Vicksburg weekly herald., 1877-11-23

Il
horse races. This delay In the South
Carolina case was a FepToach to the
American Senate.
Mr.. Wadlelgh, Of New Hampshire,
Chairman Of the Committee on PFivI-
leges aud Elections. argued that Il Was
not question Of privilege TO move to
discharge the Committee from further
consideration of the credentials Of one.
claiming TO have been elected Senator.
No member Of the Committee, who
knew what work had been, would
stand up in The Senate and say the
Committee had been guilty Of lardi.
ness. While the Senator from Ohio,
Mr.. Thurman, was attending horse
races
Mr.. Thurman-Yes, l was at one Of
them.
Mr.. Wadleigb, resuming-Aud the
aters, the Committee on Privileges and
Elections was hard at work.
Mr.. Thurman-If the Committee had
made report in this case, l would
have been attending to Il instead Of the
horse races.
Mr.. Wadleigb, continuing, said the
cases OF Spo6ord and Kellogg were
fret taken up by the Committee, and
they did not think Il would be proper
to lay aside those cases and take up an.
other, In his opinion, this desi,e TO
take this case from the Committee
was caused by tho fact that the work of
the Committee on the SpofTorL. Kellogg
case was nearly closed. In one or two
days II would be prepared 10 decide
that casa. Upon the Republican side
of the Chamber, the Senators sup
. posed the Butler case would DO
examined into and reported upon
by tho Committee, and not
O Senator had prepared himself to die.
cuss II in the Senate, having relied
upon the Committee to present the
whole case, hence the motion Of the
Senator from Ohio, Mr.. Thurman, waS
unjust TO the Republic Senator's. The
Committee on Privileges aud Elections
had shown no desire to delay, and he
hoped they would be allowed to rc.
, port on this case, or at least time
! should be given for the Senators on his
|. side Of the Chamber TO prepare them
selves for the discussion. He felt Il Il
be his duty to object to the considers
!, iion Of the resolution to-day.
} Mr.. Hoar, of Massachusetts, by unan'
imous consent, spoke of the quesliOT
: of privilege claimed by the Senator
from Ohio, Mr.. Thurman, for his reso
L luton, and denied that 1t was a privi
!, legged question He referred to the rule
! and practice Of the House Of Repre-
= sentatives, in support Of his argument
Mr.. Thurman said he did not car
whether 1t was q privileged question
or not, but he thought he could Civ
very good reasons to show It was priv
!; ileged. However, he did not propos
J, to do 80 now. He had submitted hi
"a resolution and It should be consid
y cred at q second; that the Senate ha
>, no man who knew anything abOI
~ questions OF order, unless he had serve
"A an apprenticeship IN the House of Re
~ ~ reseniatlves. 1t had been some thirt
n years sihce he Mr.. Thurman serve
~ ~ in the House and, therefore, ne kne
n nothing about such questions. In Il
"a Senate, they did business as set {
~ gentlemen, and did not bother them
selves about questions Of order. II
= Chairman of The Committee on Priv
y leges and Elections had stated that Ii
y Committee felt 1t 10 be its duty 10 col
~ ~ slider the Kellogg case first. Why th
i Committee should consider that cal
" in preference to the Eustis case, he NJ
M Thurman was at loss 10 know.
Mr.. Mitchell, of Oregon, said whC
D, the Committee on Privileges and Ele
10 lions first met q motion was pending
c. the Senate 10 discharge the Committt
n from further consideration the Eust
T. case, aud therefore II was thought be
O, to take up the Kellogg-Spo1iord cas-
60 and not consider the Eustis case viii
re- the motion to discharge the Committt
'd was pending.
Mr.. Thurman said II was he wi
d. made the motion 10 discharge the Con
ut miltee from the further considerable
lie OF tho Eustis case, and after discussiC
ho he withdrew the motion. 1t was q
yh done at one session OF tho Senate, ar
C. therefore could not have been pendiT
when the Committee took up the KC
IL logg case.
on Mr.. Salisbury, OF Delaware, a men
lie her Of the Committee on Privileges az
he Elections, said the motion Of the Sen
mt tor from Ohio, Mr.. Thurman, In Il
Euatis case was made on tho 10th
So October, aud tho Committee did n
es. meet until the 10Th, so that all the cas-
is were before the Committee when
lie met. In reply 10 the Chairman Of Il
re. Committee, Mr.. Wadleigh, ho said
NJ member of the Committee had call
to the attention OF members 10 tho ia
Dut that motion would be ma
ne 10 discharge the Committee fro
of the further consideration Of the Butt
,nl case, and therefore tho Senators on
ad other side Of the Chamber knew II 3
,lr. had time to prepare themselves. I
ltO chairman had said the Committee h
far been diligent, but he Mr.. SaulsbuT
no must say that the Committee had h
On ample time TO dispose Of the Eus
Irs, case and the Butler case, and COZ
so have made the same progress IL had
ING the Kellogg.SpoGord case. On Mo
lrn day last. in committee, he made a m
in ton tn take up he case Of Eustis, but