cussion has to do with the postponement of the tax bill?

The SPEAKER. The rules were suspended to allow the gentleman from Ohio half an hour, and then half an hour to other gentlemen in reply. The Chair thinks the gentleman from Massachusetts is hardly transgressing the limits to be allowed to the debate under such circumstances.

Mr. BUTLER. It is entirely germane, sir, when we are called upon to sit here in the summer weather, to give up all other occupations, to give up this great presidential cam paign, and to give up all the interests of the country for the purpose of raising money to pay these clerks who, again I say, are overpaid, paid more than any of the learned professions in any part of the United States.

Mr. MAYNARD. How did the gentleman vote on the twenty per cent. proposition? Mr. BUTLER. Against it ever.

Mr. MAYNARD. Then we voted together, and I ask the gentleman to vote with me on this question.

bill, and that we can go forward and pass them in a week, but that if we do not the commit tee cannot even draw up the same sections in a new bill in less than a week. If the committee cannot draw up a bill containing these sections after all their experience, how can this House be expected to discuss amendments and get through with them in a week?

We wish not to be misunderstood or misrepresented in our design. We are attempting here, if we can, to cure two running sores of corruption, to stop two leaks in the public Treasury, and to do it at once. The gentleman from Ohio persists that his bill, as it now is, furnishes the only remedy. He so insists, I fear, out of pride of offspring, out of pride in his work; that there is nothing 30 good for this purpose as the bill the committee have hatched out after seven months' incubation. Practically, however, it is in effect to say that the tax on whisky and tobacco shall not be reduced this session. If his bill be proceeded with without modification the effect will be that no bill touching whisky or tobacco can be We shall thus be holding on to a bill uselessly and causelessly, and one which no one believes can be passed into a law this session.

Mr. BUTLER. I wish all of the Compassed. mittee of Ways and Means could say as much

Mr. MULLINS. I can say it, although I am not a member of the Committee of Ways and Means. [Laughter.]

Mr. BUTLER. The volunteer member of the Committee of Ways and Means, I believe, did vote against it.

I say again the argument put forward is that we must have voted wrongly because Democrats voted with us. I have no doubt the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] voted conscientiously; that is his affair; but the fact that he voted with the Democrats is quite apparent; and in the coming presidental campaign we will have to shoulder and carry that vote of his. I want, if we are going into this campaign, to get through with this session some time or other in order to have an opportunity on the "stump 17 to explain the gentleman's vote on the twenty per cent. matter.

Now, then, sir, what we on our part desire is this: we want to take these two subjects of taxation. whisky and tobacco, out of this bill now, and pass upon them at once; and we desire to act on these at once and pass them, because it will take until September or late in the fall to pass the bill with them in it. Again, if we should lose this tax bill for want of time to perfect it in both branches, we should lose the benefit of arranging the whisky and tobacco taxes which the country demands.

Why, sir, this whisky tax has fallen from $30,000,000 to $13,000,000, and the difference between $200,000,000, which ought to be collected, and $13,000,000 which is returned, goes into the pockets of speculators, the whisky ring," which has been too strong for the Government so far, and I will say which I thought, before the vote this morning, was too strong for this House. They want the high tax kept on; and the effect of keeping this bill before the country and before the House and Senate, where it cannot be passed and where but one man has ventured to look us in the face and tell us he believed it could pass, the effect, I say, will be to keep the high tax on whisky and keep alive the "whisky ring."

Let me say to you, gentlemen of the Republican side of this House, if you allow this Congress to adjourn without taking means to bring this whisky ring into subjection to the country you might as well adjourn forever, so far as you are concerned. That is known to every man here who has seen the inner workings of the whisky ring."

Now, sir, I have a single further observation to make, and then I will give the floor back to my friend from Indiana, [Mr. SHANKS;] and it is this: if the gentlemen of the committee, as they say, cannot draw up and report a bill embracing the sections concerning the tax on tobacco and distilled spirits in less than one week, how can they expect us to discuss and pass the same whisky and tobacco sections in their bill in a week in this House? They say we have just got up to these sections in their

improved, as evidence of which I will refer to the fact that after spending seven months in bringing forth this bill they come in here with a quantity of amendments. I will not attempt to number them-themselves proving conclusively that the bill is far from being perfect. But I find no fault on that account; I only cite the fact to show that the bill is very imperfect as it is.

The chairman of the committee stated when this bill was introduced that we could get through it in ten days or two weeks. I knew then, as I know now, that he was mistaken. I have no doubt he thought so, but I was satisfied, from what little experience I have had here, that we could not get half through with it. The fact proves who was right, for we have been engaged nearly three weeks on the bill and have not got half through it yet. We are nearly half through the pages, but remember we have got to go back and consider six pages which we found ourselves unable to act upon with any degree of certainty, and therefore passed them over.

Mr. SCHENCK here made a remark inaudible to the reporter.

Mr. PRICE. Sir, I am not afraid to go to the country on my vote. I may be wrong in the votes I give, but being afraid to go to the country is not one of my failings; and it is not worth while to try to scare me.

Mr. SCHENCK. I suppose the gentleman would like to be right as to his facts.

ance to maintain, but we stand directly upon the question of practical legislation, and want to pass what we can pass. We do not want to undertake to pass that which we cannot pass. It is on this proposition that we stand in our support of this resolution. I yield the rest of my time to the gentleman who gave me the floor.

Mr. SHANKS. I yield one minute to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. PRUYN. I simply wish to call the attention of the House to the fact that some weeks ago, before the discussion of this measure commenced, I requested the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means to introduce a brief bill of the character now contemplated, telling him frankly that I had understood from his own side of the House, and from his own political friends, that they did not believe this bill could be gone through with at this session. We must look at this matter practically and determine, as the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. BUTLER] has said, whether in our judgment the bill now before the House, should it pass this body, can be acted upon by the Senate at this session. If it cannot pass the Senate it is wasting our efforts to go through with it here. Were there sufficient time for the purpose I should be very glad to cooperate in any proper effort to improve the internal revenue system, which is very defective; but I am satisfied that the most we can now hope for is to legislate on the important points mentioned in the resolution. Mr. SHANKS. I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Iowa.

Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, I am one of the unfortunate fifty-seven, if so designated, who voted originally for going on with the consideration of this bill; and I feel called upon to avail myself of the courtesy of the gentleman from Indiana to give my reasons for it, for I flatter myself that I do not do anything on this floor or off it without having, as I conceive, a good reason for it. And here, lest I forget it before my five minutes expire, allow me to say that I have no fault to find with the Committee of Ways and Means. I have no antagonism to them whatever. I think they have labored industriously, zealously, and honestly for the perfection of the bill. But I think, like all mortals, they have failed in some instances to bring it to perfection. There are a great many particulars in which the bill might have been

Mr. PRICE. Undoubtedly.

three weeks it has not had more than five full days' consideration.

Mr. PRICE. I do not think any of the gentlemen who voted with the fifty-seven in this case feel very much scared about this going to the country, for it was a self-evident fact to all men inside of this Hall, and outside of it, too, that we could not get the bill through at any time during the present session. The question of whisky and tobacco must be considered. We must have something in reference to that matter to go to the country or we shall go home condemned by every honest Republican and Democrat between the Atlantic and the Pacific; and it is for the very reason that we must have that that we are now in favor of postponing this bill and advocating the resolution. Let us take up the matter of the tax on whisky and tobacco and pass something upon that, and after that is done, if we have time, we can take up the balance of the bill and finish it.

We have no fault to find with the bill, or with the Committee of Ways and Means, but it is a question of expediency whether we shall do something in reference to whisky and tobacco, or do nothing at this session. That is why the men who are advocating this resolution take the ground they do. They may be mistaken, but they are honest in it, and their judgment may possibly approach as near to perfection as that of those by whom they are opposed. They do not claim to be perfect, but they say that they have a right to their opinions on this floor, and they think they have the good of the country as much at heart as the Committee of Ways and Means, and no more. We have no fault to find with the committee, but it is a matter of policy and prudence whether we shall take up this matter and act upon it and give it to the country. And let me remind the House that we cannot hope to have the bill passed in less than three months if we go through with the whole bill, when, if we take up the whisky and tobacco provisions, we may have a bill in less than three weeks, or less than one week, and let it go to the country, and thus, if possible, defeat these infamous swindlers of the public known as the whisky ring of the country. That is why we advocate the resolution, and for no other reason in the world. We want to go before the country aud on the record in a proper manner.

The SPEAKER. The time allowed for

debate has expired, and the question is upon ordering the main question to be now put, on which the yeas and nays have been ordered.

Mr. SCOFIELD. I ask unanimous consent to insert mineral oils" in the resolution. Mr. SPALDING. I object.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I hope that by unanimous consent the call of the yeas and nays will be dispensed with.

Mr. SCHENCK. No, sir; I want the yeas and nays on ordering a vote on this question.

The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative-yeas 79, nays 63, not voting 47; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Archer, Axtell, Barnes, Beaman, Beck, Benjamin, Bingham, Blaine, Blair, Boyer, Buckland, Burr, Butler, Cary, Covode, Dawes, Delano, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Eldridge, Eliot, Ferriss, Ferry, Fields, Glossbrenner, Golladay, Grover, Halsey, Harding, Hawkins, Holman, Hotchkiss, Hulburd, Humphrey, Johnson, Julian, Kelsey, Kitchen, Knott, Koontz, Laflin, Loughridge, Lynch, Mallory, Marvin, McCarthy, McCormick, Mercur, Moore, Myers, Newcomb, Nunn, Pike, Plants, Price, Pruyn, Randall, Robinson, Selye, Shanks, Shellabarger, Spalding, Starkweather, Stewart, Stone, Taber, Thomas, Lawrence S. Trimble, Trowbridge, Upson, Van Aernam, Van Trump, Ward, Elihu B. Washburne, William Williams, and Woodward-79. NAYS-Messrs. Allison, Anderson, Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Bailey, Baker, Baldwin, Banks, Beatty, Benton, Boutwell, Cake, Churchill, Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Coburn, Cook, Cornell, Cullom, Eckley, Eggleston, Ela, Farnsworth, Garfield, Gravely, Griswold, Higby, Hooper, Hopkins, Chester D. Hubbard, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Judd, Loan, Logan, Maynard, McClurg, Miller, Morrell, Mullins, Niblack, O'Neill, Paine, Peters, Phelps, Pile, Polsley, Pomeroy, Raum, Sawyer, Schenck, Scofield, Aaron F. Stevens, Stokes, Taffe, Taylor, Twichell. Robert T. Van Horn, Henry D.Washburn, Welker, Thomas Williams, and John T. Wilson-63.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. Ames, Arnell, Barnum, Bromwell, Brooks, Broomall, Chanler, Finney, Fox, Getz, Haight, Hill, Asahel W. Hubbard, Richard D. Hubbard, Hunter, Jones, Kelley, Kerr, Ketcham, George V. Lawrence, William Lawrence, Lincoln, Marshall, McCullough, Moorhead, Morrissey, Mungen, Nicholson, Orth, Perham, Poland, Robertson, Ross, Sitgreaves, Smith, Thaddeus Stevens, John Trimble, Van Auken, Burt Van Horn, Van Wyck, Cadwalader C. Washburn, William B. Washburn, James F. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, Wood, and Woodbridge-47.

So the main question was ordered. The question was upon the adoption of the resolution.

Mr. MAYNARD. Upon that question I call for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was then taken; and it was decided in the affirmative-yeas 74, nays 63, not voting 52; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Archer, Axtell, Barnes, Beaman, Beck, Benjamin, Blaine, Blair, Boyer, Buckland. Burr, Butler. Cary, Dawes, Delano, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Eldridge, Eliot, Ferriss, Ferry, Fields, Glossbreuner, Golladay, Grover, Halsey, Harding. Hawkins, Holman, Hotchkiss, Hulburd, Humphrey, Johnson, Julian, Kelsey, Kitchen, Knott, Koontz, Laflin, Loughridge, Lynch, Mallory, Marvin, McCarthy. McCormick, Mercur, Moore, Newcomb, Nunn, Pike, Price, Pruyn, Randall, Robinson, Selve, Shanks, Shellabarger, Spalding, Stewart, Stone, Taber, Thomas, Lawrence S. Trimble, Trowbridge, Upson, Van Aernam, Van Trump, Ward, Elihu B. Washburne, William Williams, and Woodward-74.

