The New York Herald Newspaper, March 30, 1879, Page 7

WASHINGTON. Remarkable Excitement in the House of Representatives. REVOLUTIONARY TACTICS. General Garfield’s Charges Against the Democrats, STARVING THE GOVERNMENT Flinging Down the Republican Gauit-. let of Defiance. SPEECH BY A, TH. STEPHENS. Recalling the Stirring Scenes of 1860. _———_—_ FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT. WasHINGToN, March 29, 1879, GENERAL GARFIELD AGAIN ON HIS WAR CHARGER EXPOSING THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTIONARY PROGRAMME--STARVING OUT THE GOVERNMENT. There is a rapidly increasing and intense political excitement here, but it is mainly shown by the re- publicans, many of whom are very bitter indeed, and denounce their opponents without measure. It was to be expected, therefore, that the galleries would be crowded this morning to listen to the debate. Their occupants took a lively and sometimes a noisy in- | terest in what passed, General Garfield being several | times applauded. After Mr. Stephens had spoken, and the point of order was settled, General Garfield made what was acknowledged by both democrats and republicans to be a powerful speech. Indeed, the republican members thought it so effective that they sub- scribed for 100,000 copies of it at once for cir- culation through the country. Nevertheless, it must be said that General Garfield's effort was notan argument, but a harangue. It did not discuss the merits of the question at issue, except Incidentally, but dealt largely in denunciation. He asserted that the purpose of the demecrats was to force the Executive to approve of measures to which . he is opposed or of starving the government, But General Gertield cannot. be supposed to know cither the President's mind or the intentions of the demo- crats, and forall he knows the President may be ready to approve the bill and the democrats may in- tend to withdraw their legislation if he objects and vetoes. When, therefore, he denounced{the demo- crats as revolutionary he was not arguing, but only haranguing. When he asserted that the democrats themselves had yoted in 1865 for the measure they were now repealing he ‘was corrected by Mr. Wood and others, who ex- plained that the democrats then supported this as a choice between this and a worse proposition, and it seoms that Mr. Garfield was here led by his fervor beyond the clear region of facts. He recalled the old slave catching times before the war, ho recalled the days of 1861, the results of the war, and the folly and iniquity of the men who forced the war. In fact he “made it ugly" for the South and the democrats. He made an extremely effective campaign specch, 8 very damaging public document for the democrats, and-one which must have mads them regret, as they sat and listened to him, their folly in forcing an extrasession. But he did not use an argument from beginning to end, and left the right or wrong of the question precisely where it stood before he began. On the whole he did wisely for his party and him self, for it is very well remembered that on the last night of the last session, less than a month ago, General Garfield declared himself content to give up the very matter he is now so vigorously fighting for, and that which he now declares revolutionary, the appending political legislation on appropriation bills, has been done and defended by republicans when they had the majority. In one of those instances they deliberately sent an appropriation bill thus burdened with political legislation to the President with the threat that if he vetoed it they would let the bill fail, and the President signed it under compulsion, “lest by withholding his signature the necessary appropriation be defeated; that is to say, that which they now impute without ground to the democrats, and which is undoubtedly revolutionary, they did in President Johnson’s day. Mr. MacMahon and Mr. Wood followed General Garfield. They refuted some of his statements, but they could not mect his arguments, for he had not used any; and on the whole the glory of the day remained with him. He had for listeners Secretaries Evarts and Sherman, Senator Conk)in and other prominent republicans, and he certainly gave the democrats Feason to regret their stupidity in insisting upon legislation of no importance and putting themselves in what many of them now see is a fatally com- promised position. At the close Mr. Ewing, having in mind the morn- ing hour on Monday, which is the one hour in the week when general business. can be intro- duced, innocently moved to adjourn. Ho thought it a good way to secure a chanco to introduce his inflation bill; but Mr. Sparks, democrat, at once exposed Mr. Ewing's purpose and moved to adjourn until Tuesday, by which means the morning hour is avoided, and this motion re- ceived such immediate and preponderant support from democrats and republicans that not enough men were found even to demand the yeas and nays on it, and so the week closed. al GENERAL WASHINGTON DESPATCHES. Wasurnaton, March 29, 1879, ‘THE WELSH COMPLAINT DENIED, The Department of State authorizes a contradiction of the recently published and widely circulated report that Mr. Welsh, our Minister to England, has complained of the inadequacy of his salary, No such complaint has ever been mado, and the only foundation for the erroneous statement is a letter written by Mr. Wolsh at a time when no pro- vision had been made by Congress for seo- ond ‘secretaries of legation, in which he said that rather than allow the public in- terests to suffer for want of proper assistance he would pay tho salary of a second secretary of Legation himself although his own salary was in adequate to mect his expenses. This was in no sense of the word a complaint, but merely a statement that even without adding the cost of on assistant secre- tary his personal disburse:ments exceeded his salary, NOTES FROM THE TREASURY. The Treasury now holds $350,401,400 in United States bonds to sectire bank circulation. United States bonds deposited for circulation for the week ending to-day, $2,570,000; United States bonds held for circulation, withdrawn during the week ending to-day, $3,209,000, National bank cir- culation outstanding :—Currency notes, §: 2, 2705 gold notes, $1,466,020, Tho internal revenue receipts to-day were $256,244 19 and the custom receipts $558,273 28, ‘The recipts of national bank notes for redemption for the week ending to-day, as compared with the corresponding period last year, aro as follows :—- . 1878. 1870, New York. + $976,000 $1,036,000 * Boston... » 1,411,000 1,004,000, Philadetph 22,000 *” 64,000 Miscellaneou 587,000 581,000 ‘Totals. 