FEINBERG/WHITMAN    LITERARY FILE   SPEECH FILE  "Death of Abraham Lincoln" (Apr. 14, 1879).  Newspaper clipping

Box 37  Folder 47293
Whitman, Walt
The Assassination of Lincoln. 
Walt Whitman lectures on the 
great national tragedy - The 
martyred president's life a 
mine of inspiration. In New
 York Herald Tribune, Tuesday, 
April 15, 1879, p . 6. 
1 d 56 cm.DAY, APRIL 15, 1879.—QUADRUPLE SHEET. 
THE ASSASSINATION OF LINCOLN.
WALT WHITMAN LECTURES ON THE GREAT NATIONAL 
TRAGEDY—THE MARTYRED PRESIDENT'S 
LIFE A MINE OF INSPIRATION. 
"The good gray poet," Walt Whitman, came out in
a new role, that of lecturer, at Steck Hall, last evening. 
Whitman has recited his poems from the platform, 
and in his earlier days made a few impromptu
political speeches, but to him the lecture field is still
 a new one. The gathering to hear this lecture, the 
subject of which was the "Death of Abraham Lincoln," 
was made up principally of personal friends
and admirers of the poet. Whitman, who is partially 
paralyzed, is a fine looking man of sixty-one 
years; he is some six feet in height, broad shouldered 
and firmly knit. He wears a full beard and
mustache of gray, and his hair, which is almost
white, falls below his coat collar. His shirt is worn
open at the throat. In speaking he uses few gestures
and reads from notes, sitting in a chair. He
considers last night's attempt as experimental, and,
judging by the manner in which he was received, the
experiment might be pronounced successful. It is
an interesting fact that this lecture was delivered on
the anniversary of President Lincoln's assassination,
which took place just fourteen years ago last
night. 
"Though by no means proposing to resume the
secession war to night," said Mr. Whitman. "I
would briefly remind you, my friends, of the public
conditions preceding that contest. For twenty years,
and especially during the four or five before the war
actually began, the aspect of affairs in the United
States, though without the flash of military excitement,
presents more than the survey of a battle or
any extended campaign or series even of Nature's
convulsions. The hot passions of the South—the
strange mixture at the North of inertia, incredulity
and conscious power—the incendiarism of the abolitionists
—the rascality and grip of the politicians,
unparalleled in any land, any age. To these I must
not omit adding the honesty of the essential bulk of
the people everywhere, yet with all the seething
fury and contradiction of their natures, more
aroused than the Atlantic's waves in wildest equinox.
In the height of all this excitement and chaos, hovering
on the edge at first and then merged in its very
midst and destined to play a leading part, appears a
strange and awkward figure. 
FIRST IMPRESSIONS.
"I shall not easily forget the first time I ever saw
Abraham Lincoln. It must have about the 18th or
19th of February, 1861. It was rather a pleasant
afternoon in New York city, as he arrived there from
the West to remain a few hours, and then to pass on
to Washington to prepare for his inauguration. I
saw him in Broadway, near the site of the present
Post Office. He came down, I think, from Canal
street to stop at the Astor House. The broad spaces,
sidewalks and street in the neighborhood and for
some distance were crowded with solid masses of
people--many thousands. The omnibuses and other
vehicles had all been turned off, leaving an unusual
hush in that busy part of the city. Presently two or
three shabby hack barouches made their way with
some difficulty through the crowd and drew up at
the Astor House entrance. A tall figure stepped out
of the centre of these barouches, paused leisurely on
the sidewalk, looked up at the dark granite walls and
looming architecture of the old hotel, then, after a
relieving stretch of arms and legs, turned round for
over a minute to slowly and good humoredly scan
the appearance of the vast and silent crowds.
There were no speeches, no compliments, no welcome;
as far as I could hear, not a word said. 
I saw Abraham Lincoln often the four years following
that date. He changed rapidly and much during
his Presidency, but this scene and him in it are indelibly
stamped upon my recollection. As I sat on
the top of my omnibus and had a good view of him
the thought, dim and inchoate then, has since come
out clear enough, that four sorts of genius, four
mighty and primal hands, will be needed to the complete
limning of this man's future portrait—the eyes
and brains and finger-touch of Plutarch and Eschylus
and Michael Angelo, assisted by Rabelais. A
great literature will yet arise out of the era of those
four years; an inexhaustible mine for the histories,
drama, romance, and even philosophy of peoples to
come, far more grand, in my opinion, to the hands
capable of it, than Homer's siege of Troy, or the
French wars to Shakespeare."
