The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-04-23

Florida to attend court In Alaska. The
committee think this too great o. power to be
intrusted to any one man. The question OF
giving up the original, papers is then dis,
be unsafe to deliver them. Besides 1T Is an
established rule that papers before commit
tees IF the House cannot be used elsewhere In
criminal prosecutions. The committee see
no objection to giving certified copies In GER
| tain cases, and as 1t does not appear that
these papers are to be used IN criminal
prosecution there ID no objection To giving the
certified copies. They therefore recommend
the adoption of two resolutions:
First-That no officers Of the House OF Hep
resentatives have any right to produce any
property. papers Or books belonging W the
tlles Of the House before any court, or
to- give any paper fled, or paper
belonging to the files OF the House. except
copied The second resolution gives consent
to either party, 10 the case ~ the United
States against Col. Stanly to have copies
made of such papers as they may desire.
The report was adopted.
The House then went into COMMITTEES OF the
whole on the legislative appropriation bill,
Mt. Blackburn Ii the chair.
Mr.. Bailey, OF New York, spoke In opposi-
tlon to the proposed legislation, denying that
the repeal OF tie election laws was demanded
by any great number of the American people,
Mr.. Covert, Of New York, said he did not
propose to discuss these questions further
than TO state certain facts to show the out
RACES perpetrated by John l. Davenport,
under the supervisors law In New York, He
then related IN instance In which he said men
were unjustly defrauded OF their naturaliza-
tiOn papers.
Mr. deddes, Of Ohio, yielded three minutes
to Mr.. Muldrow, Of Misssissippl, who called
Okolona States q few days ago He fMr
Muldrow) would not have believed It possible
that the gentleman from Maine, III his parti-
san fervor to make capital for his political
party could have made declarations which
| q mere recital OF facts will show to be SC
| reck less.
Mr.. Muldrow then argued and Insisted that
Mississippi was CONSERVATIVES; to prove which
he read from another paper published In his
district indorsing what he had said when he
declared that the OkolOna States did not rep
| resent Southern sentiment, He read the pro
| caedngs Of y public meeting In his district to
| the same effect. He would suggest to the
gentleman that hereafter when he attempted
| to kindle the fires of sectional dlscord that be
| should make proper quotations and from
papers that represented Southern sentiment
Mr. Frye, In reply, said that the gentleman
| from Mississippi takes another paper for his
| Endorsement, aud says 1t represents the true
sentiments Of Democracy, which the Okolona
paper didn't. and he wanted TO say IN this
connection that he was not the advertising
agent Of that paper.
| Mr.. Muldrow inquired II he had not re-
ceived circular from the editor of the Oko-
| Iona States, asking him to post the paper SO
| that Ii might obtain subscription.
Mr.. Frye replied that he had never received
but one letter from the editor Of the States
and he had IL read at the Clerks desk the
| other day. He would not circulate such per-
sonalities as were contained In that paper
| Mr.. Frye read from the papsr from which
Mr. MuldrOw had quoted and also from the
States, to show that they both indorsed the
| speech delivered lately by Mr.. Chalmers, and
which Mr.. Frye claimed was revolutionary
Both papers said that Mr.. Chalmers repre-
| sented Southern sentiment.
| Mr.. Geddes, OF Ohio, said he opposed these
election laws and supervisors laws. first, be-
| cause they were unconstitutional; second,
because OF the purely partisan purposes to
which they have been. applied and TO which
| they may 30 applied: and third. because
they were vicious and impolitC. He would
discuss mainly the latter proposition. He
argued that these laws were antagonistic tc
| the cardinal doctrine of home rule and OF
local rights. Referring to the prediction OF
| Veto he said that 1t was premature to con.
| lecture the action OF the President. It was
| also wrong to charge the dominant power
with the high crime of assault upon the life Of
the republic. AS for the charge that an at
tempt was being made to starve the country
to death, this country would live II tht
| appropriations were not made. The eonsti
| tuition Is the great organic law OF the land
and the republic would live for he had III
| abiding faith In the capacity Of the people fol
| self government.
| Mr.. Thompson, Of Kentucky, argued
against the right OF the Federal authorities
| to interfere In State elections, and elections
for Congressman were State elections.
Mr.. Bayne, Of Pennsylvania, spoke against
the proposed legislation on the bill.
Mr.. Shelabarger, Of Pennsylvania, made 0
speech In opposition to the proposed legisla,
| ton.
The committee then rose and the House a
5 lis took recess until 7 80 p. m.
/ EVENING SESSION.
At the evening session Of the Hous
speeches were made by Messrs. Waddell o
Missouri, Cravens OF Arkansas, Robertson 0
in favor Of the legislation proposed on the
legislative bill, and by Dwight Of New York
against it. The speeches were q repetition
of old arguments.
At 10 p. m. the House adjourned.