The New York Herald Newspaper, March 27, 1868, Page 3

WASHINGTON The Supreme Court Bill Passed Over the President’s Veto in the Senate. THE VOTE 32 TO 9. Another Bill for the Restoration of Alabama Reported in the House. Ratification of the Treaty With the North German Confederation. WASHINGTON, March 26, 1868. ‘The Reconstruction of Alabama. The Reconstruction Committee had a protracted session this morning, the Alabama bill being the sub- ject of ditcussion. An amendment to the billin an additional section was agreed upon. It proposes ‘that the State of Alabama shail be entitled to repre- sentatives in Congress, and shall be recognized as @ State, provided that its institutions shall never be amended or changed so as to deprive any citizen of the United States of the Tight to vote, which right is now recognized by ‘the constitution. Nor shall it be so amended or changed as to allow any person to vote who is ex- cluded from holding office by the third section of the fourteenth article of the amendment to the constitu- tion of the United States until the disability imposed by said section shall have been removed in the man- ner provided. Congress shall have the power to ‘annul and amend the constitution of Alabama or any act of the Legislature of said State contrary to provisions of this section. As this was offered by Mr. Stevens it is expected that it will conciliate the Men who act with him in the House and finally se- cure the passage of the bill. The Treaty With the North German Confeder- ation Ratified. ‘The Senate to-day ratified the treaty between the United States and the North German Confederation, providing for free emigration and that naturaliza- tion changes nationalities. The vote was twenty- nine against eight. The treaty was slightly amended, ‘but not in any important particular. The ground of Opposition was that the North German Confedera- tion might, according to the provisions of the treaty, interfere with the immigrants at any time before the time for full naturalization expired, as Austria did in the Koszta case. The Impeachment Managers Taking Testi- mony. The impeachment managers have just taken testi- mony concerning the correctness of President John- gon’s speech at St. Louis. False Rumor of a Quarre! Between the Presi- dent and One of His Counsel. A correspondent of the Evening Telegram says:— “I qm authorized to state that the report telegraphed hence of a quarrel between the President and Mr. William Evarts, one of his counsel, is entirely with- out foundation. The first that either Mr. Evarts or Mr. Johnson knew of the difference between them ‘was when their attention was called to the para- graph in the newspapers. Mr. Evarts is among the most trusted of the President's counsel, and is on ‘the best and most intimate terms with his client. This statement is of the same character as the ‘stupid rumor now running the course of the radical ‘press to the effect that the counsel for the President Antend to summon one hundred of the most promi- ment lawyers to testify in the impeachment trial in ‘regard to the legality of the Tenure of OMice act.”” Caldness Between Grant and Hancock. Some little significance is given here to the fact ‘that during his stay in this city General Hancock did not call on General Grant, as is said to be customary among prominent officers visiting the seat of govern- ment. Upon inquiry it is ascertained that General ‘Hancock did not visit General Grant for the purpose of having a conversation with him, but that on the iGrat day of his arrival here he did call at General Grant’s headquarters, and recorded ‘his hame as present in Washington, in com- pliance with an order of long standing. At that time it ts said that one of General Grant’s staff officers asked Hancock if he wished to see General Grant, to which Hancock answered ‘No; I have no ‘business to lay before the General now. Iam stop- ping at the Metropolitan, if the Generai shoul wish toseeme.” On the next day General Grant and ‘Hancock met in the street, exchanged grectings and shook hands, but had no conversation, The signifi- Cance attached to the failure of Hancock to pay the customary visit to the General-in-Chief is pointed at ‘toprove that an unfriendly feeling exists between them. This understanding of the omission, however, ts not warranted by the facts, and there is good Teason for saying it is entirely erroneous. There May not be that degree of friendliness between Grant and Hancock that subsists between the former and other generals of the army, but there has been no serious fatling out between them. The Manufacturers’ Bill Before the Senate Committee. The Senate Finance Committee had before them this morning the House amendments to the Senate amendments of the bill toexempt certain manu- factures from internal tax. The main subjects of discussion were the amendments contained in the fifth section, which retates to the collection of the ‘whiskey tax and the responsibility of assessors and other government oMcers therefor. No action was taken, but from the tone of the discussion it is under- stood the committee will not recommend con- currence in the House amendments to this section. Several members of the Finance Committee do not eonsider it practicable to carry this section into effect. : The Alaska Purchase. The House Committee on Foreign Affairs did not ucceed in getting a quorum to-day, and so no action ‘was taken relative to the Alaska purchase, It is the opinion of the chairman, General Banks, that no re- consideration of the previous action of the commit- * tee can be had until after the impeachment business 4s settled. In viéw of this fact General Banks and Secretary Seward have succeeded in making arrange- Ment with the Russian Minister here, Baron de SBtoeckl, who has full power from his government to act in the matter, whereby the time stipulated 4m the agreement for the payment of the purchase Money has been extended. The postponement of the matter by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs until May will not therefore invalidate the transaction. ‘The Gentile and Mormon Claimants to a Seat in the House as Delegate from Utah, The Committee on Elections yesterday heard the argument of Mr. McGroty, Gentile, who contests the seat of Mr. Hooper, Mormon, and to-day the com- mittee heard the reply of Mr. Hooper. The contest- ant received only a few votes, but he bases his oppo- sition to Mr. Hooper on the ground that the sitting Gelegate belongs to the Church order of Melchizedek, ‘and has, he alleges, taken the required oath of hos- tility to the United States, and is therefore disquall- fied from holding a seat in the House of Representa- tives. Mr. Hooper replies that Mr. McGroty has not produced proof of his charges. The committee, it is supposed, will take definite action to-morrow. Why General Steedman Was Removed from the Office of Internal Revenue Collector at New Orleans. ‘The Secretary of the Treasury, in reply to a resolu- tion of the House calling for the reasons in full why the Commissioner of Internal Revenue recommended the removal of James B. Steedman, Collector of In- ternal Revenue for the First district of Louisiana, encloses a communication from the Commissioner addressed to the Secretary on the 2d of December, as Containing all the information in his possession. The Commissioner, among other things, remarks that he knows of no other way to check or suppress frauds in the collection of tax on distilled Spirits than by insisting on increased fidelity and vigilance on the part of all those entrusted with the execution of the law, especially on the part of the Assessors and collectors in the several