WEDNESDAY, June 10, 1874. On motion by Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, the Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution reported by him from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, on the 29th instant, directing the Secretary of the Senate to pay certain compensation to Francis W. Sykes as a claimant to a seat in the Senate as a Senator from the State of Alabama. An amendment having been proposed by Mr. Carpenter, and an amendment to the amendment having been proposed by Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, After debate, Ordered, That the further consideration of the said resolution be postponed to to morrow. [The debate is found on pages 4798-4800 of the Congressional Record, vol. ii, part 5.] THURSDAY, June 11, 1874. On motion by Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, the Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution reported by him from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, on the 29th May last, viz: "Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay to Francis W. Sykes, late contestant from the State of Alabama, out of the appropriations for compensation and mileage for Senators, the sum of $8,374.80, being the salary of a Senator from the 4th day of March, 1873, to the 28th day of May, 1874, inclusive." On motion by Mr. Carpenter to amend the resolution in lines 4 and 5 by striking out $8,374.80, being the salary of a Senator from the 4th day of March, 1873, to the 28th day of May, 1874, inclusive," and in lieu thereof inserting "$3,000;" On motion by Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, to amend the amendment by striking out "$3,000" and in lieu thereof inserting "$6,500," After debate, it was determined in the negative-yeas 25, nays 32. On motion by Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, the yeas and nays being desired by onefifth of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are Messrs. Alcorn, Authony Bayard, Bogy, Conover, Cooper, Davis, Goldthwaite, Gordon, Hager, Hamilton of Maryland, Johnston, Kelly, Logan, McCreery, Merrimon, Morton, Norwood, Patterson, Ramsey, Ransom, Saulsbury, Stockton, Thurman, and Tipton. Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Allison, Boreman, Boutwell, Bucking ham, Cameron, Carpenter, Chandler, Conkling, Cragin, Edmunds, Ferry of Michigan, Frelinghuysen, Gilbert, Hamilton of Texas, Hamlin, Harvey, Howe, Ingalls, Mitchell, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Oglesby, Pease, Pratt, Sargent, Sherman, Sprague, Stewart, Wadleigh, Washburn, Windom, and Wright. So the amendment to the amendment was not agreed to. Ordered, That the further consideration of the said resolution be postponed to to morrow. [The debate is found on pages 4850-4852 of the Congressional Record, vol. ii, part 5.] [Second session of the Forty-third Congress. | On motion by Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, WEDNESDAY, December 23, 1874. Ordered, That the resolution directing the Secretary to pay Francis W. Sykes the salary of a Senator while contesting a seat in the Senate be recommitted to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. WEDNESDAY, March 3, 1875. Mr. Hamilton, of Maryland, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, reported the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be, and he is hereby, directed and author ized to pay to Francis W. Sykes, late contestant from the State of Alabama, the pay and mileage of a Senator from the 4th day of March, 1873, to the 28th day of May, 1874." [First session of the Forty-fourth Congress.] THURSDAY, February 3, 1876. Mr. Saulsbury submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections: "Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay to Francis W. Sykes, late contestant from the State of Alabama, the pay and mileage of a Senator from the 4th day of March, 1873, to the 28th day of May, 1874." WEDNESDAY, March 8, 1876. Mr. Cooper, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, to whom was referred the resolution of Mr. Saulsbury, submitted on the 3d of February last, to pay Francis W. Sykes the compensation and mileage of a Senator from the 4th day of March, 1873, to the 28th day of May, 1874, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report (No. 135) thereon. REPORT OF COMMITTEE. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. MARCH 8, 1876.