The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1890-04-19
IN THE HOUSE.
Representative Have q Lively TIT Over
the southern War Claims ssill.

the southern War Claims BiIi.
WASHINGTON, April ls.-In the house
to-day, Enloe OF Tennessee, rising TO n
question of personal privilege, read an ar
ticle from New York paper, declaring
that gigantic job had been discovered In
the southern war claims bill, introduced
by him. The article states that Thomas
of Wisconsin, chairman Of the committee
on war claims, had denounced the bill as
one of the most infamous jobs which had
ever been foistcd upon congress-.
Thomas said that he had not ccnsurel
any member of the committee; he had
stated that IL the bill passed Il would be
infamous, because he could prove that
number OF claims in the bill were claims
of persons notably disloyal.
Enloe said the charge In the article that
he had brought the bill before the house
In a surreptitious manner was false
hood.
Thomas reiterated his statement that a
number OF claims in the bill were those OF
dislosai persons, and that n number OF
them had never been examined by the
committee.
The court of claims bill was first on the
calendar and Thomas resolution to re-
port the bill back with the recommcnda-
ton that II he referred 10 the committee
on rules for the investigation of the stat
utes OF the measure in connection with
rules of the house was lost.
A point OF order was raised by Kerr that
the committee on war claims had no jur-
isdiction over the rule.
Thomas Of Wisconsin offered resol,I-
tion that the bill he reported back to the
be recommitted with instructions to the
committee on war claims To inquire into
the loyalty of each claimant. He said
the bill contained 2S5 claims, based on
pretended findings Of the court Of claims.
OF this number there were eight cases
where no findings had been transmitted to
congress. In 176 cases the usual method
of ascertaining the loyalty Of the parties
had not been followed. The committee
ON war claims had punched these 2s5
claims without any examination or inves-
tigation. The secretary of war had trans
mitted TO the committee since the report
OF the bill q statement showing that In ~
cases the claimant had filed vouchers for
supplies furnished confederatcs or done
some other thing indicating disloyalty.
Cannon said IL this was correct the
house dare not pass the bill until thor
Buchanan OF New Jersey denounced the
attempt to drag through the corrupt with
the incorr,Ipt cases.
Houk of Tennessee said II was not so
much the corruptness as the desire tn kill
the bill. This precipitated a wortly war In
which Buchanan, Houk, Kerr and others
took part.
Stockdale Of Mississippi argued that the
| fact that IA man signs vouchers for fur
nishing supplies To the Confederate army
was no proof Of "disloyalty." IL he hadn't
signed his property would have been
| taken anyway.
Hauk spoke for the loyal men of the
south, declaring that had il not been for
them confederacy would have succeeded
After tilt between Hauk and Gros
venor, resolution by McComas was
agreed TO rccommitting the bill with in.
structions to the committee to report II
back within two weeks and that the bill
be placed at the head of the calendar
The resolution was reported TO the house.
Grosvenor raised point Of order and
the speaker ruled the resolution out oi
order. The bill therefore went back on
| the calendar. A recess was then taken.