NAYS-Messrs. Anderson, Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Bailey, Baker, Baldwin, Banks, Beatty, Benton, Boutwell, Cake, Churchill, Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Coburn, Cook, Cornell, Cullom, Eckley, Eggleston, Ela, Farnsworth, Garfield, Griswold, Higby, Hooper, Hopkins, Chester D. Hubbard, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Judd, Loan, Logan, Maynard, MeClurg, Miller, Morrell, Mullins, Myers, Niblack, O'Neill, Paint, Peters, Phelps, Pile, Plants, Polsley, Pomeroy, Raum, Sawyer, Schenck, Scofield, Aaron F. Stevens, Stokes, Taffe, Taylor, Twichell, Robert T. Van Horn, Henry D. Washburn, Welker, Thomas Williams, and John T. Wilson-63.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. Allison, Ames. Arnell, Barnum, Bingham, Bromwell, Brooks, Broomall, Chanler, Covode, Finney, Fox, Getz, Gravely, Haight, Hill, Asahel W. Hubbard, Richard D. Hubbard, Hunter, Jones, Kelley, Kerr, Ketcham, George V. Lawrence, William Lawrence, Lincoln, Marshall, McCullough, Moorhead, Morrissey, Mungen, Nicholson, Orth, Perham, Poland, Robertson, Ross, Sitgreaves, Smith, Starkweather, Thaddeus Stevens, John Trimble, Van Auken, Burt Van Horn, Van Wyck, Cadwalader C. Washburn, William B. Washburn, James F. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, Wood, and Woodbridge-57.

So the resolution was adopted.

Mr. SHANKS moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was adopted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

GREAT AND LITTLE OSAGE INDIANS. The SPEAKER laid before the House the following message from the President of the United States:

To the House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of the Interior, made in reply to a resolution adopted by the House of Representatives on the 13th instant. The treaty recently concluded with the Great and Little Osage Indians, to which the accompanying report refers, was submitted to the Senate prior to the receipt of the resolution of the House upon the subject. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON, D. C., June 15, 1868.

Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas. I move that the message and accompanying document be printed, and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas. I also move that the Committee on Indian Affairs have leave to report upon this subject at any time, not within the morning hour.

The SPEAKER. That would require unani

mous consent.

Mr. SCHENCK. I object.

Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas. I hope the gentleman will withdraw his objection.

Mr. SCHENCK. I want to offer a resolution, and when the gentleman hears it he will understand why I object.

The SPEAKER. The President's message upon the subject being before the House, any motion growing out of it is naturally in order. But if the floor passes away from the gentleman from Kansas, [Mr. CLARKE,] the next business in order will be the motion to suspend the rules, submitted by the gentleman

from Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] on Monday

last.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

A message from the Senate, by Mr. GORHAM, its Secretary, informed the House that the Senate had disagreed to the amendments of the House to Senate bill No. 184, granting a pension to Mrs. Ann Corcoran, and asked a committee of conference upon the disagreeing votes of the two Houses upon the bill; and announced that Mr. VAN WINKLE, Mr. TRUMBULL, and Mr. EDMUNDS had been appointed the conferees on the part of the Senate.

The message further announced that the Senate had passed the following bills, in which the concurrence of the House was requested:

An act (S. No. 448) to refund duties erroneously exacted in certain cases; and An act (S. No. 469) confirming the title to a tract of land in Burlington, Iowa.

MRS. ANN CORCORAN.

The request of the Senate for a committee of conference upon the disagreeing votes of the two Houses upon Senate bill No. 184, granting a pension to Mrs. Ann Corcoran, was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to.

The Speaker subsequently appointed Mr. VAN AERNAM, Mr. MILLER, and Mr. BURR, as the conferees on the part of the House.

ELECTION CONTEST-CHAVES VS. CLEVER.

The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the House additional evidence in the contested-election case of Chaves vs. CLEVER, New Mexico; which was referred to the Committee of Elections, and ordered to be printed.

INTERNAL TAX BILL.

Mr. SCHENCK. I ask unanimous consent to submit the following resolution for consideration at this time:

Resolved, That after the report of a tax bill by the Committee of Ways and Means, in pursuance of the order just passed, no other business shall be in order but the consideration of the bill so reported by said committee except reports from the Committee on Enrolled Bills.

Several MEMBERS. That is right.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that this will cut out the morning hour entirely. Is there objection?

Mr. INGERSOLL. I object.

Mr. SCHENCK. I move to suspend the rules to introduce the resolution.

Mr. ELIOT. I must object to that at this time.

Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, is it not in order to move to suspend the rules?

The SPEAKER. It will be if the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. CLARKE] and the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] both surrender the floor.

GREAT AND LITTLE OSAGE INDIANS.

Mr. SCHENCK. I withdraw my objection to the motion of the gentleman from Kansas, [Mr. CLARKE.]

The SPEAKER. If there is no further objection it will be ordered that the Committee on Indian Affairs have authority to report upon the question of the treaty with the Osage Indians at any time outside of the morning hour. There was no objection.

RIVER AND HARBOR BILL.

The SPEAKER. On last Monday night, just before the adjournment of the House, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. ELIOT] moved to suspend the rules for the purpose of discharging the Committee of the Whole from the further consideration of the river and harbor bill, and ordering that the bill be at once considered in the House. That is now the pending motion.

Mr. ELIOT. I will modify my motion so as to assign the bill for consideration on Thursday next after the morning hour.

Mr. ALLISON. I ask the gentleman to name either an earlier or a later time.

Mr. ELIOT. If the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON] is under the impression that the Committe of Ways and Means will be prepared to report the tax bill by Thursday, I have personally no sort of objection to taking up the river and harbor bill to-morrow, and disposing of it in season to clear the way for the tax bill. Take up your bill to

Several MEMBERS.

The SPEAKER. It will not. That bill, having been made a special order by unanimous consent, will have priority over all other orders.

Mr. BLAINE. Then I do not object.

Mr. DAWES. I do not want to lose my right to call up the question of privilege, the bill to admit R. R. Butler to a seat.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that when special orders are being assigned after the morning hour questions of privilege should be called up immediately after the reading of the Journal. If there is no objection it will be ordered that the Committee of the Whole be

discharged from the further consideration of

the river and harbor bill, and that it be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole to-morrow after the morning hour. There was no objection.