districts NEW YORK HERALD, FRIDAY, MARCH 27, 1868—TRIPLE SHEET. where the fraands ate perpetrated, as through them alone can their subordinate officers practically be reached. He recommends @ number of officers for removal. The Secretary states that General Steed- man’s resignation is to take effect on the 16th of April, and that John Hancock has been nominated to the Senate to supply the vacancy, Nominations by the President. ‘The President to-day sent to the Senate the follow- ing nominations:—Charles Hall for Collector of Cus- toms at Stonington, Conn.; Alfred Allen for Consul at Foo Chow, China; E. 8. Dundy for Judge of the District Court, for the District of Nebraska; Richard F. Miller for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Idaho, The Nomination of Colonel Burnside as Second Auditor of the Treasury. The Senate has not taken action on the nomina- tion of Colonel Burnside as Second Auditor of the Treasury, in the place of Mr. French. It is under- stood that the movement for his appointment origt- nated with the Western army friends of Colonel Burnside, most of whom are influential members of the Grand Army ef the Republic. He was recom- mended for his merits as a soidier and a man, and the office was tendered without solicitation on his part. Ex-Senator Foster to Accept the Vacant Judgeship of the Court of Claims. Ex-Senator Foster has been urged by his friends to accept the appointment as one of the Judges of the Court of Claims, to supply a vacancy caused by the death of Judge Wilmot, and they say that he has con- sented to do so, Receipts from Customs. The receipts from customs at the ports below men- tioned, from March 16 to 21 inclusive, were as fol- . lows:— Boston ... New York Philadelphii Baltimore.. New Orleans, March 9 to 14 Totals ase asaesissaanesegsedicaiuensscchde. GROOHOR. Claim of a Nevada Mining Company. ‘The Commissioner of the General Land Office has received plot and field notes in the case of the claim of the Diana Gold and Silver Mjning Company, Reese River district, Nevada, for eleven and sixteen hun- dredths acres. The United States Deputy Surveyor reports that the ore in this lode, when ready for crushing, ranges from eighty to one hundred dollars per ton, and that the company’s improvements are estimated at froth thirty to forty thousand dollars in gold. Manufacturing Silk in the United States. The Secretary of State sent to the House to-day a report of Elliot Cowdin, one of the commisioners to the Paris Exposition, on the subject of {silk and silk manufactures, which says it is as easy for the United States as it is for England to immediately supply her- self with raw silk, On reaching New York by way of California it would be distributed not only among our own manufactories, but portions doubtless would be distributed to foreign countries. More especially may America be encouraged to prosecute the industry in view of the exemption of our continent from the malignity among silk worms now prevailing in Europe. When every silk country in tne world shall have become infected then the supply must cease, and we are not far from that stage, Japan and Australia being the only countries now free. He enforces his views by showing the reat skill of the American people in manufactures y machinery, and the adaptation of our country to the successful rearing of the silk worm, Supreme Court Cases Disposed Of. The following causesfwere disposed of in the Su- preme Court to-day:— ig No. ne United States vs. steamship Nina Semmes, rgued. - No. 146, United States vs, Eighty-seven bales of cot- ton marked J. H. B. Submitted, No. 147. White vs. Carman. Argued. No. 149. Burbank vs. Bigelow. Argued. No. 156 will be the first case called on Friday. THE FORTIETH CONGRESS. Second Session. SENATE. ‘WASHINGTON, March 26, 1868, PROTEST AGAINST THE EXCLUSION OF KENTUCKY CON- GRESSMEN. The Cntr lafd before the Senate a protest from the Legislature of Kentucky against the wrong done that State in excluding its Representatives fromthe House of Representatives, and §denouncing it as unconstitutional, &c., which Was referred to the Judiciary Committee, Also a memorial from the Constitutional Conven- tion of South Carolina, praying the removal of eS litical disabilities from several persons named, ferred to the Judiciary Committee, PETITION FOR THE EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF DRAWBACKS. Mr. MorGAN, (rep.) of N. Y., ome & petition from the merchants of New York, praying that the time during which drawbacks are allowed be ex- tended to January 1, 1869, which was referred to the Committee on Finance. PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF FRAUDS ON THE REVENUE. Mr. CHANDLER, (rep.) of Mich., reported favorably from the Committee on Commerce a Dill to prevent and punish frauds on the revenue and for other pur- poses. On his motion it was referred to the Comimit- tee on Finance. REFUNDING DUTIES/PAID UNDER PROTEST. Mr. SHERMAN, (rep.) Of Ohidg reported favorably from the Committee on Finance a bill to refund cer- tain duties paid under protest. QUALIFICATIONS OF JURORS. Mr. TRUMBULL, (rep.) of IIL, introduced a bill in re- lation to the qualifications of jurors, which provides that no person shall be held incompetent to act as a juror upon any grand jury, or as a juror in trials for public offences against the United States, by reason of having formed or expressed an opinion upon the matters to be submitted to such grand jury for investigation, or A ae the guilt or in- nocence of the person accused, if such opinion be merely founded on public rumor, statements in Moe journals’ or the common history of the ‘imes; provided he be otherwise competent and upon his oath declare, and it appears to the satisfaction of the court that, notwith- standing such opinion, he can and will impar- tially act upon the matters to be submitted and try the accused upon the crime charged and give a true verdict upon the evidence; but the court may, in its discretion, set aside such grand or petit juror. EXECUTIVE SESSION. On motion of Mr. SUMNER, (rep.) of Mass., at twenty-five minutes past twelve o'clock the Senate went into executive session. CONSIDERATION OF THE VETO MESSAGE. : At half-past one o’clock the Senate resumed legis- lative business and took up the President’s veto mess: pending last MMe Mr. HENDRICKS, (dem.) of Ind., took the floor. He read the second section and the act of February 5, 1867, affected by it, and said the effect of that act was to give any citizen the right of habeas corpus when restrained of his liberty in violation of the constitu- tion, laws or treaties of the United States. This ve- toed bill repealed that provision. Why do this, independent of all temporary considerations or party views? He would like to hear reasons from the Senators on the other side. In civil suits, when $2,000 or more was involved, in the Circuit Court, a ey was allowed to appeal to the Supreme Court. in a case now, when a man’s life or liberty was in- volved, appeal'to the Supreme Court waa denied. The law of 1842 grew out of a controversy in which Alexander McLeod was involved; and it provides that aliens confined under a law of the United States should have the right of appeal to the Supreme Courts, He would ask the Senator from Illinois whether that did not give the it of appeal in all habeas corpus cases up to that time? He thought it did. He would call the Senator's attention to the | of that act, in connection with that of the act of 1867, He understood the Supreme Court to hold that the latter act gave them the right of review of all habeas cor- us cases, the lan; being the same in both cases, fa foreigner