The New Orleans Daily Democrat

CONGRESSIONAL.

THE HOUSE ENGAGED UPON THE BILL

TO REGULATE INTER-STATE

COMMERCE.

No Session of the Senate.

WASHINGTON, May 11.—The Senate was not in session to-day.

The House,

Mr. Hamilton, of Indiana, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, reported amendments to the bill in relation to the Venezuela award, and they were ordered printed and recommitted.

On motion of Mr. Fenna, of Idaho, the House concurred in the Senate's amendments to the bill authorizing the issue of arms to the Territories.

Mr. Wigginton, of California, from the Committee on Public Lands, reported a bill to amend the act in relation to the sale of timber lands in the States of California, Oregon, Colorado, and Washington Territory. Passed.

Mr. Wright, of Pennsylvania, from the same committee, reported a bill supplemental of the homestead laws and asked its reference to the committee of the whole. The bill provides for donation of lands to actual settlers and giving government aid to destitute settlers.

Mr. Wright, of Pennsylvania, from the Public Lands Committee, reported a bill supplemental and amendatory of the homestead laws, and asked its reference to the committee of the whole. It provides for donations of lands to actual settlers, and gives government aid to destitute settlers. It was referred to the committee of the whole.

Mr. Welch, of Nebraska, from the same committee, reported a bill for the relief of settlers on public lands, under the pre-emption law. Passed.

Mr. Manning, of Mississippi, asked leave to offer a resolution calling upon the Secretary of the Treasury to report what fraudulent claims have been paid by the Treasury Department under the appropriation made by section 3689 of the Revised Statutes, as stated fraudulent claims. If any, have been paid since in the Secretary's last annual report, and what June, 1874, down to the date of said report, together with the amount of such claims; what action has been taken on them, and also to furnish the evidence upon which the allegation of fraud was predicated.

Mr. Foster, of Ohio, objected. The information was already in possession of the House.

Mr. Reagan, of Texas, demanded the regular order, and the Speaker announced the consideration of the bill to regulate inter-State commerce.

Mr. Hewitt, of Alabama, arose to a privileged motion and moved that the House go into committee of the whole and take up the Mexican pension bill.

Mr. Reagan said the order for to-day was made by unanimous consent, and Mr. Hewitt's motion was not in order.

The Speaker ruled that the question of consideration could certainly be raised.

Mr. Reagan said unanimous consent had been secured for this bill to-day, and if the House could now, by a majority, set it aside then the unanimous consent of the House was a cheat and a fraud.

Mr. Hewitt said he gave his consent the other day knowing the rules gave him the privilege of making this motion. The gentleman from Texas should have understood the rule and then he would not have been cheated.

Mr. Reagan said it was probable that the gentleman from Alabama knew more about the rules of the House than he did, but he, Reagan, understood the rules of common honesty and the sacredness of an agreement. If this agreement can be set aside no one will hereafter trust to the treachery of the unanimous consent of the House.

Mr. Hewitt said as the gentleman showed so much feeling, and as he seemed to imagine that some one was cheating him, he would withdraw the motion.

The House then resumed consideration of the inter-State commerce bill.

Mr. Bragg, of Wisconsin, opposed the bill because all the great railway companies of the country were in favor of it, and it was adverse to the interests of the agricultural sections of the country. States through which the great trunk lines run were in favor of it, and the Pennsylvania Legislature had already instructed its members here to vote for the bill as a beneficial measure.

Mr. Reagan said that did not prove that the railroads were in favor of it.

Mr. Bragg replied that the terms of Thos. Scott and others in Pennsylvania were synonymous with the Pennsylvania Legislature.

The bill would give the trunk lines of the country too much power. He was opposed to it also because it showed a tendency to centralize power in the general government. The bill originated with Pennsylvania, which demanded protection for every other interest, and now in this bill they want to protect Tom Scott. He opposed the bill also because it was unconstitutional. It was calculated to encourage litigation, and it was a fraud and cheat.

Mr. Potter, of New York, opposed the bill on constitutional grounds and because it conferred too much power upon railroad corporations.

Messrs. Phillips, of Kansas, and Cannon, of Illinois, opposed it because it was adverse to the agricultural interests, and Mr. Dean, of Massachusetts, because it was detrimental to local short lines of roads.

The bill was then considered by sections for amendments.

An amendment was adopted to prohibit railroad companies from combining and raising prices and pooling earnings when parallel lines of water communications are closed by ice.

The hour of 4:30 having arrived without completing the consideration of the bill by sections, several gentlemen said that under the terms of the order the previous question must be called now.

Mr. Reagan said that was not the understanding. It was that the previous question should not be called earlier than half-past 4 o'clock.

Mr. Atkins: Then the House was deceived.

Mr. Kenna, of West Virginia, inquired what the effect would be if the House now adjourned.

It was ruled that as the bill was a special order for this day only, it would not come up Monday as unfinished business.

Mr. Reagan then demanded the previous question, and a good deal of confusion ensued, as a dozen members were on the floor, trying to offer amendments. A motion to adjourn was made, but defeated.

Mr. Reagan then said that if the previous question was seconded he would ask for the previous question, and then, when the bill came up again, he would move to reconsider, and that would open the bill up again for amendments.

The motion for the previous question was agreed to, and the House, at 5:12 p. m., adjourned.