| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875
Journal of the Confederate Congress --TWENTY-FIFTH DAY--MONDAY, May 30, 1864.
OPEN SESSION.
The House met pursuant to adjournment, and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Dr. Doggett.
The Chair laid before the House a communication from the President; which is as follows; viz:
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the Confederate States of America:
A bill "to provide and organize a general staff for armies in the field, to serve during the war," was passed by your predecessors and submitted for my approval at the close of the last session. I was unable to approve it, and now desire to state my objections to it, as well as my views on this important subject, in the hope that, by a comparison of opinion, some measure may be framed equally acceptable to the legislative and executive departments of the Government.
I believe it to be established by the experience of Europe, as well as our own, that it is impracticable to organize and administer armies with efficiency without the aid of a general staff, permanent in its character, trained in its duties,
Page 114 | Page image
aspiring to promotion in its own corps, and responsible to the head of the department. Such a staff should be composed or a smart body or officers whose education, experience, activity, and special adaptation re their duties render them peculiarly competent to perform functions on which an army depends for its capacity to act with vigor. In Europe years of varied education in the schools, the cantonment, and the field fit the staff officer for his position, and a long experience in the lower grades is required before he is deemed competent to duty in a more important sphere. We are forced to make experimental appointments of officers unprepared by any previous training, and who can only acquire in actual service that experience which must serve in place of well-grounded instruction. It is scarcely possible to make this experience supply the defect of previous military education otherwise than by the organization of the officers into one corps, responsible to one head. who can assign them to positions independent of the movements of general officers, and who, by judiciously varying the field or character of their duties, can give them larger opportunities for instruction and prevent their views being narrowed to the routine and usages of a single commander, himself, perhaps, without military education.
Hope of promotion, founded on their own merit and length of good service, is as necessary to the officers of the general staff as to those of the line, furnishing the best stimulus known to honorable exertion and zealous discharge of duty. This stimulus can not exist unless the staff be organized into one corps. responsible to one chief, who, thus becoming intimately acquainted with the capacity and merits of each, is able properly to distribute the duties so as to secure the services of the right man in the right place, and afford to each an opportunity for distinction. If otherwise, each staff officer becomes dependent upon the particular commander with whom he is serving. No means of comparison exist between the relative merits of the officers. Each looks for promotion to the favor of his general, and rises in grade not by his own relative merit, but by the patronage of his commander. A gallant and able commander, whose own promotion is exceptionally rapid by reason of his special merits, is thus enabled to lift to higher grades the officers of his staff to whom he has become attached by companionship in the field, although these officers may be far inferior in merit and length of service to others whose duties have connected them with generals less distinguished. Promotion thus becomes with the staff a matter of hazard, dependent not on the merit of the officer himself, but of the general with whom he serves, and heartburnings, jealousy, and discontent are the natural results of so false a system.
Again, if the general staff is not formed into corps there will not be the "esprit" necessary in all military organizations, and there can not be the co-intelligence among the officers thereof which secures the certain and rapid communication of all information through the different parts of an army. There will also be embarrassment in their tenure of office and assignment to duty. As when a general officer dies, or is relieved from his command, there remain no duties to be performed by the staff which had been authorized for him especially. However valuable or meritorious the officers may be, they are displaced by the staff chosen by the successor of their commander. Nothing remains but to deprive them of their commissions without fault of their own, or to keep them in service as supernumeraries, and thus to add to the number of officers already in excess of the wants of the Army.
Again, an organization of a general staff should possess flexibility, so that the proper number and class of staff officers can be sent where needed. If an inflexible rule of assignment be fixed by legislation, some commands will be cumbered with unnecessary officers, while others will be deficient in the number indispensable to perform the necessary duties. Legislation would surely be considered unwise if it allotted by inflexible rule the number of troops to be used in each military department, yet it would be scarcely more objectionable titan the assignment of the same specified number of staff officers to each commander according to his grade, thus applying a general rule to a series of cases each requiring special treatment.