06,000 $2,685,000 Receipts to-day vesesees 266,000 NEW YORK HERALD, SUNDAY, MARCH 30, 1879—QUINTUPLE SHEET. ; registered four pereent bonds of April next will be ready for mailing to-pight. They number over 36,000 and represent $2,600,000 of interest. ‘The Treasury Department has shipped a supply of refunding four per cent certificates to all assistant treasurerg, and small amounts to other Aesignated depositeries, the whole amounting to $540,980. The department now has on hand about $500,000 of these c#ttifieates, and the Bureau of En- graving and Pri: is printing them as rapidly as possible, A ‘The subscriptionste the four per cent loan sinco yesterday’s report Kaye amounted to $128,950, ‘The Treasury Department reports that the number of standard silver dollars coined to date is 21,661,274. Of this number 6,605,076 are in circulation, leaving 15,056,198 now on hand, The Secretary of the Treasury this afternoon issued the niaety-third call for the redemption of five-twenty bonds of 1865—consols of 1867, The call is for $10,000,000, of which $7,000,000 are coupon and $3,000,000 are registered bonds, The principal and interest will be paid at the ‘Treasury on and after the 29th day of Juno next and the interest will cease on that day, The following are the descriptions of the bonds: — Coupon bonds dated July 1, 1867 ;— $50, No, 111,001 to No, 117,000, both inclusive. $100, No. 208,001 to No. 220,000, both inclusive, 500, No. 108,001 to No. 112,000, both inclusive. $1,000, No. 194,001 to No. 208.000, both inclusive. Total coupon bonds, $7,000,000, ‘Registered bonds, redeemable at the pleasure of the United States after the Ist day of July, 1872: $1,000. No. 44,551 to No, 44,600, both inclusive, $5,000, No, 15,801 ° ba 50, both inclusive, Total 5 uarogste, $10,000, ILLICIT DISTILLING IN GEORGIA. Collector Clark, at Atlanta, telegraphs to-day to Commissioner Raum as follows:—‘Seized three dis- tilleries on the 28th inst. The stills and fifteen gal- lons of spirits wore brought out. Also seized 1,00 gallons ef mash and beer. Three men were ar- rested.” 2 TRYING TO BLACKMAIL BUTLER, A young man, giving his name as F. W. Weyrich, was arrested by the detectives here yesterday on a charge of attempting to extort $100 from General B. F. Butler, of Massachuectts, by means of a threat- ening letter. SENSATION IN CONGRESS, Wastixctox, March 29, 1879, The Spraxsn said that in view of a discussion which took place yesterday in Committee of the Whole, and which he had not had an opportunity of hearing, he decided to give in an intelligent manner, and for the information of the Iouse, the history of rule 147, which provides that the rules of one House shall be the rules of the succeeding houses until otherwise ordered, He had read by the clerk tho debate which had taken place at the time ot the adoption of rule 147, and algo a statement made by Speaker Grow in the Thirty-seventh Congress, to the effect that he would construe the rules of the preceding Congress as continuing in force until otherwise ordered. The Speaker proceeded to say that he had been unable to find any decision of any subsequent Speaker at variance with the statement. Mr. Miuus, (dem.) of Texas, sent to the clerk's desk and had read a ruling of Speaker Kerr that the constitutional right of the House to adopt its own rules could not be superseded. ALEXANDER H, STEPHENS STARTS A DISCUESION. After some further discussion the House, at forty minutes past twelve P, M., went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Springer, of Illinois, in the chair, on the Army Appropriation bill. Mr. STEPHENS, (dem.) of Ga., obtained the floor and proceeded to speak in @ clear voice. He did not desire to say much outside of the pending point of order. The section ag inst which that point had been raised was clearly germane to the bill. All laws penal in their character were to be construed strictly, but laws involving questions of public right, public liberty and public policy were to be liberally con- strued—not strictly, The gentleman from Maine (Mr. Frye) had said that the section did not, on its face, retrench expenditures ? That was not the ques- tion. The question was, “Would it probably re- trench expenditures?” He thought it would, and peacoly sonetiy se pues + but — ainly, ‘The "atte expenditures had the use of trooy at elections. He went on to arguo that the acts of 1795 and 1817 only authorized the use of the'troops to put down domestic insur. rection. The provision for the uso of troops for civil purposes was an entirely different matter. The law authorizing the use of troops at the polls had never any existence until 1865, and the danger of such a law would not, he presumed, be denied by anybody. If there was any man on’ the floor who was in favor of peaceable elections. and order throughout the length and breadth of the land he (Mr. epnens) professed to be equally strong with him in that feeling. He was for law and order. He had witnessed the soldier atthe polls, and had seen no good of it. The country had got along three-fourths of acentury without having troops at the polls, aud the sentiment ot the people was as much against their presence there now as it had ever been. The future harmony, order and peperity of the country would be greatly promoted by hereafter a hering to the principles and precepts of the fathers of the Republic. Congress had a right to raise armies and to designate the purpose for which they should be used; and the President's right to control and direct their movements was clearly an executive one, with which Congress had no power to interfere, But it could say that the Executive could not use such forces for a particular purpose. It had a right (which he did not think the Executive would deny) to say that the military should not be used at the polls, Tet the land forces be devoted to protecting the frontier. Let the navy be afloat on the sea, protect- ing the country’s flag and commerce. Let each be in the sphere to which it was entitled, in which, in the past, it had won such honor aud glory for the common country. Let thew perform their duties, and let the civil administration of the country go on in its own channel. Let members of Congress be returned as heretofore, and if any man was de- trauded of his right, then let the high court of tho country, the House of Reprosentatives, decide that question, and not the bayonet of tho soldier. REVOLUTIONARY DECISION OF THE CHAIR. The Chairman then proceeded to rule on the point of order, which he did by declaring the section to be in order, both on the ground of its being germane and of its retrenching expenditure. There could scarcely bo a doubt as to its being germane, for it related to the duties of the army, or rather to the uses to which the army may, be put. “Germane” did not mean synonymous, but meant something near, akin, closely allied, relevant to the subject. As to the question of retrerching ex- penditures, he referred to the official estimates and to appropriations heretofore made to show how much money had been expended ror transportation and other oxpenses attending the use of the troops at the polls. ‘The ending section proposed to retrench such expenditures for the future. For these and other reasons the point of order was overruled, Mr, Conaen, (rep.) of Mich., ‘led trom the de- cision of the Chair, and the decision was sustained-— yeas 125, nays 107, ‘Mr. New, (rep.) of Ind., offered an amendment pro- viding that nothing cot ined in the section should be hela to abridge or affect the duty or power of the President under the fourth article of the constitu. tion to send troops into States on the application of the Legislature or Executive. The amendment was allowed to stand over for tho prosent, MR, GARFIFEDD's sPrecH. Mr. Gam D, (rep.) of Ohio, then took the floor. He commenced hig speech by referring to the gravity and