National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1879-01-20


HOUSE or REpRES ENT1TITES.
The House resumed, as the regular order Of bust |
ness, the consideration Of the Geneva award bill.
Mr.. HALEsaid the bill really involved contest be- |
tween the insurance companies of the great cities |
and the parties on whom unrelieved losses had |
fallen by reason Of the depredations of Confeder
ate cruisers The majority bill was for the benefit |
OF the insurance companies and no one else. If |
those companies had any right TO the award Il was |
q bare technical right. If they had had any per-
feet rghtwhy had they not gone into court instead
OF coming to Congress?
=. Mr.. MCMAHON supported the minority report |
the error in the majority report was In surprising |
That national claims had been excluded by the |
tribunal. and nothing passed upon but bundle of |
private claims. On the contrary, the claims passed
upon had been national claims. When private |
claims had been presented to the tribunal they had
been presented as witnesses to show the extent of |
the damages sustained by the Government The bill |
of the majority was not fair. 1t did not give an
equal chance TO all persons. Those who paid large
war premiums or suffered losses by excupnted
cruisers would have only sciutln of chance |
The only persons who would have any right before
the Court of Claims would he the insurance com |
panes and they would only get that right by virtue
Of the language Of the bill. The court would be |
hampcTed by the bill and controlled not by princi
pies Of justice, equity, and international law, but
Dy HcnnlcaiiueS. ON the other hand the ftlnda- |
mental principle OF the minority bill was that no
indemnify should be paid to any one who not an
AT the close of Mr. McMahon's speech the pre
vious question was seconded and the main cues |
ho 9rdeIed the understanding being that Mr. Butler
should be allowed fifteen minutes and that Mr. Knott
thoulu nave as much time as lie desired before the
vote should be taken,
=, Mr.. BUTLER made speech against the claim of
the war-prcmium men. He reviewed the history of
ne Johnson Clarendon treaty and Of the treaty of
washington and said that was agreed that national
claims only should be submitted. When the mat
Ter lie said was ~ fci before the tribunal II was
whispered around that one of the counsel of the
United States was the retained counsel of the I'm.
surnnce companies. Whether that ruInor was
right or wrong 1t is not necessary to consider but
frntt thr Gtntn Mo-
ment n pcremptOry order to It's counsel and agents
NOT 70 allow the Geneva tribunal to make any dis
ppi TsihoI, WhateEer III relation to the classes Of
The tribunal awarded sum IN block which COW
S,1o onSryliiIng Hnat money In my Judgment
any legal duty, or any claim of any class of cti.
zens Whatever There are three propositions in
nry do not believe there is n Southern gentle |
man on this iloor who will vote for that. Having
far that war could have any element Of riShii
no man who was In the Confectionery will want to
nave any advantage from money got from the
neutral friend Tor its aid In that wrong Therefore
me proposition to put the money In the Treasury
never has had any considerable support from the
The Union f"'' "
- The other proposition is to give it to somebody.
loMnom shn ii be given as an indemnity? No.
bOdy mas any legal right 10 II. We have right TO
20 win II what we please-to IL in Mississippi
ievecs IN Northern railroads In building ships or
in giving subsidies. But what ought 10 he done
with IL? It is proposed to give il TO the Insurance
companies or to give them some right 10 60 INTO
the court and set up what they call claim of sub
losulloh' ihcy nave no legal right To It now: they
DO not claim, think, any equitable right TO IT,
Premiums are the mother Of Insurance. These IN.
surnnce companies have received nearly 50 900 600
vi premiums during the war and have paid out
only about s5,5000O0.
Therefore they have lost nothing. In the bill
which had the honor TO draw and which became
law, provision was made that If, on reckoning up
me insurance business during the war, 1t was
found that any company had made "A loss Tint loss
niag
mat could show loss growing out of their war
Ilsks nave gone before that tribunal and have re-.
telved their pay. Now, who Is there here that
thlllks That there Is any equitable claim on the
part OF the Insurance companies? Nor have they any
Are they to make 100000 more? Now, who are
The war premium men? They are the class of men
VINO paid premiums and who have got no return
forthelr premiums.
