Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-06-22
EVENING STAR.
EoRTY-FOURTH CONGRESS-.
Cgossas Rroceedt,.Us YesferSas.


sENArE-After our report closed
Inc i IND appropriation bin was dis
cusSed till O'Clock, when the Senate took A
recess until p m.
On reassem6ling, Mr.. Hamilton sent IN. n
tssn 49, ~, ps me secretary, protest OF civil
The Indian bureau 10 the War department.
Ihe uestion being on agreeing 20 the
striking out the third section rrovtsins ~,
the transfer OF the bureau, Mr. Stevenson
offered as a substitute for the section the
House bill for the transfer. 10 the considers
ton of which, as an Independent bill. Mr.
Edmunds had objected.
Mr.. Stevenson said he would amend The
Mr.. windom moved to lay the amendment
on the table; which was agreed to-yeas Is,
nays %.
The amendment striking ont the section
was agreed to-yeas %, nays -.
Mr.. Window then offered a series OF amend
ments intended 20 restore, in an itemized
dental expenses OF the Indian service, which
had been rejected In bulk earlier in the day.
The amendment which appropriated SO. Oo0
for Incidental expenses, salaries OF azen; g,
sc, In Arizona. was greet to.
TIE next amendment, for the support OF
Indians ON the Colorado River agency and
ray or employees In the territory, was reject
td-yess II, nays not counted, Mr.. Window
Withdrawing IL.
Mr.. Window offered further amendment
appropriating Si,O0o for Incidental expenses
OF the central superintendency. Adopted.
Mr.. WINDOWS amendment appropriatiug
S55.0oO having failed, the former amendment
was by unanimous consent stricken out.
leaving the amount as IL came from the
House, viz: $4,000.
Mr. Sargent called up the naval app-oprIa-
ton bill. and then, at $40 p. m, the Senate
adjourned.
HOUSE.-After our report closed
The discussion OF the civil appropriation
bill was resumed, and after a short session
recess was taken until s p. m. In the
evening session a Length a "a . faNp raH
the item for
PUBLIC PRINTING AND BINDING.
Mr.. Mutchler (Pa) moved 20 strike ont so
much OF the paragraph as reduced the wages
In the government printing office 10 the
amounts paid in offices in New York, Phila.
delphis and Baltimore. He argued that that
would be too much OF a reduction, aud won Id
work an act o. injustice as compared with
the salaries paid clerks. The bill would re-
duce their wages from II 10 80 per day.
Mr.. Dunnell advocated the amendment
ana while he was speaking in favor or it this
galleries, which seemed to be nllei with
printing employees, applauded him.
Mr.. Ranall.-That settles this question.
Mr.. Vance (Ohio) said IL was setting a
bad example 10 the whole country 10 pay
more for work here than I'm other places.
These government printers received more
money than the printers of Washington city
received in private offices. They should not
be favored above other workmen.
Mr.. Randall said he hoped the House would
| not decide this question because OF any APP
| plause In the galleries, but upon its merits.
| He regretted this applause, and thought he
saw an effort TO control the action OF the
| House by applause. There was no reason
why the Government should pay more for
| printing than private establishments paid.
There is no good reason why the Government
| should pay a larger amount
| Mr.. Phillips, OF Kan, as ked Tit was not a
fact that the printers in the cities elsewhere
had work nearly all the year.
| Mr. Randall asked when printers were ont
| OF work here whether they could not go TO
! New York or Philadelphia and get employ
ment. The law OF supply and demand would
| regulate this whole matter. he had advised
many Philadelphia printers 10 come here,
| but when work was exhausted here they
went back home 70 get work.
Mr.. HOskins, OF n. Y, concurred in the
amendment offered by Mr.. Mutchler. and ar
| gued that the action proposed by the Com
tnittee on Appropriations was not pursuing
c cne pSh n OF only reducing those who re;
the committee, and these men would receive
but about $50 year. These printers are
nxtures here and have wives ADD families
10 support, and could not live on $50 year.
| 1t was unfair 10 attempt even TO reduce their
pay, and II was unjust to do IL.
| Mr.. Kelley Pa highly eulogiZed the Gov
| eminent printing Office for the work turned
| out there. They are all necessarily skilled
| wOrkmen, aud should be properly paid.
This was blow at the eight hour law, aud IL
| gentlemen wanted TO repeal that law he APP
| pealed 10 members to do 10 directly, and not
| by lefi-handed action. VINO would make
| the motion to repeal the law? He Mr.. Kel-
1
| surd 10 attempt TO regulate this matter by
| the ray OF worknen in large cities, where
| on account OF the depression of the times,
| woTknen were receiving but a pittance.
| Mr. Hereford accused Mr.. Kelley of incon-
| sistency In advocating this amendment,
| when he declared the other day that people
were everywhere suffering.
| Mr. Banks Mass contended that the pro-
position OF the committee was applying a
| rule to one class OF employees that was not
| applied to another. The government does
| not go TO other cities 10 get the qualification
OF clerks, and why should IL for the qualiti-
| Uon OF printers? He did not know why the
| committee should hound down the printers.
| For eight years the eight hour rule had pre-
| vailed and with beneficial results, and now
ii was proposed TO strike IL down.
After further debate Mr.. Mutchler'samend-
| ment was adopted.
Mr.. Vance offered an amendment provid-
| ing for giving the government printing out
by contract, and pending its consideration
| no quorum appeared, whereupon tue COM
| recess until IL O'Clock tomorrow.