solemnity of the crisis that had now been brought upon pd declared that the House had, to- muter upon @ revolu- tion against the constitution and the government; and that the consequonce of that resolve, if persisted in, meant nothing short of sub- version of the government. He sketched the two Houses at the point at issue between the and read from. & close of the last Congress, report of one of the Senate conferees to the effect that the democratic conferees on the part of the House were determined, unless the action of the House was coneurrea in, to tefiwe making appro- priations to carry on the government, and he alko quot from the speech of Senator Beck (another of the conferees) to. the eftect that the dem- ocrats claimed the right which'the House of Com- mons in England had established, after two centu- | ries eo ag to say they would not grant the money of the people unless thero was a redress of | rievances, These propositions, continued Mr. Gar- | eld, in various forms, move or loss vehemently, were repeated in the last House, aud with that situa. tion of affairs the session came near its close, The republican majority in “the Senaty and tho republican minority in the House expressed the deepest possible solicitude to avoid tho catastro- he here threatened. They ex] their strongest desire to avoid the danger to the country and to fts business of an extra session of Congress, and they expressed their willingness to let go what they con- sidered the least important of the propositions—not as a matter of coercion at all, but as a matter of fair adjustment and compromise, if they could be met | inthe spirit of adjustment on the other side, Un- fortunately, po spirit of adjustment appeared on the other side to meet their advances, And now | the ew Congres’ ix assembled, and after days of deliberation the House of — Rep- resentatives has resolved substantially to reaffirm the propositions of its predecessor, and on these propositions we are met to-day, This is no time to enter into all this case, Iam not prepared for it myself, But I shall contine — to the one phase of the issue presented in this bill. DRAWING THE LINKS. Mr, Arxixs, (lem.) of Tenn., asked Mr. Garfield “he checks for tho payment of tho interest on the | Whether ho understood him to stato that there had been no geoposision to compromise made in the Con- ference Commit Mr. Ganrurtp replied that he did not undertake to | state what had been suid in the Confereuce Commuit- # for he had not been a member of the Conierence, had been only stating what had been stated on the floor of the House aud of the Senate. Mr. Arkins—Then I state that a proposition was made in the Conference Committee the same as the Proposition uow before the Honse, and which is to be attached to this bill. ry. GARVIELD=I take it for granted that what my friend says is strictly true. I oe nothing to the contrary, The question may be asked why we make any special resistance to propositions whieh many gentlemen have declared are to be considered of no importance, So far a this side 4s oonce rned a lesire to say this. We you, gentlemen the other side, as skilful ‘liamentarians = and skilful strategists: you have chosen wisely and adroitly your line of assault; you have pnt forward” perhaps the least’ ‘objection- able of wens. Measures, but By meet that as one part our programme. We reply to it as au order of Batlle, ‘sak we are as much compelled by the logic of the situation to meet you on the skir- mish line as we would be if you were attacking the intrenchments themselves. And, therefore, on the threshold, we desire to plant our case on the general grounds on which we choose to defend it. FEEBLEST GOVERNMENT ON EARTH. Mr. GanriELp then went on to reier to what he had stated on the last day of the last Congress, as to the division of the government into three parts—the nation, the Senate and the people; and he said that, looking at the government as a foreigner might look upon it, it might be said to be the feeblest govern- ment on the earth, while looking at it as Ameri- ean citizens did was the mightiest goy- ernment. A foreigner could int out a dozen ways in which the government could be killed, aud that not by violence. Of courseall governments might be overturned by the sword, But there were some ways by which this government might be utterly annihilated without the firing of a gun, The people might say that they would not elect repre- sentatives. That, of course, was a violent supposi- tion, but there was no possible remedy tor such a condition of things, ana without a Hoase of Repre- sentatives there could be no support of a govern- ment, and, consequently, there could be no govern- ment; so the States might say turough their’ Legislatures that they would” not elect Senators. The very abstention from elect- ing Senators would absolutely destroy the government and there would be no process of com- pulsion. Or, supposing that the two houses were. assembled in their usual order, and that a bare ma- jority of one in either House should firmly bind itself together and say that it wowid vote to adjourn atthe moment of mecting each day, and would do that for two years in succession—in that case what would happen and what would be the measure of re- dress? The government would die. There could not be found in the whole range of judicial or executive authority any remedy whatever, The power of a member of the House to vote wus free, and he might yote “no” on every proposition of that kind. It was not so with the Executive. The Exveutive had no power to destroy the government, Let the Execu- tive travel but one inch beyond the line of law and there wasthe power of impeachment. But it the ele:tors among th» people who clected Representa- tives, or if the electors in the State Legislatures who created Senators, or if Senators and Representatives themselves abstain from the performance of their duty there was no remedy. WHAT THE CONSTITUTION MEANT. At a first view it might seem remarkabie, he said, that abody of wise men like those who framed the, constitution should have left the whole side of the: fabric of government open to those deadly assaults, but on another view of the cass they were wise. What was their reliance? It was on the sovereignty of the nation, on the crowned. and annointed xov- ereign to whom all American citizens owed their allegiance. That sovereign was the body of the peo- ple of the United States inspired by their love of country and their sense of obligation to public duty. As the originators of the forces that were sent to Congress to do their work they had no need of any coersive authority to be laid on them to compei them to do their manifest duty. Public opinion, the level of that mighty ocean trom which all heights and all depths were measured, was deemed a sufficient measure to guard that side of the constitution and those approaches to the life of the-nation, absolutely from all.danger, all harm. Up to this hour (he eaid) our sovereign has never failed. us. There has never been such abstention from the exercise of those primary functions of sovereignty, as either to cripple or endanger the government, And now, for the first time in our history, and I will say for the, first time in at least two centuries in the history of