Theylwere obliged 10 pay 10 per cent insurance to
gel hir ships across the water in the course of bus
mess. So great was that burden that many men
SOLD their ships, nominally or actually, to Great
bIltallii 10 sail under the British flag. But there
were oiner men who with true patriotism, carried
on business ana paid the war premiums and have
not received a dollar in return in amy way from
insurance companies or anybody else The answer
the shipowner charged the amount of his war prc-
MUM paid, and added 1t to the price Of his goods
ana therefore he has collected 1t back again from
me whoie people. That Is a fair argument, and is
TO be fairly considered. What is the fact on that
point? u could have been done so only that four
1iths of che commerce of the United states during
lhc war was carried in foreign bottoms that paid
NO war premiums.
This fourffths fixed the prices of the goods and
therefore the men who paid the war premiums
c .uld NOT charge them up In fixing the prices of
Mr.. KNOTT closed the debate His position was
one OF absolute inpartinty Not single consl
uent OF his had any more claim to the Geneva
award Than he had 10 Il diamond mine on the far
SIDE OF the moon, He himself entertained no feel.
ing or prejudice in favor Of against any particu.
lar class of claimants He only wanted simple
Justice done and such steps taken as would insure
the speediest possible distribution of the remainder
OF the fund among those legally entitled to H. lie
reviewed the proceedings OF the Geneva tribunal
and stated that the money had been awarded for
losses occasioned directly by the inCulpated crus.
ers He contrasted the bill OF the minority win The
bill of the maiority-the former being Il mere act
of grace the latter an act Of clean.handed Justice
the former presenting in most odious form all the
most objectionable features Of class legislation; tho
latter being tulfllment of the sacred guarantee
innsplanted from Magma Charta that no person,
high or low; rich or poor should be deprived of his
presumed right, except by due process of law
The minority substantially said that the fund be.
lonsed to the United states and that the war pre-.
MUM men lad no equitable or legal right to any
portion Off yet Congress had an unlimited discre.
ton win regard TO H. and should therefore give Il to
those claimants for sweet charity's snEe Thew
was no provision In the Constitution auIiorizing
Congress to peddlo luyors or deal out aims Here
was question involving SQO00O0O and the honor
OF the United Stncs which the House was nctlniIy
asked to guess upon and 10 decide as TO what Cinss
of claimants had the best right Inrcgard to thebili
OF the majority there was not syllable in n thut
proposed 10 pny cent 10 any Insurance company
or deprive OF his right any one who had puid war
premiums Inc question OF payment was SimDly
referred TO the Court OF Claims for its decision
Nothing could be iairer Or more impartial than
that
a bill almost identical with that Of the majority
had last year been passed by the House without n
dissenting voice for the distribution Of the Chinese
fund, and nobody who had let that bill pass with.
out objection could consistently oppose the present
bill lie did not stand as the advocate Ofany one class
Of claimants, butas the humble champion Ofjustlce
The insurance companies might be the bl0odless
tOullcsS monsters they were represented, still they
were composed of citizens of the United States and
looked to the Constitution and laws of the country
for simple Justice, and the government that refused
Justice to It's humblest citizen. despot to the
dcsphcd,
Mr.. HOUSE moved to lay the bin andamendmenls
OIL me table. ReJeGted-i2 in the Affirmative the
negative not counted.
The next vote was taken on Mr. Frye's amend.
mehl W the minority bill, and IL was agreed to on
shndlng Note-nyes, 1885, noes 80.
III provides that no claim by or on behalf of any
insurance company shall be admitted or allowed Ly
thc court OF Clnms unless such claimant shall show
10 Inc satisfaction of the court that during The late
rebellion me sum of its los cs In resuect 10 ts war
RISKS exceeded the sum OF It's premiums or gains
ana lhen the allowance shall not lie greater thnu
such excess. No claim Is 10 DO admissible In favor
OF any Insurance company that was NOT lnwnIllv
existing at the time OF the loss under The law nI
some one of the United States. "
Mr. CANNON moved 10 lay the bill ON Tho tobla
Dctened-yeas yG; nays, III.
The question was then taken on the substitute
reported by the minority Of the Judiciary Commit