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. Cooper, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, submitted the following report: The Committee on Privileges and Elections, to whom was referred Senate resolution No. 10, to pay Francis W. Sykes the compensation and mileage of a Senator from the 4th day of March, 1873, to the 28th day of May, 1874, have had the same under consideration, and submit the following report: The rule established by the Senate in cases similar to the present one has been uniform. A person applying for a seat in this body by reason of an election by the legislature of a State, although his application has been refused, and another adjudged entitled to the seat, has been paid the amount he would have been entitled to receive if he had been admitted and served the time the contest was pending. The action of the Senate upon such cases has been with such great unanimity as to call for little or no debate. The reasons, therefore, upon which the rule is based can only be surmised. It may be said the person claims his seat in pursuance of an implied duty imposed upon him to thus assert the right of his State to be represented in this body, which duty he owes to the public, and that expenses incurred in the performance of a public duty should be paid out of the common treasury. A proper respect for the action of a State in the choice of a Senator may also justify the rule. The committee see nothing in the present case to take it out of the general rule; they therefore recommend the passage of the resolution. SECOND INVESTIGATION OF MR. SPENCER'S ELECTION. THURSDAY, December 16, 1875. Mr. Spencer rose to a question of privilege, and, having addressed the Senate upon the subject of certain charges made in connection with his election as a Senator, submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: "Resolved, That the Committee on Privileges and Elections are hereby instructed to investigate into and inquire whether in the election of George E. Spencer as a Senator in Congress from the State of Alabama there were used, or caused to be used and employed, corrupt means or corrupt practices to secure his election to the seat he now holds; and that said committee be empowered to administer oaths, to send for persons and papers, to take testimony, to employ stenographers and such clerical assistance as they may deem necessary, and to sit during the recess of Congress, if considered advisable, and to report the result of their investigations as soon as practicable." [The debate is found on pages 232, 233 of the Congressional Record, vol. iv, part 1.] TUESDAY, January 18, 1876. Mr. Goldthwaite presented a report of the joint committee of the general assembly of Alabama, accompanied by a memorial and testimony, in regard to the alleged election of George E. Spencer as a Senator from that State; which was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. MONDAY, January 24, 1876. Mr. Goldthwaite presented a memorial of the general assembly of the State of Alabama, praying that the seat in the United States Senate now held by George E. Spencer may be declared vacant; which was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. FRIDAY, March 3, 1876. Mr. Morton submitted the following resolution; which was read the first and second times by unanimous consent: Resolved, That the sum of $15,000 be appropriated from the contingent fund of the Senate to defray the expenses of the investigation into the facts attending the election of the Hon. George E. Spencer as a member of this body by the legislature of Alabama; to be disbursed on the warrant of the chairman of the Committee on Privileges and Elections." The Senate proceeded to consider the said resolution as in Committee of the Whole; and no amendment being made, it was reported to the Senate. Ordered, That it be engrossed and read a third time. The said resolution was read the third time by unanimous consent. WEDNESDAY, May 3, 1876. Mr. Morton submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: "Resolved, That 300 copies of the testimony taken in the investigation of the charges against George E. Spencer be printed for the use of the Senate." SATURDAY, May 20, 1876. Mr. Morton, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, who were instructed by a resolution of the Senate of the 16th December last to investigate into and inquire whether in the election of George E. Spencer as a Senator in Congress from the State of Alabama there were used and employed corrupt means or corrupt practices to secure his seat he now holds; and to which committee was referred the memorial of the legislature of Alabama charging that George E. Spencer had not been legally elected a Senator from that State, accompanied by a copy of certain testimony purporting to have been taken by a committee of said legislature, and a certain report of said committee thereon, submitted a report (No. 331) thereon, accompanied by the testimony taken by said Committee on Privileges and Elections, and a request that the said committee be discharged from the further consideration of the subject. Mr. Saulsbury asked and obtained leave of the Senate to submit, on some subsequent day, the views of the minority of the Committee on Privileges and Elections on the foregoing subject. REPORT OF COMMITTEE.† [The committee consisted of Messrs. Morton (chairman), Logan, Mitchell, Wadleigh, Cameron of Wisconsin, McMillan, Saulsbury, Merrimon, and Cooper.] IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. MAY 20, 1876.