Engleh Speaking people, has it been proposed or at least insis' upon, that these voluntary powers shall be used for the destruction of the government, I want it under- stood that the proposition which I have read, and which is the programme announced to the Ameri- can people to-day, is, this day, that if we cannot have our way in @ certain manner, we will destroy the gov- ernment of thiscountry by using the voluntary power not of the people, but of ourselves, against the yov- ernment to destroy it. What is our theory of law ? Itis free consent. Thatis the granite foundation of our whole structuro. Nothing in this Republic can bea law that has nota treo consent of the House, the free consent of the Senate and the free consent of the executive. Or if the executive refuses his free consent, then it must have the tree consent of two- thirds of each body. Will anybody deny that ? Will anybody challenge a line of that. statement—that free. ogueens: is the foundation rock of all our institn- tions THREATS TO STOP THR GOVERNMENT, And yet the programme announced two weeks ago was, that if the Senate refused to consent to the * mand of the House the government should stop. The proposition was then, and the programme is now, that although there is not a Senate to veto: it, there is still a third independent factor in tho legislative power of the government which is to be coerced at the peril of the destruction of the government. It makes no difference what your issue is. It it were the simplest and most inoffensive proposition in the world, yet if yon demand as a matter of coercion that it’ shall be put in, every fair minded ropubii- can in America would be bound to resist it as much as though his own life depended on his resistance. I am not arguing as to the merits of your three amend- ments at all; 1am speaking of our methods, and I say that they are against the constitution of our country. Isay that they are revolutionary to pa core, and that they tend to the destruction of the first element of American liberty, which is free con- sent of all the powers that unite to make the law. Task anybody to take up my challenge and.to show me where hitherto this consent has been coerced as a condition precedent to the support of the govern- ment. It is u little surprising to me that our friends on the other side should have gone into this great contest on so slender a topic as the one embraced in this particular bill. Victor Hugo said, in his de- scription of the great Battle of Waterloo, that two armies were like two mighty giants, and that some- times achip under the heel of one might determine the victory. It may be, gentlemen, that there is merety a chip under your heel, or it may be that you treated it as achipon our shoulder. But whether it is under your heel or on our shoulder it repro- sents a matter of revolution, and we fight for the chip as if 1t were an ingot of the richest ore. (Loud applause on the floor and in the galleries.) A POINT FOR DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS, Let us see what the chip is. Do the gentlemen know what they ask when they ask us to repeal? Who nade this law which you now demand to have repealed in this bill? It was introduced into the Senate of the United States by ® prominent democrat from the State of: Keu- tucky (Mr. Powell), It was insisted upon in an able and claborate speech by him. It was reported against by # republican ‘committee in that body. It went through days and weeks of debate in the Senate, and when it finally came to be acted upon in that body this is about the way the yote ran:—Every democrat in the Senate voted for it, and y Senator who voted against it was a republic: No demerat voted aguingt it, but every democrat Senator gvoted for it. gWho were they? — Mer. Hendricks, of Indiana; Mr. Davis, of Kentucky; Mr. Jotnson, of Maryland; Mr. MeDougai, of Calitornta Mr. Powell, of Kentucky; . Rwhardson, of Lb nots, and Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware. re were fewer republican Senators who voted for it than there were who voted against it: Thirteen republican Senators yoted against it and only ten for it. The bill then came over to the House and was pat upon its passage here. And how did the vote stand in this body? Every democrat in the House of Representatives voted for it--sixty of them. The total number of persons who yoted for it in the House was about one hundred and thirteen, and of that number a majority. were de ocrats, The distingnish Speaker of the House, Samucl J. Randall, voted for it. The distinguished chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means (Fernando Wood) voted for it, A distinguished member from Ohio, now a Senator from that State—Mr. Pondleton—voted for it. Every man of leading namo or fame in the democratic party who was then in tho Congress of the U States voted for the bill, and not one against it this House there were but few republicans who against it, L was one of the few. Thaddetw ste voted against it. What was the object of the bi that time? It was this—it was alleged by democrats that in those days of war there was Yatertere ee with elections in the border States. re Was no charge of any interference in the States where war did not exist. But lest there might bo some infraction of the freedom of elections ® large number of republicans in Congress were unwilling to give any pearance whatever of intertering with the freedom of elections, voted against this Jaw as an expression of their purpose that the army should not be improperly used in and about any election. Mr. Cantisie, (dem.) of Ky,—I want to ask if the democrats in the Senate and the House did not vote for t proposition because it came in the form of a substitute for another proposition still more ob- Jectionable to them ? Mr. Garrirtep—The gentleman is quite mistaken, ‘The original bill was pduced by Senator Powell, of Kentucky, It was amended by several persons in purse through the Senate, but the vote L 4 the final vote. A republican Senator ni ing to Kill the proposition, and for (Sur or five days it was delayed. It was again passed, every democrat voting for it. In the House there was no debate, and therefore no expres#ion of the reasons why anybody voted for it. STEPHENS IN A MERRY MOOD. Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia —I wish to ask tho gen- tleman if the country is likely to be revolutionized and the government destroyed by repealing a law that the gentlen voted ageinst? (Laughter on the democratic s! Mr. Gane 1 think not, sir. That is not the element of revolution that I have been discussing. Tho’ proposition now {is that fourteen years have passed since the war and not one petition from any, <a REenEetiRE American citizen has come to us asking that the law be eapeniad not one memorial has found its way to our desks complaining of the law, and now the dem- ocratic House of Representatives hold that it they are hot permitted to force on another House and the Exeentive, against their will and their consent, the repeal of a law that the democrats made it shall be a sufficient ground for starving this government. That 18 the proposition we are here debating. Mr. Woop, (dem.) of N, Y.