LINCOLN'S ASSASSINATION. 
The lecturer next proceeded to read from his memoranda
concerning the assassination of President
Lincoln. These notes, he said, were written at the
time and on the spot, and have been since published.
They would, he hoped, contribute to remove the
mistiness which surrounds that tragedy in the minds
of most persons. After reciting the details he commented
on them as follows: —
Thus ended the attempted secession. Thus the
four years' war. But the main things come subtly
and invisibly afterward, perhaps long afterward—
neither military, political nor (great as those are)
historical. I say, certain secondary and indirect results,
out of the war, and out of the tragedy of this
death, are, in my opinion, greatest. Not the event of
the murder itself. Not that Mr. Lincoln strings the
principal points and personages of the period, like
beads, upon the single string of his career. Not that
this idiosyncrasy, in its sudden appearance and disappearance,
stamps this Republic with a stamp more
marked and enduring than any given to one man—
more even than Washington's. But, joined with
these, the immeasurable value and meaning of
that whole tragedy lies, to me, in senses finally
dearest to a nation (and here all our own)—the imaginative
and the artistic senses; the literary and the
dramatic ones. Not in any common or low meaning
of those terms, but a meaning precious to the
race and to every age. A long and varied series of
contradictory events arrives at last at its highest
poetic, single, central, pictorial denouement. The
whole involved, baffling, multiform whirl of the secession
period comes to a head, and is gathered
in one brief flash of lightning illumination
—one simple, fierce deed. Fit radiation—
fit close! How the imagination--how the student
loves these things! America, too, is to have them.
For not in all great deaths, nor far or near—not
Caesar in the Roman Senate House, or Napoleon
passing away in the wild night storm at St. Helena;
not Paleoiagus, falling, desperately fighting, piled
over dozens deep with Grecian corpses; not calm old
Socrates, drinking the hemlock—outvies that terminus
of the secession war, in one man's life, here
in our midst, in our own time--that seal of the emancipation
of 3,000,000 slaves--that parturition and delivery
of our new born, at last really free Republic,
henceforth to commence its career of genuine homogeneous 
union, compact, consistent with itself. 
THE USE OF GREAT MEN.
The final use of the greatest men of a nation is,
after all, not with reference to their deeds in themselves
or in their direct bearing on their times or
lands. The final use of a heroic-eminent life—especially
of a heroic-eminent death—is its indirect
filtering into the nation and the race, and to give,
often at many removes, but unerringly, age after
age, color and fibre to the personalism of the youth
and maturity of that age and of mankind. Then
there is a cement to the whole people, subtler, more
underlying than anything in written constitution
or courts or armies—namely, the cement of
a death identified thoroughly with that people,
at its head and for its sake. Strange (is it not) that
battles, martyrs, agonies, blood, even assassination,
should so condense--perhaps only really, lastingly
condense—a nationality. 
When, centuries hence (as it must, in my opinion,
be centuries hence before the life of these States or
of democracy can be really written and illustrated), the
leading historians and dramatists seek for some personage
—some special event—incisive enough to mark
with deepest cut, and mnemonize this turbulent nineteenth
century of ours (not only these States, but all
over the political and social world) something perhaps
to close that gorgeous procession of European
feudalism, with all its pomp and caste prejudices
(of whose long train we in America are yet
so inextricably the heirs)—something to identify
with terrible identification, by far the greatest
revolutionary step in the history of the United
States (perhaps the greatest of the world, our century)
—the absolute extirpation and erasure of
slavery from the States—those historians will seek
in vain for any point to serve more thoroughly
their purpose than Abraham Lincoln's death.
Dear to the muse—thrice dear to nationality—to
the whole human race--precious to this Union—
precious to democracy—unspeakably and forever 
precious—their first great martyr chief. 
A MURDERER'S FATE.
Attempt of Hezekiah Shaffer
to Take His Own Life.
WILL HE CHEAT THE HANGMAN?
An Atrocious Crime in a Model 
Community.
CHAMBERSBURG, Pa., April 14, 1879. 
Hezekiah Shaffer, the wife murderer, who is in the
jail at this place awaiting execution on Thursday,
the 17th inst., attempted suicide in his cell about six
o'clock this morning. Since the Board of Pardons
refused to interfere in his behalf he
has shown the most stoical indifference, but
has constantly proclaimed his innocence. His only
trouble seemed to be anxiety for his son, a lad who
is an inmate of the County Almshouse, and a great
repugnance to the manner of his impending
death. It was the desire to escape the
gallows which caused the attempt at suicide. 