Mr. ELIOT. I move to reconsider the vote by which the order was just made in regard to the river and harbor bill; and also move that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.

INTERNAL TAX BILL.

Mr. SCHENCK. I again ask unanimous consent to submit the following resolution:

Resolved, That after the report of a tax bill by the Committee of Ways and Means, in pursuance of the order just passed, no other business shall be in order but the consideration of the bill so reported by said committee except reports from the Committee on Enrolled Bills.

Mr. SPALDING. Does that cut off appropriation bills?

The SPEAKER. It cuts off all other business than the tax bill.

Mr. SPALDING. Then I object. Mr. SCHENCK. I move, then, to suspend the rules for the purpose of introducing and adopting the resolution just read.

The motion was agreed to.

So the resolution was introduced and adopted. Mr. ALLISON moved to reconsider the vote

just taken; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

Mr. SCHENCK. Gentlemen ask how soon a bill of that kind can be reported. That depends on circumstances, but mostly on the interpretation of the resolution. We are to report, so the resolution says, on the revision of the taxes. If we are only to report what shall be the tax on distilled spirits and what on tobacco, we will be able to report very soon indeed. If we are to retain all the machinery provided for the collection of the tax and all those portions of the bill dovetailed together giving it unity, I do not know how long it will take. I inquire, therefore, of gentlemen wiser than myself what interpretation they put upon this resolution? It only directs the revision of the taxes. I wish to know whether we are to go into the machinery for the collection of the taxes, whether we are to introduce the necessary provisions which we have already reported.

Mr. DAWES. The House has confidence that the committee will report such measures and such tax on whisky and tobacco as may be required.

Mr. SCHENCK. I ask in good faith to have the interpretation of this resolution settled. I find members of the Committee of Ways and Means are disagreed to some extent as to what the resolution at last means. I ask that the resolution be again read.

That does

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. not bring the resolution again before the House? The SPEAKER. It does not.

The resolution was again read.

Mr. SCHENCK. Now, Mr. Speaker, I ask when the Committee of Ways and Means report a bill under that resolution the members of the House will stay here and help us to get it through. When we had the other bill before us the members who voted to-day to set it aside left us by their absence without a quorum in Committee of the Whole, and thus delayed action.

Mr. PRICE. The gentleman does not refer to me, for I was always in attendance.

Mr. SCHENCK. I believe the gentleman attended faithfully.

Mr. HARDING. I was always present in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union.

Mr. SCHENCK. The gentleman need not purge himself, I will give him a certificate. Both of those gentlemen having been here are as well aware of the fact as I am that while they and I and others have been here we have been without a quorum to attend to this business; and we were without a quorum because of the absence of many of those who voted this morning to send this bill back to the committee. Mr. HARDING. I understand the gentle. man to say he is in favor of the reduction of the tax on whisky.

Mr. SCHENCK. I think the committee will be inclined to go for it.

Mr. HARDING. I hope the committee will not procrastinate, so there may be an end to the reign of the "whisky ring."

Mr. LOGAN. I hope we will have no more insinuations, and that this debate, which is entirely out of order, will be brought to a close.

The SPEAKER. The debate is not in order. Mr. SCHENCK. I thought I was in order. The House suspended the rules for the introduction of my resolution to make the bill, when reported from the Committee of Ways and Means, the special order until disposed of. In view of that I wish also to have the order of the House instructing the committee more definite. It is now indefinite, and gives rise to various interpretations.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman's resolution was adopted..

CONTESTED ELECTIONS IN WASHINGTON.

Mr. SCHENCK. I offer the following resolution; and if I cannot have unanimous consent to offer it I will move to suspend the rules. Resolved, That the rules be suspended, and Senate

bill No. 534 be taken from the Speaker's table for action at this time; and after twenty minutes' debate on each side the vote shall be taken on the passage of the bill without any dilatory motions whatever." Mr. ELDRIDGE. What is that bill? The SPEAKER. It is the Senate bill relating to contested elections in the city of Washington.

Mr. BOYER. I object.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. It is an outrage to attempt to pass this bill, allowing only twenty minutes for debate.

Mr. SCHENCK. I insist on my resolution for the suspension of the rules for the purpose indicated.

Mr. RANDALL. I call for the yeas and

nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and there wereyeas 103, nays 27, not voting 59; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Allison, Anderson, Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Bailey, Baker, Baldwin, Beaman, Beatty, Benjamin, Benton, Bingham, Blaine, Blair, Boutwell, Buckland, Butler, Cake, Churchill, Reader W. Clarke, Cobb, Cook, Cornell, Covode, Cullom, Dawes, Delano, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Eggleston, Ela, Eliot, Farnsworth, Ferriss, Ferry, Fields, Garfield, Gravely, Harding, Hawkins, Higby, Hooper, Hopkins, Chester D. Hubbard, Hulburd, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Judd, Julian, Kelsey, Kiteben, Koontz, Laflin, Loan, Logan, Loughridge, Lynch, Mallory, Marvin, Maynard, McCarthy, McClurg, Mercur, Miller, Moore, Morrell, Mullins, Myers, Newcomb, Nunn, O'Neill, Peters, Pike, Plants, Polsley, Pomeroy, Price, Raum, Sawyer, Schenck, Scofield, Selye, Shanks, Shellabarger, Spalding, Aaron F. Stevens, Stokes, Taffe, Taylor, Thomas, Trowbridge, Twichell, Upson, Van Aernam, Robert T. Van Horn, Ward, Elihu B. Washburne, Henry D. Washburn, Welker, Thomas Williams, and William Williams -103.

