The SPEAKER. The gentleman is mistaken. It is the practice every day for the committee to rise and to go into the House in order to close debate. It is true that a bill cannot be reported while amendments are pending.

Mr. SLOAN. I think I have a right to offer my amendment under the understanding of the House.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman's amendment is not germane even if he had the right to submit it. The question recurred on Mr. STEVENS's motion.

Mr. HOLMAN demanded tellers.

Tellers were ordered, and Messrs. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania, and SPALDING, were appointed. The House divided; and the tellers reported— ayes 89, noes 6.

So the debate was closed.

The question then recurred on Mr. HOLMAN'S amendment.

Mr. SPALDING demanded the yeas and nays. Mr. HOLMAN demanded tellers on the yeas and nays.

Tellers were ordered, and Messrs. HOLMAN and STEVENS were appointed.

The House divided; and the tellers reportedayes twenty-five; more than one fifth of those present; so the yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and it was decided in the negative-yeas 37, nays 76, not voting 69; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames, Augustus C. Baldwin, John D. Baldwin, Baxter, Beaman, Blaine, Broomall, Ambrose W. Clark, Cobb, Farnsworth, Gooch, Grinnell, Harding, Higby, Holman, Asahel W. Hubbard, Ingersoll, Julian, Kasson, Francis W. Kellogg, Orlando Kellogg, Kernan, Morrill, Daniel Morris, Norton, Perham, Price, John H. Rice, Edward H. Rollins, Sloan, Spalding, Up-. son, Elihu B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, and Wilson-37.

NAYS-Messrs. William J. Allen, Ancona, Ashley, Baily, Boyd, Chanler, Cole, Cox, Cravens, Henry Winter Davis, Thomas T. Davis, Dawson, Denison, Dixon, Donnelly, Driggs, Eckley, Eden, Edgerton, Eldridge, Eliot, Finck, Ganson, Garfield, Grider, Herrick, Hotchkiss, John H. Ilubbard, Jenckes, Kalbfleisch, Kelley, Knox, Law, Lazear, Littlejohn, Loan, Long, Longyear, Mallory, Marvin, McAllister, McBride, Moorhead, James R. Morris, Amos Myers, Leonard Myers, Nelson, Odell, Charles O'Neill, John O'Neill, Pendleton, Radford, Samuel J. Randall, William II. Randall, Rogers, James S. Rollins, Ross, Shannon, Smithers, Starr, Jolin B. Steele, Stevens, Stiles, Stuart, Thayer, Townsend, Wadsworth, Webster, Whaley, Wheeler, Chilton A. White, Joseph W. White, Williams, Windom, Winfield, and Woodbridge-76.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. James C. Atten, Anderson, Arnold, Blair, Bliss, Blow, Boutwell, Brandegee, Brooks, James S. Brown, William G. Brown, Freeman Clarke, Clay, Coffroth, Creswell, Dawes, Deming, Dumont, English, Frank, Griswold, Hale, fall, Barrington, Benjamin G. Harris, Charles M. Harris, Hooper, Hulburd, Hutchins, Philip Johnson, William Johnson, King, Knapp, Le Blond, Marcy, McClurg, McDowell, Meindoe, MeKinney, Middleton, Samuel F. Miller, William H. Miller, Morrison, Noble, Orth, Patterson, Perry, Pike, Pomeroy, Pruyn, Alexander H. Rice, Robinson, Schenek, Scofield, Scott, Smith, William G. Steele, Strouse, Sweat, Thomas, Tracy, Van Valkenburgh, Voorhees, Ward, Wilder, Benjamin Wood, Fernando Wood, Worthington, and Yeaman-69.

So the amendment was disagreed to.

The bill was then ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed.

Mr. STEVENS moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.

INSPECTORS OF STEAMBOATS-AGAIN.

Mr. MALLORY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a privileged motion. I move to reconsider the vote by which the House laid on the table House bill No. 667, to provide for two assistant inspectors of steamboats in the city of New York, and for two local inspectors at Galena, Illinois, which was reported from the Committee on Commerce by the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. WASHBURNE.] The motion was made by me under a misapprehension of the character of the bill. The motion was agreed to.

Mr. MALLORY moved that the bill be recommitted to the Committee on Commerce. The motion was agreed to.

Mr. HOLMAN moved to reconsider the vote by

SATURDAY, JANUARY 28, 1865.

which the bill was recommitted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.

WAGON ROADS IN MICHIGAN.

Mr. DRIGGS, by unanimous consent, introduced a joint resolution to amend an act granting aid to the State of Michigan to construct wagon roads for military and postal purposes; which was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee on Public Lands.

GRANTS OF LAND FOR RAILROAD PURPOSES.

Mr. DRIGGS also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to extend the time for the completion of certain railroads to which land grants have been made in the States of Michigan and Wisconsin; which was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee on Public Lands.

Mr. WILSON moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was referred; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.

BURNING OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION.

Mr. RICE, of Maine, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds be directed to inquire into the origin of the fire by which the Smithsonian Institute building and the valuable deposits therein were on Tuesday last, in whole or in part, destroyed, the approximate loss to the Government and private persons, the means necessary to preserve the remaining portions, and such other facts in connection therewith as may be of public interest; and to report by bill or otherwise.

CLAIMS FOR QUARTERMASTER'S STORES.

Mr. HOTCHKISS, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to restrict the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims to provide for the payment of certain demands for quartermaster's stores and subsistence supplies furnished to the Army of the United States, approved July 4, 1864; which was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

METROPOLITAN RAILROAD COMPANY. Mr. DAVIS, of New York, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill to amend an act entitled "An act to incorporate the Metropolitan Railroad Company of the District of Columbia;" which was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee for the District of Columbia.

TAX ON STATE BANK CIRCULATION.

Mr. SPALDING, by unanimous consent, introduced a joint resolution to tax State bank circulation; which was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD.