—Before the gentleman leaves that part of the discussion I desire to ask him whether he wisiies io lake the impression on this House that the bill introduced by Senator Powell, of Kentucky, which resulted finally in the law of 1865, was the bill that passed the Senate and tlie House which he stated that the prekent Speaker of the House and myself voted in favor of? Mr.GanvieLp—I have not intimated that there were no anietidments, There were amendments, Mr. Woop—I Want to cotrect the impression, IT deny that, so far as I am personally concerned, [ ever voted for the bill, except a8 a substitute fora more pernicious and objectionable measure. (Ap- plausé on the democratic side.) : Mr. GakereLy—All I say is a matter of record; what 1 say is that the gentleman voted for that law, and every democrat in the Senate and in the House who voted at all voted for it. Mr. Woon—I waut to ask the gentleman whether, in 1865, at the time of the passing of this law, the war had really yet subsided—whether there was not a portion of this country in a condition where it was impossiblé to exercise an elective franchise unless there was rome kind of military interterence; and who‘ her, at the expiration of fourteen years atter the war has subsided, that gentleman is yet prepared to continue @ war measure in atime of protound peace in the country ? GOING BACK To 1860, Mr. Ganrretp—I have no doubt that the patriotic gentleman trom New York took all those things into consideration when he voted for that Dill, and L may haye been unpatriotic in voting against it; but he and I must stand on our record as made up, be understood that I have not at all entered into the disenssion of the merits of the case. I am dis- eussing a method ot revolution against tho consti- tution of the United States, I desire to ask the forbearance of the gentlemen on the other side for remarks that I dislike to mako for they will bear witness that I have in many ways shown my desire that the wounds of the war shall be healed and that the grass that God plants over the graves of onr dead may signal ze the return of the spring of friendship and peace between all pars of this country. But I am compelled by the m sity of the situation to refer fora moment to a chap- ter ot history. ‘The last act of the democratic ad- ministration in this Honse, eightcen years ago. was aticring and dramatic, but it was heroic avd bigh- souled. ‘Then the democratic party said, “If you elect your mun es President of the United States wo will shoot your Union to death,” and the people of this country, not willing to be coerced, but believing that they had a right to vote for Abraham Lincoln if they choxo, did elect him lawfully as President, aud then your leaders in con- trol of the majority of the other wing of, this Capi- tol did the heroic thing of withdrawing from their ‘seats, and your epresentatives withdrew from their seats and flung down to us the gage of mortal battle. We called it. rebellion, but we admitted that it was honorable, that it was courageous and that it was noble to give us the fell gage of battle and fight it out in tbe open ficld. That conflict and what followed we all know too well, and. to-day, atter eighteen years, the book of your domination is opened where you turned down your leaves in 1860, and you are signalizing your return to 4 by reading the second chapter (not this timo bn befoie one) that declares that it we do not let you dastsastatute out of the book yon will, not shoot the ion to death, as in the first chapt.r, but starvo it to death by refusing the necessary appropriations. (Applause on the republican side.) You, gentlemen, have it in your power to kill this movement; you have it in your power, by withholding these two bills, to smite the nerve centres of our constitution to the stillness of death; and you have declared your purpose to do it if you cannot break down the ele- ments of free consent that up to this time have al- ways ruled in the government. SUPERCITAOUS CARPING. Mr. Davis, (dem.) of N.C.—Do { understand the gentleman to state that refusal to admit the army at the polls will be the death of this government? That is the logic ot his remark if it means anything. We say it will be the preservation of the government to keep the army from destroying liberty at the polls. “Mr. Ganrnitp—T haye too much respect for the in- telligence of the gentleman from North Carolina to believe that he thinks thut that was my argument. He does not say that he thioks On the contrary, Tamsure that every clear pd man knows that that was not my argument. Myargument was this— that unless some independent branch of the legis tive power agaiust its willis forced to sign or vote what it does not cousent to, it will use the power in its hands to starve the government to death. Mr. Davis—How does the geutleman assume that wo are forcing some branch of the government to do what it does not wish todo? How do we know that, or how does the gentleman Know it? Mr. GarrrELp—My reply to the gentleman is, that I read at the outset of my remarks the declaration ot his party asserting that this i ‘programme. In 1856, in Cincinuati, in the National mocratic Con- vention, and still later, in 1860, the national democ- racy in the United States, affirmed the right ot the veto as one of. tife sucted rights of our government,-.and declared that any law which could ait be pas#ed over a veto by a two-thirds vote chad no right-to become a law, and that the only re- “dress’was an appédl from the veto to the people at the next clection. ‘Khat has been the democratic doc- trine on that subject from the remotest day—cer- tainly trom General Jackson's timo until now. What would yon have said in 1861 if the democratic ma- jority in the Senate, instead ot taking the course which it did, had simply said:—"We will put an amendment on an appropriation bill declaring the right of any State to secede from the Union at pleasure, and forbidding any officer of the army or navy of the Unit States from interfering with any State in its purpose to secede? Suppose the democratic majority had said then, “Put that on these appropriation bills or we will re- fuse supplies to the government,” Perhaps they could have killed the government then by starvation. But in the madness of that hour the leaders of the secession government did not dream that it would be honorable to put their fight on that ground, but they walked out on their plan of battle and fought itout. But now, ina way which the wildest of se- cessionists never dreamed of taking, it is proposed to make this new assault on the vitals of the nation. A REPUBLICAN CHALLENGE. Gentlemen (addressing the democratic side of the House), we have tried to count the cost. We did try to count it im 1461 before we picked up the gage of battle; and although no man could then forecast the awful loss in blood and treasure, yet having started in we staid there to victory. We simply made the appeal to our sovereign, to that great omniporent public opinion in America, to determine whether Tnion should be shot to death. And now law- fully in our right and in our place here, we pick up the guge of battle which you have thrown down, and will appeal to our common sovereign to say whether you shall break down the principle of free consent — in legislation at the price of starving the government to to death. We are