was deprived of liberty against the rovisions of the law of foreign States, he was al- owed an ap to the Supreme Court, under the law of 1842. uid Senators reconcile that with the deprivation of that right from citizens? The act of 1789 gave the Supreme Court very limited jurisdiction in habeas corpus cases, being only in cases involving their own jurisdiction. Under this law appeal was not allowed in habeas corpus cases, en, how- ever, the act of 1842 was passed, the it of appeal in cases where individual liberty was involved ‘was revoeniaee’ He contended that, according to the act of 1867, these cases were brought in accordance with the constitution of the United States in pro- viding @ judicial system. Why keep a@ man from the highest court in the country when iis If ig in- volved while he could go there if he had two thou- sand dollars at_ stake? Suppose aman on be- fore a court unknown to the constitution of the United States—nay, decided 80 by the Supreme Court to be unknown to it—could Senators reconcile de- paving him of the right ote with principles of jaw and justice? He dep! fed the argument of the astute Senator from Nevada (Mr. Stewart), that the bill should pass because the Supreme Court was be- coming overcrowded, It was a Cnn ment for depriving men of individual liberty; he had faiied to point out any case in that court, save the MeCardle case, arising under this law; strange argument for throwing out of court one whose life was in danger. That Senator had changed his course greatl; thos two years ago, when he was very conservative as pas Lo ppm and very much devoted to e le! THW TAX RXEMPTION BILL FROM THR Hover, At this point the bill to relieve certain manufae- tures from internal tax came over from the House, On motion of Mr. SUBRMAN bie Senate non-con- I bie priviege, legisintiwg agmiast persunai liberty. curred in the Houge amendments ona ordered a com- nittee of conference. DEBATE ON THE VETO MESSAGE RESUMED, Mr. HENDRICKS (continuing) asked if Senators knew of a single instance when, after an ap) to the'court having jurisdiction over a case, t! juris- diction had been taken away? He denied that it Fd it was proposed to do ited circumstances attendin the McCardle case up to the decision of the Court of Mississippi, that MeCardie must be remanded to the military authorities, from which McCardle appealed to the Supreme Court, which, he said, had decided that such trials by itary courts were ian in time of peace. McCardie took the ition that his liberty guaranteed by the constitution had been taken from him, and asked the protection of the Supreme Court under the provisions of the con- stitution for trial by jury. Was not that bi his case directly wiihin the act of 1867, by which the Senator from Illinois ee Trumbull) said it was not affected? If (eCardie had unjustly criticised Congress, wi crime had he committed other than a libel, in regard to which the Supreme Court said there should be a constitutional trial? This was denied him, although a for er was allowed an appeal to the Supreme Court. Sup- pose a citizen of Indiana went down to Minion and committed what a military tribunal chose consider an offence, and then appealed to the Circuit Court for a jury trial. Now, the right of appeal from the decision of that court sending him back to military dungeon was to be denied to the Supreme Court—an appeal which had been thought necessary only last year, If he (Mr. Hendricks) had occasion to go South, and expressed himself as he doubtless would if he expressed himself at all, in hostility to the policy of Col would Senators say if he were arrested by the military authorities and ap- aled to the Supreme Court he should be sent back To the dungeon? Why was it that they were not willing that the Sper Court should pass upon their Legislature? More than half of the people of the United States had expressed their euinion against the constitutionality of their legislation; yet they talked about all the people of the United States. They had established a system of des- potism in the South more odious than ever was established by Haynau, though he whipped women in the streets. When Senators denied the constitutional right of trial by jury and made a law providing for a trial by a military tribu- nal, was it not of necessity a case for the Supreme Court to decide which was the law?’ It was an effort to strike down the judiciary, as the Executive had been stricken down in the last year. Do that, and all the power of the country would be in the hands of one department of the government. Were there not five judges out of eight whom Mr. Lincoln appointed, and were they not confirmed with Mr. Chase, a party leader, at their head? Yet Senators could not risk rrkies their legislation reviewed by that tribunal of their own organization when the liberty of a citizen was involved. When he voted for a law he did so in the expectation that it would stand all the tests, includ! that_of the Supreme Court, Marshall and Taney coincided in that view. Some SeyaToR—And Jefferson, Mr. HENDRICKS would not quote politicians, hut the highest judicial authorities. He went on to say that one department of the government should be a check upon another, within the sphere of the consti- tution. If this were a partisan question Senators could not act for themselves. He would not vote for a law that would not stand judicial tests. He re- gretted that no more time had been allowed for dis- cussion on this bill, and that he had not, therefore, been prepared. Mr. STEWART, (rep.) of Nevada, said it speared the rights of men were very much involved in this bill, though the appeal to the Supreme Court had been dispensed with for three-quarters of a century until last year. McCardle having committed an of- fence taken cognizance of by the military authorities was arrested, tried and then allowed to go on bail; and he certainly was not therefore laboring under very great disabilities, He (Mr. Stewart) had in that view made reference to the Supreme Court being overburdened, with business, It was as much beyond the power of the Supreme Court to hinder recon- struction as it was beyond the power of the humblest individual; therefore they were not afraid of the Supreme Court. The pon tion was that the Su- preme Court would obey the law, which was clearly on the side of Congress. Mr. Howarp, (rep.) of Mich., asked what the charge against MeCardle had been? ‘Mr. WILLIAMS, (rep.) of Oregon, said he was charged with attempting a breach of the peace and inciting insurrection. Mr. Henpricks asked if an article in a news- paper was a breach of thre peace? tir. WILLIAMS replied that {t might incite to it. Mr. JonNson, (dem.) of Md., said the proceeding was on four grounds:—First, disturbing the public peace; second, inciting insurrection; third, libelling @ general of the army; fourth, obstructing the Recon- struction acts, Mr. Stewart asked why, if the Supreme Court had jurisdiction over reconstruction and power to de- clare that war had ceased, it had not exercised it before. If the act could be construed to make mili- tary chieftains of them, the sooner it could be re- pealed the better. Mr. Jounson said the constitution provided that habeas corpus should not be suspended in time of peace. The Supreme Court had decided in the Milli- gan case that military tribunals could not try a civilian when peace revalied in tne United States. The war ending in 1865, we had a problem to solve, Many officers of the govern- ment, including, perha} the President, might be held liable under State laws for the necessary acts done during the war, and he in common with all the rest of the Judiciary Committee