The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1878-01-26

Mr.. Matthews so as 10 provide for th
payment Of the bonds in gold coin or II
equivalent, and that any other paymer
without the consent Of the creditor
be in violation Of the public faith an
in derogstion Of his rights, It was re
jected; yeas IS; nays A, rs follows:
YEAS Anthony, Bsrnum, Bayart
Burnside, Christiancy, Conkling, Dave
Eaton, Edmunds, Howe, Herman, Mt
Phersou, Mitchell, Morrill,, Randolph
Rollins, Sargent and Wadleigh.
NAYS Allison, Armstrong, Bailey
Beck, Booth, Bruce, Cameron Pa Game
ron Wis.,, Chafiee, Coke, Conover, Dayi
Qll.), Davis Nv. Ya.), Dennis, Dorsey
Eusiis, Ferry, Gordon, Grover. Heretort
Hill, Howe, Johnston, Jones Fla, Jone
(Nev.), Kirkwood, McCreery, Mcdonald
Mcmillan, Matthews, Maxey, Merrimor
oglesby, Paddock. Plumb, Saunders
Spencer, Teller, Thurman, VOORHEES,
Wallace, Window and Withers.
Messrs. Butler, White and Hoar, VIII
would have voted yea, were paired wit
Messrs. Patterson, Cockrell and Harrii
who would have voted in the negative.
The question then recurred on th
amendment Of Mr.. Morrell, submitted o
the 10Th inst, 10 the effect that it woul
be detrimental 10 the economical interest
OF the government and people to pay th
bonds in silver, and Mr.. Morrell spoke II
support thereof. He said that this reso
lution of the Senator from Ohio, no mat
ter from what motive 1t was introduced
could have and would have no other etlec
than to damage the public credit, and h
could not understand from what motiv
! It was brought forward, especially whel
he saw in the platform Of the Republi
can party Of Ohio, adopted in 1876, tha
the national honor must be maintained
and recognizing gold as the true STANDARD
Of value. He could not conceive how
was possible that Republican Senator
from that State should come here so sool
afterwards and propose such a resolution
as this. II he (Morrell) was in favor o
the so.called silver bill he could not vot,
for this resolution with its preamble a
now drawn. The amendment OF Mr.
Morrell was rejected; yeas, II; nays, Al
The question then recurred on tht
amendment Of Mr.. Chatiee, submitted OF
the 18th OF December last, which, aftel
an explanation by Mr.. Chafee, was with
drawn.
Mr.. Window said he voted for The
amendment Of the Senator from New
York (Conkling) TO make this joint res
olution, and he voted against all other
amendments. He intended 10 vote against
the original resolution, and in doing &C
did not propose 10 indicate what would bt
his vote on the silver bill when il should
come before the Senate. He was opposed
10 this iruitless expression Of opinion. II
Congress had confined itself 10 practical
legislation instead nf discussing financial
business the country would have been
more prosperous.
Mr.. Blaine said hc would vote against
the resolution as in his opinion it would
not strengthen public credit. No in.
terest Of public credit, or according TO a
letter OF the statute, these bonds were
payable in either coin, but he intended 10
show when the silver bill should
come before the Senate that II was not to
the interest OF the United States to take
advantage OF the letter Of the law and pay
them in silver. He was opposed to the
present silver bill but was in favor oi
the reconciliation OF silver on basis
which he would have the honor to pro-
pose.
Mr.. Hill said he could not vote for the
resolution, because it affirmed that the
debts OF the United States to-day were
payable in silver dollars, when there were
no silver dollara. II the silver dollar
could be remonetized in any way to make
1t equal to the gold dollar good thing
would be done for the country. He be-
lieyed the silver dollar could be made
equal to gold in three ways. let. By in-
creasing its weight. ID. BY limiting its
coinage. Sd. By limiting It's legal ten
der power. He could not vote to coin
the silver dollar, and again throw on the
country a deprecated dollar that cheated
everything it touched.
Mr. Edmunds moved to indefinitely
postpone the further consideration OF the
resolution.
Mr.. Gordon said he would vote for the
preamble and resolution Of the Senator
from Ohio because he believed the recital
Of the facts contained therein was true
and the resolution suggested a policy
which he believed to be honest, Just and
wise.
Mr.. Paddock said he would vote for the
full reconciliation OF silver, but would
not vote for this resolution now before
the silver bill became law.
The motion Of MIR. Edmunds to post
pone 1t was rejected. Yeas 90, nays 4S
The question being on the resolution as
submitted by Mr.. Matthews on December
9Th last, il was agreed TO. Yeas As
nays %, as follows:
YEAS Allison, Armstrong, Bailey
Beck, Booth, Bruce, Cameron Pa Cam.
eron (Wis.), Chaflee. Coke, Conover, Da'
Wis (Ill.), Davis (W.Va.), Dennis, Dorsey
Eustis, Ferry, Gordon, Grover, Hereford
Howe, Jones (Fla.), Jones New, Kirk.
wood, McCreery, Mcdonald, Mcmillan
Matthews, Maxey, Merrimon, Morgan
0glesby, Plumb, Ransom, Salisbury,
Saunders, Spencer, Teller, Thurman
VOORHEES,, Wallace and Withers-4S.
NAYS = Messrs. Anthony. Barnum,
Bayard, Blaine, Burnside, Christiancy,
Conkling, Dawes, Eaton, Edmunds, Ham.
lin, Herman, Lamar, Mcpherson, Mitchell,
Morrill,, Paddock, Randolph, Rollins,
Sargent, Wadleigh and Windom-22.
In addition to the pairs above named
Mr.. Hill announced that he was paired
with Mr.. Garland. II that Senator was
present he would vote aye and he (Hill)
10 the negative.
The question recurred on the preamble
submitted by Mr.. Edmunds on the 14lh
inst. 1t was rejected, yeas II, nays Al.
A vote was next taken on the preamble
Of. Mr.. Morrill, on the 18th, and it was
rejected without roll.call.
Mr.. Edmunds then moved 10 amend the
preamble submitted by Mr.. Matthews by
inserting the following:
And Whereas, By the provisions OF the
coinage act Of 1878, passed on the 18th Of
February OF that year, andSf the revised
statutes which took effect on the first day
Of December OF that year, all provisions
Of law authorizing the coinSge Of such
silver dollar were repealed.
Mr.. Matthews said he would accept the
amendment,
Mr.. Thurman hoped his colleague
would not accept It. He was not pre-
pared 10 say the law was repealed. The
question involved the construction Of the
statute. There was no necessity for this