National Republican., 1884-03-04

In the Mexican war, ana did not contain n pro-
vision not already sanctioned by the house OF
representatives. Persons who were under politi-
cal disabilities were excluded from the benefit Of
we pI. He was in favor Of pensioning soldiers
the soldiers Of the different wars should not be
connected in the same bill
Mr.. Browne opposed tho bill, because II would
put on the pension rolls all who actually appeared
on some muster roll Of the army Of the United
states In the war with Mexico. II would put on
tho rolls men who never saw a living or q dead
Mexican aud never heard The discharge of A aun,
unless II were fired by accident IL nut on the
rolls men who did dot need pension. lie
who actually served in Mexico or who
participated In any battle in the Mexican
WAT without regard to the time of service,
ano 70 put on the rolls every man who was on the
muster roll for sixty days who could show that he
was IN such q pecunary condition as to need tho
assistance OF the government How did the gen.
temen of the majority forget the 100000 men
VINO VINO served IN war equal In Importance to the
he ' cyaah Ta6 SsTiGSY THY happened to think Of
Seminole war. Why did they happen to think OF
the wars prosecuted by the states to capture run.
Sw STorhS RhtSoS on why dd they fsms%SGT wars
treaties between tho United States and
the savage tribes and then forget these
Lhirty.seven years since the Mexican war? 1t was
niteen years since the close Of the warof the rebel
Lon and certainly the men who carried the hag
OF the nation to victory during the rebellion were
n much entitled to service pension as men who
appeared on muster roll In the war with Mexico
war 10000 went from the saveholding states aud
ths hill was brought in because the rebel soldiery
sonlu 90 PVT on no other pension roll That was the
nc wanted a chance to amend the bill so RS to
lion.
Mr. Hewitt, of Alabama, replied TO Mr.. Browne,
anu commented on the fact that that gentleman,
while chairman of the invalid pension committee
AZ the last congress, had not brought i'm bill to
put union soldiers on the pension rolls. These
tOluiers were not so ignorant that they could be
n0odWnked by the gentleman from Indiana.
They knew that the gentleman rang in the union
sQidler here but for one purpOse-to defeat this
Dill ANA not Tor the purpose of putting any union
soldiers on tho pension rolls. 1t was very unkind
OF the gentleman to refer to wars brought about
py states in order to capture fugitive slaves. The
cause OF the Florida war was not the hunting UP
of runaway negroes, but The murder OF whites by
the Indians. The only objection he (Atr HEWITT
had to the pending bill was that II did not include
Mr.. Townshcnd asserted that the gentleman
from Indiana (hIr. Browne) was attcmptng 10
knife the bill by means that were not fair nor
Mr.. Calkins thought the tmo had come when
the survivors OF q Mexican war should be PEN
stoned as u graceful tribute TO gallant service.
Mr.. Stocksluger supported the bill as an act of
justice to grey. haired men.
NJ. Cox, OF New York, made an appeal in be.
nelt OF tho bill and declared that II measure
whlch should bring every man to his feet to do
hon0r to the Mexican veterans. The Language of
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. BrOwncl should
not be applied to the democrats hero, That gen.
tleinan had ntimateI that the desire to get rebel
solulers on the posion rolls their reason for
bringing in this bill, and that they did indirectly
what they could not do directly. If that was the |
genteman's Idea, for one, he repuduted It, II was
unknown to the democratic side of the house. |
Language had no term of reproachl and mind no |
idea OF detesaton adequate TO express the odous-
ness OF this Kind Of an idea which attempted |
to be fixed on that side of the house.
The rules were then suspended and the bill |
p9ssed-yeas 2g7, nays &c.
The following Is the negative vote: Messrs. |
Arnot, Bayne, Bingham, BisbGe, Boutele, Brewer |
OF New York. Brewer of New Jersey, Browne OF |
Indiana, Brown of Pennsylvania, Chace, |
Cutcheon, Eycrh9rt, Harmer, Hiscock, Holton, |
james, Kean, Kelley, Lawrence, Long, Lyman, |
MCKINLEY MillHrd Miller of Pennsylvania, Morse, |
ONeill OF Pennsylvania, Parker, Phelps, Poland, |
Ranney, Ray of New York Ray of New Hamp- |
shire. Reed, Rockwell, Russell, Skinner of New |
York, Smith. Steele, Stewart Of Vermont, Stone, |
struble, t. Is. Taylor of Ohio, Wadsworth Wait, |
Warner of Ohio, and Whitlng-i6.
Mr.. Cox, OF New York, moved that the house |
adjourn, his purpose being to prevent Mr. Con- |
verse from making motion to suspend tho rules |
and consider the bill increasing the duty on wo Il.
Mr.. Beach called for the yeas and nays, which |
were not ordered and the vote by teller5 resulted
-l0i TO 96-in favor of adjournment
Mr.. Mckinley wanted to reconsider tho vote by |
which tho house refused to order the yeas and |
nays, and Mr.. Holman moved to table that mo- |
tiop. |
This was agreed to-years I4S. nays 1850 the |
house stood adjourned at3:5O.
- This cannot DO considered test vote on Mr. |
Converse's proposition, for such strong opponents
as Mr.. Blackburn aud Mr.. Hurd voted against ad-
journment.