Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-01-07
.xzv1IIrH CONGRESS.
WASHINGTON, january 6, 1885.

United states IN the court OF Claims.
Referred TO the Committee on Appropri.
atoms.
The Oregon Central lsnd-forfeiture
bill was taken up. Mr.. Morgan said
that as both senator's from Oregon wish
ed this bill to pass he supposed it was
expected that all other senator's were
to stand off and see the bill become a
law as il stood but he was compelled
by his sense Of duty as senator to say
that it ought not so to pass. 1t was a
bill Of a radical character. He (Mor-
gan) favored the return to the pub
lie domain Of all IMMIGRANTS not earn
ed by railroad companies, but provision
should be made for judicial ascertain
ment Of the rights Of all parties whose
property was to be confiscated when the
property had been confscatcd as the re-
suit of the war. Mr.. Morgan was glad
TO be able to bear testimony to the
equanimity Of the people of the United
States--speaking through their repre-
sentatives in Congress, who, even under
the pressure Of passions aroused by
the war, had decrccd that seized pro-
perty should be carried into court be-
fore being disposed of.
Mr.. Morgan moved to amend by add
ing to the bill the substance Of the pro-
visions which on his motion had been
added to the Atlantic and Pacific for
fixture bill, providing method of judi
cial procedure for the ascertainment of
the rights Of any parties claiming under
the grant.
At 2 o'clock the interstate commerce
bill came up as the regular order. but
by vote Of % to % was laid aside in
order to continue the consideration Of
the Oregon Central bill.
Mr.. Morgan spoke at considerable
length in advocacy Of his proposed
amendment.
Mr.. Slater replied to Mr.. Morgan,
and maintained that Mr.. Morgans
amendment was unnecessary.
After further debate the amendment
of Mr.. Morgan was brought to vote,
and was rejected-yeas, Is; nays, %.
The bill was then read third time
and passed without division.
Before the announcement Of the
vote on his amendment, Mr.. Morgan
changed his vote from yea to nay, and,
on the passage Of the bill, gave imme-
date notice Of a motion to reconsider.
Executive session and adjourned.
House OF Representatives.
The House at 1926 went into Com
mittee of the Whole (Mr. Rogers. of
Arkansas, in the chair on the pension
appropriation bill.
Mr.. Hancock. Of Texas, explained
the provisions of the bill, which appro-
priated s59,976,000. or $4,000 less
than the estimates. There was some
new legislation in the bill. He thought
that this general legislation would prove
advantageous to the country.
Mr.. Warner, of Ohio, invcighed
against the abuses which existed under
the present pension law in the matter of
compensation allowed to claim agents.
and declared that the piracy of the Mid
die Ages was an honest calling compared
with the operations of claim agents in
the city of Washington. They claimed
to besfiends of the soldiers; they were
the kind of friends to the soldiers that
wolves were to sheep.
Mr.. Randall, of Pennsylvania, said
that at the last session the House had
adopted a proposition to remedy the
evils existing but the Senate had re-
fused to concur in it. In the conference
committee legislation had been formu-
lated which was enacted into a law, and
under this law the abuses complained
of by the gentleman from Ohio had
crept in.
Mr.. J. d. Taylor. of Ohio, attacked
the Committee on Pensions. Bounty, and
Back-Pay, and characterized it as the
graveyard of all pension legislation.
Mr.. Warner, of Ohio, replied i'll vim
dication of the action of the committee.
In the course of further debate Mr..
Refer t0hio). having the floor, was in
terrupted several times by Mr.. Warner.
Mr.. Keifer declined to yield, and ex-
pressed the belief that it was very un-
fair for gentleman who had consumed
nearly an hour in indicating himself
and his committee TO insist on interrupt
ing other speakers.
Mr.. Warner replied that he had not
consumed as much time in vindicating
himself as the gentleman from Ohio had
spent last session in attempting to vim
dicate himself.
Mr.. Refer asked the Chair to have a
good deal Of forbearance towards the
gentleman from Ohio, because it was
constitutional with him to interrupt in
the discussion of bill.
Mr.. Keifer entered his protest against
the whole system of pension-claim
agents. and expressed his disapproval Of
the proposed reduction of pension
agents from eighteen to twelve.
The bill having been read for amend
ments. Mr.. Eyerhardt, of Pennsylvania,
offered proviso that all applicants for
pension shall be presumed to have had
no disability at the time of enlistment,
but such presumption may be rebutted.
An amendment was adopted pro-
yiding that attorneys fees shall not be
paid until the claim is allowed. Ii
shall then be paid by the Government
pension agent. limiting fees to ten dol
lars, except in cases where a special
contract for a fee of twenty-five dollars
is filed, and restricting such special
contracts to agents and claimants re-
siding in the same State.
On the motion of Mr.. 0'Hara. of
North Carolina. an amendment was
adopted providing that the mode and
manner provided for the regulation for
payment Of white pensioners shall APP
ply to all pensioners.
The committee then rose and the bill
was passed.
Adjourned.