Mr. SWEAT asked unanimous consent to in

troduce a bill to authorize the extension of the Northern Pacific railroad eastward to Ontonagon, State of Michigan, to provide for its connection eastward with the Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Canadian system of railroads at Port Huron, Detroit, Toledo, Fort Wayne, and Dayton. Mr. ELDRIDGE objected.

ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.

Mr. LOAN, by unanimous consent, presented resolutions of the constitutional convention of the State of Missouri, instructing the Senators and Representatives of that State to vote for the constitutional amendment for the abolition of slavery; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.

NAVAL REGISTER.

Mr. A. W. CLARK, from the Committee on Printing, introduced the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to:

Resolved, That there be printed for the use of the members of this House twenty-five hundred copies of the Navy Register.

Mr. A. W. CLARK moved that the vote by

NEW SERIES.....No. 29.

which the resolution was passed be reconsidered; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

PAY DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY. Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table a Senate bill for reference only.

No objection being made, the bill of the Senate (No. 382) to provide for the better organization of the pay department of the Navy, was taken from the Speaker's table, read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. ENROLLED BILL.

Mr. COBB, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that the committee had examined and found truly enrolled an act (H. R. No. 677) to amend an act entitled "An act to provide ways and means for the support of the Government, and for other purposes," approved June 30, 1864; when the Speaker signed the same.

Mr. STEVENS. I now insist that we proceed to the regular order of business; and therefore I move that the House adjourn. [Laughter.] The motion was agreed to; and thereupon the House (at four o'clock and ten minutes, p. m.) adjourned.

IN SENATE.

FRIDAY, January 27, 1865. Prayer by Rev. V. M. HURLBERT, of Yonkers, New York.

The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a report of the Secretary of the Treasury, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 23d instant calling for a statement showing the amount of collections in each internal revenue collection district, and the amount of moneys deposited in authorized depositories, as paid to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue by the collector of each district, stating that the information called for is contained in the tabular statements accompanying the annual report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, which will be laid before Congress during the present week in printed form. The communication was ordered to lie on the table, and be printed.

CREDENTIALS PRESENTED.

Mr. SUMNER presented the credentials of Hon. HENRY WILSON, chosen by the Legislature of the State of Massachusetts a Senator from that State for the term of six years, commencing March 4, 1865; which were read, and ordered to be filed.

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.

Mr. WILSON presented the petition of Hollenbeck & Zeigler, of Savannah, Georgia, praying payment for property taken by the military force under the command of Major General Sherman; which was referred to the Committee on Claims.

Mr. SHERMAN presented a petition of citizens of Ohio, clerks in the War, Treasury, and Interior Departments, praying for an increase of salary; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. SUMNER presented a petition of citizens of Massachusetts, clerks in the Interior, War, Treasury, and Navy Departments, praying for an increase of salary; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. DOOLITTLE presented the petition of medical officers in the several regiments compris ing the third division fifth Army corps, praying for an increase of the pay of surgeons and assistant surgeons in the military service of the United States; which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia.

Mr. HOWARD presented the memorial of Ernst Maurice Buerger, pastor of the German Evangelical Lutheran Church, Washington city, District of Columbia, and member of the German

Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and other States, praying that ministers of the gospel may be exempt from military duty; which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Mr. SHERMAN asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No. 413) to establish a certain post road; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads.

Mr. POMEROY asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a joint resolution (S. R. No. 104) for the return of Arkansas to the Union; which was read twice, and ordered to lie on the table, and be printed.

Mr. HOWARD asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No. 414) to authorize the construction of the Northern Pacific railroad eastward to Ontonagon in the State of Michigan, and provide for its connection eastward with the Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Canadian systems of railroads at Port Huron, Detroit, Toledo, Fort Wayne, and Dayton; which was read twice by its title, referred to the Committe on Public Lands, and ordered to be printed.

Mr. HARRIS asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No. 415) to amend an act entitled "An act to restrict the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims, and to provide for the payment of certain demands for quartermaster's stores and subsistence supplies furnished to the Army of the United States," approved July 4, 1864; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.

Mr. CLARK, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of Frederick Bauer on behalf of the German Evangelical Church of Martinsburg, Virginia, paying compensation for the burning of their house of worship while being used by Union soldiers, reported adversely thereon, and moved that it be postponed indefinitely; which was agreed to.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the petition of George P. Ihrie, late colonel and additional aid-de-camp on the staff of General Grant, praying compensation for the loss of personal baggage and property captured and burned by rebel cavalry on or about the 11th of January, 1863, reported adversely thereon, there being no case stated, and no proof furnished, and moved that its consideration be indefinitely postponed; which was agreed to.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the petition of Frederick Miller, praying indemnification for damages sustained by him in being ejected from his residence and place of business by a surgeon in the United States service, reported adversely, there being no sufficient proof of the justness of the claim, and moved its indefinite postponement; which was agreed to.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the petition of James M. Confer, late surgeon of the twenty-ninth regiment Indiana volunteers, praying compensation for property lost while in the service of the United States, reported adversely thereon, there being no sufficient proof of the justness of the claim, and moved that it be postponed indefinitely; which was agreed to.

Mr. ANTHONY, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of Peter Hays, G. F. Randall, and Peter Monservone, praying to be reimbursed for loss of clothing and other personal effects occasioned by the sinking of the United States steamer Sumter on the night of the 24th of June, 1863, reported adversely thereon, and moved its indefinite postponement; which was agreed to.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the memorial of James N. Carpenter, paymaster United States Navy, praying compensation for horses and cattle pressed by the United States Army, and for property destroyed by the battles of Spottsylvania Court-House and the Wilderness, and for the confiscation of certain bank stock by the rebel government, reported adversely thereon, and moved its indefinite postponement; which was agreed to.

