The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1889-02-27
FOUR NEW STATES.
North naECTa. SOUTH DAKOTA. Mon
TaNA AND WASHINGTON

TANA AND WASHINGTON
To be simultaneously Admitted to t
Union by Proclamation Of the PresideIS4
The Direct Tax Bill Goes to the sPresiS7
dent for His Approvai-WhatW Was Said
and Done in Congress Yestepday-vesAS---l
WASHINGTON, Feb: 72o'21d| the House,
to-day, Immediately after the reading OF
Elie Journal, the contest over, the direct
tax, bill was resumed, Caswell of Iowa
calling .u]pthe conference report as
matter of privilege He declined to
Weld to enable the Speaker to clear his
table of Senate bills, although be was
warned by Hooker of NisssspM Jtat
he had better do so. sS
Crisp of Georgia raised the question
of consideration against the conference
report, stating that while he was willing
to give precedence to appropriation bills,
he would antagoniZe any other measures
with a contested election case. 90 $
The House ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
nays 93-to consider the conference
report. hut Bland of Missouri moved
reconsideration, having voted IN the
affirmative to enable him to make that
motion.
Kelley moved to table the motion to-
reconsider. The motion to table tbs:
motion to reconsider was approved :
yeas 159, nays 71-and Stewart CT
Georgia proceeded to address the House
in opposition to the adoption OF the
report. Referring to the speech made
nv Grosyenor of Ohio, he declared that
it was calculated to, psodE2e< Sntatlp
between the North and South, and he
protested solemnlv against the issue
the gentleman sought to raise. He
(Stewart) did not raise It, ana
he warned the gentleman that
Southern members were here TO observe
constitutional requirements, obey the
sSfsm. and; Il need be- to defend the flag;
but that they were not to be deferred
froudomg WhatswaS right by anything
conyias from hiH8( (Ar GrosveuoD.
Gresyenor denied that in the remarks
made BY him, criticized by the gentle
man from Georgia, he had used anG
offensive language, or any language
which could be construed as a threat
against the peepsea aof Gisef fssee1ttif:s Aae
was not open tOSf Lecture onst tie snbleet
of Cancellation from the gentleman from
Georgia. He had never introduced Sec
tionalism into any debate over ADJUST
ness proposition, and he never would.
Bland of Missouri opposed the confer
ence report, declaring that the object
The 65ii -was, to squander the money
in the treasury in osder that the oner-
Gus, dishonest, roIeetiye system Of taT-
alton might be perpetuated.
Oates of Alabama, one of the conferees,
saidsthat he had refused to sign the re-
port because of his unalterable, unwaver-
ing opposition to the bill from the time
S.of its inception gz,rsass
The constitutional features of the bill
diseussed-by~ 9ates7-Hooses'a
Caswen .SaBd the cenfereaes report was
3 thenaged 5oySeas gs, aays ssa
Springer presented the conference
report on the Territorial bill. The bill,
as agreed to in conference qroSides fx
5 the admission of the States of North
Dakota, South Daketa,s Meataaa7a
8 Washington. The Territory Of Dakota
is to bedYiided On the line Of the seventh
standard parallel produced due West to
the Western houadarysof the TerHoFy.
It is made the duty Of the President to
admit the four new States by pr6clama.
ton. if the Constitutions framed ssare
ratified at an. election to be- held On the
first TUESDAY, il, QctobeR~s Each. Qfxthe
new States shall DeSentitfed to- one rep
resentative in Congress, except South
OaLnta which shall. be entitled to two