New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-02-03
BY TELE GRAPH,
CONGRESS.
House..

WASHINGTON, February "A large num-
ber OF bills were introduced and referred
| 4 Joint select committee was ordered to
investigate the affairs of the District of Co
| lumba
A resolution to pay mail contractors in
the South tor services prior to the war, was
offered by Mr.. Young, of Georgia, but
| failed.
| A resolution instructing the Committee
on Appropriations to inquire into the sub
Ject was offered by Mr.. Sener. of Virginia,
| and adopted.
| Articles OF impeachment were presented
by Mr.. White, of Alabama. against Judge
Busteed. and were referred to the Judiciary
| Committee.
The bill for the trial of General Howard
passed
Senate.
| Preliminary business was upimportant
| A resolution was introduced by Mr., Wright.
directing the Finance Committee to inauire
into the expediency Of abolishing the in
| ternal revenue office and imposing the
dates of that bureau on the Treasury De
partment. Agreed to.
| Mr.. Morton concluded his speech upon
Louisiana, and the Senate voted to lay the
matter aside, and discussed the bankruDt
bill until adjournment.
| Mr.. Cooper's bill was introduced for re-
| funding certain internal revenue taxes and
| directs the remission or repayment of all
taxes assessed or collected from citizens in
the lnsurrectiOnary States contrary to the
provisions of the Treasury Department cir.
| cular, issued June 81, 1865
| The Chair laid before the Senate House
| joint resolution for special court of in
quiry in the case of General O. o. Howard,
| and verbal amendment, offered by Mr..
| Logan, was adopted
| Mr.. West, OF Louisiana, objected to the
passage of the resolution. The usag, OF
the army was to appoint three officers on
the court OF inquiry, but this resolution
| proposed to depart from that usage and to
| appoint five officers on the court
| Mr.. Logan said he knew nothing about
| the facts OF the case, but understood that.
| General Howard was anxious to have the,
| court appointed.
Mr.. Sumner inquired if it was not desir;.-
bic to have the action of the Military Com
mittee on this resolution. 1t was certainly
| an innovation in the number of officers
(hvel, and he would like to have the COM
mittee inquire into the matter and explain
the exact condition of the case
Mr.. Conkling said, as these charges
against General Howard had emanated from
the executive branch of the government, it
was right and proper that it should consist
OF five officers. He understood that Gen
eral Howard was willing for the the court,
and that he regarded it to his credit. He
|
having been manned in body, and, until
after this investigation should clear him,
manned in reputation. The judgment of
| court composed of five members would
have more weight than one of three.
Mr. Morton inquired why it was neces-
sary to have the court inquire into the legal
and moral responsibility OF General How
| ard.
MIR. Conkling replied that it was for the
nf haH fGn
| not only as to the cold fOrmalities of the
| case, but also as to the question Of the in
| tegrity and honor of General Howard
MIR. Thurman said that he was somewhat
| surprised that this measure was brought
before Congress. The President had, all
the time, authority to organize court of
inquiry, and he could not see why Congress
was called upon to stir up the President.
Mr.. Conkling. SAID that the statute OF lin
itation had run against the case.
Mr.. Thurman said he did not understand
it so, but if there was the least foundation
in the world for the accusations against
General Howard, he must express his sur
prise that the executive had not long ago
ordered court to investigate them. He
read from the letter of the Secretary of
War containing the charges, and said that
while he (Thurman) gave no opinion as to
the truth of the charges, he was surprised
that the President had nos long since or
dered a court of inquiry.
He next read from the opinion Of the At
tOrney General on the case and said that
the Attorney General had, all at once, be-
come exceedingly anxious as to che liberty
of citizens, and doubted if Major General
could bs tried by military court. There
was time when people, not in the army,
were tried by military courts, and that, too,
in States where the civil law was in full
operation. There was no doubt, though, in
the mind OF the Supreme Court, when the
question came before it. If the law officers
OF the government gave such an opinion az
that, he (Thurman) did not blame the
President nor the Secretary for sending to
Congress for advice.
Mr.. Morrill,, of Maine, said that General
Howard was perfectly willing for the court.
He (Morrill) did not believe that a single
one of these charges would lay at the door
OF that officer.
The resolution was passed.
Mr.. Morton addres sed the Senate on Lou
isiana affairs. He reviewed the arguments
of the Senator from Wisconsin (CarpenterI
and contended that the Kellogg govern
ment was the legal government of thee
State, the President and the other house
OF Congress both having recognized it,
He quoted from the Rhode Island case, of
Potter against Robbins, and said it directly
sustained his views in this case. Senator
Carpenter would admit that he was more
familiar with the laws of Wisconsin than he
was with those of Louisiana, and certainly
the decisions of the legal tribunals in Lou
isiana were entitled to more might than the
argument of any politician or Senator. No
question before the Senate now depended
on the former decisions of Judge Durell
Mr.. Morton then spoke at length as to the
legal power of the President to employ tho
land and naval forces of the United States,
Of
Wisconsin on that question were too mar
row He thought the argument of the gen
tleman lCarpenter) that the President had
never recognized the Kellogg Legislature,
seemed to be trif1ing with the whole matter.
The President did recognize that Legisla-
ture, even if he had not recognized
Kellogg as Governor, and that amounted
of the Kellogg government by the
President was in pursuance Of law, and in
every sense was an act of the United States
consistent with the public good. The pro-
position to set aside the State government
of Louisiana, and order a new election, was
one OF the gravest character 1t could not
be done without setting aside a portion of
gress should order new election
now the constitution Of Louisiana
would require another one for
members of the Legislature next November.
Mr.. Conkling thought that nothing could be
more fallacious in testing the powers of the
President than the arguments of the Sena-
tor from Wisconsin (Carpenter) that he
must receive information from the Legisla-
ture of the State, and demand for inter
ference before he could interfere. He
lConkling) would venture to say that if
turbulence existed in any State of the
Union, and the President knew of it, he
could interfere, even if he received no out
cry from the Governor. No matter about