ready to pass these bills for the support of the government at any hour when you will offer them in the ordinary way, and if you offer theseother measures as separate mei we will meet you in the spirit of fair and f rnal debate, But you shall not compel us—you shall not coerce us—even to save this government until the question has yone to the sovercign to determine whether it will consent to break down any of its voluntary powers, And on that ground gentlemen, we peek ourselves, (Loud applause on the republican side anc in the galler.es.) We remind you, iu conclusion, that this great ze of yours in regard to keeping the officers of the governinent out ot the States has not been always yours, I remem- ber that only six years before the war your law authorized marshals of the United States to go through all our households and hunt for fugitive slaves. It did not only that. but it empowered marshals to call for a posse comitatus and to call upon all the bystanders to join in the chase, and your democratic Attorney General declard in an opinion in 1854 that a marshal ot the United States.might call to his aid the whole posse, inelud- ing soldiers and sailors and marines of the United States, to join in the chase and to hunt down the fugitive. Now, fellow members of the House, if, for the purpose of making slavery eternal, you could send your marshals and could mon posses and used the armed forces of the United States, by what face or grace can yon tell us that, in order procure freedom in ctec- tions and peace at the polls, you caunot use thé same marshal with his armed posse? But I refrain trom discussing the merits of the proposition, I have tried in this hurried and unvatistectory way, to give my ground of opposition to this legirlation. As Mr. Garfeld resumed his seat, he was again londly applauded on the republican side and in the galleries, ANOTHER OHIO MAN IN OPPOSITION. Mr. MeManon, (dem.) of Ono, said that the gen- tlemen on the other side, improved every oppor- tunity that offered, to read the gentlenten on his side ‘a lecture as to their past and present con, duet. ‘That sentiment was re-echoed by a partisan press. Mo wanted to know where those gentlemen had. received their authority to hold over Southern gentlemen the threat that the tevlings created by the war were not yet pacified, If it was not competent for Southern men to be admitted to the tloor of the House, with a tull right of voting on vital questious as their judgment directed, then the war for the Union had been a failure. W had been the me: my of the publ roclamation hekt out to citizens of the South? It had been an invitation to the South to return to the Union, to re- turn to the halls of Congress, and in @ united country to legislate for the benefit of all, and because gentlemen did «0 their conduct was charac terized as revolutionary attd partaking of their action in 1860 and 161, If they saw fit to speak for liberty at tho polls, were they to be denounced as revolu- tionary and wa to starve the government? He reminded his f js on the other side that they ina large hey had the nt; but to rity. To be sure t ybody knew how President. He wos surprised that his fri Ohio (Mr, Garfield) had not discusse of the proposition under consideratt not know whether the gentleman confessed that it was right becatse he voted against it in 1865, or whether ho was unwilling to commit himself on the question, WHAT DEMOCRATS DEMAND. ‘The law of 1865 had been passed during the war, when it was popnlar with the republican party to agyrandize the executive power, aud when almost every conceivable outrage was perpetrated under the plea of preserving the peace at the polls, That law nad been patsed when the democrats ha no ju either branch of the legisla Was 1 | ture. ‘by had not that gent!cman stated whether the . Let it | | shading measure was an unfust one or not? It came with an 1) grace from any repablican to say that the pro- Vision was improper because it. was put Upon an appropriation bill. The republicans themselves had many measures in the same way. It had never been cousidered revolutionary, but, on the contrary, a8 a protection against arbitrary power, to attach legislation to appropriation bills. “The demo- crate wanted the jury-box purified, the use of the troops at the polls prohibited and the repeal of the inost infamous of all res, which put it in the ower of marshals and their deputies to corrupt the Pattot box and intimidate honest voters. ‘The statute books were full of infamous laws piaced upon them by the republicans. Some of them his party pro- posed to repeal at the present time; others they would repeal at some future time (which he thanked God was not far distant). When all the departments of the government were in the hands of the demo- crats, then the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Garfield) would witness that revolution which was always going on when a republican officer was to be put out of office. (Langhter on the democratic side.) JOHN BROWN BOGYISM. . He was proceeding to argue against the use of troops to quell slight disturbances arising on ac- count of the Violation of State laws, when he -was interrupted by Mr, Ware, (rep.) of Pa., who re- marked that during the John Brown raid a dis- tinguished officer had been sent up with the military, but, hearing of disturbances in Maryland he had gone there for the purpose of making arrests. ‘That Officer had been no less a person than Kobert E. Lee. Mr, McMavow—Joln Brown had intrenched him- self in United Mates property. ¥ Mr. Witrr—John Brown was in jail in Charleston at the time. (Laughter.) Mr, Sr le san not so well acquainted with the John Brown afiNr as the gentleman and his party, whose politica pabulum it furnished for many years, (Leughter.) Mr. Warrr—There was E. Lee went into Maryland ty make arrests. :0 call for aid, but Robert Mr. McMavon—The same (istingufshed gentle- man once marched into the gemyeman’s own State, and the Legislature never invited nm either. Mr, Warr *, with the yeat'eman (Mr. M-Mahor)- did not assi in driving him ou Fr NDO WOOD'S REMARKS. Fenxaxpo Woop suid that the law of July 1861, authorized the President to substantially hold she military power over the whole country, espec over the insnrrectionary States. In the exercise of that authority the President had entire and complete control over the polls throngh the military power of the government. — Muc plaint had arisen im consequence. ‘here had heen a gross abuss of that — authority. Troops had been sent to disiriets entirely quiet, where there was no need of military interference. The abuse had been so great that 1m 1865 8 republi- can Congress had passed the law to which the geu- tleman from Ohio (Mr. Garfield) had referred. sent to the Clerk’s desk and had read the law alluded want, to, which is cutitled “An act to prevent officers ot the army or navy from interfering’ with elections in the States.” The act of 1465 having been read, Mr. Wood went on to say that act gave # construc- tion and limitation to the powers of tie Executive under the act of 1861. It took fronrthe ‘President the power to place troops at the polls except to keep the peace. The gentleman tra Ohio (Mr. Garfield), and Mr. Davis, of sed that bill because it limited the