National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-02-07
A Lively Discussion in tho House Upon the
Bill To Prevent This Disease.
The Doctrine Of State Rights Brought
in by the Democrats.
Various Bills and Resolutions Presented
for Confederation in Both Houses.
THE HOUSE.

Director Of Columbia hospital, Mr.. Evans OF
Pennsylvania
Directors Of Columbian Institute for tho Deaf
and Dumb, Mr.. Tucker. Of Virginia, aud Mr..
Calklns Of Indiana,
Consulting trustee OF Washington reform school,
Mr.. Eldredge of Michigan
Mr.. Cosgrove entered motion 10 reconsider the
vote Dy which the house on Tuesday rejected the
resolution empowering the committee on ex-
penditures In the interior department to send a
suOSommlttee to examine tho work on Hot
Springs creek.
Mt Lewis offered q resolution referring to the
court OF claims for Investigation, and report all
claims for cotton seized by the union authorities
uuflng the civil war. Referred.
on motion OF Mr., Russell, 10000 extra copies OF
the morrison tariff bill were ordered printed.
un motion Of Mr.. Matson, q resolution was
adopted calling on the secretary Of the interior
ior copies of al orders and correspondence relat-
Ing u irregular practices the part of attorneys
pracuclng before the pension Office, together with
copies OF all official charges against such attor-
peys, ana copies OF circulars used by them which
are deemed to be deceptive In character.
pills were introduced and referred as follows:
- by Mr.. Thomas: Authorizing the purchase OF
snug Harbors for disabled seainen.
by Mr.. Curtin: For the establishment OF q
nrancn home for disabled volunteers in ono of
Mr.. Gibson offered resolution directing the
Somittee on expenditures in the department of
Justice 70 examine INTO the occasion for the un-
an West Virginia, Referred.
Mr. Belmont, from the committee on foreign af.
cent to transmit to the house complete copies of
all correspondence between this government and
that OF Great BRITAIN respecting the exraditton
81 alleged fugiuves from justice, that has laken
place since the date of the Presidents special
message TO congress OF Dec. %, 1876 announcing
that the suspended extradition under the treaty
OF 1872, had been reserved, and that the CORE.
bpondence BIO accompanied by projects of any
new extradition stipulations, which may have
Deen submitted by either government to the other
since the suspension in 1876 of the operations
under the tenth article of the treaty of 1872.
Mr.; Calkins inquired whether the gentleman
had investigated to find out how much work the
ment.
Mr.. Belmont replied that the correspondence
would not be very vouninous. One OF the OBJ
lects OF the resolution, however, was to discoyer
now much correspondence had passed between
the two governments on the subject.
Inc resolution was adopted.
MT. Clements, from the same committee, re.
ported u resolution calling on the secretary of
state for Information as to how many and Which
q the foreign ministers, consus, or agents of tho
United States to any foreign country have been
aUsent from their post OF duty since the first OF
January, 1852. and the length Of such absence
also whether their salary mas been paid during
The house then, at 1895, went into committee OF
pneumonia bill.
seripg one of the vast Industries Of the County,
and an industry in which the state of Texas was
specially Interested. His opposition was not in
splred by the apprehension that there existed to-
day within the state single case of pleuro-pneu-
monia: Why had not the committee seen fiji to re-
strict operations Of the bill to the states in which
the plague existsp There were in this measure
eHis ahd dangers infinitely worse than the cattle
plague; He criticised seriatim the provisions OF
tne Dill and especially that section, which pro-
yldes Tor the division of the expense of eradicat-
lns the disease between the United States and the
state in which IL exist. The United States had no
right To say what amount should be paid by any
state, and, in caseof a REFUSAL to lay an embargo
upon the shipment and expectation of its caLtle.
out the provisions OF The bill, but he predicted
That S2500OO would be found not to be pocket
change when compared with the vast sums which
would be needed. No more magnificent plan had
ever been conceived OF to unlock the vaults of the
treasury and disgorge the public funds.
