The Portland daily press., 1877-11-09

time OF the Presidential Inauguration there
were in the Southern states four regiments of
300 men each, two of which had since been
withdrawn.
Mr.. Schlecher inquired whether the commit
tee had taken the trouble to examine whether
the strength of the army suficed fer the pr1-
lection of the border.
MI. Atkins replied that in his oninion Tho ~
my was sufficiently large fer that purpose.
Mr.. Foster, member of the APPROXIMATION
Committee, remarked in reply to MIR. SchIeich-
er that the committee had taken pains to in
form itself, and that all officers said the present
force was not sufficient.
Mr.. Atkins said he would now yield ten min
utes to the gentleman from New York Mr..
WOODY.
Mr.. Wood said that the remarks he proposed
to submit had reference to the general condition
of expenditures and receipts of the government.
but as his statement would occupy longer than
ten minutes, he would take some other oppor-
tunity to express his views.
Mr. Foster said 1t was the opinion of the
General OF the army that on the 1st of Noyem-
Der not more than 10000 men were in the army
Today, however, a statement has been read
from the paymaster general, asking an increase
IN tne pay appropriation because mistake was
made as to the number of men, his information
being that the present force is about % 00O The
difficulty into which the law of appropriation
had fallen arose from the fact that it is felt in
Its bounden duty to reduce the appropriation for
the army and the army itself. The members of
the minority had no desire to embarrass the ac-
ton OF the majority. He believed, however,
that force of $4,000 men was as small as the
needs OF the country warranted. They were
! not disposed to make factous opposition to the
action of the majority, they would perhaps test
the sense of the House in one or two questions.
but not further. His own impression was that
Congress ought to make an appropriation for
$4,000 men: The provision for a less number
was an invitation to Indian hostilities and Mex
lean raids. He predicted that deficiency hill
| for at least $2 100000 would have to be passed
| for this years support of the army.
To an inquiry by Mr.. Blackburn Mr. Atkins,
| chairman, replied that the whole cavalry force
| would be 10000 men, but the language of the
bill was that cavalry companies might be re-
| cruted to 100 each, not that they should be.
Mr.. Conger suggested whether there ought
| not to be provision in the bill to allow mod
crate rate OF interest on pay already due the
| army. He instanced case in which widow
| of dead soldier had to sell her claim for pay
| at per cent. of the whole amount in order to
| get money to bury her husband.
Mr.. Money of Mississippi asked Mr.. Conger
/ to give the name and particulars of that case.
Mr.. CoDger-The gentleman need not rush
| with such alacrity after the case 1t is enough
| for me to say that l have had information with
| in the last "a hours.
| After some further discussion with Mr.. Money
| Mr.. Couger continued.
Mr.. Phillips of Kansas, said this morning the
| Adjutant General told him that from the best
| data the army stood at about $4,000. Nomi-
nally the army was $4,000 strong. He wished
| to ask the chairman of the Appropriation Com
mittee if he desired to keep it down to the
| standard to which it had been reduced by Jo-
| seph and Sitting Bull When Gen. Gibbon at.
| tackled Joseph he had six companies of men,
! with but 120 men in all, and the Committee on
| Appropriations made its appropriation on that
| basis.
Mr. Durham said the gentleman on the other
| side OF the house had endeavored to place the
responsibility of the failure of the army bill
last year upon the Democratic party. they
| were entirely wrong. The House had passed
the bill but the Senate refused to do so, and it
was then the duty of the President to call an
| extra session. The responsibility, therefore, if
there was any, rested upon the Republican par
i ty and the President.
Mr.. Foster asked if the gentleman from Ken
lucky had not understood the General of the ar
| my to say that the committee had better dis
band tho army than reduce it to 10000 men.
1 Mr. Durham answered that if the committee
| had pandered to the preludces of those who
liked the martial tramp of untold thousands, it
would increase the army to $4,000. The Gen
l eral had expressed desire to have 40, 900. He
did not think it was necessary to put the re-
striction clause of last years bill into the pres
| ent bill since the President had stepped upon
| the good old Democratic ground of non inter-
| vention with the local government of the
| states. In conclusion he gave notice that in
the next army appropriation bill be would not
vote to make an appropriation for more than
$1,000 men.