Mr. HOWE, from the Committee on Claims,

to whom was referred the petition of Charles De Arnaud, praying additional compensation for services rendered the Government in obtaining valuable information concerning the movements of rebels, at the request of General Rousseau and other general officers of the Army, reported adversely thereon, and moved that it be postponed indefinitely; which was agreed to.

Mr. HOWE, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of Henry Charles De Ahna, praying for the return of $2,000 deposited by him with Jay Cooke & Co., to the credit of C. V. Hogan, an employé in the secret service of the Treasury Department, and a joint resolution (S. R. No. 71) authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to dispose of certain moneys therein mentioned, which relate to the same matter, reported adversely, and moved that they be indefinitely postponed; which was agreed to.

Mr. COLLAMER, from the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads, to whom was referred the bill (S. No. 390) relating to the postal laws, reported it with amendments.

Mr. COWAN, from the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office, to whom was referred the bill (S. No. 387) amendatory of an act entitled "An act to promote the progress of the useful arts," approved March 3, 1863, reported it without amendment.

LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS IN WASHINGTON.

Mr. MORRILL. The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was recommitted the bill (S. No. 376) to amend an act entitled "An act to amend an act to incorporate the inhabitants of the city of Washington, passed May 15, 1820," approved May 5, 1864, have instructed me to report it back with an amendment, and to ask for its present consideration.

By unanimous consent, the bill was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

Mr. CLARK. I do not desire to have the bill referred. I think the Committee on Finance understand what it is. It can be laid on the table, and we will examine it and see if it is like the other, and then be prepared to act upon it without a reference to the committee.

The VICE PRESIDENT. That disposition will be made of it, if there be no objection.

MEXICAN AFFAIRS.

olution; which was referred to the Committee on Mr. ANTHONY submitted the following resPrinting:

Resolved, That five hundred additional copies of the correspondence on Mexican affairs, heretofore ordered, be printed for the use of the Senate.

COUNTING OF PRESIDENTIAL VOTES.

Mr. TRUMBULL submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to:

Resolved, That a committee consisting of three members be appointed by the President of the Senate, to join such committee as may be appointed by the House of Representatives, to ascertain and report a mode of examining the votes for President and Vice President of the United States, and of notifying the persons chosen of their election.

The VICE PRESIDENT appointed Messrs. TRUMBULL, CONNESS, and WRIGHT, as the committee on the part of the Senate.

CONDUCT OF GENERAL J. C. DAVIS TO NEGROES. Mr. WILSON. I offer the following resolution: Resolved, That the committee on the conduct of the war be instructed to inquire into and report upon the action of Brevet Major General Jefferson C. Davis in preventing a number of negroes, who had joined the Army on the march through Georgia, from crossing a creek known as "Ebenezer creek," near Savannah, by burning the bridge after the troops had crossed, on the night of the 8th of December last, many of these negroes having been killed by the rebel cavalry or drowned in attempting to cross the creek on rafts.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there any ob

That the act approved May 5, 1864, entitled "An act to amend an act to incorporate the inhabitants of the city of Washington, passed May 15, 1820," be amended so as to read as follows: "That the said corporation shall have full power and authority to lay taxes on particular wards, parts, or sections of the city, for their particular local improvements, and to cause the curb-stones to be set, the foot and carriage ways, or so much thereof as they may deem best, to be graded and paved; to introduce the necessary sewerage and drainage facilities under and upon the whole or any portion of any avenue, street, or alley; to cause the same to be suitably paved and repaired, and at all times properly cleaned and watered; to cause lamps to be erected therein, and to light the same; and to pay the cost thereof, the corporation of Washington is hereby authorized to lay and collect a tax upon all property bordering upon each street or alley that may be paved, sewered, lighted, cleaned, or watered by said corporation in accordance with the provisions of this act. And also to lay, or cause to be laid, simultaneously with the grading or paving of any avenue, street, or alley in which a main water-pipe or main gaspipe, or main sewer may have been laid,water or gas service pipes or lateral house drains, from such water or gas main or inain sewer to one foot within the curb line in front of every lot or subdivisional part of a lot which may bound on such avenue, street, or alley, and to which a gas or water service pipe or house drain may not have been already laid; and to pay the cost thereof, shall have full power and authority to lay and collect a special tax on every such lot or subdivisional part of a lot."

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. The bili was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. CLINTON LLOYD, Chief Clerk, announced that the Speaker of the House had signed the enrolled bill (H. R. No. 659) making appropriations for the service of the Post Office Department during the fiscal year ending the 30th of June, 1866: which thereupon received the signature of the Vice President.

DEFICIENCY BILL.

The message further announced that the House of Representatives had passed a bill (H. R. No. 709) to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for the service of the fiscal year ending the 30th of June, 1865, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate.

Mr. SHERMAN. I desire to have that bill taken up now and read twice. There being no objection, the bill was read twice by its title.

Mr. LANE, of Indiana. I object; let it lie

over.

Mr. WILSON. I do not desire to have the resolution considered this morning. I simply wish to send to the Chair a paper which I should like to have read, and then let the whole matter lie for investigation.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The paper will be read, if there be no objection.

Mr. GRIMES. I should like to know what the character of the paper is.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair cannot tell without its being read.

Mr. GRIMES. Let the whole thing lie over. If it is a paper attacking General Davis, and the officers and men under his command, it is not proper that it should be read in this connection.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Objection being made, the paper cannot be read, and the resolution will lie over.

PASSENGERS ON STEAMSHIPS.

Mr. CONNESS. I offer the following resolution, and desire its present consideration:

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to instruct the collectors of customs to enforce the act entitled "An act to regulate the carriage of passengers in steamships and other vessels," approved March 3, 1855, and the act entitled "An act further to regulate the carriage of passengers in steam and other vessels," approved July 4, 1864, and all other existing acts of Congress relating to the carriage of passengers by steamships and other vessels.

Mr. CONNESS. I hold in my hand a paper addressed to the Senators and members of the House of Representatives in Congress from California and Oregon, signed by a very large number of the passengers on the late trip of the steamer Costa Rica from Aspinwall to New York, which I ask to have read.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The paper will be read, if there be no objection.

