJury. II Inlent No no.
affect gentlemen who could send their chill
dren 10 private schools, but ~ would uIiNe
away industrious poor people who objected 70
! their children sssOciating with colored emil
dren and would injure the states and break
! up the public-schOOl system there.
I Mr.. Rainy advocated the bill Ihey were
! not seeking social equality. lie ana the men
! of his race preferred to choose their own asso-
clates. They wanted this law enacted so tnat
/ they should be recognized as other men ny
could not negro members OF congress enjoy
/ the same rights and immunities IN hotels as
Z a white member Of cODgrosss Why should
/ they not have the right 10 go into restaurants
| without being insulfed. The members on the
other de Of the house from The southern
states had an antipathy against the eolored
! race because il had shown It's manhood ana
va or in defense Of the nas-
! Mr. Luttrell offered a resolution instructlnE
/ the Judiciary committee 70 report on the bili
! directing suits 10 be brought against the seVe-
raj Pacific railroad companies for interest
/ paid for them by the governments. Referred
Mr.. Colton offered resolution instrucung
! the committee on railroads and canals 70 IN
uuire whether the rates OF the Chicago, ROCK
| Island and Pacific railroad company tof
/ the transportation Of ears, freight anu pas
| sengers across the bridges and tracks cnhhect-
| ing Davenport and Rock Island are reason
| able, aud II not, to secure reduced rates
| Adopted. ~,
| " affairs, reported a resolution requesting the
] President TO convene a court OF inquiry 70
/ consist Of not less than dve officers OF the
! army, whose duty il shall be TO investigate all
/ the CHARGES against Brigadier-Genersl .. o.
! Howard contained in the communication OF
] the secretary Of war OF December 9th.
! dr. Butler Mass suggested that half OF the
/ court should consist Of officers who had served
/ with the cOlored troops; Tor he knew tnat
! there was great pref judice among the army Of
/ fcers against General Howard, because he had
/ been at the head Of the freedmen 5 bureau
| which they thought was not eonsenla4 with
1 the dignity OF an army officer.
| Mr. Coburn said that il was within the dis
| crstjou Of the President 10 select men with
out prejudice, and he could see nc danger OF
/ iutrIsting il to the President. He sent TO the
/ clerk desk and had read letter rom zen
| erRl Howard, cOuring an inquiry and
waving all Lecnn LCsil ODltGllGLln- AAtCA AAH-
| cussiOn the whole matter was recommltted.
| Mr.. Cessna presented petition signed by
/ two hundred and one cltiZenS OF somerset
county, Pennsy lvan1a, relative 10 the claim Ol
] George Chorpenning against the government,
| urging its reOpenlng and re-exaInlnatlon. ne
| proceeded 20 state the history OF the case, ana
! 10 defend his own connection with IL, and the
| action of Postmaster-GeneralC Creswell on ii.
Mr.. Dawes commented on the unusual
course pursued by Mr.. Cessna, and suggested
that nobody who had confidence IA MS case
/ was apt TO argue it beforehand. The unfa-
| yorable action Of congress on the ChoFpen-
/ ming claim had been taken on the unanimous
! repSrt of a committee Of the house, before
/ which every person having an interest," ID the
] case had an opportunity 10 appear. Inc ac-
ton OF the house was unanliIlous, anu - - "a a.
the action Of the senate. NeNertheiess, ne
/ would not characterize the case nor pre- udge
il il II was TO be re-exsmined.
Mr.. Cessna defended his course and said thal
/ he had adopted it. lest If he had nled a pc
/ ution in the usual way, he would nave oeen
charged with having done Il in a SLEEK, quiet,
sly way; his constituent Chorpennlng nau
] never been present before the committee
4 which inquired into his case, either IN person
or by attorney, although he had asked me
gentleman fr N Massachusetts Dawes ~
give his client hearing.
| Mr. Dawes replied that he had told Mr
Cessna that the committee would oe glsd u
hear him and his constituents whenever and
! a. long a they pleased, and while no altOrne
tor ChOrpeuning appeared in the committee
room while the examination was gong on
the attorney had contented himself Win pei
! Sonal interviews with the members OF the
committee to explain, to argue ana 70 per
I Suade them.
/ Mr.. Beck-The gentleman LCessusl sat here
| when the report was made and never opened
his mouth, and IL i'll becomes nm now 70
! come here and renew the subj ject.
] Nj. Dawes-I more the paper VIII De reisT-
red to the same committee aud let us have an
other report.
/ The speaker TO Mr.. CesSna-Io what com
mittee does the gentleman desire to have Jne
| papers referred
Sir. Cessna-I have not yet presented the
papers I will withhold them for the pres
ent.
! Mr.. Dawes, ssrcastically-This is personal
explanation. Laughter -
The house then adjourned 10 January a-i''i