NAYS-Messrs. Adams, Archer, Axtell, Barnes, Beck, Boyer, Burr, Cary, Eldridge, Glossbrenner, Golladay, Grover, Hotchkiss, Humphrey, Johnson, Knott, McCormick, Niblack, Phelps, Pruyn, Randall, Robinson, Stewart, Taber, Lawrence S. Trimble, Van Trump, and Woodward-27.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. Ames, Arnell, Banks, Barnum, Bromwell, Brooks, Broomall, Chanler, Sidney Clarke, Coburn, Eckley, Finney, Fox, Getz, Griswold, Haight, Halsey, Hill, Holman, Asahel W. Hubbard, Richard D. Hubbard, Hunter, Jones, Kelley, Kerr, Ketcham. George V. Lawrence, William Lawrence, Lincoln, Marshall, McCullough, Moorhead, Morrissey, Mungen, Nicholson, Orth, Paine, Perham, Pile, Poland, Robertson, Ross, Sitgreaves, Smith, Starkweather, Thaddeus Stevens, Stone, John Trimble, Van Auken, Burt Van Horn, Van Wyck, Cadwalader C. Washburn, William B. Washburn, James F. Wilson, John T. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, Wood, and Woodbridge-59.

So (two thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was before the House, and was read a first and second time.

The bill was reported. It provides that whenever any person has received or shall hereafter receive a certificate from the register of the city of Washington, based upon satisfactory evidence furnished by the commissioners of election, notifying him of his election. to any elective office in said city, the person receiving such notification shall be entitled to enter upon the discharge of the duties of his office, and the certificate of the register shall be prima facie evidence of his election to and right to discharge the duties of the office.

The second section provides that any person who shall hinder or obstruct a person holding the certificate of election mentioned in the foregoing section from entering upon or discharging the duties of his office, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, in any court of competent jurisdiction, shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000, or be imprisoned in the county jail not exceeding six months, or both, in the discretion of the court.

The third section proposes to give the supreme court of the District of Columbia, or any judge thereof, jurisdiction to enforce, by mandamus or otherwise, the right of any person holding the certificate mentioned in the first section.

Under the fourth section any person who claims, or shall hereafter claim, to be elected to any elective office in Washington city may commence proceedings before the supreme court of the District of Columbia, by petition setting forth the facts upon which he relies, and shall serve a copy on the incumbent or person who has received the certificate of elec

tion; and the person so served is to make answer to the petition within five days; and the court is thereupon to try the rights of the parties to the office in a summary manner; and for that purpose a special session is to be called and held whenever necessary for the purposes of such trial; and the decision of the court in any case so brought before it is to be final and conclusive. And when the legal organization of the board of aldermen or board of common council shall be delayed on account of any contest in relation to the election of any member of either of said boards, the mayor of said city is hereby authorized to make temporary appointments of all subordinate officers, whose appointment or election is authorized by the said mayor and members of said boards under existing laws, to continue until said boards shall be legally organized.

Mr. RANDALL. I move to lay the bill on the table.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. On that I call the yeas and nays.

The SPEAKER. The Chair cannot entertain the motion. By the resolution suspending the rules the House has ordered after twenty minutes debate on each side that the vote shall be taken on the passage of the bill, without any dilatory motion whatever.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. The motion to lay on the table is not a dilatory motion. The Speaker has so held.

The SPEAKER. The order of the House is precisely the reverse, however, to-day. This order is not only "without any dilatory motion whatever," but it says that after twenty minutes debate on each side the House shall take a vote on the passage of the bill.

Mr. RANDALL. Is it not in the power of the House to vote the bill down-to kill it? The SPEAKER. It is; by rejecting it. Mr. RANDALL. Well, I want to take a summary method of doing it, by laying it on the table.

The SPEAKER. The House has ordered, under a suspension of the rules, that after twenty minutes' speeches on each side the vote shall be taken on the passage of the bill. Mr. ROBINSON. When was that order made?

The SPEAKER. Just now, under a suspension of the rules, by a vote of yeas 103, nays 27.

Mr. ROBINSON. I understand that the rules were suspended to bring the bill before the House, but that does not pass the bill.

The SPEAKER. It does not pass the bill, of course.

Mr. ROBINSON. I have not heard any resolution put that we shall have twenty minutes' speaking on each side. The SPEAKER. That is now to commence. Mr. ROBINSON. By what order? The SPEAKER. Under this order which the Chair will read.

Mr. ROBINSON. The House simply suspended the rules that the bill might be brought

up.

The SPEAKER. That is not a correct statement. The resolution adopted by the House was as follows:

Resolved, That the rules be suspended, and Senate bill No. 534 be taken from the Speaker's table for action at this time, and after twenty minutes of debate on each side the vote shall be taken on the passage of the bill without any dilatory motions whatsoever.

Mr. ROBINSON. The Speaker will excuse me; I was mistaken.

Mr. SCHENCK. Gentlemen will observe that the charter under which we are doing business just now is the resolution just passed. [Laughter.]

Mr. ROBINSON. It is not the usual way, and I was mistaken.

Mr. SCHENCK. It allows twenty minutes' debate to each side. That is not very much better than putting the previous question on the bill, I admit, but it does afford gentlemen on either side an opportunity through some one or more of their number to state the reasons why they will vote for or against the bill. That

is all.

Mr. BOYER. I do think twenty minutes' time is entirely inadequate for the discussion of such a measure as this.

Mr. SCHENCK. It is too late now to reconsider that matter.

Mr. BOYER. I make an appeal to the gentleman and to the House to allow longer time. Mr. SCHENCK. I should have finished by this time, if the gentleman had not interrupted me, and given way to him.

At present the law does not provide any way for trying cases of contested elections. The Senate has passed and sent to us a bill which supplies that omission. So far as the mayor of this city is concerned, I believe that whatever dispute may have occurred in relation to his being inducted into office all are agreed that he at least was elected by a small majority. So far as the members of the two boards constituting the council of the city (its legislative department) are concerned, there is a dispute in at least one of the wards, and there are two sets of claimants. In consequence of this there has been an organization or attempt at organization by both, and each has recognized a different mayor, one the mayor-elect and the other an ad interim, whom they have created for the occasion. This condition of things, although people at a distance may regard it as rather a "tempest in a tea pot," considering the excitement that it has occasioned here in this city, is yet very serious, and I am assured by more than one gentleman who from his position ought to know and understand the subject well, that if Congress stands by and permits this anomalous condition of things to continue it will result probably in violence before the end of the week, such being the threats made and such the temper that is being excited.

Now, I regard it as a thing not for a moment to be consented to that we, acting as the Legislature of this District and city, should sit here and permit such a condition of things to continue when we can apply a remedy. I have been anxious, therefore, that the bill from the Senate which remits this subject to the supreme court of the District should not only become a law, but that by our concurrence in it, with or without amendment, as the case may be, it should become a law so soon as to prevent this condition of things from ripening into further or greater troubles.