The Secretary read, as follows:

ON BOARD THE STEAMER COSTA RICA,
AT SEA, January 3, 1865.

To the Senators and Members of the House of Representatives in Congress from California and Oregon:

We whose names are hereunto subscribed respectfully call your attention to the following statement:

We left San Francisco on the 13th of December last in the steamer Golden City.

We paid for tickets to New York in gold coin the sums charged for our passage. At Aspinwall we came on board this steamer, and have not been able, so great was the crowd, to obtain places to sleep. Some of us having no blankets have purchased them here. We have been compelled to

sleep on deck, and been exposed to the severity of the weather, and to much suffering, at the risk of damaging health, and losing life, Few of us have the means or time to litigate for damages against rich men or rich corporations. We appeal to you and ask, if you cannot redress our grievances, that at least you will try to prevent the repetition of like outrage and cruelty to thousands of your constituents going by sea to California and Oregon. Not only sick men, but sick women and children, have been subjected to much suffering. We have other causes of complaint-such as have often been brought to public notice-but cannot dwell on them now.

We earnestly hope, by your efforts, to be able hereafter to boast that we have a Government whose laws are respected and obeyed by the most powerful and wealthiest men, while protection is afforded to the weakest and humblest American citizen.

Mr. CONNESS. Mr. President, I shall detain the Senate but a moment in reference to this subject. It will be observed that the petition of these passengers, detailing their sufferings by the trip referred to of the steamer Costa Rica, makes no charge of bad treatment or incapacity on the part of the ship upon which they traveled on the Pacific side; and I desire in what I shall say, which shall be very brief, to entirely exculpate and exonerate the Pacific Mail Steamship Company from any blame growing out of the management of their line and the carriage of passengers. On the contrary, I think they are entitled to commendation, which I am disposed to bear testimony to here. They furnish, in return for large prices charged for passage, the best mode of communication perhaps that is furnished out of any port of the United States of America to passengers. Their ships are large and commodious; they are built with all the modern conveniences, and with regard not only to comfort, but, to the extent that it can be secured, with regard to the perfect safety of the persons whom they take in charge.

The contrary, however, is the fact in regard to the ships composing what is known as the Atlantic Steamship Company, or, in other words, the company known as the Vanderbilt Company. It may be said with perfect truthfulness that there is not a ship going out of the port of New York and sailing for Aspinwall and back, of all the ships employed by that line, that is fit to get a clearance and go to sea. For perhaps more than two years past such steamships as the 'Ariel and the Champion, notoriously unfit and unseaworthy, have been employed by the company of which I have last spoken to transport passengers between these two ports, causing in the transit by sea the extremest sufferings as well as the greatest danger to the passengers intrusted to their charge. In many instances the voyages have been prolonged, and in every instance where passengers have offered in excess of the number allowed by law to go on board those ships and be carried by them, they have accepted them without any reference to whether they could accommodate them or not. I have myself made passages on their ships when the scene that was laid before my attention constantly was perfectly horrible to contemplate. Insufficient in regard to the quality of the ship, insufficient in regard to the amount of room proportioned to the number of passengers, insufficient in regard to the food furnished and its quality, insufficient in all respects, and scandalous to the American people that vessels in such a condition should be permitted to go out of such a port as the great commercial metropolis of America. But these things have gone on without cure or without remedy being applied.

It will be remembered that at the last session of Congress an act was passed which we now simply ask for the enforcement of. In conversation yesterday with the honorable Secretary of the Treasury on this subject, he said very promptly, "Introduce a resolution directing attention to the subject, and I will enforce the law." Our people will thank that officer for the readiness with which he is prepared to enter upon this important duty. There is no more crying abuse than that which exists at the present time upon this subject. The Oregon Senators, every citizen of the United States who travels by these lines, can bear testimony to the exact truthfulness of the statement made by these suffering passengers.

Not wishing to detain the Senate longer, I ask for action on the resolution.

Mr. NESMITH. I desire simply to concur in the statement by the Senator from California in relation to the treatment which passengers receive at the hands of those managing the company on this side, and I also concur in what he has stated in

relation to the treatment which passengers receive at the hands of the company on the other side. Those who charge an exorbitant amount for passage should certainly treat passengers as men should be treated, and not as brutes. The transition from the ships on the other side to those on this side is like that from a palace to a pig-pen; and I understand that the responsibility rests upon a very wealthy gentleman of New York, Mr. Vanderbilt, who, by means of his great wealth, has been enabled to keep off all competition, while he has utterly refused to give the people such accommodations as they have paid for. Sir, the horrors of the passage on this side of the IsthmusI have made it frequently and it has been so every occasion-have only been equaled by what we read of the terrible miseries suffered in the "middle passage" by the victims of the African slave trade. He has destroyed not only the comfort and the health but the lives of our people. He has grown rich by a monopoly which has caused the sacrifice of the lives of many of those who have attempted to make the trip from the Pacific to the Atlantic and from the Atlantic to the Pacific. I have understood that this company is not now in the hands of this man Vanderbilt; but at least he, or his son-in-law, Mr. Allen, at present has the control of it, and I believe that Mr. Allen is actuated by the same principle which governed Vanderbilt, and that is to grasp all the money he can, sacrifice the health, comfort, and lives of passengers, and render them no equivalent for what they pay.

I am very anxious to see the resolution adopted. I do not know that any beneficial result will grow out of it. I fear not; but as the Senator from California states that the Secretary of the Treasury has manifested every disposition to coöperate with or to enforce any resolution the Senate may adopt, I hope that we may effectuate something by the passage of this resolution. Let us try it at any rate, and test it. When we fail in that, we shall have to resort to some other measure to secure justice against a wealthy, unprincipled monopoly which cares nothing either for the life, the comfort, or the health of those committed to its charge for transportation.

