WASHINGTON, April 22.
HOUSE. – On motion of Mr. Morrill it was resolved that the President should be requested to strike from the rolls the name of any army officer who has been known to be habitually intoxicated by the use of intoxicating liquors, while in the service. Mr. Morrill stated that he had been assured that the commanding General who failed to reinforce the two Vermont companies who suffered so severely at Yorktown, was drunk, and hand fallen off his horse into the mud. Mr. Morrill was asked for, but declined to give the name of the General.
An unsuccessful effort was made to lay fifteen or sixteen confiscation bills on the table, but the motion to do so was lost by yeas 39, nays 60.
Mr. Bingham’s substitute providing for capture and condemnation of the enemy’s property, and to indemnify the U. S. for expenses incurred in suppressing the rebellion, was agreed to – 62 against 48.
Adjourned.
WASHINGTON, April 23.
SENATE. – Mr. Trumbull presented a petition from W. C. Jewett for a defensive stand-still policy at Yorktown, to secure a reserve force of 25,000 men.
Mr. Hale offered a resolution that the military committee inquire whether any General before Yorktown had exhibited himself drunk in the face of the enemy; and if any measure had been taken for the trial and punishment of such officers. Mr. Hale referred to the statement of Mr. Morrill in the House yesterday, and thought it high time some notice should be taken of this state of things. If officers thus leave men to be slaughtered like beasts, no punishment is too great for them.
Messrs Foster and Foot concurred in the remarks of Mr. Hale, and thought that the Senate would not confirm the nomination of officers known to be intemperate.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. Davis introduced a bill prescribing an additional oath for grand and petit jurors in the U. S. Courts.
The bill recognizing the independence of Hayti and Liberia, and the appointment of a diplomatic representative, was taken up.
Mr. Sumner said that our government, usually friendly to new governments, had turned aside from these nations. It was time to put an end to this anomaly in history. Mr. Sumner concluded his speech by saying – By recognizing these two nations we only tardily follow the example of the principal nations of the globe. The bill was then postponed till to-morrow.
The confiscation bill was taken up. Mr. Davis resumed his remarks in opposition to the bill. He concluded that Congress had no right to pass such a bill under the war power.
HOUSE. – The House resumed the consideration of the confiscation bill, which was tabled by 48 against 14.
The bill to facilitate the suppression of the rebellion and prevent the recurrence of the same, was taken up. It authorizes the President to direct our Generals to declare the slaves of the rebels free, and pledges the faith of the United States to make full and fair compensation to loyal men who have actively supported the union, for any losses they may sustain by virtue of this bill.
Mr. Olin understood that the committee on Judiciary had agreed substantially that none of the confiscation bills referred to them ought to pass.
Mr. Thomas, of Mass., remarked that the committee recommended that none of the confiscations bills pass.
Mr. Olin said the disposition of the House and country was that there should be some legislation on the subject. As the judiciary committee could not agree on the matter, he proposed that a select committee of seven be appointed to take the subject into consideration, and if such a committee be untrammeled, the House might anticipate a proper measure of legislation.
Mr. Dunn regarded the subject of confiscating rebel property as one of the most difficult questions before Congress, in the decision of which was involved the restoration of the Government to its former state of prosperity. He congratulated the House and the country that this morning there had been laid upon the table a bill, which, if it had been passed, would have disgraced the civilization of this age. {Exclamations on the Democrat side of “Good! That’s so!”} It was a bill, which at one fell swoop, would have impoverished the people generally, from old age down to innocent childhood.
– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Thursday Morning, April 24, 1862, p. 1
HOUSE. – On motion of Mr. Morrill it was resolved that the President should be requested to strike from the rolls the name of any army officer who has been known to be habitually intoxicated by the use of intoxicating liquors, while in the service. Mr. Morrill stated that he had been assured that the commanding General who failed to reinforce the two Vermont companies who suffered so severely at Yorktown, was drunk, and hand fallen off his horse into the mud. Mr. Morrill was asked for, but declined to give the name of the General.
An unsuccessful effort was made to lay fifteen or sixteen confiscation bills on the table, but the motion to do so was lost by yeas 39, nays 60.
Mr. Bingham’s substitute providing for capture and condemnation of the enemy’s property, and to indemnify the U. S. for expenses incurred in suppressing the rebellion, was agreed to – 62 against 48.
Adjourned.
WASHINGTON, April 23.
SENATE. – Mr. Trumbull presented a petition from W. C. Jewett for a defensive stand-still policy at Yorktown, to secure a reserve force of 25,000 men.
Mr. Hale offered a resolution that the military committee inquire whether any General before Yorktown had exhibited himself drunk in the face of the enemy; and if any measure had been taken for the trial and punishment of such officers. Mr. Hale referred to the statement of Mr. Morrill in the House yesterday, and thought it high time some notice should be taken of this state of things. If officers thus leave men to be slaughtered like beasts, no punishment is too great for them.
Messrs Foster and Foot concurred in the remarks of Mr. Hale, and thought that the Senate would not confirm the nomination of officers known to be intemperate.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. Davis introduced a bill prescribing an additional oath for grand and petit jurors in the U. S. Courts.
The bill recognizing the independence of Hayti and Liberia, and the appointment of a diplomatic representative, was taken up.
Mr. Sumner said that our government, usually friendly to new governments, had turned aside from these nations. It was time to put an end to this anomaly in history. Mr. Sumner concluded his speech by saying – By recognizing these two nations we only tardily follow the example of the principal nations of the globe. The bill was then postponed till to-morrow.
The confiscation bill was taken up. Mr. Davis resumed his remarks in opposition to the bill. He concluded that Congress had no right to pass such a bill under the war power.
HOUSE. – The House resumed the consideration of the confiscation bill, which was tabled by 48 against 14.
The bill to facilitate the suppression of the rebellion and prevent the recurrence of the same, was taken up. It authorizes the President to direct our Generals to declare the slaves of the rebels free, and pledges the faith of the United States to make full and fair compensation to loyal men who have actively supported the union, for any losses they may sustain by virtue of this bill.
Mr. Olin understood that the committee on Judiciary had agreed substantially that none of the confiscation bills referred to them ought to pass.
Mr. Thomas, of Mass., remarked that the committee recommended that none of the confiscations bills pass.
Mr. Olin said the disposition of the House and country was that there should be some legislation on the subject. As the judiciary committee could not agree on the matter, he proposed that a select committee of seven be appointed to take the subject into consideration, and if such a committee be untrammeled, the House might anticipate a proper measure of legislation.
Mr. Dunn regarded the subject of confiscating rebel property as one of the most difficult questions before Congress, in the decision of which was involved the restoration of the Government to its former state of prosperity. He congratulated the House and the country that this morning there had been laid upon the table a bill, which, if it had been passed, would have disgraced the civilization of this age. {Exclamations on the Democrat side of “Good! That’s so!”} It was a bill, which at one fell swoop, would have impoverished the people generally, from old age down to innocent childhood.
– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Thursday Morning, April 24, 1862, p. 1
No comments:
Post a Comment