power resident over the troops. Therefore, he said, thy act of 1865, for which he voted, was » great improve- ‘nent on the law as it thenstood, It was alimitation ‘on the power of the Prosident; it was im the same line that his side of the House was now acting to get rid of theee unconstitutional, despotic and outrageous laws that has been passed for partisan, wicked pur- poses and in order to maintain a wicked power for, the destruction of the interests, property and rights of the American people. ‘Mr. Warre stated that the law of 1835 was the law to-day, and that the republican party did not desire to interfere with it. As the democrats had assisted to make that law just as it was, he asked whether it ‘was not inconsistent in the same party to enforce its repeal on an appropriation bill. DEMOCRATS WILL RULE NOW. Mr. Woop, in reply to Mr. White, said that the su- thority conferred on the Executive, under the law of 1465, to keep the peace at the polls, had shamefully abused; that the construction of it by the Executive had gone far yond the authority and and limitation of keeping peace at the polls; that the troops had been used for the purpose of intimidation and for the purpose, absolutely, of compelling the voter to fol- low executive dictation. He said that no small part of the power of the republican party had been de- rived from the abuse of that little clause in the act of 1865, Now the democratic party had power in both houses of Congress they intended to maintain the civil power of tne Government. They believed this to be a government of opinion, not of force or violence. ‘They believed that the people of the coun- try everywhere should exercise their suffrages ac- cording to the dictates of their own judgments, without Exveutive interference, whether that inter- ference came in the shape of armed soldiers or in auy,other way, In either case it was repng- nant to’the institutions ot the country. The demo- cratic’ party intended to maintain this position. They were willing to go betore the people on the great issue whether this was @ military despotism ; whether members of Congress were to be elected at the point of the bayonet, and bye. 4d the people the United States, North and South, sgould stand on the equal platform of free uncontami- nated, “tnmiolested ant ft with by any other: power except 'the powerjof their own con- science and judgment. CONSISTENCY IN POLITICS, ed some facts as to the passage of «admitted that the words “to keep polls’ were inserted om the motion ator Pomeroy, and had their origin in the his- tory of the “border ruffian” times in Kansas, which were brought into the debate. That amendment had been supported by aman whom the gentleman from Ilinois (Mr. Sparks) recognized as the Magnus Apollo at the Bar ot Illinois—Mr. Lyman ‘Trumbull. Mr. Sranks—He was a republican then, was he not? Mr. Warrr—Certainly; but he was as good a lawyer then as he is now, Senator McDougall then moved to postpone the bill indefinitely. Mr. Powell said, “No, no,” and at his request the final vote was taken and the bill passed. Senator Harian then en- tered a motion to reconsider, which motion was de- bated, and in the debate Reverdy Johnson held that it was competent to give that power to the President for the purpose of enforeimg peace at the: polls, The yeas and mays were again called on the final passage of the bill, and every democrat in the Senate voted for it. It came to thi House, was roferred to the Judiciary Committee, was d back from that committee, and the honor- utleman from New York (Mr. Wood) and the mocratic members voted for it without mak- any complaint or criticism about this clause. The point which I make is that under the circum- stances it 18 little short of revolutionary to force repeal of that clanse upon an appropriation bill, That ia the point, on which I am willing to stand before this myre ‘This closed, for the day, a debate which excited the deepest interest on the floon and in the galleries—it being regarded as the opening of the great parlia- mentary contest upon which Congress has entered, The galleries were well filled with on attentive and occasionally excited audies and among the listen- ers on the floor were Secretaries Evarts and Sherman and Senators Burnside and Rollins. The House then, at ten minutes past four P. M., adjournes till Tuesday, when the debate is to be re- sumed, Mr. Belford, of Colorado, having the floor, ARMY INTELLIGENCE, Wastrxetox, March 29, 1879. A general court martial has been appointed to meet at the Cavalry Depot, Jefferson Barracks, Mo., on the 2d of April, for the trial of such prisoners as may be brought before it. The following is the detail for the court :— Surgeon E, P. Volum, Major J. F. Wade, of the Ninth cavalry; Captain J. H, Gageley, of the Third fnfantry; First Lieutenant F) M. Gibson, of Seventh cavalry; First Lieutenant C, H. Rockwell, of the Fifth cavalry, Judge Advocate of the court. COUNTERFEIT FIFTIES. Captain H. R, Curtiss, of the Secret Service division of this city, states that there is a most deceptive counterfeit just floated on the National Bank of Commerce in New York of $50 denomination. The officer states that these notes are taken from the same plate from which the counterfeits on the Broadway and Tradesmen'’s National banks, of New York, and the Third National Bank, of Buffalo, im this State, were printed. From a@ scrutiny of the counterfeit notes it is evident that this “new issne” is of the issue of counterfeit notes printed for ciren- lation in Germany, in which, to answer present pur- poses, an erasure has been made by acids, and “Bank of Commerce in" printed in in common type. Fur- ther proof of the alteration is noticeable in the fact that tho signatures of the officers of tho Broadway Bank remain unaltered. In erasing the title, “Broadway National Bank,” the entire has been destroyed and the greasy appearance given to the substituted — title could hardly fail to attract attention and question as to its genuineness. Captain Curtiss has little doubt that this ix the same plate that was engraved by Charles Ulrich, and trom which he and Cole and Ott, now undergoing sentence, printed a large amount of the notes which were so profitably cir- culated in Germany. In consequence of the ex posure following the arrest of Ulrich, Cole and Ott « considerable number of — the notes vent to Germany were left on hand and re- turned to this city, and they wore altered, fortunately, by bunglors. $6 ‘far as has been ascertained oniy two or three of these counterfeits are in circulation, Another peculiarity, which will at once condemn the note upon exanination, is that in the figure of Justice, on the back of the note, the “bandage” is above the eyes instead of over them. NOT GUILTY OF MURDER, Tho jury empanelted to try Frank Brady, indicted for murder in the second degree, in having in con- nection with John Quinn caused the death of John McGuirk in a drunken brawl, in New Rochelle, on Sunday morning, September 15, 1874, at alate hour ou Friday night Frendered a verdict of not guilty, | whereupon he was discharged trom custody, 7 —_ MAYOR COOPER’S RESOLVE, } THEA REMOVAL PAPERS IN THE CASE OF THY POLICE COMMISSIONERS TO BE SENT TO AI~ BANY WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY—WHY