National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-05-23

nonVri'' potior
Findiay stevens
Greenleaf Sumner Of California,
Hardoman, Throckmorton,
Herpert -, a r, : coorrto
HIM %' Vi h''o"hiu' Wcier "
Jones of Wisconsin. woodward,
Lore, worthington,
Haple.
There was some difficulty in regard to the
pairs but by diigent work on the part of
Messrs. Post, of Pennsylvania, and Wilson, of
Iowa. who have charge of them for tho re-
spective sides of the house, they were finally
Strengthened out
The question then required on the motion
to reconsider and it was agreed to-yeas 1873,
nays 100.
Between the first and second votes Messrs.
Lawrence and Lanham paired. Mr.. Weller,
who had voted with tho republicans on the
motion to lay on the table, this time RETAINED
from voting, and Mr.. Warner, of Ohio, and
Mr.. Patton, of Pennsylvania, who had not
before voted, on this motion voted in the
affirmative. This accounts for the change in
tho result
Mr. Browne, Of Indiana, moved to recon-
nit the case to tho committee on elections
with instructions to that committee to make
recount of the ballots cast for contestant
and contestee in all the several voting
precincts in tho county of Marion, in the
seventh congressional district of Indiana, aud
mako report of tho result thereof.
Mr.. Springer, of Illinois, made the point Of
order that the motion was not iS order as
the rule which permitted motion to recon-
NIT applied in terms to "bills' and not to
Resolutions" lie made the further point
that even were it in order TO recommit a
resolution, it was now too late to make the
motion, as the house had taken action under
operation of the previous question.
The speaker ovcrruled the point of order.
The house was then in precisely the same
position as when tho previous question was
ordered As to the other point that it was
not in order to recommit resolution, the
chair was of opinion that the torn "bilP'
was generic and included all legislative
propositions which could come before the
house.
Mr.. Blackburn inquired whether it was
not a fact that under tho law of Indiana bal
lots were only required to be preserved for
six months That period having expired
there would be no offcnsc committed against
the laws of Indiana if the ballots wero de-
stroyed or tempered with.
Mr.. Peelle. of Indiana, replied that as O
matter of fact there was in Marion county q
contest for tho office of sheriff still pending,
and that the ballots had been preserved.
Tho house, by a vote of yeas 1874 nays 1874,
refused to rccoinmit the resolution.
Mr.. Horr, of Michigan, rising to a question
of privilege, said mo eX-member of congress
has right to the floor, if ho takes it and
then abuses its privileges by attempting to
influence legislation here. now rise to say
that it has been brought to my notice by q
democratic member of this house that an ex-
member of congress, who is the father of one
of the litigants in this case, has been on the
floor of the house soliciting members, sending
for them, taking them into consultation, and
attempting to influence them in their votes
on this case. If that DO true it Is such vio-
lation OF tho dignity ana integrity oil this
house that it ought not to go unnoticed.
81 desire to say" replied MIR. Randall, OF
Pennsylvania, that the father of tho contest
ant would be unnatural If he did not take
the deepest interest In his sons contest. lap
plause ON the democratic and laughter on the
republican side.I And stand here witness
to the fact that that gentleman has exercised
the most careful propriety in connection
Herewith" lApplause ON the democratic.
side.
And want to say turther," broke in MIR.
Blount, of Georgia, that it is notorious
fact, known by all the members on this floor,
that this rule has been violated time and
again; chat ex-members OF congress in the
employ of railroad companies and in other in
terests have been importuning members on
this floor"
why did you not call attention to it,?
inquired Mr.. Brown, of Pennsylvania.
why have not you done ity' retorted Mr..
Blount.
Because / have not known it," replied
Mr. Brown.
"Oh! my dear sir; you arc a very inno-
cent persou" returned Mr.. Blount. 81 want
to add that this rule has been obsolete for
months and years. 1t ought to have been
enforced, and tito gentleman from Indiana is
certainly excusable under the circumstances,
when tho rule has been obsolete in every
other direction"
Mr.. Springer made the point that tho rule
related to person who was interested in a
claim pending before congress. 1t had refer
ence to u pecuniary interest to hired attOr-
neys coming on the floor and advocating the
passage of claim, and it had never been
assumed that it had any reference to gem
tleman who came looking after the interests
OF o friend or relative in u contested election
case.
Mr., Horr said that he had made the state
ment, not for the purpose OF any political
claptrap, but because no found that the dig
nifty of the house and its honor were being
violated, and he felt it his duty to call the
attention oil the houa. TO the fact Tho geu-
tcman from Pennsylvania said that it was
natural for father to feel for his son. SO it
was, but it was also natural for him, If he
had the sense Of honor he should have, to do
1t in scemly and becoming manner