The inspecting duties in an army ought not, in my judgment, to be separated from those of the adjutants. The erroneous impression prevails that an inspecting department, independent of the general staff, is established in most of the armies of Europe. The reverse is the fact, and the duties of inspection are so intimately connected with the other duties of the general staff that they can be properly performed by it alone. The objections to the separation are manifold. In the first place, officers having no other than inspecting duties must frequently be unemployed, even in war, while in peace their duties will occupy
Page 115 | Page image
but very little time. Next, it is to be observed that where the adjutants and inspectors form one corps the duties of the adjutant make him familiar with the details of the service where reform and discipline are most needed, and thus render him more competent to effective inspection when assigned to that duty than he could be if exclusively employed as inspector. Lastly, the duties of an inspector are such as not to render the officer who performs them acceptable to his brother officers, if his duty be properly performed. It is not to be wondered at that an officer, whose duties may not be inappropriately described as those of a detective, should, if his duty be rigidly performed, incur somewhat of the odium of an informer, and when these duties constitute the sole service of an officer permanently attached to an army he must become either so lax in their performance as to render him useless, or his professional pride and self-respect are wounded and his relations with his brother officers unfavorably affected by the distrust and dislike resulting from his official reports. When, however, an assistant adjutant and inspector general is from time to time assigned to the making of necessary inspections at various points, this temporary discharge of an unpleasant duty becomes but an incident in his professional career, and does not affect his relations with his brother officers.
Having stated these as the general principles which, in my judgment, should govern legislation on the subject, the objections to the bill passed at the last session can be more easily understood, and I proceed to state them briefly:
This power of assignment is given without reference to, or consultation with, the War Department or the Executive, and might be exercised in contravention of the views and judgment of both. Leaving out of view the question whether it is in accordance with the Constitution to make the commander of an army independent of the Commander in Chief in the discharge of any of the duties of his office, and looking only to the effect of such a system, it plainly creates in this branch of the service as many independent executives as there are generals commanding armies in the field, and thus destroys that unity of design and concert of action which are indispensable elements of success in war. The generals commanding armies would be by this section vested with the right to derange the organization of their commands as settled by the Commander in Chief by removing from their appropriate functions the commanders of corps, divisions, and brigades whom the Executive had selected and the Senate had approved as specially fitted to lead the troops in battle.
That the general commanding the army has, under the terms of this section, the right of assigning general officers under his command to the duties of the general staff, without reference to the authority of the Executive, is plain from the other sections, which declare that the President is to appoint, with the advice of the Senate, the staffs of all general officers other than those who command armies.
Nor does this section restrict the commanding general in relation to the branch of service or the grade of the officers whom he is permitted to assign to commissary and ordnance duties of the general staff. It is only necessary that they be below the rank of brigadier-general. The commanding general would have the power, therefore, to assign a captain commissary to be chief of ordnance, or a lieutenant of infantry to be chief commissary, without check or control from the President or Senate, while the President would be without power to appoint subordinates to the officers thus selected by the general of an army without submitting their nominations for the approval of the Senate. Not only, therefore, is all order of authority interverted by these provisions, but the officers assigned to duty by the commanding generals, not being permanent members of the general staff, would be independent of its chief, and inextricable confusion would necessarily result.
This section, so far from responding to the title of the bill by providing a general staff, in reality breaks up that which now exists, subdivides it into a number of small bodies irresponsible to the head of the department, and destroys the possibility of any regular, consistent, and intelligent cooperation in the action of our forces, so essential to success. Its effect is to create a staff for generals, not a general staff.
Page 116 | Page image
If a contest should arise between the quartermaster-generals, the commissaries-general, or the chiefs of ordnance of Generals A and B, in any district of country, for supplies or means of transportation, who is to determine between these rivals, each equal in authority and each dependent on a separate chief? How are the chiefs of those bureaus in Richmond to apportion the supplies in store according to the wants of the different armies, without authority to exact from them reports and returns? If it be said that these officers would become temporarily responsible to the heads of departments, how is this responsibility to be enforced if the orders of the general and those of the chief of the department should conflict? If ordnance depots are provided at different points for different commands, how is the officer in charge of these depots to act if ordered by the chief of ordnance of a general in the field to make a different disposal of the stores from that ordered by the head of the department in Richmond?