Mr. Reagan TOOK similar ground i'll opposition
TO The measure, and argued that many OF It's pro
visions were unconstitutional. He fully sympa-
thized with the purpose of the bill, but thought
that the measure, as reported, would create an
evil greater than it was proposed to remedy
MI HUNT also argued against the bill on con-
sttutional grounds, Contendng that 1t gave to the
federal government powers which were expressly
reserved 10 the states.
Mr. Eaton considered the pending bill as the
most mischieyous which had been presented To
congress ut the present session, mischievous be-
cause II was III utter violation OF the constitution
ana took from tho states their powers and their
rights II ought 10 be chan9ed In its title and Il
should be entitled bill ito abrogate ang aunul
tue constitution aud deprive the states of the
rights which belong to them" 1t undertook to
make the President the master Of the people OF
this great confederation of states 1t was another
OF those wedges driven into the constitution.
There had been plenty OF those wedges in the
past He hoped that there would be fewer In the
future, because the safety of the great people
rested upon the sovereignty and rights of the
states
Mr. Anderson spoke in support Of the measure.
terrible disease was threatening one of the
greatest industries OF the country, and congress
had the power on the ground Of protecting the
general public and the rights of property to stamp
~ out AnH Yet me proposition to do so was met
with the OLD, old argument of state sovereignty
aud state rights. While the whole animal I'M.
dusry was IN danger Of being annihilated II was
over state line and eradicate the disease No
such objection was made, however, when a Mis-
ssasiiIPpi tevee oiii came up. Gentlemen were
should be permitted to go to the demnition
smitheree1s before they would vest any power in
the federal government to preventit
Mr.. Muldrow, while favorlng the general DUR.
poIt ol the pil, opposed certain provisions in 1t,
ana gave notice that he would, ut the proper
time, move to recommit it for amendment ana re-.
vision.
Mr. Peters and Mr., Lawrence supported the bill,
and dwelt upon the immediate necessity of taking
steps TO eradicate pleuro-pneumOniu,
Mr.. Cannon expressed his hearty concurrence In
the purpose 2t the legislation, and failed to find
any constitutional stumbling block in the way OF
voting for it,. A liberal construction of the con
stilution should always be given when a great
public good was 70 be accomplished or great
MIR. Rowell contended that the proposed legis.
latton was absolutely necessary 10 project the cat
tie interest," and that 1t was not possible for Inc
states TO do so without federal aid.
Mr. Nnting confined his remarks to an argu
menI nDlrmlng inc ConStituuonality of the ID o..
poaeo law and Mr.. Perkins contcnded that con-
upon the subject.
Mr.. Belford said that he would not vote for the
bill, unless II was fundamentally reconstructed
Iut lie was not going 10 vote against IL under the
hilnsy prctext OF state rights. He believed that
this was great nation, and that It was It's duty
TO protect tne health Of the people. lie objected
TO the bill, because II authorized some scientific
crank, TO be appointed by the commissioner of
agriculture 10 take charge OF the whole subject
anu 10 investigate the condition OF the cattle
which were to BIO shipped from one state to an-
other, That was too great power to put in tho
that the bill would be recOmmitted, and that the
committee would remodel and reiAsnion IL.
Mr.. Potter sympathized With some of the objects
winch were sought 10 be secured by this bill
when were within the constitutional power of
congress TO accomplish. But our government was
system OF self government aud the federal gov
eminent should not invade the rights of the states.
ms question was not so much question Of state
rights as IL was one OF state duty, and his state
was competent TO discharge IL. New York was
not willing that she should be deprived Of her
control over the cnttl0adlsease within her terri
tory. because she believed that she could do 1t
better imam any other power. The work OF eTadi-
Gazing the disease was one OF n magnitude too
great 10 10 taken out of the hands OF the states
ana put In charge Of an executive appointee.
MT. Hepburn made Il constitutional argument
IN support or lhe view that the federal govern
menl could, in the exercise OF its power to regu-
late commerce, legislate in the manner proposed
by the bill.
MIR. Cox, of New York, made a bright two.
minute speech against the bin, which he asserted
tended TO- break down the old weil.ordered
division OF state and federal power
MIR. Gibson, passing over the constitutional oueg-
ton with references 10 the time when the repuh-