Helena weekly herald. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1867-1900, 1877-02-01
No. II


them one day in Gods temple making mer-
chandise there and changing money for
profit, and he made scourge of small cords
and whipped them out Laughter] That
is what is the matter. may not hold to all
that the Master taught, but shall adhere in
that respect, if in no other, to His sayings and
doings
Lynch opposed the bill because it was un-
constitutional.
Knott opposed the bill because he was one
of those who entertained the opinion that
there was nothing involved in the Presiden-
tial question which demanded or justified the
measure under consideration even conceding
that Congress had the right under the consti-
luton to pass such bill, which, in his opin-
ion, it had not Where was the power to
delegate the right of counting the votes to
any other tribunal Such delegation would
be the utter destruction of the entire system.
Carr opposed the bill on constitutional
grounds.
Dunnell said he found some things in the
bill which prevented him from giving it his
approval. In his opinion, the emergency
had not risen for Congress to put its vile
hands upon the Supreme Court. The emer-
gency was not such as could compel Congress
to trample down the dignity of that high
court If this bill were passed, it would be-
come precedent, and the same great farce
would be played over again four years hence.
HordoDhurrh favOro6 thn hill
Townsend. of Pennsylvania, did not think
the Vice President had the sole power to
count the votes, and he therefore favored the
BILL
Pratt, of Iowa, opposed the bill as at yari-
ance with the whole course of cOnstitu-
tional precedent. It created tribunal un-
known to the constitution, with unlimited
powers and with the authority expressly del
egated TO judge of the extent OF its own
powers, so as to make it supreme on the
question.
Vance, of North Carolina, sent to the
Clerks desk and had read telegram from
Governor Vance, of North Carolina, stating
that resolutions approving the bill had just
passed both branches of the Legislature al
most or quite unanimously.
At four o'clock, before calling the previous
question, Payne allowed Hopkins to read all
amendment containing a proposition to refer
to the commission all the testimony taken by
either House.
Payne refused to allow the amend ment and
moved the previous question, which was Sec
onded, though Southard endeavored to get
an amendment concerning Colorado. Payne
having an hour to close, yielded to Walker,
who supported the bill.
Lawrence enumerated eight constitutional
objections.
Blackburn said this was no proper subject
of arbitration.
Payne, chairman of the committee which
reported the bill, closed the debate in brief
but earnest speech, in the course of which he
said that although the danger of civil war
had been flippantly sneered at, there had
been danger of such war, with which no
war in ancient or modern republics could
have compared.
The debate was closed and the Speaker an
nounced the vote. The most intense excite
ment prevailed, and as Republican after Re-
publican voted "No," that vote seemed to
cause surprise to many who had supposed that
fully half OF them would support the bill.
The Speaker announced that he found he
had a right to exercise his constitutional
privilege and vote as Representative from
the State of Pennsylvania He directed the
clerk to call his name, and his response OF
*aye' was greeted with applause. Finally
the count was completed, and the result was
announced as yeas, 1911; noes, sc. There
was but slight manifestation on the announc-
ment, and then the spectators left the CALLER
les and one of the most important and excit-
ing sessions of the House closed at 5:25.
-~<&D\,,% %--
A BILL entitled can Act to provide for
the organization Of the militia, is pending
before the Legislature. Section 80 describes
the persons who are exempt from enrolment
under this act. Among these are named the
following in one category:
"Third, ministers of the Gospel, members
of the Legislature, idiots, lunatics, and other
persons of unsound mind"
A trife rough, that, on ministers and leg
islators. Would not an amendment be in
order by which different description OF the
disabilities of these persons could be arrived
at? We are convinced that both preachers
and lawmakers would prefer to be held as
eligible for military duty in preference to