National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1879-04-16

and cost MS more people and treasure to hold her
Than any other state, except Virginia cost us.
Tho people with whom you live arc the people BY
whom YOU are TO be Judged. If the people of North
Carilona were loyal how did the gentleman (I,us-
SELL know that while he himself was serving In the
Confederate army, or while hcwas nmcmbcr of the
Confederate Leglslaturc-thcn becoming Rc-,ub.
lican Judge, without ever having graduated from
INV ONCE. lLoughter.l am not Nstonished that
thc rules adopted by the Southern claims Commits.
sion should meet favor with that gentleman.
lLnughtcrl agree with the gentleman from Ohio
(Nlr. Gurneld) that the substitute Offered by Inc
gentleman from Tennessee CIR. Young ought not
TO be adopted.
o ine supreme Court applies the ro that the char
aeter OF lhc clalmaiit Is to be determined by tho
community IN which he lived rs TO whether he was
n Y cuemy OF not. IL holds that the court cannot
of no ne personal character and disposition
~, 1 "uNluua inhabitants Of cnehly's territory, nnd
uat " must be governed by the principle OF public
~" 50 often announced from the bench rs Hpplca.
bic nllkc to civil and International claimants, that
an the people of every state or district In surrcc-
ton against the United States must DO regarded as
enemies until, by the action Of the Legislature aud
inc Executive OF otherwise that relation Is thor
oughly and permanently changed.
u Every one of these claimants then was an enemy.
lhey had no legal claim against the Government,
ana when we commenced opening the doors Of the
Treasury TO them we did II as matter Of gratuily.
ANA yetyOu ask all these men (mcaning the South
ern members of the House) who lost their all in the
cause, TO vote to tax themselves 10 pay men who
were disloyal to them as well as disloyal to us-to
men who were good Lord and good devil, DC.
place where they lived during the war Laughter
You ask them to do that. You ask that the burdens
Of this, already overburdened people shall be In
creased In violation of international law.
Mr.. GARFIELD. The general doctrine OF bellig
erens is OF course accepted by everybody TO cover
as enemies technically all the inhabitants of the
belgercnl territory; that general doctrine Is rccog
nized by all lawyers everywhere. But nobody has
ever denied, except the gentleman from Wisconsin,
that during our late war and since 1t the Supreme
Court has repeatedly determined that In cases be.
fore IL the question of loyalty cannot be raised
where the party has been granted pardon. II was
stated i'll the last Congress that 90 per cent. OF all
the people OF the seeded States were what we
would call disloyal, and every IN those States
that amounted to anything belonged to that cate
81 desire to traverse that proposition by some facts.
Do gentlemen know that leaving out nll the border
Statos) there were iiny regiments and seven com
panies OF white men In Our army lighting for the
| Union from the States that went into rebellion
| Do they know that from the single State of Ken
lucky more Union soldiers fought under our flag
| than Napoleon took into the battle Of Waterloo;
| more than Wellington took. with all the allied
| armies against Napoleon? DO they remember that
10000 cOOrcd men fought under Our flag against
the rebellion and for the Union, and that of that
number 1000 were from the States which went
into rebellion?
| rights, and that when we came out of the war we
should not pay them and their families for all the
proper Losses that they suffered in aid Of our Gov
| eminent Is what had hoped 10 man on either
| side of the House would say. am glad to know
| that the gentlemen who fought against us do moi
| say it-not one of them. 1t remained for one Of
our own soldiers to say that nothing ought to be
| paid to any man, howeverloyal ifhe came from the
South; In my judgment that's in the highest degre(
| Commission 20 on until 1t has acted oil the case
before H. and then let it be mustered out Let us no
enlarge that business, but let us complete IT. Mos
of all let us not turn over to the court where thu
distinction between loyalty and disoyalty Is not re
talned
Mr.. TAYLOR. represent constituency which
was as true to the Union and Us true to the flag ~
| the constituency represented by the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr, Bragg. If he means to init
loyal to the flag and that they were enemies to tn
Government, then, In the name of 10000 soldier
from East Tennessee who fought under the Union
flag, and in the name of the people | represent,
hurl II back In his teeth. Laughter and applause
l Mr. SPRINGER moved to amend Mr.. Young's sub
silute by adding proyso that The cases thus trans
crrcd 10 the Court of Claims shall be subject to tn
same defense by the Government that could hav
been made If the cases were pending before til
commission.
Mr.. ATKINS argued that II would be very grea
wrong to the 5000 claimants who had gone into tn
expense of submitting their testimony to the South
crn Claims Commission to have their cases 10,
dumped into the Court of Claims a court which
had been stated III debate did not decide more thai
forty or fifty cases year.
The question was taken on Mr.. Springer
amendment and II was rejected only thirty.hy
members voting in the Affirmative.
Mr.. YoUSG's amendment, in the nature of sui
stltute for Mr. Drugg's amendment, was rejected
50 TO l0T.
The question then required on Mr.. Bragg
amendment.
Mr.. HOOKER moved to amend by transferring a
pending claims to the district courts in the respect
! i've districts where the claimant resides. Ruled on
| on point of order.
) Mr.. BRACES amendment was then rejected 65 +
5 liz.
Mr.. sPRINGER'onered an amendment abolishin
! the southern Claims Commission and provldin
that any person who may have u claim against tn
| United States of which the Court of Claims wOul
: not now have jurisdiction, but founded Oh equit
and justice and not barred by limitation, may I'll
his plea in the Court Of Claims 1t further provide
that the court shall report It's finding TO Congress
and Congress shall not allow or authorize the pa!
ment of any private claim not payable undere Nis
! ing law until the claim has been investigated b
l the Court of Claims.
9 Mr. SPRINGER stated that his amendment VIZ
identical with what was known rs the Potter bill
4 and which had passed the House almost unan
: mousy at the last Congress except that his amen'
: ment provided that the eases pending before ii
c commission should be transferred to the Court
: claims to be examined MS other cases, The ament
J ment would take away from Congress the daily a.
, of examining private claims. or all the ribuna
i under the sun for the adjudication Otprvate claim
| Congress was the wOrSt-unjuSt to claimants vi
q Just TO the Government and unjust to eyerybod
| concerned. -
Mr.. REED opposed the amendment The low g
| innate which the gentleman from Illinois IN
J. Springer) put upon thejustice OF the House mu
Y have come to him from his experience upon Il
: | Election Committee.
against him as member of the Committee on Ele
IS | ton and said that every report which he IN
Il favored had been adopted by the House.
Mr.. REED. The injustice OF the House In ador
!. ing them Is precisely what referred to.
Mr.. SPRINGER. Then your remark should hay
8 been addressed 10 the House, not to me indiyi
y ually.
/ Without diSposing of the amendment the cor
Q mittee rose and the House directed that all deba
L on the amendment shall close in ten minutes aft
the House again goes into committee.
!. The House then at i:t0 adjourned.
u