Without going into the details of this bill, these are the reasons why I will support it, being satisfied with its provisions in the main.

Now, so far as I am concerned, I am willing to give any portion of the time I control to gentlemen on the other side, so that they can give their reasons for not supporting the bill.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I think it proper that the debate on the other side should be concladed before we take our twenty minutes.

Mr. SCHENCK. Very well. I have stated the reasons which are sufficient to control my vote for this bill. I will now yield the floor to any gentleman who may get it. I do not suppose that we are compelled to occupy the entire twenty minutes allowed for this side.

No one arising to speak in favor of the bill, The SPEAKER said: The debate in favor of the passage of the bill is now closed.

Mr. RANDALL. I desire to say here that the object of this bill is to accomplish a political result which I deem unworthy of any political party, certainly of the now dominant party, in a country like ours.

Some time ago a bill was passed through this House in reference to the charter of the city of Washington. The dominant party, then supposing that they were in danger of losing the mayoralty of this city, changed the old mode of appointing and electing every officer in this city, took that power away from the mayor and gave it to the joint convention of council and aldermen, The election came on. Admitting the statement of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] to be correct, their candidate for mayor was unexpectedly elected, while, also unexpectedly to them, the two branches of the common council were carried by the white people of the district, who were

aided by the soldier, against the black people of the District. It now becomes necessary to traverse the whole mode of electing and appointing officers, which results from the bill lately passed, and to change it so that by this procedure the control of the two branches of the common council shall be handed over to the black people of this District.

This bill is a proposition to do nothing more or less than to throw out three white candidates for the council in one ward and put in their places three white representatives of the negroes in that ward. That is the sole issue. I say again, that I have never known any party, in any part of the country, who stooped so low to do that which was wrong, to profit by it; and I do not believe they will profit by it in this case. I believe as they were defeated and overthrown under the charter which they thought it necessary to pass, in order to put down the white people of this District, so will they fail again.

In the particular ward to which I have referred they have undertaken to deprive the soldiers of the right to vote, to which they were entitled quite as much as were the negroes who were brought in and made voters in this District after a residence of fifteen days.

However, no effort of mine can stop the action now proposed. My province is only to expose the proposition and the purpose of it. I am surprised that gentlemen on the other side should undertake to act in this way. They are undertaking to give the black people of this District the control over the white people of the District. That is really the issue involved in the passage of this bill.

For one, I shall content myself with casting my vote against this measure in every shape and form. I now yield to my colleague, [Mr. BOYER.]

Mr. BOYER. Mr. Speaker, we seem to have arrived at that stage of the legislation of Congress when it is in vain to appeal to any principle of justice or fairness, or to advocate any cause because it is founded upon existing law, unless at the same time it can be demonstrated that it is for the interest of the party in power, and will serve to perpetuate its rule. It is the same whether the proposition be the reconstruction of a State, or the election of mayor and councilmen of a city.

I have not time to discuss the questions involved in this measure. I have not time to read the law as it stands upon the statutebook, a law which was framed by this Congress for its own purpose, and intended to regulate the municipal elections of the city of Washington, and which, because it does not now operate as it was supposed it would, so as to continue the power of the Republican party in this city, it is proposed to change, after the election which it is to affect has actually taken place, and to direct that certificates of election shall be given to those who failed to receive a majority of the votes at the polls.

By the act of Congress lately passed there were five judges of election provided for the city of Washington, to be appointed by the supreme court of the District. Those judges were to attend to the registration of voters, and to decide who was a legal voter within the meaning of the act of Congress. These judges of election were actually appointed by the supreme court of the District. They per formed their duties. Lists of registration were made out and perfected. Another act of Congress subsequently passed provided that there should be commissioners of election appointed by the same court, who were to receive the ballots cast by the persons whose names had been entered by the judges of election upon the lists of registration. These commissioners were ministerial officers merely. By the express provisions of the law they are to decide, not upon the qualifications of voters, but only upon their identity; and this is all in fact that in the late election the commissioners of election undertook to perform. In the fifth ward of this city it so happened that these commissioners of election in pursuance

of their duty returned, as it was provided by law that they should do, that certain individuals who had received a majority of the votes cast were elected to the common council. It

happened that they were not Radicals, as was expected, and hence the trouble. The register of the city, who under the law has nothing to do but simply to make a record of the returns and to notify the persons elected-mere ministerial acts-undertook to withhold the notice from certain persons of those who were returned in the first instance by the commissioners of election as having been legally elected to the council. It is true that after the performance of that act, the commissioners of election were induced to make a supplemental return; but when they did that they were functi officio, without any further power and incompetent to revoke the return which they had previously made according to the express provisions of the law. The law further provides, that upon returns being so made, the mayor of the city shall proclaim the persons so returned elected. That was done in this instance. Yet those gentlemen thus elected and so returned and proclaimed as elected were denied the right to take their seats at the council board. And now, it being evident that there is no law for such a proceeding, this shameless retroactive measure has been introduced into the Senate, passed there, and is now before this House, for the purpose of making the certificate of the register, who before had no judicial powers, the prima facie evidence of election, thus changing the law from what it, was when the election took place for the mere purpose of enabling the Republican party to have a majority of councilmen at the board where they had been unexpectedly left in a minority by the result of the election.

Mr. NIBLACK. I trust the gentleman will allow me a single inquiry. I have not had an opportunity of examining this bill since it was passed by the Senate; but I understand that as to the question of a prima facie case, it creates one rule with reference to the mayor, and another with reference to the members of the council. I wish to inquire whether that is the fact?

Mr. BOYER. It is.

Mr. NIBLACK. And being so, does not that operate in each case in favor of the Republican candidates?

Mr. BOYER. Undoubtedly it does. The design is patent upon the very face of the bill. I wish I had time to ventilate it before this House and before the country. It was well for the gentlemen on the other side to restrict the debate on this side of the House to twenty minutes. It is their habit thus to restrict debate when the measure which they introduce and undertake to force through this House will not bear the test of honest, fair discussion.

Mr. DAWES. I would like to ask the gen. tleman one question. Who, under the existing law, gives the certificates to the parties claiming to be elected?

