St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-04-14
TIRED CLERKS.
Wading Through the Journal OF
the Last Week--Dakota and
Montana Bills.

the Last Week--Dakota and
Montana Bills.
WASHINGTON, April 13.-The clerk
proceeded to read the journal of the
legislative day of Wednesday, April 4.
The journal consists of ninety manu1
script pages, exclusive of seventy-one
roll calls. Mr.. DOckery, of Missouri,
asked unanimous consent to dispense
with the reading of the journal, but 4.
b. Taylor and Mr.. GroSvenOr interpOsed
objection. They did not, however,
demand the reading of the roll
calls in full, as such reading
would occnpy two or three days.
The clerk then proceeded to read the
skeleton outline of the journal. The
reading consumed exactly one hour. A
large number of executive documents
which had accumulated upon the speak
er's table during the deadlock, were
laid before the house and appropriately
referred. Mr.. Blount, of Georgia, from
the committee on poStoflices and post
roads, reported the pOStOtfice apprOpria-
ton bill, and it was referred to the COM
mittee of the whole. Mr.. Peel, of
Arkansas, presented the conference
agreement with the GrOes Nentre,
Pigean, Blood, Black Foot, Indians iH
Montana, and it was agreed to; also,
conference report upon the bill dividing
the great Sioux reservation into smaller
separate reservations. Agreed TO. The
speaker then proceeded to call the COM
mitteeS for reports of private charac-
ter, and large number were submitted
and placed upon the private calendar.
The remainder of the day was spent
in committee of the whole i'm the dis
cussiOn of bill for the payment of a
claim of 500 for the occupation of cer-
tain property in Memphis by United
States troops in 1864. 1t was opposed
by Mr.. GrOSvenOr, of Ohio; Mr.. Thomas,
of Wisconsin, and Mr.. Bear, of Michi-
gan. and advocated by Mr.. Richardson,
of Tennessee. Mr.. Allen, of Michigan,
said that the gentlemen on the Demo-
cratic side
HAD SETTLED TWO THINGS:
First, that they would not allow the
loyal states to receive back their share
of the direct tax, and second, that the
Southern states would not be required
to pay their share. He would, there
fore, suggest that all claims of the
character of the one pending should be
put up as Set-otfS against the direct tax
owed by the Southern states. Mr. Rich
ardsOn replied that day had been fixed
for the consideration of the direct tax
bill. If the gentleman thought that it
was not good policy to pay these waT
claims, why had his party in 1864
passed law for the payment
Of such claims to loyal persons?
Mr.. Allen replied that in 1864 he had no
idea that congress was doing anything
of the kind. He had been in TenneS-
see at that time attending to other bust
ness. Mr.. Lanham of Texas, hoped that
gentlemen would not ''fritter away"
the time of the house in discussing the
direct tax bill while a small private bill
was under consideration. Mr.. Mont
gomery, of Kentucky, appealed to the
house to prevent the consideration of
private claims on the calendar by talk
ing. away every Friday. He
had constituents who, during
the war, had differed from him
in sentiment and who had to-
day differed from him in politics, and
who were before congress as loyal
claimants. He would vote for the pay
ment of the claim of every loyal man.
The quality of loyalty ought not to be
tested by the locality in which the claim
ant lived during the war, but if it were
so tested the quality of the loyalty of
citizens of Tennessee and kentucky
ought to be placed higher than that OF
those who lived where it had been per-
fectly safe to be loyal. No action was
taken on the bill. The house then took
a recess until 1880, the evening session
to be for the consideration of private
pension bills.