National Republican., 1882-12-22

Hatch objected. The resolutions were then
referred TO the committee of the whole and
Mr.. Kelly gave notice that he would ask for
their consideration Thursday or Friday.
The following
were introduced and referred
By Mr. Rich For the sanitary inspection Of
by Mr. wise; To enlarge the customhouse at
by Mr. Pettigrew For the appointment of two
additional justices of the supreme court of Dakota
BY Mr.. Scranton: To establish the northern judi
cial district Of Pennsylvania.
BY Mr.. BeltzhOnver \ resolution calling on the
secretary of war for full Information iif regard 10
all measures which have been taken To secure the
arrest and trial of H. W. Howgnte.
by Mr.. Cnase For the construction Of bridge
across the Thames river near New London.
BY Mr. Cassidy: To disnpprove the act of the
legislature OF Utah comforting the right of suffrage
on women.
THE SMELLING IN ALASKA.
The speaker laid before the house a letter
from the secretary of the treasury transmit
ting the report of the collector of customs at
Sitka, Alaska, iustlyiug the sholling ofan In
dian village by the United States revenue
steamer Corwin. Referred.
Also, letter from the secretary of war call
ing attention to senate bill now on the
speakers table for the lief of the sureties of
George Il. Eliot, and stating that the effect of
its passage would be to pay $4,000 to the sure
tics-suretes which the government never re-
ceivcd, but which was paid by Eliot for the
manufacture of tice metre. The letter and
the bill were referred to the committee on the
judiciary.
Also, letter from the secretary of war trans
mitting the report of the board of engineer
officers appointed to examine the improve
ment of the mouth of the Columbia river,
Oregon. Referred.
Mr.. Butterworth moved that the house 90
into committee of the whole on the army ap-
preparation bill
MIR. Kasson asked that the civil service bill
be taken up, and, upon Mr.. Butterworth's
refusal to yield, said that he would demand II
vote of the house on the question.
Mr.. Randall, of Pennsylvania, said that it
was and had been the policy of the democratic
side of the house, without interfering with
the civil service bill, to give the preference to
appropriation bills.
Mr.. Kasson. But the gentleman will see how
easy it is to crowd out the civil service bill.
Mr.. Hiscock. desire to repel any assertion that
| wish TO aniagonize civil service reform.
The house then, at 12:45, went into commit
tee of the whole (Mr Townsend in the chair
on
THE ARMY APPROPRIATION BILL,
which appropriates $24,65l, 200.
After an explanation of the bill by Mr.. But
terworth, Mr.. Hewitt, of New York, addressed
himself to the consideration of the provision
that, for army transportation, the land grant
roads which have received government aid by
loan or guarantee of bonds shall be allowed
compensation of not exceeding 90 per cent. of
the amount paid byspriyate parties for the
same kind of service.
He apologized for again referring to this
subject, but he did not think that the house
appreciated the magnitude of the question
involved in this legislation. The provision
attached to this bill was, in substance, the
same as the one attached to the postotiice ap-
preparation bill by the amendment of the gen
tleman from New Jersey (Mr. Robeson). 1t
was curious and suggestive fact that the
gentleman who reported the postoffice appro-
priation bill was opposed to the amendment
which was forced upon it, and the gentleman
who reported the bill Thursday announced that
he was opposed to this provision. He did not
remember in his congressional experience to
have encountered case like this-two great
appropriation bills brought in by two eminent
gentlemen, who announced that they were
opposed on principle to the provisions of the
bills which they managed.
Mr.. Hiscock inquired whether Mr. Butter
worth had made any such announcement.
Mr.. Butterworth replied that he had ex-
pressed his unwillingness to give his assent to
the doctrine that the government might arbi-
trarily fix the compensation to the Pacific
railways for carrying government supplies.
Mr.. Hewitt then proceeded to quote from
the remarks of Mr.. Hiscock on the poStoflice
appropriation bill to the effect that the COR
porations were simply trustees of the property
of the general government His colleague
came from a state which had ever upheld the
right of private property. 1t was a state in
which communism and confiscation under the
guise of law had never been allowed to raise
its head. His colleague represented a district
ofsolid farmers and manufacturers who owned
this property, and they would hold him to a
rigid account for his declaration that there
was no private property in this corporation,
because the original projectors were able un-
der the contract made by the government to
construct these roads for great purposes
national purposes declared by the supreme
court to have been of such importance that
| the very life of the country in its
hour of peril was dependent on their
construction. His colleagues constituents
would never admit the doctrine that the
stocks and bonds which were issued in con-
formity to an act of congress did not repre-
constituents had bought these stocks and
bonds; they were the private property of his
constituents and when he said that that was
the property of the government he must
come face to face with those constituents
| The only issue was whether tho government
or ockholders owned the ronds, His col
league said they were the property of the
il pleased with it, and in doing this he pro
posed to violate the plighted faith of the gov
crnment. He (Mr. HEWITT maintained that
there was u higher law, which was over al
statutcs-the law of human conscience, tho
law of moral obligation, and he had yet tC
be taught that this law ceased when il touched
the domain of legislation. This proposition
involved the reputation of the solemn obliga
tions of this country, it was reputation under
the name of rcadjustmcnt term which wa
odous to the honest people of this country
He knew that gentlemen on the other sid,
had allied themselves to the doctrine of read
iustmcnt, hut he wanted to rcpudiato for tn,
people of his state; and he would not have
taken the floor if his colleague, who should
have spoken for the honor and conscience o
the state of New York, had not laid down
doctrine which must offend the Justice, con
science and sense of honor of every man wh
had to deal with public and private rights
This proposition was not only abhOrrent t.
the moral sense, but it was an act of grievOu
folly. The government wanted to get bacl
its money. There were two ways of gcttin
il back. One was to take the roads by tn
throat and make them disgOrge what the
had got and confscate the property whic
had been entrusted to them an
which they had distributed anon
innocent holders That was the propositiO
submitted by the appropriation committee
, the other method was for the government I
keen its contract and enforce the payment
the debt This could be done by proceedin
) In the direction Of the Thurman funding ac
The report of the commissioner of railway
estimated that the amount that would go int
( the sinking fund fEom government transports
! tion was Sl8,000000. 1t was proposed to tax
one-half of this sum and keep it In the trea
i.