The resolution was agreed to.

BILL RECOMMITTED.

On motion of Mr. HARLAN, the bill (H. R. No. 222) to extinguish the Indian title to lands in the Territory of Utah suitable for agricultural and mineral purposes, was recommitted to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

QUOTAS OF THE STATES.

Mr. DAVIS. I offer the following resolution: Resolved, That the Secretary of War inform the Senate how many men in the aggregate, both for the military and naval service, have been recruited in each State, and how many negroes for such services have been recruited in each State, and how many negroes have been recruited in the State of Kentucky, and how many in each county in said State, giving under each head aggregate numbers. Mr. SUMNER. I think that had better lie The resolution

over.

The VICE PRESIDENT. will lie over under the rules. Mr. DAVIS. Allow me to make a single remark.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The resolution is not open to remark, objection being made to its consideration.

Mr. DAVIS. I want the Senator from Massachusetts to withdraw his objection. I reckon he he is at liberty to do that.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Certainly he is; and when he does so it will be time for the Senator from Kentucky to make his remarks.

Mr. DAVIS. The Chair interposed and would not give me an opportunity to ask the Senator to withdraw his objection. I hope he will withdraw it for a moment, and let the resolution be read again. I think he did not understand it.

Mr. SUMNER. I have no objection to its being read again, but I do not wish to lose the privilege of objecting.

The VICE PRESIDENT. If there be no ob- || jection, the resolution will be again read. Mr. SUMNER. For information. The Secretary read the resolution. Mr. WILSON. I desire simply to say that the Committee on Military Affairs-

The VICE PRESIDENT. The resolution is

not open to any sort of discussion, the Senator's colleague having objected to its consideration. Mr. DAVIS. Will the Senator from Massachusetts withdraw his objection, or will he insist upon it?

Mr. SUMNER. I would rather that the resolution lie over until to-morrow.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Objection being made, the resolution must lie over under the rules.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE.

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. LLOYD, Chief Clerk, announced that the House had agreed to the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 94) for the relief of Isaac R. Diller, and to the amendment of the Senate to the joint resolution (H. R. No. 99) reserving mineral lands from the operation of all acts passed at the present session granting lands or extending the time of former grants; and had passed without amendment the bill (S. No. 363) to amend the charter of the Washington Gas-Light Company.

The message also announced that the House had passed the following bill and joint resolutions, in which the concurrence of the Senate was requested:

A bill (H. R. No. 714) supplemental to the act entitled "An act to restrict the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims," &c., passed July 4, 1864;

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 150) to refer the claim of Selmar Serbert back to the Court of Claims;

claim of George Ashley, administrator de bonis A joint resolution (H. R. No. 151) to refer the non of Samuel Holgate, deceased, back to the Court of Claims; and

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 152) to refer the claim of Danford Mott back to the Court of Claims.

DEFICIENCY BILL.

Mr. CLARK. I ask the Senate now to take up the deficiency bill.

By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. No. 709) to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for the services of the fiscal year ending the 30th of June, 1865.

Mr. CLARK. I will state that, as I understand this bill, it is exactly like the deficiency bill which was before the Senate with the exception of the second section, which is substantially the same provision to which the Senate objected before, but in a little different form. I desire that that section of the bill be read to the Senate. It is a short section.

The section was read, as follows:

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That $38,000 be, and the same is hereby, appropriated, to be added to the contingent fund of the House, to enable the House of Representatives to fulfill its pledges and obligations heretofore made, and the same shall be audited and settled on such vouchers as shall be produced by the Clerk of the House. Mr. CLARK. This is in substance the same provision which the Senate twice struck out from the bill, but in a little different form. I move now that the bill be amended by striking out that second section; and on that question I ask for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON. I ask the Senator from New Hampshire if the section which he proposes to strike out is identical with the one on which the Senate acted before?

Mr. CLARK. It is in substance the same, but it is in different form. The House of Representatives now propose that we shall allow them to add to their contingent fund such an amount as will enable them to pay their employés. Instead of a provision reporting it as a deficiency to pay their employés, they now ask to make it up to their contingent fund. It is only putting it in different form. The thing is the same under a different dress.

Mr. JOHNSON. Then it is not a provision for a deficiency?

Mr. CLARK. It is not a deficiency. The yeas and nays being taken, resulted-yeas 33, nays 3; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Buckalew, Chandler, ClarkConness, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Farwell, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Hendricks, Howe, Johnson, Lane of Indiana, Morgan, Morrill, Pom, eroy, Powell, Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Van Winkle, Willey, Wilson, and Wright-33. NAYS-Messrs. Richardson, Saulsbury, and Wade--3.

ABSENT-Messrs. Brown, Carlile, Collamer, Cowan, Harding, Hicks, Howard, Lane of Kansas, McDougall, Nesmith, Riddle, Trumbull, and Wilkinson-13.

So the amendment was agreed to.

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. It was ordered that the amendment be engrossed, and that the bill be read a third time. The bill was read the third time, and passed.

RETALIATION ON REBEL PRISONERS.

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the joint resolution (S. R. No. 97) advising retaliation for the cruel treatment of prisoners by the insurgents, the pending question being on Mr. WILSON's motion to recommit it to the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, at the adjournment of the Senate yesterday I was referring to the fact that as far as I was then advised, or, indeed, as I am now advised, there is not before us any official evidence that the cruelties practiced upon our prisoners which are mentioned in the report of the 5th of May, 1864, have been continued since. I was told by the honorable member from Connecticut [Mr. FOSTER] that he had it from one who had belonged to the Army, and who was unfortunate enough to be captured and imprisoned in one of the prisons in South Carolina, that there was, to a certain extent, at least, cruelty as far as cruelty consists in failing to give the prisoners a sufficient ration. What I meant, however, was that we have no official evidence other than what is contained in the report of May 5, 1864, that the outrages which are hypothetically stated, though stated as facts in the resolution reported by the committee, have been perpetrated since that report.