If such a bill should become a law, in vain would the War Department seek to exact rigid obedience to law or orders from the irresponsible staff created under its provisions. In vain would it seek for the information necessary for its guidance, or attempt to change the relative strength of armies to meet the varying movements of the enemy. The staff officers could be made the ready and safe means of thwarting the Government in its orders for the removal of troops from one command to reenforce threatened positions in another, and could be easily rendered subservient to the natural but dangerous propensity of most commanders to retain all the troops under their own control for the safety of their own commands, without reference to more urgent needs at other points.
It is scarcely necessary to add to these considerations more than a bare allusion to the tendency of such bodies of officers, when dependent for their own promotion on the favor of their special chiefs, to resort to agencies less commendable than the zealous discharge of their legitimate duties for the attainment of their desires.
Numbers of zealous, meritorious, and valuable officers have made the duties of the general staff objects of special study; have embraced the staff as a branch of the profession in which, under existing laws, they are entitled to promotion for merit and long service, just as the line officers have a right to promotion in their branch.
This bill deprives the staff officers of this the great incentive to the zealous discharge of duty. It debars them from promotion to the higher grades of their own branch of service, and bestows these prizes of honorable ambition on officers of the line, who will thus monopolize the promotions to the higher grades, both in the line and staff, to the entire exclusion of the officers of the latter. Few will be willing to remain in the staff under such circumstances. Those who consent to continue will be those least ambitious of promotion, and the whole staff service will be impaired in tone and efficiency.
Page 117 | Page image
having no reference to the necessities of a command. The staff allowed is excessive in number and rank in many instances and entirely inadequate in others. A law providing a general staff on such a basis as is assumed in this bill can not, from its very nature, be executed according to its terms. The labor required of the staff connected with a brigade, division, or corps depends on the fact of its being part of an army or a separate command, as well as on the number of men, the extent of the country over which operations are to be conducted, the abundance or scarcity of supplies in the district, the existence or absence of railroad, river, or other transportation, the concentration or dispersion of the troops, and the many other circumstances which control military movements in time of war. It is impossible to apply a rigid, unbending rule to such diverse cases.
An organization into corps meets all these difficulties by providing for assignment of the proper number of officers to different commands according to the needs of each.
According to the bill as passed, the staff would embrace an addition of about four hundred officers, involving an increased annual expenditure for pay, rations, forage, and allowance, amounting to $1,138,728 above the present staff as organized by general orders under existing legislation.
If generals are to be allowed to change the staff of each army to which they may be assigned at their pleasure, it is difficult to calculate the extent to which this abuse would grow, the number of men that would be withdrawn from useful service to cumber the staff, or the increase of expenditure involved.
Congress will perceive that with objections so radical it was impossible for me to approve the bill passed at the last session, and that the subject was too important to be treated in a hurried message within the last few hours of the close of a Congress. Concurring in the expediency of legislation for the organization of a general staff, I have thought a full exposition of my views on the subject would, perhaps, conduce to the framing of a measure which would carry into effect the views of the legislative department while excluding the provisions which have compelled me to decline approving that devised by your predecessors.
JEFFERSON DAVIS.
Richmond, May 28, 1864.
On motion of Mr. Garland, the communication was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and ordered to be printed.
The Chair laid before the House the memorial of the James River Canal Packet Company, asking increased compensation for carrying the mail; which was referred to the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads.
Also, a Senate bill (S. 50) "to regulate the selection of juries in the district courts of the Confederate States in certain cases;" which was read a first and second time and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Also, a Senate bill (S. 48) "to amend the act to provide an invalid corps, approved seventeenth February, eighteen hundred and sixty-four;" which was read a first and second time and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.
