The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1880-06-17
Hill, Butler and Hampton.

8! In the discussion Of the Kellogg.Spof.
ford caae in the United States Senate,
Senator Mcdonald concluded his areu.
ment against unaeating Kellogg on last
Friday, aud at the conclusion of his re-
marks Senator Hill obtained the floor,
and after reviewing the replies to his ar.
gument ON the 11th and 10Th of Nav.
said he would have some plain words
with the gentlemen on his side of the
chamber who had argued against the
resolutions to unseat Kellogg. Their
attitude, ne said, was singular and not
logical. The Republicans believed the
Packard Legislature legal, and therefore
believed Kellogg legally entitled to his
seat; The Democrats who opposed the
resolution admitted the illegality of the
Packard Legislature, yet held that Kel-
logg was entitled to his seat.
Mr. Butler remarked that he did not
argue thet Kellogg was elected, but that
the Senate having within its jurisdiction
declared Kellogg entitled to the seat, no
future Senate had jurisdiction to revise
that action. He thought that if Mr..
Hill submitted to the decision Of the
Electoral Commission, though he be.
lieved 1t wrong, and to the decision of
the Supreme Court In the States rights
cases, which he believed to be wrong. he
could not consistently criticise his iBut-
ler's) position in this matter.
Mr.. Hill went On to argue that the
fplain dictate of the Constitution, that
Senators must be chosen by the Legisla.
ture Of the State, could not bs evaded.
Ii the Senator from South Carolina did
not believe the Packard Legislature to
be legal, ne could not believe that that
dictate had been obeyed.
Mr.. Butler said heacted according to
his own construction of the Constitution,
not that OF the Senator from Georgia or
any other Senator. If this matter now
came up fof the first time he would vote
against Kellogg, but he was arguing in
the case now before the Senate. not on
the case which was before it three yeara
ago. 81
| Mr. Hill, resnming his remarks, said
| that when the case was re-opened the
| Democratic majority in one day voted
down ak resolutions which declared or
assumed that the case was settled,
Mr. Butler said these votes wore in
conclusive; they were on amendments
offered by the opposition to kill the reso-
luton.
MIR. Hill rejoined that if the Senate
| thought the case re, 1bjudicata it should
have voted for they. Amendments. The
Honorable junior Senator from South
| Carolina had voted against them every
ttime. ~ ~
Mr. Hampton explained that he had
been opposed to the -s-opening of the
case, but on the assurance that it was not
to be- re.opened, that tho COMMITTEES was
merely to take additional testimony for.
the information of tho Senate, ne con.
sented TO vote for it. He did net think
ie Was authorized to make such report
as it did, lis7i57IsI
Mr.. Hill; rezuming, said the Senators
from South Carolina had selected him as
the mark for their irony and spleen. He
was, however, their friend, and when
friends differed plain words should be
used. When Buffers and Spofford's
cases came before the Committee on
Privileges and Elections the Democratic
members had moro difficulty with But.
! ler's than Spofford's. Spofford q title was
! better than Buffers, but the Senate de-
[ cided in favor of the Legislature that
elected Butler; therefore, they acted
favorablyi in his'case. MIR. Hill confessed
he was disappointed. He had not
thoughtiwhen he voted to admit Butler
that he was aiding to admit strength
which would be used to keep out o man
with o better title. Referring to the de-
nial by Butler that South Carolina had
done nothing to oppress Louisiana, Hill
| quoted an article from The Charleston
1 Reigs and C6arier to tho effect that Kel-
logg was not elected, but "that 1t should
not be forgotten, our. own gallant Butler
should also be seated, and the Democrats
/ were in duty bound to stand by the
arrangement Also an article endors-
i ing sBrtlers Argument against unseatine
Kellogg. MIR. Hill said he thought these
Ieupported all he had previously said on
the subject.
Y Referring 10 Senator Hamnton's re-
cent speech, Mr. Hill wondered why the
Senator had spoken OF his t.sn bravery
during the fiWGr, entls Igi1y ne had con-
trasseo is with the spirit of certain 9TH
ers who, h6 said, had been Gin q safe
1 place. aIamlbrave enough now said
Il Dir. Hili, "neithec to boast OF my own
IachieVoraents nor TO deprecate those IF
the Senator from South Q olina. It
did not wqniregW war 60 mako fnela Union
il man. 4 am, and ever have been, one
i from conviction. feel under no obliga.
ton, therefore, 20 yield ono jot5of equal
] rights ard privileges Of tho Southern
! States under the Constitution in order 70
appease Northern wrath, or to show 90
the Northern people that I have been
i brought to the condition of submission
| and subservient loyalty :,
H .tt RsplyinSS, Mr.. Butler said :iIf .he Sen.
Il atoE from SeoFgia had voted fioriiiS (Bul..
lez's admission II bile ID doubt IA: u. his
election, IL had not ;ncreasefi siiis rssi,sst
for the Senator from Georgia. Ifthere syhA
Il the elightesk doubt la the Senator'S mind
2 Icoueesniug his title les him make a motion
Il nov co vacnfAs cha, tsSak and hr n QfAla.Yi