Democratic Sentinel, Volume 20, Number 22, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 June 1896 — WORK OF CONGRESS. [ARTICLE]

WORK OF CONGRESS.

THE WEEK’S DOINGS IN SENATE AND HOUSE. A Comprehensive Digest of the Proceedings in the Legislative Chambers at Washington —Matters that Concern the People. Lawmakers at Labor. The House Tuesday by a vote of 165 to 69 passed the bill for the- repeal of section 61 of the present tariff law providing for a rebate on alcohol used in the arts or medicinal compounds. An amendment wns attached providing for a joint commission to consist of three members from each honse to examine and report on all questions relating to free alcohol at the next session. The Senate amendment to the general deficiency bill, excepting the I- rench spoliation claims and claims under the Bowman act, were disagreed to and the bill sent to conference. Another partial report on the Indian appropriation bill which left only the question of sectarian schools and the old settlers' claims still in, dispute, was adopted. Tariff and finance each came in for a share of consideration in the Senate. Early in the day Mr. succeeded in having the filled cheese bill taken up, whereupon Mr. Dubois offered an amendment adding 75 cents a barrel to the tax on beer. On the question of adopting the amendment the debate became general. Senators Mills and Gray supporting and Nelson, Aldrich and Vilas opposing it. The bill was displaced by the bond bill, which was advocated by Mr. Pritchard and opposed by Mr. Limbiay. A bill was passed to pension, at $75 a month, the widow of Gen. George E. Spencer, at one time United States Senator from Alabama. The Senate Wednesday defeated the proposition to increase the beer tax 75 cents per barrel by the vote of 34 to 27. The House spent almost the entire day discussing the Senate amendment to the general deficiency bill appropriating sl,027,000 for the payment of about 700 French spoliation claims, $548,000 for 325 war claims, found to lie due under the Bowman act; $174,000 for the payment of what is known as the Chautauqua claim for the construction of an ironclad steam battery in >1864, and about SIO,OOO for Indian supplies furnished in 1873 and 1874. The vote was close, but the friends of the claims carried the day—lll to 97. All interest in the House proceedings was overshadowed by the St. Louis horror. A resolution was passed directing the Secretary of War to place»at the disposal of the Mayors of the stricken cities a sufficient number of tents to provide for the temporary necessities of the homeless and to render such aid as might be in his power. Mr. Barthold, of St. Louis, who saw Secretary Lamont, said there were eight or ten boats used in the Mississippi river improvement which might be able to render assistance, and these will be ordered to the scene of the disaster if necessary. When the House resolution was received in the Senate authorizing the Secretary of War to loan tents and render aid to the Mayors of St. Louis and East St. Louis Mr. Palmer, of Illinois, asked immediate consideration. Mr. Vest, of Missouri, interposed the suggestion that while it might seem ungracious for him to interpose yet, in view of late reports showing the usual exaggeration attending the first hours of calamity he did not consider this action necessary. The people of St. Louis, he said, could take care of themselves, and, although the resolution could do no harm, yet he deprecated the tendency to rush impulsively to Federal sources for relief. Mr. Harris, of Tennessee, said he fully sympathized with this view, although the resolution, being here, it should be acted on, and made joint instead of concurrent. Mr. Cullcmi, of Illinois, said he felt from the latest reports that there was no occasion for the passage of the relief resolution, and that the respective States would be able to take care of their people on both sides of the river. Yet, as the House had acted, Mr. Cullom urged that the Senate should give its assent. He added that he was still in doubt and worried over the situation on the Illinois side. The resolution was amended to be joint instead of concurrent, thus requiring presentation to the President, and was then adopted. The House later agreed to the Senate amendment, which makes the resolution joint instead of concurrent. The Joy resolution for the relief of the St. Louis sufferers reached the President at 5 o’cloek and was signed by him ten minutes later.

In the Senate Friday the bills repealing the law relating to rebates on alcohol used in the arts, and amending the law concerning the distilling of brandy from fruits were passed. The latter authorizes the exemption of distillers of brandy made from fruits from the provisions relating to the manufacture of spirits, except as to the tax thereon. The House spent almost the entire day debating the Johnston-Stokes contested election case from the Seventh South Carolina district. The Republicans were badly divided. Those who favored seating the contestant, Johnston, who ran on a Populist-Re-publican ticket, finding themselves slightly in the minority when the voting began, inaugurated a filibuster which lasted until the conference report on the naval appropriation bill 1 came to the rescue, and the House recessed before final action was taken. Johnston’s partisans were outvoted—los to 95, and 103 to 99—the first vote being on the minority resolution declaring Johnston entitled to a seat, the second on the majority resolution declaring him not entitled to it. An effort will be made to reconsider. Mr. Cullom of Illinois spoke at considerable length in the Senate Monday against the pending bill to prohibit the issue of bonds. The President returned to Congress, three private pension bills, with his veto in each case. In the case of two of the bills, granting pensions to Mrs. Amanda Woodcock and Jonathan Scott, both originating in the House, he points out that, owing to careless descriptions in the bills, the pensions could not be paid under their terms. Jn the other, t Senate bill granting a pension to Helen M. Jacob, the President forcibly sets out his objections to allowing pensions to soldiers’ widows who remarry. The President says: “There is no duty or obligation due from the Government to a soldier’s widow except it be worked out through the deceased soldier. She is pensioned only because he served his country and because through his death she as his wife has lost his support. In other words, she becomes a beneficiary of the Government because she is a soldier’s widow. When she marries again and thus displaces the memory of her soldier husband and surrenders all that belongs to soldier widowhood she certainly ought not, on the death of her second husband, be allowed to claim that' she is again the soldier’s widow.”