Mr. BOYER. Under the existing law it is provided that the mayor shall proclaim who are elected according to the returns of the commissioners of election; and that was done in this instance. The register has nothing more to do with it than to perform the simple ministerial act of notifying the persons who are elected; and whether he notifies them or not under the law it cannot make one particle of difference, nor affect in the slightest degree the validity of the election of those who are returned as the elected officers by the commissioners, and who are proclaimed to be so elected and returned by the mayor.

Mr. DAWES. I was simply inquiring who, under the existing law, gives the certificates. Mr. ELDRIDGE. The gentleman from Massachusetts ought not take up the time of the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. BOYER] when it is so limited.

Mr. BOYER. No, sir; I cannot yield further. The gentlemen are welcome to all the capital they can make by the passage of this measure. If we cannot discuss it here, we can take the

opportunity to discuss it before the country. We shall show that those whose votes were thrown out were soldiers who resided here one year, and had been legally registered according to the law as it existed at the time. I should like to ask how it was known that their votes were cast for the conservative candidates? I should like to know upon what law or correct principle these men undertake to decide that the votes thus cast were on one side or the other? What official evidence had they? What testimony did they take? What judicial tribunal of any kind was the case ever before?

Mr. MAYNARD. As the gentleman asks for information

Mr. BOYER. I cannot yield. The reply would be, I suppose, that the commissioners of election undertook to mark the ballots which were voted by these soldiers, so their ballots could afterward be recognized in the count. I should like to know upon what correct principle that is to be allowed in any community where it is provided by law that the election shall be by ballot? The sanctity of the election by ballot depends on its privacy. No election officer or any other man in the community has the right to look inside of a citizen's ballot to find out how he voted. He has no more right to do that than to put his hand into the pocket of the voter and take from it his pocket-book. Doubtless, when the next municipal election in Washington takes place, this Congress, if the majority in it should remain as it is, will invent some new dodges for the emergency, and set aside the law which they are now making with as little scruple as they dispose of that which they enacted a few months ago, if by so doing they can help their own friends into office.

I have been informed that the votes of over a hundred soldiers were thrown out of the ballotbox to accomplish the object in this case. All these have, without any judicial investigation, been deducted from the votes polled for the Conservative candidates. Has it come to this that the presumption is that the enlisted soldier when he goes to the polls votes the Democratic ticket? If that be so on that issue I should rejoice to go before the country. Let the dusky sons of Africa vote the Republican ticket. If we have the white soldiers of the country to vote ours, we shall be content with this exchange, and we do not mean to be always defrauded.

I am sorry I must discuss this measure in this desultory way. If I had time I should pre

fer to review with more deliberation the law as it stands, and expose more at length the injustice, the fraud, and the outrage of this bill upon the rights of the voters of this city. As it is we have little else to do upon this occasion than to enter our protest against this iniquitous measure, and put ourselves upon record against it by our votes.

The SPEAKER. The question is on the passage of the bill.

Mr. NIBLACK demanded the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative-yeas 94, nays 25, not voting 70; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Allison, Anderson, Bailey, Baldwin, Beaman, Beatty, Benjamin, Benton, Bingham, Blaine, Blair, Boutwell, Buckland, Butler, Cake, Churchill, Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Coburn, Cook, Covode, Cullom, Dawes, Delano, Dixon, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Eckley, Eggleston, Ela, Eliot, Farnsworth, Ferriss, Fields, Garfield, Gravely, Halsey, Harding, Higby, Hooper, Hopkins, Chester D. Hubbard, Hulburd, Jenckes, Judd, Julian, Kelsey, Koontz, Laflin, Loan, Logan, Lynch, Mallory, Marvin, Maynard, McCarthy, McClurg, Mercur, Miller, Moore, Morrell, Mullins, O'Neill, Paine, Peters, Pike, Pile, Plants, Polsley, Pomeroy, Price, Sawyer, Schenck, Scofield, Shanks, Shellabarger, Spalding, Aaron F. Stevens, Stokes, Taffe, Taylor, Thomas, Trowbridge, Twichell, Upson, Van Aernam, Robert T. Van Horn, Ward, Elihu B. Washburne, Henry D. Washburn, Welker, William Williams, and John T. Wilson-94.

Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley, Baker, Banks, Barnum, Bromwell, Brooks, Broomall, Cary, Chanler, Cornell, Ferry, Finney, Fox, Getz, Griswold, Haight, Hawkins, Hill, Asahel W. Hubbard, Richard D. Hubbard, Hunter, Ingersoll, Johnson, Jones, Kelley, Kerr, Ketcham, Kitchen, George V. Lawrence, William Lawrence, Lincoln, Loughridge, Marshall, McCullough, Moorhead, Morrissey, Mungen, Myers, Newcomb, Nicholson, Nunn, Orth, Perham, Phelps, Poland, Raum, Robertson, Ross, Selye, Sitgreaves, Smith, Starkweather, Thaddeus Stevens, John Trimble, Van Auken, Burt Van Horn, Van Wyck, Cadwalader C. Washburn, William B. Washburn, Thomas Williams, James F. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, Wood, and Woodbridge-70. So the bill was passed.

During the roll-call,

Mr. RAUM stated that he was paired with his colleague, [Mr. MARSHALL.]

The result having been announced as above recorded,

Mr. SCHENCK moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I demand the yeas and nays on the motion.

Mr. SCHENCK. I withdraw it.

PAYMENT OF BOUNTIES.

Mr. PAINE, by unanimous consent, offered the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Secretary of War be directed to communicate to this House a statement of the number of additional bounties paid under the act of July 28, 1866, by the paymaster general during each month since January 1,1868, to claimants from the respective States and Territories.

Mr. PAINE moved to reconsider the vote

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

The latter motion was agreed to.

EXTRA PAY OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYÉS. Mr. BINGHAM. I rise to a privileged motion. I move to reconsider the vote by which the House passed the joint resolution (H. R. No. 291) giving additional pay to certain employés in the civil service of the Government at Washington.

REMOVAL OF THE CAPITAL.

