The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1879-02-22
ciently paid, in having the Government Of

the United States saved to them.
Mr.. Conger opposed the bill. and several
sharp passages occurred between.him and
Mr.. Eden.
Finally Mr.. White Pa@, moved to
strike ont the enacting clause OF the bill,
and it was agreed to without division.
Inadvocating the next bill on the Calen-
dar for the payment of $1,000 to A. III.
Richards, of Virginia, for SUPPLIES furnish
ed the army during the war.
Mr.. Sheelly stated that he had no
sympathy for that class of claims. His
people who had to bear the burden of
taxation had no sympathy for it, but it
the people of the South must accept as q
penalty.
MIR. Bragg opposed the bill. There had
been little or no loyalty in Virginia, ex-
cept such as had been enforced by COR
don of soldiers with bayonets, and then it
had thrived most Justify upon the supplies
the commissary of the army had:furnished.
Mr.. White, of Pennsylvania, moved to
strike out the enacting clause of the bill.
Agreed to: yeas 1Ol, nays 4S. A number
of Democrats voted in the affirmative,
while eight or ten Republicans voted in
the negative.
The next bill was one for the payment
to John Zumstein of $4,000 for supplies
furnished by him as sutler to the army at
the conclusion of the battle of Shiloh.
Mr.. Keifer supported the bill.
Mr.. Bragg said the chief merit in the
bill was that the claimant came from Ohio.
The claim was a worse one than the one
for the robbery of hen roost could be.
Suffers had generally managed to take
care of themselves, and it was sometimes
their practice to rob soldiers. He moved
to strike out the enacting clause. Agreed
to without division.
.ka1 - Ii
the calendar for the relief of Hiram john
son and others of Tennessee. Before, how
ever, proceeding to speak on that bill, he
called attention to the fact that state
ment had been published sometime ago
citing the claim of Mrs. Herbert, of Louisi-
ana, reported by him as specimen brick
of the grand structure of war
claims, which the Southern people
wanted paid. The Republican Commit
tee had distributed it as campaign doc
ument, and he had been criticised for
reporting such claim. The fact should
also have been stated that this very bill
had been three times reported on favora-
bly,, once by Mr.. Conger and twice in the
Senate by Senators Mitchell and Wad
leigh. It had been stated that not per
cent of the people OF the South had re-
mained loyal to the Union. Gentlemen
who had followed the United States flag
into the South ought to know better than
that. He stood here honest enough to do
justice to the loyal people in the South.
But for the loyal element in the South the
history of the country would not have
been written as it had been. In
more than one battlefield it had
been Southern arms and hearts
that had, turned the tide of the bat
tie in favor of the Union. Those loyal
persons in the South were now asked to
sacrifice their claims for the benefit OF the
country. Why not ask the bondholders
to sacrifice themselves for the good OF the
country?
stated that when the claim of Mrs. Her
bert had been reported, he had considered
it as bold and unblushing fraud. The
Solicitor of the Treasury had sent an off.
Ger TO Louisiana to examine the claimant.
His report showed it to be a fraud. He
also opposed the pending BILL If it was
passed bill should be passed reimburs-
ing $2S, 600 to the town of York, Pa, on
account of losses incurred through the
raid made by General Early during the
Gettysburg campaign.
On motion of Mr.. White the enacting
clause of the bill for the relief of Hiram
johnson and others, of Tennessee, was
stricken out.
The only bill agreed to by the Commit
tee was one for the relief of Gibbes &
Co., of Charleston, S. c..
The Committee then rose and the
House adjourned