The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-02-03

ion or any public documents or papers. in open
or executive session, TO enable the Senate, IN
oDen or executive session to review the PROPHECY,
or the reason, or the information upon which ne
acted, or may have acted. in making removals or
suspensions would be attempt TO obtain sucn
information by false pretenses, and for uses and
purposes not authorized or justified by any law
or public policy of the United States; and she.ld
The President grant such request, or require any
members of his Cabinet TO obey such directions
from the Senate. when deemed by him to be
made for such unjustifable and unlawful uses
and purposes would no to recognize and encour-
age an improper practice and an injurious inno-
walton upon his exclusive and INDEPENDENT rights
and duties as President of the United States"
Mr. Hoar inquired whether The request to print
included the printing OF the stump-speech in the
belly of the resolution.
Mr. ingalls, gave notice that when the original
and substitute resolutions should come up to-
morrow he would move to refer them to the COM
mittee privileges and elections for further
consideration.
The resolution, according to request was laid
over until tomorrow.
The next bill on the calendar was bill to per-
nit the United States consul at Warsaw nus
sia to accept certain decorations rendered him
by the Russian government. THE consul is q
Russian subject and not an American citizen
Mr. Edmunds Mr.. ingalls, and Mr.. Logan op-
posed the bill, and Mr. Morgan spoke IN Its
favor.
Mr Logan evoked applause from the galleries
by his remarks, concluding as follows: Let
the decoration Of the American citizen be his
daily walk and his demeanor toward his fellow
man. That is the only decoration that
American citizen should. in my opinion, wear"
The electoral-count bill thea came up, and Mr..
Evarts took the floor. He favored the recommit-
tai of the bill to the committee He thought
section should be added to the bill, making it the
duty of the Governor of each State, under seal
of the State as soon as practicable after the final
act Of the State in the electoral appointment, 10
communicate to the United States government
the result Of that process This communication
should show the names of the persons elected or
appointed as electors, and what votes had been
cast for such persons respectively. Mr.. Evarts
was satisfied that if this was done the difficulties
surrounding the question of counting the vote
would disappear, for we should have the highest
public authority showing the final act of the State
In the election.
Mr.. Teller denied the right of Congress to sub
NIT the question to the Supreme Court The
question, who the electors for any given
State. was question for the State alone. and
Mr.. Teller therefore favored leaving to the Gov
ernor of each State the matter of the certificate,
and proposed an amendment to the effect that in
case of the Inconvenience of the two houses,
ana III case such non concurrence--and conse-
squsnt failure to count the vote of State-re-
suited in taking away the majority required by
the Constitution, or when, by not counting the
vote of State, an election should be had of
person different from the person who would be
elected Ii the votes were counted, that IN those
two emergencies it should be declared that there
was no election. and that the House of Repre-
sentatives should make an election as required
by the Constitution.
Mr. Wilson, of Iowa. opposed the bill.
-, Mr. Evarts submitted amendment that
il should be the duty of the executive of each
sstate as soon as practicable after the final as
certainment of the appointment of electors. to
commuriSsate. under seal of the State, to the
SecretarClof State of the United States, GER
tifcate5 showing the result of such ascertain
menk setting forth the names of the electors
and~other particulars, and to deiver>to the elee
tors of such State similar certificate in tripli-
cate, such certificates to be transmitted by the
electors with the resnit of their own actions
Mr.. Edmunds opposed the motion to recon-
nit, but it struck him that Mr. Evartss sug-
gested amendment embodied an extremely
valuable idea 1t could be discussed lii the SEN
ate however, well as in COMMITTEES.
After further debate. the motionsto recommit
was brought TO vote. and resulted, yeas 30
nays 22-the affirmative vote being about
equally divided between Republicans and Demo
Gratis. All proposed amendments went with the
bill
The Dakota bill was then placed before the
Senate, and Mr.. Logan obtained the floor bat
gave way for executive session, after which
the Senate adjourned.
The resolutions of Mr.. Riddleberger and Mr..
and the Senate. will come up for consideration
in the morning hour to morrow. and Mr.. Logan
will have the floor at o'clock on the Dakota bill.