Mr. LOGAN. I move to suspend the rules for the purpose of introducing the following preamble and resolution:

Wheras it is obvious that a disloyal element exists in the city of Washington, which is adverse to the authority of the Congress of the United States, and that a large portion of the citizens thereof have determined to set the laws of Congress at defiance, and to shield and defend conspirators and assassins, to menace and insult the representatives of the people assembled to make laws for the government of the nation; and whereas a great portion of the citizens of said city are at the present time, in direct violation of law and in defiance of the authority of Congress, attempting by revolutionary measures to overthrow the legally constituted authorities thereof by preventing said authorities from the due exercise of their legal functions, which proceedings are calculated and intended to produce riots and bloodshed, and render the city undesirable as a residence, and an unsafe and unfit place for Congress to assemble; and whereas it is of the highest importance that the capital of the nation and the archives of the Government should be in a place wholly secure from foreign invasion; and whereas it is of the greatest consequence that the seat of Government should be easily accessible by many lines of railway, and should be located in a populous region and a rich and highly cultivated country, and where obstructions to access and free communications are not interposed by the hostile legislation of neighboring States:

Be it resolved, That a committee of five members be appointed by the Speaker to inquire into the propriety and expediency of removing the seat of the General Government from said city of Washington to a point near the geographical center of the Republic, and that said committee be authorized at any time to report by bill or otherwise.

Mr. BOYER. I object to the introduction; it is a gross slander on this community. Mr. ELDRIDGE. Is not the question debatable?

The SPEAKER. It is not. Mr. ELDRIDGE. I was about to say I this District.

Boyer, Burr, Eldridge, Glossbrenner, Golladay, Grover, Holman, Hotchkiss, Humphrey, Knott, McCornick, Niblack, Pruyn, Randall, Robinson, Stewart, Stone, Taber, Lawrence S. Trimble, Van Trump, and Woodward-25.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. Ames, Archer, Arnell,

The SPEAKER. Debate is not in order. Mr. BOYER. It is utterly without foundation in truth.

Mr. LOGAN. I call the gentleman to order.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I demand the yeas and

nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. ROBINSON. It is not understood that the adoption of the motion will carry the resolution also.

The SPEAKER. It does not. It is a mo. tion to allow the resolution to be offered at the present time.

Mr. MAYNARD. Will it be in order if the motion prevails to discuss it?

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. LOGAN] will then be entitled to the floor subject to the hour rule.

Mr. BÖYER. Is it in order to move to lay it on the table?

The SPEAKER. It is not.

The question was taken on suspending the rules; and there were-yeas 43, nays 67, not voting 79; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Allison, James M. Ashley, Beatty, Benjamin, Butler, Cake, Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Coburn, Covode, Cullom, Donnelly, Ela, Ferriss, Ferry, Gravely, Harding, Higby, Hopkins, Judd, Julian, Kelsey, Loan, Logan, McClurg, Mercur. Moore, Morrell, Mullins, Paine, Pile, Price, Sawyer, Shanks, Taffe, Upson, Robert T. Van Horn, Elihu B. Washburne, Henry D. Washburn, Thomas Williams, William Williams, and John T. Wilson-43. NAYS-Messrs. Adams, Bailey, Baker, Banks, Barnes, Beaman, Beck, Bingham, Boutwell, Boyer, Burr, Cary, Churchill, Dawes, Delano, Driggs, Eldridge, Eliot, Farnsworth, Fields, Garfield, Golladay, Griswold. Grover, Hawkins, Holman, Hotchkiss, Chester D. Hubbard, Hulburd, Humphrey, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Knott, Koontz, Laflin, Mallory, Marvin, Maynard, McCarthy, McCormick, Miller, Myers, Niblack, O'Neill, Peters, Pike, Polsley, Pomeroy, Pruyn, Randall, Robinson, Schenck, Spalding, Starkweather, Stewart, Stokes, Stone, Taber, Taylor, Thomas, Lawrence S. Trimble, Trowbridge, Twichell, Van Aernam, Van Trump, Ward, and Woodward-67. NOT VOTING-Messrs. Ames, Anderson, Archer, Arnell, Delos R. Ashley, Axtell, Baldwin, Barnum, Benton, Blaine, Blair. Bromwell, Brooks, Broomall, Buckland, Chanler. Cook, Cornell, Dixon, Dodge, Eckley, Eggleston, Finney, Fox, Getz, Glossbrenner, Haight, Halsey, Hill, Hooper, Asahel W. Hubbard, Richard D. Hubbard, Hunter, Johnson, Jones, Kelley, Kerr, Ketcham, Kitchen, George V. Lawrence, William Lawrence, Lincoln, Loughridge, Lynch, Marshall, McCullough, Moorhead, Morrissey, Mungen, Newcomb, Nicholson, Nunn, Orth, Perham, Phelps, Plants, Poland, Raum, Robertson, Ross, Scofield. Selye, Shellabarger, Sitgreaves, Smith, Aaron F. Stevens. Thaddeus Stevens, John Trimble, Van Auken, Burt Van Horn, Van Wyck, Cadwalader C. Washburn, William B. Washburn, Welker, James F. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, Wood, and Woodbridge-79.

So (two thirds not voting in favor thereof) the rules were not suspended.

Mr. BUTLER obtained the floor.

TAX ON MINERAL OIL.

Mr. SCOFIELD. With the permission of the gentleman from Massachusetts, I ask unanimous consent to offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Committee of Ways and Means be authorized to include in such new tax bill as they may report the subject of mineral oil.

Mr. SPALDING. I object.

Mr. SCOFIELD. Will the gentleman allow me to move a suspension of the rule?

Mr. BUTLER. I will, but not to have the yeas and nays called on it.

Mr. SCOFIELD. I move to suspend the rules to enable me to offer the resolution.

The question was taken; and two-thirds not voting in favor thereof, the rules were not suspended.

INDIAN COMMISSION APPROPRIATION.

Mr. BUTLER. I move that the rules be suspended, and that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union be discharged from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 1218) appropriating money to sustain the Indian commission, and to carry out treaties made thereby, and the same be considered in the House now.

The question was taken; and two thirds voting in favor thereof, the rules were suspended and the bill was brought before the House for action, the question being on ordering it to be engrossed and read a third time.

Mr. BUTLER. I only desire to state to the House that this appropriation bill is for the purpose of enabling the Indian commission under General Sherman to carry out the engagements they are now making with Indians