Also, a bill (H. R. 52) "to amend an act of this Congress entitled
Page 118 | Page image
'An act to provide for holding elections of Representatives in the Congress of the Confederate States in the State of Tennessee,'" which had been return from the Senate with the following amendments:
Mr. Heiskell moved to suspend the rules requiring the amendments to be referred to a committee.
The motion prevailed, and the amendments of the Senate were concurred in.
Mr. Dupré, under a suspension of the rules, presented a communication from the Superintendent of Public Printing; which was laid upon the table.
Mr. Dupré, from the Committee on Printing, to whom had been referred a Senate bill (S. 22) "to secure the prompt printing of the laws of the Confederate States," under a suspension of the rules, reported back the same with the recommendation that it do pass with the following amendments:
Add the following as independent sections:
Insert after the word "printing," in the second line of the bill, the words "publishing, and binding."
The question being on postponing the bill and placing it on the Calendar,
It was decided in the negative.
The amendments of the Senate were agreed to.
The bill was read a third time and passed, and the title was read and agreed to.
Mr. Chilton, under a suspension of the rules, submitted the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Committee on Accounts audit and certify the amount of necessary expense incurred by Captain Ben. Lane Posey in attending as a witness before the committee charged with the investigation of the charges against W. R. W. Cobb, and said account, when so audited and certified, shall be paid out of the contingent fund of this House;
which was adopted.
Mr. Sexton moved to suspend the rules, to take up for consideration the bill "to establish certain post routes thereto named."
The motion prevailed.
Page 119 | Page image
Mr. Sexton submitted the following amendments; which were agreed to:
Mr. Fuller submitted the following amendment:
Amend route No. 2173 so as to read:
"From Fayetteville, by Lumber Bridge, Dundarrach, Mealton [Maxton?], Gilopolis, Laurinburg, Springfield, and Gibson's Store, [North Carolina,] and Brightsville, South Carolina, to Cheraw, South Carolina."
The amendment was agreed to.
The bill was engrossed, read a third time, and passed, and the title was read and agreed to.
The House then proceeded to the consideration of unfinished business, viz:
The resolution of Mr. Foote in regard to a change in the head of the Treasury Department.
Mr. Foote, by unanimous consent, having modified his resolution by striking out the preamble,
Mr. Lyon moved to refer the resolution to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. Foote demanded the yeas and nays thereon;
Which were ordered,
Yeas: Akin, Anderson, Ayer, Barksdale, Blandford, Boyce, Bradley, Branch, Bridgers, Eli M. Bruce, Horatio W. Bruce, Chrisman, Clopton, De Jarnette, Dickinson, Echols, Elliott, Farrow, Funsten, Gaither, Gholson, Hodge, Holliday, Johnston, Keeble, Kenner, Lester, Lyon, McCallum, McMullin, Montague, Morgan, Pugh, Rives, Russell, Shewmake, Singleton, J. M. Smith, Smith of Alabama, Swan, Whitfield, Witherspoon, and Wright.
Nays: Atkins, Baldwin, Bell, Chambers, Chilton, Conrad, Cruikshank, Dupré, Foote, Foster, Fuller, A. H. Garland, R. K. Garland, Gilmer, Goode, Hartridge, Heiskell, Hilton, Lamkin, J. M. Leach, J. T. Leach, Logan, Machen, Marshall, Menees, Miller, Murray, Orr, Perkins, Ramsay, Rogers, Sexton, W. E. Smith, Staples, Triplett, Turner, and Villeré.
So the motion to refer prevailed.
Mr. Sexton introduced
A joint resolution "of thanks to the Ninth Regiment of Texas Infantry;"
which was read a first and second time, engrossed, read a third time, and passed.
Mr. Russell submitted the following resolution:
Resolved, That the joint resolution fixing the time for the adjournment of the Senate and House of Representatives on the thirty-first day of May, eighteen hundred and sixty-four, be, and is hereby, rescinded.
Page 120 | Page image
Mr. A. H. Garland submitted the following amendment:
Add at the end of the resolution the following: "and the Senate concurring, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives adjourn their respective bodies, sine die, at twelve o'clock meridian on Saturday, the fourth day of June, eighteen hundred and sixty-four."