When the Sheriff's little daughter carried him his
breakfast in his cell this morning she found the
prisoner bleeding profusely, and, giving the alarm,
Sheriff Gable immediately made an examination and
sent for Dr. Montgomery, the physician to the jail.
The doctor found that Shaffer had opened an artery
in each arm, but how he managed it seems a mystery
to the jail officials. By some it is supposed the
cutting was done by means of a piece of wire taken
from a broom incautiously left in his cell, while
others believed that he has had a pocket knife, which
he is thought to have brought with him at the time
of his arrest, secreted for the purpose of taking his
life after all hope of escape had fled. The
cuts on the arms were made both above and below
the elbows, and each leg was punctured between the
knee and the ankle. Previous to the discovery the
loss of blood was very great and the culprit was
almost unconscious when found. He is very
weak from the loss of blood and it is 
thought the chances are about even as to
whether he will live until the time set
for his execution. He is lying on his cot in a semi-conscious 
condition, and his mind constantly wanders.
He imagines himself employed by Colonel
Dixon, in whose regiment he served during the war,
and fancies that he is ploughing corn on the
Colonel's farm. If he had sat upright
while bleeding, the death which he sought
would have ensued, but lying prostrate on his cot
the position of his body prevented the complete flow
of blood necessary to the accomplishment of his
purpose. The whole affair shows considerable cunning
and ingenuity, and he still asserts his innocence
of the murder of his wife and declares that he did no
wrong in attempting his life. 
CRIME IN THE COUNTY
The crime for which Shaffer is to suffer the full
penalty, of which he sought to escape by his own
hand, was committed on the 21st of February, 1878,
and his impending execution excites deep interest
in the community more because of the infrequency
of crime in the Cumberland Valley than
from the circumstances attending the homicide itself.
Seventy-two years have elapsed since there was an
execution in this county, and the criminal in that
case, as in this, was a wife murderer. In the interval
there was only one conviction for the capital offence—
that of an Irish railroad hand, who murdered
a fellow workman in 1838, but who was respited
on account of insanity, and finally died
in prison. With such a history in the past it is not
suprising that the quiet inhabitants of this valley
should be appalled at a crime like Shaffer's, especially
as another murderer, a negro known as
Peachy Swingler, is in the jail here awaiting
execution on the 4th of June for the
murder of another colored man. Two murderers
to be hanged within so short a period in a
county where the enormity of a murder was
almost unknown and whose inhabitants prided
themselves upon dwelling in a happy valley,
which Dr. Johnson might have chosen
as the scene of his story of "Rosselas," not only
serves to call attention to the feelings which such
events naturally arouse, but also to the locality and
surroundings of the tragedies. 
A VALLEY OF PARADISE 
The Cumberland Valley, extending from the Susquehanna
to the Potomac, and about twenty miles in
width, throughout its entire length is one of the
most beautiful—if not the most beautiful—in the
whole country. Lined on both sides by high ranges
of the Blue Mountains, which seen at a distance
look like perpendicular walls standing against
the sky—blue as the azure of the heavens and straight
as the horizon at the summits—the effect is one of
indescribable beauty and grandeur. Between the
mountain walls the landscape is gently undulating,
and the farms and villages which
succeed each other, many of the farmhouses
and cottages being as tasteful and comfortable
as the mansions which line the banks of the Hudson
or the shores of the Sound are so well kept and neat
and trim that instead of the borrowed name which
now applies to it it might have been called
the Valley of Paradise. About midway between
the rivers is the town of
Chambersburg, from which I write and where
I have just seen the victim of the law writhing in the
agony of his own attempt at destruction, as if in
mockery of all these beautiful surroundings. It
must be midway, for here the streams divide, the
waters of the Conococheague flowing southward
into the Potomac, and those of the
Conodoguinnet northward into the Susquehanna,
Chambersburg is a village almost as beautiful
as the valley in which it nestles or the hills around
which its homelike dwellings cluster, and Chambersburg
besides has a history. In 1864 the rebel
General McCausland ruthlessly burned it to the
ground because, as some local poet has put it,
Retaliation, 'twas assumed
Most plainly such an act demands.
and the people of the town are now petitioning the
Legislature for compensation for the losses occasioned
by that act of vandalism. Previously John
Brown, of Ossowatamie, had made it the base
of his operations against Harper's Ferry, and
here two of his confederates were captured. 