thought the act of 1867 was eminently proper. It was hmnimon provi- ded for that purpose, not for the protection of rights Bike ‘earn: States, as the Senator from Illinois said. Mr. TRUMBULL believed the law of February 5, 1867, was passed rd for the protection of colored citi- zens in the South, to protect them from oppression under State laws. Mr. Jounson replied that it was comprehensive in its character and covered all such cases, The ques- tion in the McCardle case was strictly a judicial and legal one, irrespective of the tribunal before which McCardle was tried; and every man would admit that it was to be decided by the courts, and not by the military. The Circuit Court having re- fused to discharge McCardle, he applied to the Supreme Court under the act of Feb- ruary, 1867. The Senate held that that did not authorize an appeal; that it did not cover the case of a habeas corpus ss in the Circuit Court, but only embraced cases in that court upon appeals from a@ District Court. He had made a motion to dismiss the case from the Supreme Court for want of jurisdiction, and made an argu- ment to that effect; but he failed by the unanimous vote of the court, the Chief Justice engine. “We entertain no doubt that an appeal in case lies)’ and again saying, “We are satis- fled that this court has jurisdiction to view the decision of the Circuit Court.” We, therefore, thought the Senator's opinion that the court did not vote that it had jurisdiction under the act of 1867 was an utter misapprehension. The Senator had urged upon them that the Circuit Court from which the appeal was taken had no jurisdiction. The court answered that that was a question to be decided when the case was heard on its merits, They disposed of another objection in the same way. The Senator intended that by the second section of the act of 1867 certain cases, such as military offences, had been excluded from the operation of that act. In regard to men who had been giving aid and comfort to the enemy during the war, they declined to decide that question until they should hear the case, when, if they concluded that McCar- die came under that class, +) Baber refuse to in- terfere. He (Mr. Johnson) believed that term would be found to be law offences committed by those in the miHtary service of the government, and as the i was passed in February, 1867,and the arrest ade the following November, McCardle could ‘e fallen under that denomination as claimed. war had long been over; and in point fact he was arrested because of the offence specifically stated in the return and nothing else. He (Mr, Johnson) entertained no doubt that in the opinion of the Supreme Court the case was before them under the authority of the act of February 5, 1867. He had great confidence in the ability of the Chief Justice, who, he thought, had made that point clear. He had great esteem for the Senators who voted for this bill, but they must par- don him for saying that he regretted it was passed without sufficient knowledge on the part of those who, if they had understood it, would certainly have Moo it, That its was not to be inferred from its title was manifest. On the 11th of March, 1867, this bill was reported in regard to appeals in several cases, which was unob- Jectionable. He detatled the circumstances of ite amendment and pi He would not say it was the object that would unparliamentary; but the effect was to conceal ita purpose when there should ee disclosure. 4 a1 like ho} were not to be assed on party grounds; it wou The ‘dignity of the Senate, The that Cony would establish a Supreme Court. He hoped they were not coming upon times when the Supreme Court was to be abolished—useful as it had been to the preservation of all institutions of the nation. When it was claimed that the Supreme Court had become subjected to political influences it must be admitted that our form of government te a failure, The Senator from Nevada (Mr. Stewart) had intimated that a political oe was involved here. Mr. STEWART asked, if this was not a ques- tion, whether it is not for the political department of Lt | eae to determine who are public ene- mi Mr. Jonnson said the Serator had not thrown much additional light on the subject by that remark. The Supreme Court must hold to their authority to decide upon the constitutionality of laws or prove recreant to their oaths, If C were left total unrestricted despotism would certainly —resull De bop any who seemed to have understood us better than any writer of our own, based his opinion of the it security of our individual citizens upon the fact that we have @ Supreme Court. There are but two great powers, force and law—law, whose voice, Homer said, “is the harmony of the world.” In view of the haste shown in the ponaee, of the bill, ‘would not the historian say that I was to avoid the decision of the Supreme Court upon the legisiation of Congress? ie was glad to believe that if the law was passed no such decision would be made; but he would be more glad if they were to leave this question to the Supreme Court, when, if they decided the legisiation uncon- stitutional, Congress would have the gratification of knowing that they were acting within the constitu. conflicts of to-day would soon be forgotten, 8 Would see that to that ag prosperity of the of Per, after to tion. and those who came institution we owe the sai past and our of th Mr. SAULSBURY, (dem. | referring the great privilege of habeas corpus, asked what Congress was engaged in to-dag. To reach one soll- tary case they were seeking to repeal this inestima- rd ‘on the other side intended to Let them *go and confess before. their that ge ~~ e existed under the ry It was evident that Senators ass this bill, but if gress insisted on Resping the leaden cloud of despotism over the South, God helping them, they would appeal to the high court of the people in No- vember next, which would set aside its verdict, Mr. BAYARD, (dem.) of Del., had not thought it possible that the Senate of the United States would pass a retractive.law divesting the rights of any citizen. He quoted Kent, Mangfleld and other au- thorities on the point, and sid he had been of opinion that in this country, above any other, no bill denying this great right could be presse. It was evident, however, that this bill would be passed, not by a constitutional, but by a partisan majority. He recited the circumstances attending the passage of the bili in the House and said decorum only pre- vented his characterizing it as in his opinion tt de- served. He condemned the hurried manner in which the message had been forced on their con- sideration by an oveoncring majority, before it was even printed, when a large number of the Senate were apprised of the character of the bill as . He Fegretted to hear the langnago of the istinguished Senator from Maine (ee Fessenden) yestel oy, in serie that on that side they did not need to discuss it, but were prepared to vote, It was evident that ms (Mr. Bayard’s protest) against it would be fruitless. The amendment did not repeal the jurisdiction of the Circuit courts, but took away the right of appeal to the highest tribunal! of the land. In his opinion the contrast between the bill as it orl- ginally passed the Senate and the amendment subse- juen adopted by the House was enough to con- lemn it. They came into absolute conflict with each other. The same bill authorized an appeal in case of property, which would add twenty cases to the docket for one that would added by this provision for the protection of liberty and life; showing the inconsistency of the argument of the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Stewart) that