Mr. Hartridge submitted the following amendment to the amendment:
Strike out the whole thereof and insert the following, viz: "and that the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives adjourn their respective Houses at twelve meridian on Tuesday, June seventh."
Mr. Marshall moved to postpone the consideration of the resolution and amendments for the present, to enable him to call up his motion to reconsider the vote by which the Senate bill "to regulate the compensation of members of Congress for the present session" was lost.
The motion to postpone prevailed.
The motion to reconsider also prevailed.
Mr. Chambers moved that his motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill was ordered to a third reading be taken up for consideration.
The motion prevailed.
Mr. Goode called the question; which was ordered, and the motion to reconsider prevailed.
Mr. E. M. Bruce moved that the bill be referred to a special committee of one from each State.
Mr. Dupré called the question; which was ordered, and the motion was lost.
Mr. Marshall moved to amend the bill by striking out the words "for the present session;" which amendment was agreed to.
Mr. Russell moved to amend the bill by adding at the end thereof the words "for twelve months after the passage of this act."
Mr. Marshall moved the previous question; which was ordered.
The amendment of Mr. Russell was lost.
The bill was read a third time, and the question recurring and being put,
Shall the bill pass?
Mr. Foster demanded the yeas and nays;
Which were ordered,
Yeas: Baylor, Branch, Eli M. Bruce, Horatio W. Bruce, Chrisman, Dupré, Elliott, Ewing, Foote, Funsten, Gaither, A. H. Garland, Goode, Hanly, Hartridge, Heiskell, Hilton, Hodge, Keeble, Kenner, Lamkin, Lester, Logan, Machen, Marshall, McCallum, Miles, Miller, Morgan, Ramsay, Read, Rogers, Smith of Alabama, Swan, Triplett, Villeré, and Whitfield.
Nays: Akin, Anderson, Atkins, Ayer, Baldwin, Barksdale, Bell, Boyce, Bradley, Bridgers, Chambers, Chilton, Clopton, Colyar, Conrad, Cruikshank, De Jarnette, Dickinson, Echols, Farrow, Foster, Fuller, R. K. Garland, Gholson, Gilmer, Holder, Holliday, Johnston, J. M. Leach, J. T. Leach, Lyon, McMullin, Menees, Montague, Murray, Perkins, Pugh, Rives, Russell, Sexton, Shewmake, Simpson,
Page 121 | Page image
W. E. Smith, Smith of North Carolina, Staples, Witherspoon, and Wright.
So the bill was lost.
Mr. Read moved that the rules be suspended to enable him to introduce a bill.
The motion was lost.
Mr. Foster moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill "to regulate the compensation and mileage of members of Congress for the present session" was lost.
Mr. Marshall moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
Mr. Hanly demanded the yeas and nays thereon; which were not ordered.
The motion to lay on the table was lost, and the motion to reconsider prevailed.
On motion of Mr. Foote, the bill was referred to a select committee of one from each State, to be appointed by the Chair.
Mr. S. B. Callahan, Delegate from the Creek Nation, appeared, was sworn to support the Constitution of the Confederate States, and took his seat in the House.
The House then returned to the consideration of the resolution of Mr. Russell to rescind the resolution of adjournment.
Mr. Heiskell called the question; which was ordered.
The question being on the amendment of Mr. Hartridge to the amendment of Mr. [A. H.] Garland,
Mr. Hodge demanded the yeas and nays;
Which were ordered,
Yeas: Anderson, Ayer, Baldwin, Bradley, Eli M. Bruce, Horatio W. Bruce, Clopton, Colyar, Conrad, De Jarnette, Elliott, Farrow, Foote, Funsten, Gholson, Gilmer, Goode, Hanly, Hartridge, Heiskell, Hilton, Hodge, Holder, Holliday, Johnston, Kenner, J. M. Leach, Machen, Marshall, McCallum, McMullin, Menees, Miles, Montague, Murray, Perkins, Rives, Rogers, Russell, Shewmake, Simpson, Staples, Villeré, Whitfield, Wickham, and Witherspoon.
