Warren sheaf. [volume] (Warren, Marshall County, Minn.) 1880-current, 1881-10-15

OATH Mr. Edmunds said that he would not
object to the presentation Of the petition, and
it was laid upon the table Hereafter it may
be referred to the committee on privileges and
elections. A committee consisting Of Senator'S
Pendleton and Anthony were appointed to wait
upon the president and inform him that the
Of half an hour was taken.
At the expiration Of that time the senate re-
convened, and the committee reported that the
president had said that he would communicate
with the senate in writing tomorrow. Mr..
Edmunds presented resolution that the stand
ing committees of the last session be continued
for the present session, and that the president
pro tenn. fill any vacancy that might exist
MI. Harris promptly objected. and the resolu-
ton goes over until tomorrow under the rule.
The senate then adjourned.
PEoBLEMATIC.
It cannot be definitely stated what will be
the course pursued by the opposing parties in
the senate with reference to the completion o
the organization, for the reason that neither
side has yet fixed upon line Of action. There
is deep conviction among Republican sena-
tors that every possible safeguard should be
thrown about President Arthur. When Senator
Bayard was elected president pro tenn, it was
impossible to do anything but file protest, be-
cause the Democrats had the power With
tons have changed. The Republicans have at
least as many votes as the other side, and
practical majority, should Judge Davis con-
tinue his policy of refraining from voting
either way There is q pretty well matured
tenn, but the matter has not been made the
subject of caucus action. It probably will be
tomorrow forenoon, as the Republi-
cans meet for consultation at that
time. Some of the Republicans
fear the Democrats may resort to
best information to be obtained indicates that
this apprehension is not we'll founded. Mr..
Bayard himself is understood to hold that they
cannot afford to assume the attitude of OBJ
structionists when such q course might
be traced to similar motives: At
that they should appear anxious to accelerate
CLOSE THE SESSION THIS WEEK
if possible. This. of course, is incompatible
with the idea Of parliamentary tactics Of dill
atory nature. It is understood that one feat
ure Of the situation with reference to the pres
idency is that very considerable element of
the Democratic side at heart did not care to
accomplish the election of Bayard, and will do
nothing to hinder his deposition. It fact, at
least one of the Democrats said to-day that he
could not be induced nor driven nor bound by
1Ao CduCu5 W UIoVout pdSSdeo VI D. Io5OAu-
ton to seat Judge Davis, except
the other side had The power to elect
him they could do so. He knew that his con-
stituents would not expect him to go further
than that for his party, and he would not do it.
Mrs. Christiancy Details the History OF Her
Wrongs
WASHINGTON, Oct 1O.-In the hearing before
the examiner to-day in the Christancy divorce
suit, direct testimony of Mrs. Christiancy was
continued She testified that when Mr.. Christiancy
took her to his home, March z, in the summer Of
1876, the party consisted of himself and five sons,
four grown aud the other thirteen of age About
two years of her married life was spent in Michi-
gan. During that time she had charge of the house,
and with the exception of the services of inexpe
rienced servant girl fifteen years old she performed
all of the household duties, including mending her
clothes. The youngest son, George. was very
kind to her, and they grew quite fond of each other
The others were kind enough when sober, but all.
were addicted to drinking, and when intoxicated
would quarrel with themselves and their father
They used low language and had frequent brawls
She protested against being compelled to live that
kind of life, and wanted a house separate from
her husbands sons, which he promised to provide
but never did She never said she
would get up some, unless at a time when she was
indignant at the treatment she received. She did
not believe in divorce. When she left Peru she
did not intend to apply for divorce, although
not think of doing so until after he applied for
divorce from her on the ground of adultery, after
she returned home from Peru. She said nothing
about what occurred there except to members of
her own family. She kept from the public the fact
that they had separated and the cause Oft, and
would not have told it to the public until COM
PEELED to do by the petition for divorce if
he continued to refuse to support her.