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. Morton, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, submitted the following report: The Committee on Privileges and Elections beg leave to submit the following report: On the 16th day of December, 1875, the Senate adopted the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Committee on Privileges and Elections be hereby instructed to investigate into and inquire whether in the election of George E. Spencer as a Senator in Congress from the State of Alabama there were used and employed corrupt means or corrupt practices to secure his election to the seat he now holds; and that the said committee be empowered to administer oaths, to send for persons and papers, to take testimony, to employ stenographers and such clerical assistance as they may deem necessary, and to sit during the recess of Congress if considered advisable, and to report the result of their investigations as soon as possible." Afterward a memorial from the legislature of Alabama, charging that Mr. Spencer had not been duly and legally elected, which was accompanied by a copy of the testimony purporting to have been taken by a committee of that legislature, and a report.of the committee upon the testimony, was also referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. This testimony was ex parte in its character, very much of it hearsay, and could not be received by the committee as evidence. The question whether Mr. Spencer was elected by the lawful legislature of Alabama, raised in the memorial referred to, and in the specifications filed before the committee by the counsel, Mr. Morgan, who represented the State of Alabama, was considered by a majority of the committee to have been fully settled in the contest for the seat occăpied by Mr. Spencer, before made, in the Senate by Mr. Sykes. The question in that contest was whether what was known as the court-house legis*The views of the minority referred to were never presented Taken from Serate Reports, 44th Cong., 1st sess., No. 331. The testimony accompanying the report is here omitted. lature. by which Mr. Spencer was elected, or the capitol legislature, by which Mr. Sykes was elected, was the lawful legislature of Alabama. After full consideration and argument of counsel, it was determined by the committee and afterward by the Senate that the court-house legislature was the lawful one, and that Mr. Spencer and not Mr. Sykes was entitled to the seat. The question having been definitely settled, it was considered by the committee that it was not competent for the committee or the Senate to reopen it, and that it must be treated as res adjudicata. Upon the other branch of the inquiry, as to whether Mr. Spencer, or his friends, had been guilty of bribery, corruption, or other unlawful practices in procuring his election, the committee made faithful and diligent inquiry. Mr. Morgan, counsel for the accusers, subpoenaed and examined many witnesses, and, after the testimony was over, supported the charge against Mr. Spencer by a lengthy argument. Those charges were not proven in any respect. No witness testified that Mr. Spencer had given, directly or indirectly, or offered to give money, or anything of value, in consideration of votes, or support, in the Alabama legislature; nor was it shown that any of his friends had done so. Some hearsay testimony was offered to the effect that certain persons had said that they had received money in consideration for voting for Mr. Spencer for the Senate; but this testimony was ruled out by the committee. The persons alleged to have made these statements were competent witnesses, but were not produced, nor was it proven that any money had been paid to them for such a purpose by anybody, whether a known friend of Mr. Spencer or not. The counsel for the accusers complain strongly of the rejection of such testimony; but its illegality and worthless character were too plain to require argument, and had it been admitted it might have contributed to make some scandal, but would have proved nothing. Attempts were made to offer the hearsay statements against Mr. Spencer of persons who were not shown to have been engaged with him in any conspiracy to procure his election by corruption or undue means, and by whose statements made in his absence he could not be bound by any known principle of law, which were also rejected by the committee. While hearsay evidence was thus excluded, the door was thrown open widely to prove the payment of money by any person to any member of the legislature, or to be used with the legislature, to procure Mr. Spencer's election, by any person, whether such person was shown to be a friend of Mr. Spencer or not. The committee deem it unnecessary to go into the full details of the case, and having thus given the general result, beg leave to be discharged from the further consideration of the resolution and memorial, and herewith submit copies of the testimony taken before the committee. REIMBURSEMENT OF MR. SPENCER'S EXPENSES. THURSDAY, December 18, 1884. Mr. Hoar presented a petition of George E. Spencer, late a Senator from the State of Alabama, praying to be reimbursed the amount