Nays: Akin, Atkins, Bell, Blandford, Boyce, Branch, Bridgers, Chambers, Chilton, Chrisman, Cruikshank, Dickinson, Dupré, Echols, Ewing, Foster, Fuller, Gaither, A. H. Garland, R. K. Garland, Keeble, Lamkin, J. T. Leach, Lester, Logan, Lyon, Morgan, Pugh, Ramsay, Sexton, Singleton, J. M. Smith, W. E. Smith, Smith of North Carolina, Swan, Triplett, Turner, and Wright.
So the amendment was agreed to.
The question recurring on the amendment of Mr. Garland, as amended,
Mr. Heiskell called the question; which was ordered.
Upon which Mr. H. W. Bruce demanded the yeas and nays;
Which were ordered,
Yeas: Akin, Anderson, Atkins, Baylor, Bell, Blandford, Boyce, Bradley, Branch, Bridgers, Chambers, Chilton, Chrisman, Colyar, Conrad, De Jarnette, Dupré, Echols, Ewing, Farrow, Funsten, Gaither, A. H. Garland, R. K. Garland, Gilmer, Hartridge, Heiskell,
Page 122 | Page image
Hodge, Holder, J. M. Leach, Lester, Logan, Lyon, Machen McCallum, McMullin, Menees, Miles, Miller, Murray, Pugh, Rives, Sexton, Shewmake, Simpson, Singleton, J. M. Smith, W. E. Smith, Turner, Villeré, Whitfield, and Witherspoon.
Nays: Ayer, Baldwin, Eli M. Bruce, Horatio W. Bruce, Clopton, Cruikshank, Dickinson, Elliott, Foote, Foster, Fuller, Gholson, Goode, Hanly, Hilton, Holliday, Johnston, Keeble, Kenner, Lamkin, J. T. Leach, Marshall, Montague, Morgan, Perkins, Ramsay, Read, Rogers, Russell, Smith of North Carolina, Staples, Swan, Triplett, and Wright.
So the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. Atkins moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and called the question; which was ordered, and the motion was lost.
The question recurring on the resolution of Mr. Russell, as amended,
Mr. Marshall demanded the yeas and nays;
Which were ordered,
Yeas: Akin, Anderson, Atkins, Ayer, Baldwin, Baylor, Bradley, Branch, Bridgers, Chambers, Chilton, Chrisman, Clopton, Conrad, De Jarnette, Dickinson, Dupré, Echols, Ewing, Farrow, Foote, Funsten, Gholson, Gilmer, Goode, Hartridge, Heiskell, Hilton, Hodge, Holder, Johnston, Kenner, J. M. Leach, J. T. Leach, Lester, Logan, Lyon, Machen, McCallum, McMullin, Menees, Miller, Murray, Orr, Perkins, Pugh, Rives, Russell, Sexton, Shewmake, Simpson, Singleton, Staples, Villeré, and Witherspoon.
Nays: Bell, Blandford, Eli M. Bruce, Horatio W. Bruce, Cruikshank, Elliott, Foster, Fuller, Gaither, A. H. Garland, R. K. Garland, Hanly, Holliday, Keeble, Lamkin, Marshall, Miles, Montague, Morgan, Ramsay, Read, Rogers, J. M. Smith, W. E. Smith, Smith of North Carolina, Swan, Triplett, Turner, and Wright.
So the resolution was adopted.
A message was received from the Senate, by Mr. Nash, the Secretary of that body; which is as follows, viz:
Mr. Speaker: The Senate have passed a bill (S. 53) to amend the several acts in relation to a volunteer navy, and a bill (S. 38) for the payment of commissioners appointed under the act entitled "An act to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in certain cases," and to confer certain powers upon said commissioners; in which I am directed to ask the concurrence of this House.
Mr. Cruikshank, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported as correctly enrolled
And the Speaker signed the same.