The honorable member from Ohio, [Mr. WADE,] who was one of the committee by whom the report of May 5, 1864, was made, interrupted me yesterday by saying that there had been an antecedent report in which evidence was presented to the Senate of other outrages of the same description. The purpose for which I referred to the report of May 5, 1864, is rather strengthened than weakened by that fact, because it appears that even prior to the 5th of May, 1864, the Senate, and of course the committee, whose business it had been to examine into the facts, were advised that these cruelties had been practiced; and yet from that time until a few days since, I am not aware that any measures have been recommended by the committee or any member of the Senate, looking to a resort to such a system as is proposed either by the resolution introduced by the honorable member himself, or by the report made by the committee to whom that resolution was referred. I suppose, Mr. President-and they had a right to rely upon it-that the members of the committee, including my friend from Ohio, were under the impression that the President of the United States would take all proper steps to arrest these barbarous acts as against

our own men.

the belligerent who has been guilty of such outrages has waked up to a sense of duty; he has dropped his character of savage and barbarian, and he has reassumed that of a Christian or of civilized men; he has since that, so far from promoting the purpose which he had in view by conduct of that description furthering the advance of his own cause, he has pursued a policy more fatal to him than anything that the enemy could do; and he must feel, or is supposed to feel, that in the judgment of the civilized world he stands condemned, and that of itself is, in the case in which the outrages have not been continued, supposed to be the cause, and a sufficient cause for their termination.

The honorable member says, and no one who knows him doubts him, that he is as far from entertaining any inhuman feeling, or seeking to accomplish any inhuman purpose as any member of the Senate or any man to be found anywhere. I certainly do not doubt it. He thinks, however, that a sense of duty in the case which he supposes to exist would compel him to do what is against his better nature, and to aid in the perpetration of horrors at which his original nature would stand shocked; but he would do it from a sense of duty. Then in order to enable himself, or any person who may be put to the discharge of a function of that description to do it at all, he must be satisfied that it is necessary to do it; and if in the particular case the outrages of which he complains are now no longer being perpetrated, and we have no evidence before us that it is the purpose of the enemy to perpetrate them in the future, how can it be that he will forget the humanity which God has written upon his heart?

Mr. WADE. I think, if the Senator will read the resolution that is now before the body, and the amendment pending, it will save him the necessity of making all that argument. There is nothing in it about punishing or retaliating for anything that has been done, and if there is nothing of this sort doing now, then there will be no retaliation. That is all there is about it.

Mr. JOHNSON. I will speak of that by and by. What the honorable Senator himself proposed was to commence the work of torture at once. What the committee proposed was to commence the work of torture at once. The effect of the amendment which he suggests is to leave it to the President to commence the work of torture at once. That is a power I would not give to any living man.

That I am right in the view I take of the original proposition of the honorable member, and of that of the committee, and of the proposition which he proposes in the amendment that he suggests, I will show the Senate in a moment; but I assume now that I am right; and the honorable member's interruption-kind interruption, I am sure of me shows that even he could not bring himself to punish in this way for enormities in the past, not being repeated, and without any evidence that it is the purpose of the rebel enemy to repeat them.

You punish, by your penal laws in a case of murder, by hanging the culprit because he is the guilty party, and because it is necessary that he should be hung in order to guard against the repetition of like offenses by others. But if, in point of fact, it was possible to ascertain-a murder being once committed-that no murders would be committed in the future, and that the man might be permitted to live, the law of nature and of nature's God would say, and does say, let him live. If we could read his heart and see that it was entirely changed, that he never would repeat the offense, and we could be satisfied, by reading the hearts of the community, that such an offense would never be perpetrated by any member of the community, it would be cruelty in the extreme to take the life of him who had offended, and repented, under such circumstances.

In a case of that kind the law assumes that

Now, what is the resolution? My friend, saying, no doubt, what he believed he could do under such circumstances in the resolution which he proposed, felt, and well he might feel, that the

to whose custody these prisoners were to be subjected was a duty hard, if not impossible, to perform; and he therefore provided that the officer who declined to carry out the punishment prescribed to the very letter should at once be stricken from the rolls of the Army.

Mr. WADE. I perceive the Senator is going upon a false hypothesis. I would stand now, if I could, for the original resolution, for I believe it to be exactly right, and I only yield on account of weak brethren. [Laughter.]

Mr. JOHNSON. The "weak brethren" will be able, I suppose, to take care of themselves, providing they will agree with the honorable member from Ohio that they are "weak brethren." I do not know what his idea of weakness is, but I should think that my friend from Michigan, [Mr. HOWARD,] in relation to this measure, was anything but a "weak brother." I think he has gone to the whole extent that any man born a Christian could go. I have not heard anything from the honorable member from Michigan, [Mr. CHANDLER,] and who, I believe, is a member of the same committee with the member from Ohio, that induces me to think that in this particular he can be considered a "weak brother." If they do not go as far as the farthest, they go as far as any other man living, except the honorable member from Ohio. He is farther than the farthest.

But I have referred to it, Mr. President, for the pose of showing what the original proposition was, and how my friend from Ohio, although satisfied, as he has told us, that he could discharge that duty, when he came to read his own heart in the solitude of his own room, and then that resolution, felt that there was something in the nature of the duty which he was calling upon an officer of the United States to discharge so revolting that he could not be made to discharge it, and he provided for the failure to discharge it by clothing the President not only with the power, but making it his duty to dismiss such an officer at onee from the service.