necessarily incurred by him in defending his title to a seat in the Senate; which was referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. FRIDAY, February 13, 1885. Mr. Hoar, from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, reported the following resolution for consideration: "Resolved, That there be allowed and paid out of the contingent fund of the Senate to George E. Spencer, formerly a Senator from the State of Alabama, the sum of $7,132, being the amount actually and necessarily expended by him in maintaining his title to his seat." FRIDAY, February 20, 1885. On motion by Mr. Hoar, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution given above, and it was Ordered, That it be referred to the Committee to Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate. TUESDAY, February 24, 1885. Mr. Jones, of Nevada, from the Committee to Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate, to whom was referred the resolution (given above), reported it without amendment. TUESDAY, March 3, 1885. On motion by Mr. Jones, of Nevada, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution (given above), and Resolved, That the Senate agree thereto. [Special session of Senate, March, 1877.] L. Q. C. LAMAR, Senator from Mississippi from March 6, 1877, till he resigned, March 9, 1885. Mr. Lamar was first elected for the term beginning March 4, 1877. Objection being made March 5, 1877, to the oaths of office being administered to him, his credentials were laid on the table. The following day, the credentials were taken from the table after debate, and he was sworn. It appears from the debates that the objections to the admission of Mr. Lamar were upon the ground that the "State government in Mississippi was a usurpation." (An inquiry into alleged frauds in the election in Mississippi in November, 1875, had been made by a select committee and a report thereon ⚫ submitted to the Senate August 7, 1876.) Most Senators proceeded upon the ground that Mr. Lamar had at least a prima facie title to the seat and should be sworn, though it was claimed that this rule had not been followed in the case of Mr. Pinchback, of Louisiana. The history of the case here given consists of a transcript of the proceedings of the Senate relating to it from Senate Journal, 2d sess. 44th Cong. (special session, March, 1877). The debate is found on pages 5-15 of the Congressional Record, vol. vi. SATURDAY, March 3, 1877. Mr. Alcorn presented the credentials of L. Q. C. Lamar, elected a Senator by the legis lature of the State of Mississippi for the term of six years commencing March 4, 1877; which were read. MONDAY, March 5, 1877. Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: Resolved, That the credentials of Senators-elect in all disputed or contested cases lie upon the table until to-morrow." Objection under the foregoing resolution having been made to the oaths of office being administered to Mr. L. Q. C. Lamar from Mississippi, whose credentials were heretofore presented, Ordered, That his credentials lie on the table. TUESDAY, March 6, 1877. Mr. Wallace submitted the following resolution for consideration: "Resolved, That the credentials of L. Q. C. Lamar, Senator-elect from the State of Mississippi, be taken from the table and that he be sworn." Mr. Spencer called for the reading of a report made to the Senate at the first session of the Forty-fourth Congress, by the Committee on Privileges and Elections, on the subject of recent elections in the State of Mississippi. Mr. Wallace having objected to the reading of the said report, The Vice-President submitted the question to the Senate, Shall the report be read? and it was determined in the negative. The question recurring on the resolution of Mr. Wallace, On motion by Mr. Spencer to amend the resolution by striking out, in the last line thereof, the words "that he be sworn," and in lieu thereof inserting "be referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections when the committee shall be appointed," On the question to agree thereto, After debate, it was determined in the negative—yeas 1, nays 58. On motion by Mr. Spencer, the yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, The Senator who voted in the affirmative is Mr. Wadleigh. Those who voted in the negative are Messrs. Allison, Anthony, Bailey, Barnum, Bayard, Beck, Blaine, Bogy, Booth, Bruce, Burnside, Cameron of Pennsylvania, Chaffee, Christiancy, Cockrell, Coke, Conkling, Conover, Davis of Illinois, Davis of West Virginia, Dawes, Dennis, Eaton, Garland, Gordon, Harris, Hereford, Hill, Hoar, Howe, Johnston, Jones of Florida, Jones of Nevada, Kernan Kirkwood, McCreery, McDonald, McMillan, McPherson, Maxey, Mitchell, Morton, Oglesby, Paddock, Patterson, Plumb, Randolph, Ransom, Rollins, Saulsbury, Saunders, Sharon, Sherman, Teller, Thurman, Wallace, Whyte, and Withers. So the amendment was not agreed to. The question recurring on the resolution of Mr. Wallace, On the question to agree thereto, After debate, it was determined in the affirmative—yeas 57, nays 1. |