the repeal should be made because of the press of busi- ness in the Supreme Court. Had it come t this, that the rights of property were to be protected, but not those of life and liberty? The inference was that the Senator could find no better argument. Why was the retrospective clause introduced if it was not sought in the McCardile case to supplement the on - ment by legislation? The Senator from Illinois (Mr. Trumbull) had told them they had existed since 1789 ‘witnout this law, and could probably exist without it. It might be unimportant, but the great keg tion was that it was retrospective in its action. It violated a great general principle, recognized even by the Roman Emperors and now recognized by the law of imperial France. He had not examined the McCardie case, and had but a limited knowledge of it; but there could be no question that this bill con- templated divesting him of an acquired civil right, which, according to Chancellor Kent, was condemned by the laws of all civilized nations. It would be nothing more, if passed, than stamping out the ex- isting rights of American citizens. He had no hope that it would be considered without reference to party. There Ru remained two remedies, It might be that the Supreme Court would decide that the bill does not apply to cases already docketed before it and already filed. Were he a judge of that court he should not hesitate on that question, He would pronounce his decision upon the law as it stood, before this bill passed, and cipegoeean? dis- miss the appeal, denying the relief asked for. Ifthe object was to preserve the miscalled Reconstruction acis—and he saw no other—the bill was a political order. Such legislation would be highly injurious to any party attempting it. The people would regard it as equivalent to a decision by the Supreme Court that those laws were unconstitutional. He was one of those who loved civil liberty, and he prayed God that he would not live to see the country at the mercy or the will either of a single individual or a congregation of individuals, Mr, BucKALEW, (dem.) of Pa., called attention to the singular fact that the debate had been all on one side thus far. He also alluded to the circumstances under which the bill was passed. The bill was announced by the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Trum- bull) as being totally harmless so far as the McCardle case is concerned; but the member that offered the amendment avowed his intention to remove that case from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and the member who had charge of that bill applauded that purpose. It was fair to assume that the bill was intended to take away the existing jurisdiction of of the Supreme Court in such cases. The denial of the Senator was feeble and fruitiess. He adverted to the circumstances out of which arose the act of 1867, many cases having been decided by the Freedmen’s Bureau as weil as by the State courts. It was felt to be desirable to have uniformity of action. Only a year had elapsed since the enactment of the law, and they now protested against the repeal of a pro- vision of that law securing personal liberty. That rovision was found to be necessary now, especially ise Congress had undertaken power never be- fore assumed by them. It was necessary therefore to clothe the judicial department with commensurate wer. a this point (half-past five) Mr. FEssENDEN sug- gested that an agreement be made to take the vote at one o’clock to-morrow, a8 many Senators did not desire to sit out the discussion, Mr, BUCKALEW had no objection. Mr. MoCreEry, (dem.) of Ky., proposed a recess until to-morrow at ten o'clock, After some talk on the point Mr. ConKLING sug- sted that no other legislation be taken up to-night ut this bill. Mr. BucKALEW—I would certainly object to any Honse amendment being acted upon. (Laughter.) Mr. HENDRICKS ) Sad agree to any understanding that would enable Senators te go home, He did not desire to speak to empty benches. Mr. BUCKALEW continued. He said the law had been framed for the protection of the freedmen and others from the operation of State laws, but such was the imperfection of human language that the law was forced to apply as well to the rights of whites as blacks. It was unfortunate that laws could not be framed so as always to favor our friends, But the nature of justice was such that friend and foe must alike be aifected by the laws which we enact, It was, therefore, no objection to the law of 1867 that it could be invoked by a man not belonging to the class for whose benefit it had been framed. This law was to be repealed in order to prevent the demolition of the Reconstruction acts bs the Supreme Court. What a spectacle it was that a Lap cag eet individual, dwelling on the banks of the Mississtppt, could carry the passers of this bill, with all their influence, into the Supreme Court, and there, by the simple force of law and reason and right, perchance overcome and demo- lish their boasted work of so-called reconstruction | In the course of his eulogium on the law and the august tribunals of justice, whose power in this en- lightened age was mightier than the force of armies in former times—— Mr. Morton, (rep.) of Ind., asked him to give way to a motion to adjourn. Mr, WILLIAMS reminded the Senate of their under- standing yesterday that a vote was to be reached to- day, am itr. BUCKALEW resumed his remarks and spoke of the manner in which the Supreme Court as it now exists had been constituted, referring to the legisia- tion which at one time increased the number of justices to ten, and afterwards, for merely political reasons, diminished it to eight, to be reduced to seven When a vacancy occurs. Ite spoke of the bill which had been introduced into the House with the purpose to prevent the Supreme Court from exer- cising @ function which Mr, Marshal and all the emi- nent jurists of the land had ever regarded as one of its highest and most indefeasibie; and why, he asked, is that bill allowed to slumber here? Because you find that it will not answer your pur ; for two- thirds even of the court whiclf you have consti- tuted will not uphold you in your unjust sand unconstitutional legislation. He quoted the declara- tion of Mr. Madison, that “the great danger to our institutions ~~ in the tendency of Con to en- croach upon the other departments of the govern- ment,’ and maintained that the action of this Con- [eed had been to strip both of them of their most mportant prerogatives. He appeaied to the party iu power to rest content with their present triumpha, and to go before the people for their decision, but im- yaks them not to lay sacrilegious hands on the ‘emple of Justice, ‘The bill was then passed over the veto by the fol- lowing vote:— Yens—32. Morton, rep, of Ind. Nye, rep., of Nevada. Patterson, Fea of i i. roy,'rep., of Kansas, Ramecy, rep, of Mina. Rona, rep., of Kansas, Stewart, rep., of Nevada. mn of Maas, Cameron, rep. of Pa. Cattell, rep., of N. J. Chandler, rep. of Mich. Gole, rep’, of ti Conkling, rep., of N. Y. Cragin, rep., of N. H. Hdimutds rep. of VE ., of Conn. Frelitghuyeen, rep., of N. 3. Harlan, rep. of lowa. Henderson, rep.) of Mo. Howard, rep. of Mich. Howe, rep., of Wis. Morgan, rep., of N. Y. Morrill, rep. of Me. Morrili Fep. Bayard, dem., of Del. MeCreery, dem. of Ky. Buckalew, dem., of Pa, Rortony dem ‘ot Ming Bare cos cot Baber, a St Bel Hendricke; dem,, of Ind. manga Messrs. Grimes @nd Corbett, in favor, had paired with Messrs, Johnson and Vickers, the bill. CONFERENCE COMMITTER ON TAX BXEMPTION. The CHAIR appointed as the Committee of Confer- ence on the part of Senate on the tax exemption