Having said as much as I propose to say of the proposition first suggested by my friend from Ohio, I come to the proposition as reported from the committee, which is almost precisely the same in words, and is substantially identical with the original resolution offered by the member from Ohio, except that it omits the provision that the officer is to be dismissed if he does not perform his duty, and announces to the President that it is not the purpose of Congress in passing the resolution to make it obligatory upon him; but we are asked to say to him that it is his duty to resort to this measure. We are to tell him that a resort to this measure is absolutely necessary in order to put an end to the barbarities being practiced upon our own prisoners; and under some doubt I do not stop to inquire whether it was well founded or not-of the authority of Congress by legislation to interfere with the President at all in relation to such duties as are stated in this resolution, it concludes with saying that it is to be understood merely as advising the President, and not as controlling him. Advising him to do what? The honorable member from Missouri, [Mr. BROWN,] whom I do not now see in his seat, the other day said that it was not the purpose of the committee to suggest to the President the propriety of proceeding at once to the execution of this duty of retaliation; and he found. as he supposed, a reason for that construction in the latter clause of the resolution which declares that the resolution itself is designed to be merely advisory to the President. That is true; but what is the advice? What are we asked to do? What is every individual Senator asked to do? To advise the President that in our opinion he should proceed at once to starve, to torture, to assassinate, to freeze to death the prisoners who are in our own hands. The language of the resolution, not the preamble, is:

That in the judgment of Congress it has become justifiable and necessary that the President should, in order to prevent the continuance and recurrence of such barbarities, and to insure the observance by the insurgents of the laws of civilized war, resort at once to measures of retaliation; that in our opinion such retaliation ought to be inflicted upon the insurgent officers now in our hands, or hereafter to fall into our hands as prisoners; that such officers ought to be subjected to like treatment practiced toward our officers or soldiers in the hands of the insurgents, in respect to quantity and quality of food, clothing, fuel, medicine, medical attendance, personal exposure.

And every other mode of dealing such as our prisoners have been treated with in the hands of the insurgents. The President is advised to do that at once. My friend from Ohio, to assist his "weaker brethren," by the amendment which he sent up to the Chair the day before yesterday, and which is now before us, makes it not a matter of

advice to the President, but the obligation of the President. He proposes that the President shall be not only advised, but directed to pursue the policy mentioned in the resolution, and we assume that it is in the power of Congress in a matter of this sort to control the President in the management of prisoners. He does not mean to leave to the President any discretion. I speak now of the original amendment. His present amendment bearing upon this subject I will recur to in a moment. He says the President shall at once starve, torture, poison, refuse medicine to the sick, and surgical attendance to the wounded prisoners of the enemy, and if all will not do, if we become tired of the slowness of the remedy, the President is directed to have the poor victim of the chances of war assassinated.

Now, Mr. President, what is the other amendment proposed by the member from Ohio?

Mr. WADE. I have offered but one.

Mr. JOHNSON. I mean the other part of the amendment. You have offered one; but that is made up of two provisions.

Mr. WADE. It is one amendment.

Mr. JOHNSON. It is one amendment, but there is always in every good thing, and the Senator intends this as a good thing, more than one proposition. He proposes to strike out all that part of the original resolution which directs the President to subject the prisoners taken from the enemy to precisely the same kind of treatment that our prisoners receive, and to substitute for it what I will read:

And that the executive and military authorities of the United States are hereby directed

Not advised

to retaliate upon the prisoners of the enemy in such manner and kind as shall be effective in deterring him from the perpetration in future of cruel and barbarous treatment of our soldiers.

Now, is it expedient to exert it even if we have the legal power to exert it? The honorable member assumes that the starvation of the four or five thousand, or the twenty or thirty thousand, or whatever may be the number of prisoners now in our hands, will prevent the starvation of the thousands who are in the hands of the enemy or may hereafter come into the hands of the rebel enemy. Does he know it! Who can? If the rebel government was privy to the enormities practiced upon our prisoners, they are to be restrained by no moral restraint. Everybody will concede that. They are brutes in the form of man; they are savages worse than the wildest Indian that ever ran loose on the prairies; and nothing like moral restraint will prevent their continuing these barbarities. Suppose they do; are we to continue them? Then what will the world say? What would any man say if he had the power in his own hands? What will the voice of Christian civilization say? That such barbarities must be arrested. Other nations have an interest in it. They cannot stand by and see the people of the United States become a band of savages, not fighting in honorable warfare, meeting the foe face to face, but after he has succumbed and yielded to the power exerted against him by either side and gets into the hands of either party, the work of extermination is to begin in the most odious and disgusting form ever known to civilized man. Would not one man, if a Christian, having the power, arrest it? Who can doubt that? Will not the nations of Christendom be called upon to arrest it? Will the God of justice fail to proclaim that it is their duty to arrest it?

But then what is to become of the Union? Where is the struggle to end? From the first I never doubted how it would end if conducted upon high, elevated principle. I never for a moment

Not as he shall judge to be effective," but questioned that the time would come, and as I

"as shall be effective." He does not leave it to the President to decide whether any such measures of retaliation are necessary; he directs him to retaliate upon the prisoners of the enemy "in

such manner and kind as shall be effective." What will the President have a right to say? The Senate of the United States have before them a proposition to retaliate in kind, starvation for starvation, torture for torture, assassination for assassination, exposure for exposure, and we are about to tell him that he must take the subject into his own hands, and measure out precisely the degree of punishment to prisoners in our hands as he shall deem necessary to prevent a recurrence of like enormities upon our prisoners in their hands. When is he to do it? The honorable member says it was not his purpose, nor will that be the effect of the resolution, to commence the work of retaliation at once, not to punish for past offenses. I certainly have no right and would be the last man in the Senate to question the sincerity of any purpose that the honorable Senator says he entertains; but I submit to him whether, if his amendment should be adopted as he proposes, the President is not to resort forthwith to retaliation. If his amendment striking out and inserting should be adopted, the resolution will read:

That in the judgment of Congress it has become justifiable and necessary that the President should, in order to prevent the continuance and recurrence of such barbarities, and to insure the observance by the insurgents of the laws of civilized war, resort at once to measures of retaliation.

think it should have come before, and would have come before if the armies of the United States had been properly used, but that the time was sure to come when the rebellion would be frustrated

and the authority of the Government reinstated; and no matter what may happen, no matter what course from time to time the United States or the rebels may adopt, I shall continue to entertain the same expectation, and shall continue till the last ray of hope is extinguished in the darkness of perpetual night. But let us turn as against each other the arts of the savage; let us proclaim war to the knife, and, what is but little worse, a resort to such measures as are contemplated by this resolution, and the other side continue to meet us in the same way-I speak it with due respect to those who entertain a different opinion about this resolution-we shall no longer have the support of the God of justice; the war ought to cease; the destruction of the Union, the end of the freest constitutional Government that ever existed will have come, and ought to come if it is to be supported only by a resort to savage methods.

