National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1879-04-17
HOUSE or REpRES EyTaTJYEs.

MT. lOuNG Clcnn.), chairman OF COminluee OIL
Epidemic Diseases, reported bill flor which the
Senate joint resolution to the same effect was sub
slltued) relating to the organization of the National
Board Of Health Passed,
Mr., STEPHENS, chairman OF Committee on Coin.
age, Weights, and Measures, reported bill providing
Tor the interchange Of subsidiary coins for legal
tender money under certain circumstances, and
making such coin legal tender in all sums not ex.
Section provides That the holder OF any silver
coin OF tho United States of smaller denomination
than 81 may present the same IN sums OF $40, or
multiples thereof at the office Of the Treasurer or
Assistant TreHstrcrs Of the United States and re-
ceive therefor United states egal.tendor money,
Section provides that the coins received at the
Treasury or the Subttcasurcs under the provisions
OF this act shall be exchanged IN sums oil $40 or
multiples thereof for egnl.tcnder money, on de-
mnnd OF any holder thereof.
Section provides that the fractional orsubsidiary
silver coin shall hereafter be legaiender In sums
not exceeding $50, and section repcals all acts
In conflict with this act
The report accompanying the bill states That the
bill Is bnsed upon the petition OF the New YORK
Gas Light Company and upon other petitions.
Mr.. CoNGER made the point OF order that the
committee had no right TO report the bill inasmuch
as the subject had neve, been referred red to ii,o
which the bill was based had been regularly re
fcrred through the petition box.
Mr.. STEPHENS replied In the Affirmative
The Speaker called attention TO the fact that the
only endorsement on the petition was that OF IS.
b. Chitlenden. February Z lS7e"
must have fallen on.
subsequently he found It and sent 1t up to the
desk.
Mr. s1ErHESs said that the bill had been intro
duced In an unusual way, but right way. II he
had been compelled TO resort To the tedious method
ofintroducing the BILL through the petition-box
no person, perhaps was more responsible than the
gentleman from Michigan (Nir. Congerl for that
gentleman had on last Monday obstructcd the in
Mr. CoSGER inquired # Mr.. Stephens intended to
charge HIM with an obstruction of business not
within the legitimate province ofany member OF
Mr. STEPHENS. ! did not.
Mr. CoSGER. Then, though esteem the venera-
bic gentleman from Georgia, would advise him 10
use his terms more carefully.
Mr. STEPHENS. In what way?
Mr.. CoSGER. When the gentleman speaks of my
obstruction as though violated any rule even the
great respect have for him will not allow Inc to
keep q g1S1urys a,a no, mean to saw that tho
gentleman violated any rule lie did, however, OBJ.
truct the Offering of bills last Monday according
10 the rules, grant, and while he was obstructing
Mr. CoxGER tntcrrupting). nsk the Speaker If
that is q proper expression to use about member
of this House when he acts strictly within the rules
of the House. and If II Is not Objectionable and Ct
may use the expression) unparliamcntary
The Speaker. The Chair must take the word of
the gentleman from Georgia that he meant no re.
Election whatever, and nothing which docs not
mean to reflect is supplementary.
Mr. STEPHENS do not mean TO reflect upon any
body when l say that any gentleman flibusteIs
That has got TO be parliamentary word.
The Speaker. And a very expressive one.
Mr.. STEPHENS, continuing, said that while the
gentleman from Michigan had prevented the intro
ductlon of bills in one way. hc(Stcphcns) had found
another way Of getting them In lcgitmatcly and
properly. He would have preferred 10 have had
them referred in the regular way but that had been
Mr. CoNGER called attention to the fact that the
gentleman (Chittendenl whose name appeared on
the petition, had introduced it at the last Congress
| II was bad enough to have this thing come in by
the window in this Congress- but II appeared not
only that IL had not come in regularly, but In fact
| II had not come in Mt all.
| Mr.. STEPHENS explained that he had Withdrawn
the petition from the files, and had himself Mt this
session, presented 1t again, and had referred to
| the Committee on Coinage. Weights, and Measures.