bill, Messrs. Sherman, Williams and Morgan. ‘The Senate at half-past six o'clock adjourned. WASHINGTON, March 26, 1868. REMONSTRANCE AGAINST STAMPING CIGARS. Mr. Huppanp, (dem.) of Conn., presented a re- monstrance of citizens of Connecticut against the stamping of cigars. FREIGHT AND PASSENGER TARIPF ON THE PACIFIC RAILROADS, The SPEAKER announced that the first business in order was the joint resolution to regulate the tart for freight and passengers on the Union and Central Pactfic Ratiroads, the question being on seconding the previous question op Mr. Price's motion to refer to the Committee on the Pacific Ratirqgad. Mr. Wasttsurne, (rep.) of M1., ho} the previous question would not be preased now, but that some further discussion of this important matter wonld be allowed. There Was no pablie basivess pressing on the House this morning and atgnly ent i some time might be pro- ~ Towa, opposed more discusgion ‘at tins time,” it was 3 useleas waste of The matter should be first considered in committee, and the committee would have an opportunity of report- ing it back on next Wednesday, and would report it back if some shape, When discussion could be had on it. ‘Mr. Hay, ) of Cal., ‘expressed the hope that the Houge would not be under the false impression that the Pacific Railroad Committee was unfriendly to the objects of the joint resolution. It was not so. He hoy that there would be at some time 4 discus- signe re uestion. * ir. URN, rep.) of Wis.—Why not now? Mr. Hiaany—Well, if you please, sit; it seems tome more consistent, unless the House has lost all faith in the Pacific Railroad Committee, to let that committee report on this subject before it should be further dis- cussed. I am in favor of discussion and wish to say something on the subject myself, It will bé borne in mind, however, that when the proposition first came here from the member from iconsin (Mr, Washburn), they undertook to press it through ‘under the previovs question and without any debate whatever; now there has been a speech on each side. I shall undertake to show that the proposition isin eonflict with the Railroad Law as it now is, and that the proper way is to amend that law, Mr. FARNSWORTH, {ep of lL, denied the intima- tion of his colleague (Mr. Washburn) that there was no public business pressing. The onstruction Committee had reports to make, and there were only three more working days until after the Tpeschaceun trial, The gentlemen wanted to discuss the matter; they might have a chance of doing so during the trial, as the House might meet for discussion, and nothing else, As Mr. Price insisted on the previous question, Mr, WASHBURNE, of Ill., demanded a’ call of the House, remarking that if the friends of the railroad were all present he wished the members on the opposite aide to be present likewise, The House, on a division, refused to order a call of the House. Mr. WASHBURNE, Of Ill, demanded the yeas and nays, The vote was taken and resulted—yeas 44, nays 80, So a call of the House was refused. The previous question was then seconded by 63 37, Mr. WASHBURNE, of Ill, determined to fight it out on that line, called for the yeas and nays on ordering the main juestion. The yeas and is pt Pxoeten and the vote was taken, with a li result. Mr. WasHnurng, of Ill., demanded the yeas and nays on the motion to refer, and the yeas and nays were ordered, Mr. INGERSOLL, (rep.) of IIL, suggested the refer- ence of the joint resolution to the Committee on Roads and Canals, Mr. Price said he had no objection to its reference to the Judiciary Committee, as it involved a legal question. Mr. Wasipurng, of Ill, said he wished to submit a proposition, which was that this should be consid- ered a test vote and that those who voted for the reference should be considered as in favor of the Pacific Railroad Company’s maintaining their ex- orbitant charges. The latter part of the sentence was almost inaudible on account of calls to order, ‘The vote was then taken on Mr. Price’s motion to refer to the Committee on the Pacific Railroad, and it was agreed to—yeas $3, nays 49—as follows:— Yras—Messrs, Ames, Anderson, Archer, Ashley of Nevada, Ashley of Ohio, Axtell, Baldwin, Banks, Beaman, Beck, Ben Jamin, Bingham, ‘Boutwell, Broomall, Buckland, Garey, Shurehiil, Chanler, Clarke of Kansas, Covode, Dawes, Dixon, Dodge, Eliot, Farnsworth, Ferris, Ferry, Flelds, Gollady, Gravely, Griswold, Higby, Hill, "Hooper, Hotchkiss, “Hub? bard of Conn., Hulburd, Janckes, Jobuson, Kelley, Ketchum, Knott, Laflin, Lincoln, ‘Loan, Mallor; urg, McCormick, Miller, Moore, Morrell, Mungen, Myers, Newcomb, Nichol soa, O'Neill, Perham, Phelps Planta, Poland, Polsey, Pome. roy; Price, Bruyn, Raum, Robertson, Ross, Stnith, Stevens of N-it., Stevens of Pa., Trimble of ‘Tenn. ‘Trimble of Ky. Tyitchel, Upron, Van’ Hom of Mo. Van "rear sg Waghbuirt of Mass., Welker, Williams 0 son of Tow: cy of Onto Wilson cf Pa, nad Woodiriage cea, om Wilso Nays—Balley, Baker, Barnes, Beatty, Bromwell, Burr, Coburn, Cook, Gullom, Fox, Getz, Glossbrénner, Halsey, Hol mun, Hopkins, Hubbatd of W. Va., Hunter, Ingersoll, Judd, Sultan, Kerr, Koontz, Lawrence of Ohto, Lough ridge, Maynard, Merettr, Mullins, Niblack, Orth, Paine, Pike, Pile, ‘Sawyer, Shanks, Bitgreaves, Spalding, Stone, i ‘Taylor, Tate, Van Anken, Van Horn of N. ¥., Wi burn of Wis,, Washburne'of Ill., Windom, Wood ward—49, Before taking the vote the rule forbidding members to vote on matters in which they have a personal in- terest was read at the request of Mr. Holman, PRINTING OF J. ROSS BROWNE'S REPORTS OF THE MINERAL RESOURCES OF THE GREAT WEST, BTC. Mr. LAFLIN, (rep.) of N, Y., from the Committee on Printing, reported resolutions for printing 15,300 copies of J. Ross Browne’s reports on the mineral resources, for the use of the House, and 500 copies of the report of the commission of life saving inventions for the use of the Treasury Department. The question as to printing J. Ross Browne's re- port gave rise to a discussion, Mr. Cavanagh, the delegate from Montana, characterizing it as a bogus report, which ignored the great claims of Montana as a mining Territory; Mr. Holbrook, the delegate from Idaho, regarding it as a report which, though it con- tained inuch valuable information, did not ‘ard, Wash and Woo ests of capital report and Mr. Higby taking a like view. ir, Washburne, 0! the amendment to be offered. ‘The resolutions were adopted. RELIEF FOR MAIL CARRIERS IN THE TERRITORIES. Mr. Farnsworth, from the Conference Committee on the bill for the relief of Messrs. Greathouse and Kelly for carrying the matis in the Territories, made a report, which was agreed to, limiting the amount to $8,000. MEMORIALS, ETC. The SPEAKER presented various Executive commu- nications, including the following:— A memorial from the Constitutional Convention of. South Carolina for the removal of political disabilt- ties from John B, Ashmore and forty-two other citi- zens of South Carolina, which was referred to the Reconstruction Cominittee. A memorial and protest of the ete d Legista- ture against the constitutional wrong and injustice of refusing that State its just representation in the House of Representatives, which was referred to the Comunittee on Elections. THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD. Mr. WASUBURNE, (rep.) of Ill, called up the mo- tion made on the 26th of February by Mr. Washburne, of Wisconsin, to reconsider the vote by which a let- ter from the Secretary of the Lorn | elative to the Union Paciiic Railroad was ordered to be printed. He congratulated his friend from lowa (Mr. Price) on his success in preventing him (Mr. Washburne} being hearg this