The Portland daily press., 1886-03-17
XLIXth CONGRESS- FIRST SESSION.
SENATE.

WASHINGTON, March 16.
| Mr. Morrill,, from the committee on finance,
! reported adversely the bill introduced by
| Mr. Malone to allow drawbacks on imported
| tobacco when manufactured in this country
and afterward exported. Placed on the
| calendar
| bill increasing the pension of soldiers
| widows was taken up.
| An amendment offered by Mr.. Manderson,
| at the request, he said, of Mr.. Hawley, was
| agreed to, providing That the ad]utants gen.
| eral of a State may be recognized as repre-
| senting the claimants under the bill when
| the laws of the State require those officers to
| do so, without expense to the claimants or
| the government
| MT. Wilson moved reconsideration of the
| Senates action agreeing to the amendments
| already adopted. This motion was made SO
| that the adoption of the entire bill might not
| be endangered in the House because of the
| Senate amendments.
| After some discussion all the amendments
that had been agreed to by the Senate were
| then formally disagreed to, and the bill was
| passed in the form in which it came from
| the House, and now only needs the Presi-
dents signature to become law.
| The bill increases the $S per month pen
| sion of widows and dependent relatives to
| $12 month"; and prohibits any recognition
| of claim agents or of attorneys in connec-
| ton with the bill, and forbids any compen-
| sation to be paid to such agents or attorneys
/
| tion to the increase OF pensions provided for
| by the bill.
Mr. Hoar called up the new electoral count
! bill and it was read.
| At o'clock the judiciary committee reso-
| lutiOns were taken up,. and Senator CullOm
| took the floor, but gave way to Mr.. Morrill,.
| The Senator from Vermont said the Sem
! ator from West Virginis (Mr. Kenna) in his
| speech had read letter signed by Mr.. Nor
! rill as chairman of the committee on finance,
| and stated that that letter was the beginning
| of the present controversy. When the
/ Senate assembled in December it was pro-
| mulgated that the administration, and
| especially the Treasury Department was to
| be conducted on business principles. There
| fore the committee on finance pursued its
| usual routine of business and sent a letter to
| the Secretary of the Treasury in identically
| the same terms as the one read by the Sen
| ator from West Virginia 1t related to the
| suspension of a collector of internal revenue
/ at-(Here the Senator seemed to remember
| that the subject was an executive matterl-
| no matter where-and received from the
1 Secretary of the Treasury response stating
that the officer in question was suspended
| because the President and Secretary of the
/ Treasury were satisfied he was not discharg
ing the duties of his office in accordance
/ with proper business methods" There was
| no other cause for the suspension.
| Mr.sMorrill. continuing, said that the pa
| pers and reasons given were so satisfactory
| that the committee unanimously reported
| -Hun DuL lie DolleV6Q ne was LTISpdSSlng
| again. The policy pursued by the committee
| was the same it has pursued ever since he
| (Mr MorrilD had been member of the COM
| mittee, and the committee had never had a
| refusal until recently.
Mr.. Morrill, read portion of the law ere
| ating the Office of Secretary of the Treasury
| which defines the duties of its incumbent,
\ Ito make reports and give information to
/ either branch of the legislature in person or
| in writing as he may be required respecting
l oil mo rafarrn6 n him w tho Sanafa +
| House of Representatives, and said it was
| perfectly clear that the Senate had right to
| call on the Secretary to come before any
| committee or furnish papers.
| Mr.. Cullom then resumed the floor. he
! said the refusal of the Attorney General to
| furnish the papers called for by the Senate
| was denial of the right of the Senate to in
| quire into the management of a public office.
| The Attorney General was an officer of the
law. His duties were defined by the law,
| and it was his duty to obey the law. The
| senator stated in his minority report that
| from 1889 to 1867 there could not be found
| single case like the one under discussion.
| The truth was that in the hundreds of calls
1 that had been made there could be found
| very few instances in which the information
| asked for had not been furnished to either
| hJuse. prominent fact was, that when
| either branch of Congress had called for any
| information, it had usually been furnished,
| and that in the exceptional cases in which it
| had not been the refusal was not based on
| the constitutional eprerogatiye of the Presl-
1 dent.
MI. Cullom then discussed at some length
| the constitutional questions involved in the
| Presidents power of removal. HeWas will
ing to allow large latitude. to the. Presi-
| dent in that matter, but as the very hungry
| and very thirsty were clamOring for seats at
the official feast, there was danger that
| falseho0d or even perjury might be resorted
| to. If the President had acted in good faith
| he had been deceived, for, said Mr.. Cullom,
| persons had been removed in Illinois than
| whom no more faithful public servants could
be found, and against whom no charge of Of
| fetal misconduct could be sustained
| Mr.. MaXey followed Mr.. Cullom. He said
4 the real object of the Senate was to ascertain
| the Presidents reasons for suspensions or
| do indirectly what confessedly could not be
| done directly. He quoted from the recent
| speech of Mr.. Sherman in the. Senate, in
which it was stated that nobody proposed
| to control the discretion of the President,
and insisted that the action of the Senate in
| the matter under consideration was an at
| tempt to control the discretion of the
| President; an attempt, however. which
| would fail
Mr. Dolph then took the floor in support
| of the majority report. He would not dis
| cuss the questions raised as to the right of
| Congress to be informed as to how the law
had been executed or as to the state of the
| Union. Upon that branch of the question
concurred with what had been so ably said
| by the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Ed
| munds). The provision of the law, he said,
| intended for the protection of SCARED and
| disabled veterans of the Union army had
| been disregarded by this administration.
Mr.. Dolph here sent to the desk and had
the clerk read the report of the employment
| committee of the Grand Army of the Repub-
| lie, Department of the Potomac for the past
| year. This report among other things stated
| there had been officers for the class which
the committee represented, and that the
| greater part of their labOrs had been direct
| ed to securing the reinstatement of comrades
| to places under the government from which
| they had been discharged. Seyenty-eight
| Grand Army comrades had been discharged
| during the past year as well as large num-
| Der of eX-Union soldiers and sailors not affil-
| lated with the Grand Army.
| At five minutes of five Mr.. Edmunds un-
| derstanding that Mr.. Dolph did not wish to
| proceed further today, moved an adjourn
| ment but expressed the hope that the
| Senate would sit later tomorrow.
| The Senate then adjourned, Mr.. Dolph
| retaining the floor.
HOUSE.
Mr.. Browne of Indiana, offered as q privi-
legged question the following preamble and
| resolution
| Whereas There was pending in the 4Sth Con-
| greSs a bill, containing among other matters an
| appropriation of $4,000 for certain improve
mentS on the Ohio river, at JetferSOnville,
| Ind, known as the JefferSonvie levee appropria-
ton; and, whereas, it is charged by reputable cit