The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1877-11-27
CONGRESSIONAL.
SENATE.

Privileges and Elections, submitted re-
port, accompanied by resolution, De.
claring that w. p. kellogg is entitled 4
u seat 10 Senator from L0nisiana for six
years, from March 4th, 1877. He asked
the present consideration Of the resoIn
tion, but objection was made by Merri-
mon, Withers aud others, and the resolu.
tion was laid over until tomorrow.
Mr.. Merrim0n submitted a minority
report signed by Hill, saulsbury and
himself, in favor Of seating spotIord. Oe.
dered printed.
House Bill to repeal all that part Of the
act oil January l4th, 1875, known as the
resumption act, which authorized the
Secretary Of the Treasury to dispose oi
United States bonds and redeem and can.
eel grecnback currency, Was read by the
title and referred to the Committee on
Finance.
The latter portion Of the morning hour
was devoted to discussing 4 resolution
submitted BY Mr. ChAiFse, calling upon
the President for information rs 10 what
impediments exist which prevent him
from executing the laws against the
Union Pacific RailroAd and its branches,
but before reaching the vote the morning
hour expired and consideration was re-.
sume,l OF the resolution 10 discharge the
Committee on Privileges and Elections
from further consideration OF the creien.
tials Of n. c. Butler, claiming a ssat as
Senator from South CGrolinS, and Mr..
Davis, OF Illinois, explained the reasons
why be favored the motion to discharge
the committee.
Mr.. DAVIS said the contest now going
on 10 The Senate has attracted the atten.
tion Of the country, and from the pecul.
lar position he occupied in relation 10
the parties, he trusted 1t would not be
out Of the way for him to give briefly the
reasons why he should vote for the mo-
J tion Of the Senator from Ohio tThurmAn).
There were three seats in the Senate va
cant; one belonging to South Carolina and
[, two TO Louisiana, and il waa matter oi
great importance that they be filled. The
legislation Of Congress was binding on
those States, and the people thereof had
right to expect that the claims to these
would be acted on at the earliest possible
moment. He Davis) supposed when the
session opened that lhese three seats
would be filled, or declared vacant by the
end Of the session. Itwaa too late for
that. He had no agency in bringing this
resolution before the Senate, bat the mover
oiit (rhurmanl probably knew that his
Davis Judgment did NOT approve OF the
policy towards the Sonth aince the rebel
lion. He thought the Southern States
should be represented by persons
identified with the Interests Of their
people. 1t had been suggested that
this motion to dischArge the Commit.
Tee was against the usage Of the Senate.
The Senator from Delaware (Bayard)
few days ago cited a precedent in the
cle Of the bill for the readmission Of
Texas into the Union some years ago, and
if he (DAvis) might be allowed 10 refer
to proceedings OF the other House OF
Congress he could say that only last week
representative from M4ine had moved
TO discharge the Committee on Elections
from the further consideration OF the
Colorado case, and this motion resulted 10
fixing day for its hearing. He (Davis)
did not see why this case should be long
er continued in the Committee on Privi-
leges and Elections. II did seem TO
him that the case could be decided By the
Senate upon the conceded facts which ap.
peared in the briefs Of the respective
contestants, Corbin and Butler. IL the
committee should examine this South
Carolina csse such an examination ould
undoubtedly result in two reports, both
able no doubt; but what was the necessity
for these reports when all the facts would
be reached in open Senate; besides, in the
evenly balanced condition OF parties in
the Senate, it was apparent that these
two reports would not receive that cou-
alteration which reports in other mat
tiers ordinarily receive. The Com
mittee on Privileges and Elections had
to-day reported in the Louisiana con-
test, and It was asked that this case be
acted upon before the South Carolina
case. II the reportin the Louisiana case
had been made TO the Senate before the
introduction Of the resolution Of the
Senator from Ohio (Fhurman) to dis.
charge the committee from further con.
siderAtion OF the credentials OF Butler he
would have voted TO consider the Louisi.
ana case frst and against the resolution
Of the Senator from Ohio, but as the Sen.
ator had submitted bis resolution first il
took precedence and he Davis believed
that now was the proper time to decide
the case in open Senate.
The Vice Pfesident-The question il,
Will the Senate agree to the resolution |!
Mr.. Edmunds-Mr. President, believe
my honorable friend from Illinois Dayis)
is partly correct in speaking Of the even.
ly balanced state oil the parties in the
Senate. Whether he referred to all the
parties 10 the Senate or not don't know.
Laughter. There are two parties in the
Senate that are very nearly evenly bal.
ancel. How It is with the third DO not
know. Laughter.
Mr.. DaVis-Ths third l. unanimous.
Laughter
Mr.. E1munds-I assume that the third
party is unanimous. "a my friend Just
said. Laughter.l | hope We shall have
order, Mr.. President. I can not go on.
The Vice President-That rests with
the Senator from Vermont. Laughter.
Mr.. EdmRnds-Then we shall have or.
der. The very statement that my honor.
able friend made leads me to think that
il he would reflect little, he would see
its error. It ia only the other day that
my friend himself, in respect to the case
Of Eustis, Il think thapiA the name Of one
OF the Louisiana people, which on the
face OF it was a simple question rising on
the state OF the papers as they were read
here by the Senator, saw with his usual
quickuess and clearness Of apprehen.
sion that there WA q question OF law in
volved, and one that ought to be consil-
cred, as he stated II belieye) himself, by
the committee and reported upon. Not
a dispute Of the facts, but that the COM
mittee ought to report after careful
study and Investigation and examination
OF the authorities, political history aud so
on, in order that the Senate may be in
formed OF the state OF the Law. But what
says my friend now In the case from South
Carolina? There he thinks there Is no
dispute Of the facts, because, he says, the
facts are conceded in the two briefs.
do not know that. What authority has
the Senator for saying that the facts we're
conceded? ssIt may be, that some
honorable friend OF nv political way Of