THB MAYOR*WOULD NOT ALLOW THE COMMISSION~ ERS TO \ANSWER THROUGH COUNSEL—NOT & COURT. The extreme heat thrown out from a blazing fire in the Mayor's office caused great beads of perspiration to ornament the scalp of Chief Magistrate Cooper yesterday afternoon when the “intelligent and cour- teous” representative of the HeraLp was announced, The venerable cx-Seyator George H. Purser was en- | grossing His Honor’s attention for the moment, and the piercing eyes of Andrew Jackson met the calm and benignant gaze of the Father of His Country as they focussed upon the swivel chair furnished by the late Andy Garvey, in which sat the arbiter of the fate of the Police Commissioners, then trembling ip the balance. THE APPROACH, Disengaging himself from the tascinations of the ex-Senator the Mayor welcomed the Henan reporter with characteristic fervor, seemingly impressed by the importance of the interview. “I come, Mr. Mayor,” said the reporter, ‘to pnt ta you a few queries in behalf of the Hrnap.” “Yes, [know, I know,” replied Mr. Cooper, as he wiped first the perspiration from his forehead and then his shining glasses. “There appears to be so Much unnecessary mystery about the whereabouts of the charges against the and the thiends who are —oaene Police. Commissioners that it seems best to say, “Where are they?’ ”” “There is no mystery about it.”” + “Have you sent them to the Governor?” » AN INTERRUPTION. Just then the Chief Clerk approached the Mayor, escorting two women, one of whom was comely, the Much com |¢the other not. “Well, my good woman,” said the Mayor, “what can I do for you?” “I came about the child,” said she. “I was to keep it three months on trial, and if I liked it to adopt it. Well, I neglected to get my papers, and B if Ican, to keep the child.” “What child?’ gasped the Mayor. “The child I got from the Orphan Asylum. Here's | it’s picture.’* “Qh, L have no power to interfere with that. That’e their business.” “This picture was taken the day before he left. Muryland, fad op- | He's a fine little boy, and—”” “I dare say, I dare say, my dear Madam, but as L have no power in the matter, po conversation, however interesting,«would be of the last use. Good, moraing.’” AGAIN THE CHARGES. Besum.ing, the Mayor said I have not told the public thatthe papers were sent to the Governor be. cause they were not sant. The certificates of re- moval, with thereasons, for my action, have not yes |, gone to.Albany.’” “Why not?” “For reasons entirely satisfactory to myself and which would be perfectly satisfactory to the publio if they knew them. “Such as the embarrassment of appointing succes sors to theremoved Commissioners?” “Of that’I don’t careto speak; but that is an em-- . barrassment certainly.”” “Is it because you are imdoubt as tothe charges themeetves “Not at al “The delay is zather.a long one, and the public sp- pear to be restiye.”” “Well, they wilh notthave to wait much longer. You can say thatauthoritatively. Action will be taken af once, THE MAYOW AS A PROPHET. “Why do you so oftenqveil your intentions by says ing ‘I never predict?’ ”” “[ don’t say 80.” “You are so reported.” “T can’t help that. I holditbat the public are en- titled to know all that is done.as soon as it is done, The books, papers and acts of the Mayor are public property; but when the future is involved and his plans are the subject of scrutiny! think it is dis) \erettonsry “with himr to publish or withhold. IF should consider it boyish to say that I had no plans and that I did not predict the fature. I have plans, and in my own’ mind I forecast the future, but re- vealing my plansiand publishing my intentions are matters entirely in my own discretion.” NO RIGHT TO HOLD COURT. “Do you adhere to the belief that the Commission. ers had no right to appear by counsel?’’ “Certainly I do.” “Tn all other courts they —" “This is not a court. The Msyorcan hold no court.” “Oakey Hall held a court.” “Excuse me; I don’t say anything about Oakey Hall or his court. I simply say the Mayor can hold no court. He can swear no witnosses. If I bad sent the charges to these officials and offered to hear them personally or by letter, without counsel, there woul@ have been no objection. Of course I adhere tomy belief.” “But Mr. Curtis says—” “Mr. Curtis was right enough so far as a court is concerned, but as this is not a court, I fail to detect the pertinency of the allusion.”” «Then you will send your pspers of removal, with the reasons, very soon?” “I shall—at once. ‘And all this muddle will be ended very soon?” = * “It will—at once.” “Will Mr. Sheridan Shook probably, as it were, be one of the commissioners ?”’ m “Of that Iam not prepared to speak.”” “You are not vacillating at all?’ “Not the slightest, This isa grave emergency. I have had sufficient reasons for every step taken. The final step will be taken very soon—at once.” WHAT'S IN THE WIND? Police Commissioner Erhardt spent a considerable portion of yesterday investigating the Street Clean- ing Department. When he returned to the Centra? Office he was closcted with several, city officials. Tt was reported that he had made some new discoveries in this department, but upon being interrogated by a reporter declined to give any information. THE MISSING EMIGRANT. NO TRACK OF FRANZ VOONGOOREN OR HIS FORTY-EIGHT THOUSAND FRANCS—- HAS HE BEEN MURDERED ? No tidings have as yet been received of Franz Voongooren, the aged emigrant whose disappear- ance from his boarding house, No. 130 Greenwich street, on Wednesday night, having in his posses- sion 48,000f. (about $9,000), was noted in the Henatp of Friday, Since that time Superintendent. Jackson, of Castle Garden, has had Detective Groden on the case, but all his efforts to find the missing emigrant have proved frnitless. Superintendent Jackson is inclined to believe that Voongooren has been foully dealt with. He says that anumber of passengers on the steamship Scythia, upon which the missing man came to this country, were acquainted with the fact that he had consid‘ erable money about him, and afew of the boardi house runners may have heard rt and determined to ; put him out of the way. Some of this class of people would not stop at murder for a la of money, and it is posatble that the ag was watched, and when he appeared for a walk on Wednesday evening decoyed to some haunt on the water front, murdered and his body thrown into the river. The nephow of the missing man finds it impossi- ble to account for his uncle's disappearance, except on the ground that he has been robbed and mur- dlered. “Ho says that his uncle had no earthly reason to'steal, and does not believe that he would have re mained away one night if he were alive, The nephow is now penniless, and will probably return to. Belgium, where his mothet resides and is very wealthy, Superintendent Jackson says that tho police were immediately notified of Voongooren's disappearance, and that yesterday they had several detectives from Headquarters working on the case, DEATH OF AN OPIUM EATER. Lo Chung, an Americanized Mongolian, and said te be the prodigal son of wealthy parents, who reside in Brooklyn, died yesterd pital from, it is alleged, opium poisoning. Deceased condition in a amount: emigrant nnconseio fe vedas pitcher for the y will be held this after.