Page 123 | Page image
The Chair laid before the House a Senate bill (S. 53) "to amend the several acts in relation to a volunteer navy;" which was read a first and second time and referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs.
Also, a bill of the Senate (S. 38) "for the payment of commissioners appointed under the act entitled 'An act to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in certain cases,' and to confer certain powers upon said commissioners;" which was read a first and second time and referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. Lyon moved that the House resolve itself into secret session.
The motion was lost.
The House then resolved itself into Committee of the Whole to consider the special order, viz:
The bill to amend the tax laws,
Mr. Sexton in the chair.
Pending which,
The hour of 3 having arrived,
The Speaker took the chair and announced that the House would take a recess until 8 o'clock.
Having reassembled at that hour,
The House again resolved itself into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Sexton in the chair; and having spent some time therein, the committee rose and reported, through their Chairman, that the committee had had the subject referred to them under consideration, and had come to no conclusion thereon.
The Speaker announced the appointment of the special committee on the Senate bill "to regulate the compensation and mileage of members of Congress for the present session" as follows:
A message was received from the Senate, by Mr. Nash, their Secretary; which is as follows, viz:
Mr. Speaker: The Senate concur in the resolution of the House of Representatives rescinding the resolution passed by the two Houses fixing a day for the adjournment of the present session of Congress, and fixing Tuesday, the 7th day of June next, therefor.
The House then, on motion of Mr. Miles, resolved itself into secret session; and having spent some time therein, resumed business in open session.
On motion of Mr. Machen,
The House adjourned until 11 o'clock to-morrow.
Page 124 | Page image
SECRET SESSION.
The House being in secret session,
A message was received from the Senate, by Mr. Nash, their Secretary; which is as follows, viz:
Mr. Speaker: The Senate have passed a bill of the following title, viz:
In which I am directed to ask the concurrence of this House.
The Chair laid before the House a Senate bill (S. 57) "to provide for the appointment of officers with temporary rank and command;" which was read a first and second time.
Mr. Miles moved to suspend the rule requiring the bill to be referred to a committee.
The motion prevailed.
Mr. Foote submitted the following amendment:
In the second section, strike out the words "such time as the exigency may require" and insert in lieu thereof the words "thirty days."
Mr. Hartridge demanded the previous question.
Mr. Hodge demanded the yeas and nays thereon; which were not ordered, and the demand for the previous question was sustained.
The question being on the amendment of Mr. Foote,
Mr. Foote demanded the yeas and nays; which were not ordered, and the amendment was lost.
The question recurring on ordering the bill to a third reading,
It was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. Chilton moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was ordered to a third reading.
Mr. Hilton called the question; which was ordered.
Mr. Foote demanded the yeas and nays thereon;
Which were ordered,
Yeas: Baldwin, Baylor, Branch, Chilton, Cruikshank, Foote, Fuller, A. H. Garland, Gilmer, Holliday, Lamkin, J. M. Leach, J. T. Leach, Logan, McCallum, Orr, Ramsay, W. E. Smith, Smith of North Carolina, Triplett, and Villeré.
Nays: Akin, Anderson, Barksdale, Bell, Blandford, Bradley, Bridgers, Eli M. Bruce, Chambers, Colyar, Conrad, Dickinson, Echols, Ewing, Foster, Gaither, R. K. Garland, Gholson, Goode, Hartridge, Hilton, Hodge, Johnston, Keeble, Lester, Lyon, Machen, McMullin, Miles, Montague, Morgan, Perkins, Pugh, Sexton, Shewmake, Simpson, Singleton, J, M. Smith, Smith of Alabama, Whitfield, and Wright.
So the motion to reconsider was lost.
Mr. Goode called the question; which was ordered.
The question being put,
Shall the bill pass?
It was decided in the affirmative, and the title was read and agreed to.
On motion of Mr. A. H. Garland,
The House resolved itself into open session.
PREVIOUS SECTION .. NEXT SECTION .. NAVIGATOR
| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |