Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-05-14
The HOliSe.

announced the appointment of Mr.. Culbertson
in place of Mr.. Reagan as member OF the
committee to investigate the alleged corrup-
ton in the election case of Donnelly vs.. Wash
burn.
The House then went into committee Of the
whole, Mr. Cox in the chair, on the legislative,
executive and judicial appropriation bill. The
reading of the bill was not interrupted until
the clauses were reached relating 10 the once
| of commissioner of internal revenue. At this
| mint Mr. Dibrell offered an amendment pro-
| yi6inr that the salaries of storekeepers and
paupers at all distilleries that mash less than
sixty bushels of grain per day, shall not exceed
$50 Der month, while distilleries are in opera
tion, and $35 while they are not IN operation,
and at all other distilleries storekeepers shall
not receive exceeding 900 while distilleries are
not in operation.
| Mr.. Baker opposed the amendment, assert
! iug the effect would be to injure the faithful
| and honest administration of the service. The
vo,e on The amendment resul ed 81 to 80, and
| the point of no quorum was raised by Mr..
Baker. A call of the roll showed quorum
present.
The question REQUIRED upon the amendment,
which Garfield characterized a. O moonshlne
amendment, and it was agreed tC 81 yeas to G6
mas. Pending further DEBATE the committee
rose and the session of Wednesday came to a
close and that of Thursday began.
A good deal of confusion was occasiOned by
Mr.. Townshend, of Illinois, claiming as ques-
ton of privilege, the tight to present in open
house number of petitions In favor OF the
abolition of the tax on salt. The speaker
ruled the petitions must be referred to the pc
tition box.
Mr.. Cobb introduced bill appropriating
$500, OG0 to supply deficiencies in appropria-
tions for the payment of pensions fo- the fs
cal year and asked for its present consldera-
ton. Much opposition was manifested to this
course and an angry colloqny ensued between
Blackburn ard Cobb as to whether the COM
mittee on appropriations had directed Cobb to
report this bill. IL was finally referred to the
committee On appropriations.
Mr.. Springer then took the floor to reply to
the speech recently made by Mr.. Orth, but
welded a few moments to Mr. Monroe, who
made short explanation of bis position as to
the report on Venezuela claims.
Mr.. Monroe referring to the alluslon made
TO him by Mr. Springer, on the occasion of the
personal explanation of Orth, said the infer
euces had been made by some of his Republic
can friends that Springer had intended to con-
yev the impression that the Republican minor
ity on the committee of foreign affairs, and
especially himself, (Monroe), had no other or
better reason to offer for omi tting from the re-
port on the Venezuela matter the portion re-
iatinn to Orth than the fact that Orth had
withdrawn from the field as a candidate. He
(Monroe) did not think that inference fsirly
warranted by the language used, nor did he
believe that Mr.. Springer could have intended
to convey such an impression. But the result
had been that he had been requested to give his
recollection of the facts In connection with
that report and he therefore proceeded to do so.
He said that when he ascertained that passage
would be introduced into the report rejecting
upon the character of Orth, he earnestly object
ed to it. His first and principal reason for OBJ
iecting was that he thought the proposed para
graph did Orth injustice. He had formed q
favorable opinion of Orth as an upright and
honorable man, and he thought that general
good character should 60 for something when
iudging of mans conduct. He also thought
the evidence in the case furnished no proof
of corrupt or dishonest motives. Under
all the circumstances the course
pursued by Orth appeared to Monroe to be re-
concilable with the theory of honest purpose,
| while he thought that it was an error of judg-
ment in Orth to have come to Washington In
the capacity of attorney for the Venezuela
| claimants. Still it was evident to him that
Orth might have regarded what he did as COM
| ing fairly within the scope of legitimate
| practice OF his profession. Having formed
that opinion, he had urged Springer to omit
that portion of his report which contained re-
ference to Orth, and had stated that unless that
were done he could not join in
making the report. He had urged
further the importance of unanimity on
the part of the committee, and had called
Springer's attention to the probability that the
paragraph would produce an excited political
| debate in the House and thus imperil the
measure reported from the committee.
| Springer had contended that the paragraph in
| question was warranted by the evidence; that
| il did no injury to Orth; that it was a legiti-
mate part of the inquiry, and that it must be
retained in the report, but finally, for the sake
of unanimity, Springer had yielded the point
in dispute and the passage in regard to Mr..
| Orth had been omitted.
| Mr. Spri lger then took the floor and after
giving short history of the claims against
Venezuela proceeded to the speech delivered by
| Orth, taking it point by point. Upon the
point made by Orth that there was discrerau-
CIV between the report which had been pub
lished in the Chicago Times and the report sub
mitted to the House, Springer said printed
slips of the report as originally written had
! been furnished the representatives of that
paper with the understanding it should
not be published until adopted by the
committee, and that its premature pub
lication was without his knowledge or con-
sent. Referring to Orth's charge that he
(Springer) had been pursuing him for partisan
purposes Springer said that friends of the gen.
tleman had urged that inasmuch as
he had withdrawn from the guberna.
tCrial field, all reference to his course be
omitted from the report, and for that reason
and not of personal kindness to the gentleman,
he (Springor) had finally consented to do go
Springer then proceeded to criticise Orth' 8
acting as an attorney for fraudulent demands
between the time of his election and taking his
seat, claiming it was clear violation of the
| statutes, and said: 81 submit to this
House and the country whether my course in
endeavoripg to expose fraud and prevent our
government from enforcing with the army and
| navy the payment of dishonest and fictitious
claims, or his in urging, as member of Con-
gress, C .ercive measures, and after having been
elected to Congress, in acting as attorney for Q
| Venezuela claimant, for which he received
$1,000 is deserving of the condemnation
which he invites. Springer, in connection
with his remarks, presented certified copies oi
all papers in the case and of the
claims of Beales, Mobiles and Garrison
versus the government of Venezuela, from the
files of the mixed commission appointed fol
the settlement cf the claims established under
the convention of April 25th 1866, between
the United States and Venezuela. Ordered
printed and referred to the committe on foreign
affairs.
Mr.. Orth replied in a tone of great bitterness
to what he called the extraordinary diatribe oi
the gentleman from Illinois, and spoke of the
malignity of heart that had tried~to tortur,
his conduct into criminal act. He declared
that Mr.. Springer had for years pursued hin
with the malignity of political and persona
emnity, and said that he might, on some futur