morning on the Pacific Railroi matter; but now he had an hour to discuss the ques- tion, Part of that time he would now yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin. Mr. WASHBURN, (rep.) of Wis., said the country would notice the fact that no thanks were due to the House for his being able to make an explanation now which he had wished to make when the matter was up before. It was simply due to the fact that he had had the foresight some time since to move to reconsider the vote refer- ring the Secretary's letter on the subject, thinking that just such an occasion might come up. He dis- claimed any intention of imputing Lnproper motives to the gentleman from lowa g Tr. Price), who had felt probably as he himself had felt, that the Pactfic Ratiroad was a necessity. The bill of 1864 was a very improperly guarded bill, in which every restric- tion for the protection of the people that was con- tained in the act of 1862 was wi out. He saw by this morning’s Chronicle that there was another scheme on foot to build a Pacitic Railroad from Cairo through to Arkansas and New Mexico; and he believed this and the other Pacific railroad schemes now on foot would require two hundred or two hundred and fit, of dollars. Referring to the Sioux City Ralir asked the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. W her he had consented fo an; change i which that road was to be built in any other ganner than was provided in the act of Mr. Wr svom, (rep.) of Minn., replica that he had never conseuted to any such alteration. One of the chief complaints that he had had to make against the Union Pactic Railroad Company was that by means unkuown to him procured that alteration. He had been one of two or three who had insisted on having the condition as to the Sioux City road put in the act of 1862. Mr. ALLISON, (rep.) of Iowa, remarked that he had stated Fie | his belief that the Minnesota dele- gation was in javor of the change, but he had been informed this afternoon by ntleman from Min- nesota (Mr. Windom) that he had not favored it. He would, however, call upon the chairman of the Union Pacific Railroad Committee to state whether the Minnesota delegation had not pressed upon that committee the exact change made in reference to the Sioux City branch, Mr. WASHBURN, of Wis., declined to yield for that pu , and proceeded with his remarks, r, WASHBURN, Of Ill, sald that after the extraor- dinary developments tou the Union Pacific Railroad Company, a8 to the character of the com- pany, the gigantic power itis commencing to exer- cise, ite extortions from and Pre of the peo- ple, and after the disclosure of the alleged if not fraudulent, issue of more than @ million of gov- ernment bonds to enable a private company to build a railroad in the State of lowa in @ southeast direc- tion, under the pretext of building a Pacific faportanioe ea would attroce universe’ attenton, iy ance, al ould al univet attention. Mn Washburne then entered i of the passage of the amended act Pacific Railroad Company in 1864. He alleged that all amendments were voted down which pi ed to protect in any ay, the publfe interest, mand that the bill was carried t fing influence of the ntieman from lowa (Mr. ) and the gentleman m Pennaylvania (Mr. Stevens), No man who was resent in the House in the night session in which he bill was considered, in June, 1864, could ever for- t the extraordinary’ seene then presented. The jobby mustered in full force. To say nothing of the allegations of expenditures, in @ confidential way, the scene was one of the most animated and ex- he had ever withessed in a service of nearly sixteen years in the House, The galleries were pee ed with lobbyists, both male and female, and by shysters and adventurers, hopt for something to turn up, The gilded corridors o} the Honse were filled with bo ge who broke through all rules, and made their way upon the floor of the House and into the seats of the mem- bers, In @ speech made on that occasion he had the bill and challenged the various hal of had shown their extr: inary character, and parti- cularly the provisions which subordinated the lien the governmont held ag security for the vast amount of bonds tt liad become Hable for, He hat asked 1 tatapeoch who waa willlvg to bevleso that, shoul on Public Lands, reported a bill granitn; the Iowa and Missouri State Line Railroad Somnbenys which was ordered to be printed and recommitted. UNITED STATES NAVAL STOREKEEPER AT RIO JANEIRO. calling upon the Secretary of t! tion as to the employment of a paymaster of the nav as a resident naval storekeeper at RiaJaneiro, whicl ‘was adopted, visions of an giicient government ‘of the rebel State and 887, stitution of State government which is republican in form; and whereas, at an election commencing on the 4th 14 February, fe State, constitution ; therefore tled to representation in Congress as soon as the Le; of said State, the members o tion mentioned in the ty shall uly ratified the amendmentto the constitution of the United States of the Commanding General of the Military District tn w! Alabama ia included to notify the members of the ture of said State chosen at the election held in February, nize person to vote who i# excluded from oftice by the fourteent! article of the amendment of the constitution of the United States, until the disabilities Imposed by said section shall have been removed in the manner therein provided; and shall have power to anaul any amendment to of Alabama, or an: trary to the provisions of this section. of the bill, going over mant of the 8: that were urged by him yesterday when the question was laid before the House. tion put on that occasion as to the number of white men who had voted at the election, and which was answered by Mr. Stevens, of Pa., who gave the num- ber as one thousand, Mr, Farnsworth said that the official returns showed that seven thousand white men had voted for the adoption of the constitution in Alabama, He added that over twenty thousand lo justice to Idaho or Montana; Mr. Ashley, of Nevada, refer- Ting the opposition to the fact that Mr. Browne would not deal in. ape and nonsense to suit the tnter- ts and speculators; Mr. Axte!l endors- ing the highly valuable and reliable character of the lil, Wanted to reduce the num- ber of copies to 5,000, but Mr. Laflin would not allow bill. allusion to which his colleague (Mr. Woodward) de- sired to reply; but Mr. Kelley declined to yleld the floor for that purpose, remarking that his colleague, like the Irishman at. Doi saw a nigecr’s head he was bound to have a dip at — Laughter.) as] to every refractory rebel in the South, and to every timid Union man, that every State that will roy constitution providing as that of Alabama did the right of every man to hold the land and to vote to exercise all other political rights will be admitted, even though terror and the threats of clandestine lynching and hanging may have kept some of them from the polls. providing that the nied or abridged in any State except for treason, ay or other crime infamous at common law; but that suf- frage shall forever be untversal and impartial, and that Congress shall have power to annul any act of Alabama in violation or derogation of the acta with regard te suffrage; and that in case of the Legislature reauc! lation admitting it into the Union shi void. suffered ali that the ecclesiastical authorities of diocese have desired to inflict. allegation of your address, I affirm, without disproval, that from the trial | have neither in my pulpt nor through the press argued, still less issues involved. dor and my independence as a presbyter and a man, did I not now take