Mr.. Singleton defended the action Of the
committee on appropriations and said he had
taken notes of Gen. Sherman's statement and
that he had estimated the!presenttstrengt ofthe
army at Il, 600 men, remarking that by reason
| of death, desertion and discharge the compan-
| les have been reduced to 20 or % men. He had
| stated so positively from personal inspection.
l The committee acting on the principle that it
| was to make an appropriation for the support
| of the army had provided for $4,000 men for
| four months and for $1,000 men for the remain
| der of the year. What else could the commit
tee do. 1t had not undertaken to legislate as
/ to the increasing or diminishing of that num-
| Der. Gen. Sherman had been asked whether
he thought the army should bs used for the
putting down riots in the several states, and he
had answered emphaticaIly that it should, and
it was in that view that Gen. Sherman thought
i the army should be increased. For himself
| (Singleton) he wished it understood he was OPP
| posed to standing army for the purposesof in
terferring with riots in states until at least it
| should be demonstrated to his mind that the
state authorities were not able to put them
| down.
Mr.. Foster-Does the gentleman object to
the use of the army putting down riots in West
Virginia and Maryland.
Mr.. Singleton-I object to the use for any
| such purpose as it has been used in the past.
Mr.. Foster repeated his question but could
| get no direct answer.
Mr. Singleton contended that the Republi-
cans were responsible for the failure of the
army bill, and said that the President in with
drawing the troops had endorsed the views of
the Democrats. and Ohio aud Pennsylvania
had been heard from endorsing the Democratic
| party.
Mr.. Foster-Endorsing the President.
Mr.. Singleton said if they endorsed the Presi-
| dent they endorsed the Democratic party too.
He thought If the troops had not been kept 10
the South the Custer massacre would not have
| occurred.
In answer to question by Mr.. Frye he said
II hax ,Af IL. Al.
Southern states if they were not there for pc
/ itical purposes
General debate here ended and the Clerk
read the bill by sections.
| Mr.. Scheicher offered an amendment strik-
1 ing out the clause forbidding recruiting the
army above It's present strength and called at
| tent1on to the fact that there were not troops
enough to allow the pursuit of the Mexican
| raiders. and it the residents on the frontier
| were not protected war would result
Mr.. Blount opposed the amendment saying
| that in 1856 when there were only IL, 900 men,
| the Mexican frontier was as long as now.
Mr.. Calkins thought the recent riots showed
that an army of 10000 men was none too large.
There followed a sharp passage between
| Messrs. Luttrell and Cakins as to whether the
| rioters vera laboring men or not, Mr.. Luttrel
| contending that they were and Mr.. Calkins
that they were not.
Mr.. Baker of Indiana favored the amend
ment; Mr.. Mills of Texas also.
Mr.. Atkins was greved at seeing any of the
Democrats commit themselves to the doctrine
of large standing army.
Mr.. Blackburn of Kentucky moved to re-
duce the force to Il 900. He didn't think the
way to suppress such disturbances as occurred
last summer was to shoot down the impover-
ished laborers driven to desperation by the
robberies of which they were the victims by
reason of the persistent class legislation of the
last fifteen years. He gave notice that he
should call the yeas and nays on his motion.
Mr.. Pridemore of Virginia agreed with Mr.
Blackburn.
Mr.. Hewitt of New York thought mora time
was necessary for proper consideration of the
question of recognizing the army than the
committee had given it. He thought the army
should be paid and the question of its increase
or decrease left 10 the future.
Mr.. Wright of Pennsylvania thought the
sending of U. s. troops to Pennsylvania last
summer was unnecessary. He favored. a re-
duction to 10000 men.
Mr.. Clymer took the same view as Mr..
Hewitt
After some further discuss IN by Messrs.
Cnlberson and Blount, the House adjourned
without action.
THE ELECTIONS.