The Portland daily press., 1886-01-22
XLIXth CONGRESS- FIRST SESSION.
SENATE.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 2.

dar.
Among the bills introduced was one by
Mr. Butler to enable the people of the Terri
tory of Dakota to form constitution and
State government He said it was intended
as a substitute for the bill already pending.
The new bill is an enabling act," and ap-
plies to the whole territory instead of mere
ly to the southern portion. Referred to the
committee on territories.
A resolution, offered by Mr.. Hoar, was
agreed to, calling on the Secretary OF the
Treasury for information showing the char
acter and amount of claims paid under the
treaties with France of 1908 and 1841, and
the treaty with Spain of 1919, together with
| the names of the claimants.
A bill was introduced by Mr.. Van Wyck to
| prevent the demonetiZation of American
| In introducing this bill, Mr.. Van Wyck said
the Senator from Vermont yesterday remark
| ed that no parties in the Senate or out OF 1t
were seeking to demonetize silver, but even
now, Mr.. Van Wyck continued, and 1or
some time, there had been determination
| or conspiracy on the part of capitalists to de-
monetize silver and violate the laws ana con-
Stitution
The bill, at Mr. Van Wyck's request, was
| laid on the table for the present.
| The Senate proceeded to the consideration
| of bills on the calendar. The first bill in or
| der was one to divide that part of the Sioux
reservation in Dakota into a separate reser-
vation and to secure the REIMBURSEMENT OF
| the Indian title to the remainder.
| Mr. Teller protested against the lndian
| tribes being treated as independent nations.
| Laws should be passed orthelr government,
| if net as citizens, then as wards OF the ma
| tion They should be made self-supportlhg
| as soon as possible. .
| Mr.. Dawes said we had already treaties
| with the Indians, and even If we concludes
| to make no more we should not violate those
| already made.
| After further debate the bill went over and
| %bo ~ Ylrnuido for thn counting OF the
| electoral votes was taken up.
| Mr.. Sherman then took the ti0Or. He dld
| not wish, he said, to intiict speech on the
| Senate as to this bill, but he wished to say
| that no time was better for its consideration
| than the time when no great political ques-
| tion was before the country. The matter IN
| volved a point more dangerous to the future
| of this country than probably any other; In
most of its features the bill was not obJec-
| tionable to any one. The critical points in
volved were two, both presented by the
| fourth section of the bill. That section pro-
| vided that in case there was but one return
| from State the House should meet accord
| ing to the provisions of the Constitution,
| that the returns should be opened by the pre-
siding officer of the Senate, in whose custody
| they would then be, and that the votes should
| then be counted. That mandatory provision
| was the only mandatory provision on the
| subject in the Constitntion-that the votes
| shall then be counted" There was no mode
| pointed out in the Constitution by which the
| votes should or might be counted; no provis-
| ions were made as to the settlement OF any
| dispute relating to the legality of the votes
| of electors, whether the electors had con
| formed to the law of the Constitution, when
| one set or another set of electors had been
| elected; no provision pointing out any au-
uhority of any person or body TO DECIDE
| which of the two sets of returns should be
| electors ION account of ineligibilty of such
| electors) should or should not be counted, or
| to have it's vote counted. There was, how
| ever, no declaration that the President of
| the Senate, who opened the returns should
| count the electoral votes, or that the House
or Senate should pass on the question. All
| that it said was that the president OF the
Senate, in the presence OF the Senate and
| House of Representatives would open the
certificates and the votes shall then be count
ed The trainers of the Constitution adopt
! ed a new provision, but that new provision
| has presented many of the same difficulties
| that occurred under the old, and to this day
1 Congress has never been able to solve any OF
| them. He cited cases where trouble had
been imminent, owing to the imperfection of
the existing law, and said Il think this is a
vital question that we ought to decide. We
| ought to approach it without regard to party
| afiliation, and try if we can to decide this
! most difficult question of American politics.
| The objection have to this bill under con-
| sideration is that it does not solve any OF
these questions 1t does not settle a single
| one of the questions that have their origin
| in the past, or that are likely to arise in the
| future" Mr. Hoar's theory of the bill is
| that when State presents itself, and by but
| one utterance declares, '"ThiS is my action,
it shall be counted as the constitutional ac-
| tion of that State unless both houses OF Con-
| gress agree to reject it. When there are two
| voices, each purporting to be-of course not
| each actually, but each purporting to be-the
| declaration of State as to what its action
| has been, then it requires the concurrence of
the two houses to reject one and accept the
| other.
Mr.. Sherman offered an amendment, strik-
| ing from the bill the clauses allowing either
house to exclude the State, and providing
| that in case of disagreement between the
| two houses the question in dispute shall be
| submitted to a joint convention of both
| houses, which Joint convention shall imme-
diately and without debate, upon the roll
call Of the respective houses, vote upon the
question or questions upon which there have
been such disagreement, and the decision of
| majority of the members of the joint con-
! vention present shall be deemed final and
| conclusive, and the vote shall be counted ac-
cordingly by the President OF the Senate
that while the two houses shall be in meeting
as provided in this act, the President of the
Senate shall have power to preserve or
der, and no debate shall be allowed and no
question shall be put by the presiding officer
except to either house on motion to with
draw, or upon a question upon which the
two houses have disagreed as aforesaid.
Mr.. Edmunds said that the proposition of
Mr.. Sherman was that in case the Senate
and House of Representatives disagreed in
their constitutional and authorized capacity
as government of the United States, there
should be a consolidated count of heads-76
Senators and 325 Representatives and that
the majority of all per capita should deter
mine the result.
"and had got to be eaten up by cat at last,
| should just as soon be swallowed today as
to be undergoing a discussion in her claws
for three or four days before was swallow
ed. That is exactly this case. The Senate
of the United States might as well propose
to the House a bill which declares that in
case of a disagreement between the two
houses in respect to Identification, a vote
that then and there the judgment of the
House should prevail and be done with.
Mr. Sherman thought that was what the
bill already did.
Senator Evarts opposed the bill on consti-
tutional grounds. Though | do not wish to
discuss this question now, with all due re-
spect to the Senator from Ohio, who has adj
dressed the Senate, it seems to me that his
proposition to solve this grave constitutional
difficulty is precisely Mr.. Pickwick's advice
to his followers-..to always shout with the
mob, and when Tupman suggests suppose
there are two mobs?" Pickwick replied,
s'then shout with the largest" laughter
| At 40, the Senate went into executive ses-
sion, and when the doors were reopened adj
iourned till Monday next.
HOUSE.
A number of executive communications
were laid before the House by the Speaker
and appropriately referred. Among them
was one from the Secretary of the Treasury
submitting an account of the investment in
the sinking fund of the Union Pacific and
Central Pacific railroads, and recommending
such modification of the act of March 1878
as will authorize the Secretary of the Trea-
sury to invest the sinking fund in other than
government securities,
The House then resumed consideration
of the bill to increase the pensions of soldiers
widows.
Mr.. Wolford of Kentucky made an i'm
passioned speech in favor of the bill and as
there was much confusion around him as he
stood in the centre aisle.
Mr.. Reagan of Texas took the ground thai
only soldiers who had been disabled in the
war, or widows who had been the wives Of
soldiers at the time such disability occurred
should receive pensions. He criticised the
manner in which special pension bills were
passed by Congress, and stated that he
would drive the petitioners to the pension
office and make them give the proofs re
quired by law. He was in the House when
the arrears act had passed, and had seen
Democrats urging Democrats to vote for II
| because it would give them the soldier vote