some notice of ceremony to which I have, quest, been subjected, and po argument to which I troduced and com} and rude refusal to receive the pro! my able and reverend counsel and father—all these were ane, if not intended, to aggravate the attempted a a ‘that there may be no reasonable ground for mis- understanding. previously to the preparation observationg to‘which I have already aire now, and in full consciousness bilities which it may entatl, solemnly to protest Ly the whole course, conduct and conclusion e unjust 3 the proposed provisions of the law of 1864 become a Jaw, the rem: would be worth a straw; that that any security was left i as to House had ret amendment refusing to subordinate ——— ment security by a vote of 38 to $1, and the was finally passed on the re) ference, there is no record of an the story of the legisl Pacific Ratlroad bill of 1864 as it would history of the country. In conclusion Mr. Washburne aining security of the government and had demonstrated than idle to for all the government's to adopt it was worse rt of the Committee of Con- sed the yeas and nays, and final vote. He had told tion of the House on the 0 into the The House ‘ielded three minutes to Mr, Price, and then moved lay the motion to reconsider on the table, which was agreed to, THE ADDITIONAL BOUNTY. - Mr. VAN Wyck, (rep.) of N. Y., ty unanimous con- bo oahred pan ne ee 2 the Farmener enera! state why the members of the ity- po New York Voluntee a aeare who served three years, fly dollars adaidonak The SPEAKER stated that the resolution should call ave only been allowed bounty. on the Secretary of War for the information, . Mr. Van Wyck said he would modify the reso- lution in that particular, Mr. ELpripag, (dem.) of Wis., sald he would not object to that, The SPEAKER remarked that the resolution was before the House by unanimous consent, and that an amendment could be offered to it, The resolution was amended and adopted. e RAILROAD LAND GRANT, Mr. ANDERSON, (rep.) of Mo., from the Committee lands for Mr. ARNELL, (rep.) of Zeno. offered a resolution he Navy for informa- THE RESTORATION OF ALABAMA. Mr. Farnsworra, from the Reconstruction Com- mittee, reported back the bill to admit the State of Alabama to representation in Congress, as follows:— ‘Whereas thé peoplo of? Alabama, in pursuance of the pro- ct of Congress entitled “An act for the more * passed March 2, he acta supplementary thereto, have framed a con- 4th day of large majority of the legal voters of aald id election, voted for the adoption of sald enti- ture jeo- voting Be it enacted, That the said State of Alabama shall iy which were elected at reamble of this act, shall he Banned by the Thirty-ninth Congress, and known as article fourteen, SKC. 9 And be it further enacted, That it shall be the ov cl Legisla- 1868, to assemble at the capital of said State within thirty days after the passage of this act. nO. 8 That the sald State of Alabama shall be admitted to representation in Congress and shall be recoznized as a State ont e ‘on the following fundamental conditions:—That constitution of Alabama shall never be so amended as to deprive any citizens, or any class of citizens of the United States, of the right. to vote bi ay the constitution herein recog- jor shall be go amended or changed as to allow an) ‘Com conatitution act of the Legislature of said State con- eo Mr. SPALDING, (rep.) of Ohio, offered as a substitute the bill introduced yesterday in the Senate by Mr. Stewart. Mr. POLAND, (rep.) of Vt., withdrew the substitute which he had given notice of last week. Mr. BINGHAM, (rep.) of Ohio, moved to amend the bill by striking out the third section. Mr. FARNSWORTH addressed the House in support arguments Referring to the ques- white men in‘Alabama were members of the Union League. Mr. LIAES, (rep) of Pa., asked how the fact of seven thousand white men having voted for the con- stitution had been ascertained. Had the whites and blacks voted separately, or had they been registered with reference to distinction in color? Mr. Farnsworru replied that at many of the polls the oficers of election marked the votes of colored men and those of white men. Mr. Kerr, (dem.) of Ind., asked whether the reguit had been reported in accordance with any law. Mr. Faxnswort said the fact had. not been re- turned by General Meade, and he did not know that any law required it, Mr. Kerk inquired how the information had got into the possession of the committee. Mr. FARNSWORTH sald he had received that infor- mation by telegraph and letter from unquestionable sources in Alabama, Mr. Beck, (dem.) of Ky., @ member of the Recon- struction Committee, asked whether the committee had received information that seven thousand white men had voted for it, and if so, when. Mr. FaRNsworrn replied that he himself had re- ceived that information, Mr. Beck—But the committee has not. Mr. FARNsworta—Whether the gentleman from Kentucky has or has not received it I do not know. Mr. BeckK—Has the committee, as such, received 1t? Mr. Farxswortu said he was not aware whether the committee, as a committee, had received it, but he thought that members of the committee and ae of the House had received similar infor- mation. Mr. KRLLEY addressed the House in support of the In the course of his remarks he made some mnybrook Fair, whenever he In_ the name of republicans he Congress to admit Alabama, and to proclaim of Pa., offered an amendment. Mr. STEVENS, (rep.) ite of suffrage shall not i o suffrage below the universal sight, eee ni Mr. FARNSWORTH gave notice that he would move the previous question at half-past three o'clock to- morrow, and ask a vote at half-past four, The House at h t four o'clock adjourned, “THE TYNG CASE REVIVED. Rev. Stephen H. Tyungy Jr. to Bishop Potter Greeting—Sharp Reply to the Prelate’s Ad- monition—The End Not Yet. Rey, Stephen H. Tyng, Jr., has written the follow- ing letter to Bishop Potter in relation to the ad- monition of the Bishop:— Cuvuron oF THE HOLY rie} New York, March 14, 1968, ht Rev. H. Porren, D. D., LL. D., D. O. Ley xon:— Riaut Rey. AND Dean Str—I have now silent Notwithstanding the. 3 beginning to the end before the ‘tated, the I should, however, be je ignominious in submission to your re- the prolonged admonitton have listened from your R soon as my lenten engagements will pe! I urpose to present, both to yourself and the pul ‘ pk = ‘Panik review of ‘the whole pr includin, the language of our sentence. The church which fine city th fae] as LB the nee ol ie Hi e1 whom Tecteat ea Shannen ese ten fs as witnesses; ligious services wi jeted the exercises; your positive of vener- —_ referred, I de- ‘of the responsi- of ecclesiastical trial in which I have as I hold it, ag In duty bound, to have been respondent. equally opposed to the principles of the com- mon law, the canons of the, nt Episco} Church and the doctrine and discipline of Christ this Church hath received the same. I absolute! deny ite larity Ct ba gg A authority. oe A resentment, 0} ve jecision nod toureeting censure T to general judgment of the the Church, to the tmpartial review of the other tian churehes of this | God, and to Jesus, the us all, Your servantin to the word of the seeped and bishop H. TYNG, Jr. ~~ WAVAL INTELLIGENCE, The United States steamer Don, Commander Ralph Chandler, baving finished necessary repairs of ma- chinery, sailed from Havana for Key West on the 19th instant. Paymaster W. R. Winslow has been ordered to duty in charge of the provisions and clothing at Nore mo Navy Y: has resign ard. erat Paymaster Samuel 8. Wood, Jr., Acting Master 8, W. Rhoades and Acting First Ae ‘ ineer ©, W. Pennington have been honor-