If we began this career, and if we should stop at the end of a year or two or three or ten years, what sort of a Union should we have? How long could we live together with a Union so restored? Years in the life of a Government are but as moments. How long would it be that the honorable member's descendants, and my descendants, if it were possible to suppose that we were on opposite sides of this rebellion, and he and I resorted to such a course as is recommended by these

scendants, after a temporary arrest, should have occurred, would again be cutting each other's throats, trying to see which could starve the soonest, trying who was most expert in the arts of assassination, who could torture most, who could starve slowest, who could expose longest to the destructive influence of the elements, who could keep alive longest by refusing surgical and medical aid to the prisoner whom he may get into his hands? Success in such a contest-my friend will pardon me for saying it-is but infamy.

Then comes in his amendment that the President shall adopt such measures as shall be effect-resolutions-how long would it be before our deive. I have a right to assume that the President is as patriotic as the honorable member from Ohio; that he is as anxious to put an end to these barbaritics as any member of the Senate; and that he may, therefore, do precisely what the honorable member tells us he will do. That, as I said just now, is a power I would not give to the President. I would not let him, if I could prevent it, resort to measures of retaliation of this description; and yet it is manifest that if we adopt a measure such as this will be after it shall have been amended as proposed by the honorable member from Ohio, the President will be directed at once to retaliate. Retaliate how? "In kind;" and that is what the honorable Senator means. He is to retaliate in kind; so that at last we come up to the question; first, whether, if we had the power, it is expedient to exercise it; second, whether we have the power. By power I mean the right.

Then as a matter of policy, if I am right, assuming the power to exist, we ought not to adopt it." Have we the power? The honorable member from Ohio, my friend from Michigan, and the honorable member from Missouri [Mr. BROWN] have told us, and told us properly, that the right to retaliate is recognized by the laws of We all know that.

war.

Mr. WADE. Then what are you debating about?

Mr. JOHNSON. The question is as to the extent that you say the right goes. Like all other rights

Mr. WADE. If you stop short of making it effectual, you had better not begin.

Mr. JOHNSON. Perhaps not. I will speak of that by and by. There are some things that should not be accomplished at all if they cannot be accomplished except by the perpetration of an enormous crime. The power of retaliation exists as a right of war, everybody admits; but has it no limitation in this age of the world? My friend from Michigan has told us that he has gone through all the authorities cited by Halleck in his system of international law, and he has looked everywhere else to find whether there was any authority that limits the exercise of this right of retaliation, and has found no authority which looks to such a limitation. The honorable mem-' ber is clearly mistaken, Limited by necessity"

Mr. HOWARD. was my language. Mr. JOHNSON. Then necessity limits it? Mr. HOWARD. That is what I said; and that is the only limit.

Mr. JOHNSON. So I understood you; and now, with due deference to the better judgment and greater research of the honorable member from Michigan, I say, and should say, with perfect confidence, if he had not expressed a different opinion, that there is a very clear and defined limit. You can retaliate to accomplish a purpose in such cases, but there are cases in which you have no right to retaliate in kind; and just in proportion as the honorable member from Michigan described graphically, so as to excite the indignation of all, the enormities practiced upon our prisoners, just in that proportion did he go to prove that there was no authority to retaliate. The necessity in the contemplation of the law of nations terminates when retaliation becomes cruelty, and offensive to the laws of God and man. Let me imagine a case. I speak to humane men; I speak to Christian men. Suppose these rebels were to burn five hundred of our prisoners at the stake; would you burn five hundred? Can you find any book which will justify you in saying that you could retaliate in that way?

Mr. HOWARD. Does the Senator from Maryland desire an answer?

Mr. JOHNSON. Certainly.

Mr. HOWARD. Mr. President, in such a distressing case as that to which the Senator has alluded, if I were a commander in the field I should certainly forbear as long as reason and my duty to my country and my countrymen would allow; but should I finally discover that it was the persistent purpose of the enemy to burn my prisoners who should fall into his hands, if he should repeat the process so many times as to make it perfectly obvious to me that that was his settled usage and rule of conduct, and if I should discover to my own satisfaction that the only effectual mode of arresting the outrage was to punish his prisoners in my hands in kind, horrible and revolting as the spectacle might be, I should feel it my duty to my country and to my army to burn his prisoners also. I should regard the necessity of the case as the only limit to the. rule, because (if the Senator will allow me) there must be some way of restraining and punishing and preventing these terrible barbarities; and the only way, as I said before, it seems to me, would be to punish in kind, after having waited a reasonable length of time and resorted to all other reasonable modes of preventing the evil.

Mr. JOHNSON. I do not think after that that my friend from Ohio can say the honorable Senator from Michigan is a "weak brother."

Mr. HOWARD. No, sir; not a bit of it. Mr. WADE. I did not say he was before. I said there were weak brothers. I did not designate them.

Mr. JOHNSON. He is not one of them, certainly. Then suppose the enemy we were contending with were savages, and they put their prisoners to the stake, subject to the slow fire, and, to make the punishment as they think more effectual, dance around the prisoner while he is burning to death. My friend from Michigan, I suppose, if he was directed to perform the duty, and the recurrence of the same outrages could not be prevented in any other way, would be found leading the dance! "Necessary," says the hon