Mr.. CoNGER said that there appeared to be irrcg.
ularitios all through on account of the eagcess TO
| get the bill before committee The decision OF
| The Speaker, If IL oycrruled his point of order,
| would determine new method OF proceeding ana
| would entirely dispense with the morning hour OF
| Monday. II would prevent the House having SUI
peryision of its business and would avoid all qucs-
lions az to the proper reference of bills.
| The Speaker said that the question at issue was
whether the committee had right on petitions
appropriately referred to propose legislation. He
was of the opinion that any committee had that
right.
In the past history OF the House the subject of the
| tariff had always been considered by the Commit
| tee ontWNys and Means, not by the reference, per
haps, of bill, but as in the last Congress by the
reference of petitions. The Committee on Ways
and Means had, without question, submitted re
port based upon the petitions of citizens. Most o
the legislation In regard TO private business was
based upon the petitions of claimants. Constantly
State Legislatures, by means of Joint resolutions
were in the habit of asking for public buildings
lighthouses, &C. and the respective committees tC
which such joint resolutions were referred uni
formly introduced legislation based upon them
The chair therefore, thought that committees haC
the right to introduce bills based petitions, ant
overuled the point of order
make motion TO refer the bill to the Committee
ON Banking and Currency, where 1t maniiestiy be
longed.
The Speaker replied that It would be If the gen
tleman from Georgia (Mr. stephens) yielded Tho
floor for that purpose.
Mr.. STEPHENS declined to do so ut present, bu
intimated that he would do so hereafter.
Aessrs PRICE and CHlrTESDES spoke In favor o
thei reference to the Committee on Banking anc
Currency, 49,. 800
Mr., KELLEY said that If the bill had been intro
duced I'm an unusual way 1t had been due to thos,
gentlemen VINO had defeated the presentation o
bills on Monday by means of parliamentary tactics
Prior to theadOption oftherule, which had been vir
tually set aside by those tactics all bills arose from
petitions or from notice that gentleman woult
Introduce bill on certain day
Pending action on the bill the morning hour eX
The House then (at l.15) went into Committee o
the Whole (Mr. Blackburn in the chair ON the leg
islatve appropriation bill, the pending question
Is known as the Potter bill which authorizes any
person having claim against tho United States
not barred BY any statute OF limitation to ie
Mr.. Young (Tcnn.) had offered an amendment L
strike out the words mot barred by any statute
|
Mr.. ATKINS offered substitute for Mr.. Springer
amendment.
Tho substitute repeals the acts establishing thu
Southern Claims Commission the repeal TO take
effect ON the 10th of March, 1880; and II directs th
transfer of all cases then pending TO the Court o
Chains. II then enaCs the Potter bill
A point of order was made on Mr. Atkins substi
tute, argued, and oVCrrulCd.
The question was first taken on Mr. Young
amendment and II was rejected.
Mr. SPRINGER then accepted Mr., Atkins substi
tutc and proceeded to aIptlein support Of II.
Amer discussion, Mr. Atkins amendment was re
iected, and the committee proceeded with the sue
Ceedng clauses of the bill.
An amendment to provide for M additional At
tornoy-General for the POst-Olice Department. wa
offered by Mr. Caldwell, discussed and rejected.
Az h0ll.p0st two the committee had disposed o
all the bll except the portions specially reserved
for general discussion, being the provisions in re
spcct TO the mode Of selecting grand and petit IN
roTs, repeating the Jurors test OATH and also in rc
spect TO supervisors Of election and deputy mar
shus.f
Mr. WHITE raised a point of order against the pro
e vision which repeats the test oath and prescribe
{ the manner Of drawing jurors.
AppropIiates money for the supreme Court an,
United states District and Circuit Courts, and re
4. duces the per diem of jurors; but II was held b.
Q | Mr.. White that II was competent for him TO rails
+ the point of order which he had inNsmuch as TN
proposition against which II had been raised was
I separate proposition, although not in separat
: The Chairman said he was not advised of an
/ case where member had been permitted to sui
, divide n paragraph in in order TO subject part Of
! TO point order when the whole OF IL would no