In the days before the war Chambersburg was on the
direct line of the old underground railway from Virginia,
and many a weary slave made his way through
the valley while the hounds of the master and the
oaths of the professional slave catcher sounded
in his ears. Despite these things the community
was an exceedingly moral one, and if it has
retrograded within a few years this result is mainly
to be attributed to the demoralizing influences of the
war. The Cumberland valley being overrun by the
hostile armies during the rebellion and its inhabitants
familiarized with scenes of lawlessness and disorder.
THE MURDERER AND HIS NEIGHBORS. 
In this connection a word in regard to the character
of the inhabitants of the beautiful valley cannot
fail to be interesting. Originally it was
settled by Irish Protestants, but the Germans
soon followed in swarms, and now
the "Dutch," as they call themselves, comprise
the important elements in the community. Many of
the people are Mennonites and Dunkers, a peculiarly
industrious and thriving class of citizens whose integrity
is above all price. A genuine Pennsylvania
Dutchman, especially a Mennonite or Dunker, is
not apt to sell his farm, and certain not to barter
away his conscience. The region is mainly agricultural,
and downright poverty is almost unknown.
Although the county almshouse is one of the best
ordered charitable institutions in the country it has
comparatively few inmates. and these mostly helpless
children who grow up to be useful and often influential
citizens.  It was out of this institution
that Shaffer the murderer came, and for a number
of years he seemed in a fair way to do as much honor
to his Alma Mater as if the Franklin County Almshouse
had been a great educational institution. At
the beginning of the war, when only twenty-two years
of age, he enlisted in the Pennsylvania Reserves
and participated in all the battles from Dranesville
to Gettysburg, being wounded more than once. At
Antietam, it is said, he took a wounded comrade who
was in danger of falling into the hands of the enemy
upon his back, and, carrying him away, saved him
from capture. After his discharge from the
army he married a daughter of Daniel Snyder,
a poor man living in his own house at the base of
the North Mountain. Snyder's property comprises
only a few acres;  but upon it he gave Shaffer permission
to build a small house. The front of Shaffer's
house is on a line with Snyder's and about fifty yards
distant. Here Shaffer lived for some years previous
and at the time of the crime for which he was arrested,
tried and convicted, and for which he is to pay the
penalty on the scaffold if he survives the attempt
upon his life.
HISTORY OF THE CRIME.
The history of the case shows the murder to have
been one of the most atrocious and unprovoked in
the annals of crime in this country. Sarah Snyder,
a sister of Mrs. Shaffer, was in the yard outside of
her father's house about sunrise on the morning
of the murder and in full view of
Shaffer's house. She heard a scream and a dull,
heavy sound like that which would be caused by a
fall down stairs in the house of her sister, and at
once started to alarm her father. Before she succeeded
in getting to the door. which was only a few steps
distant, Shaffer came out of his house and walked
toward her. She entered the house by the back door,
and a few minutes afterward Shaffer came in by the
front door. "Sis," he said, meaning his wife, "had
fallen down stairs and was either dead or dying."
Investigation showed that what he said was
only too true.  Mrs. Shaffer was found lying
on the kitchen floor, at the foot of the
stairway, dead.  Her face was covered with blood,
and her hair and clothing were completely saturated,
the corpuscles being already dry, which showed that
she had been dead some time.  Everywhere there
were evidences of a deadly struggle.  Pools
of blood covered the floor at the foot
of the stairway, and it was afterward discovered
that much of the blood had trickled
through the floor. The stair door and the walls were
stained with blood.  In describing the scene one of
the witnesses on the stand said it "looked as if
you had stuck a hog and let it bleed
there."  A double-hilted axe, a smal pole-axe
and a wooden bootjack were found
standing against the wall. The axes were bloody,
handles and all, and there were hairs on the pole of
the small axe which exactly corresponded with the
hair of the murdered woman.  The bootjack was
also covered with blood, and clinging to it
were large bunches of the dead woman's hair.
There was no blood on the floor outside the
landing where the body was found except a small
smeared spot where the head lay, thus showing that
the bleeding had ceased before it was placed there.
Shaffer's account of the event was not in harmony
with these facts.  He and his wife slept apart,
she occupying a bed in the loft above
the stairs and he sleeping in a room down stairs
beside the kitchen. He said he had risen and made
the fire, after which he stretched himself on his bed,
with his clothes on. According to his own
story he heard a scream and a noise
as of some one falling down stairs, and
running at once to the stairway he
found his wife lying senseless on the landing with
her feet up the stairs. He immediately lifted her
out, laid her on the floor and ran to give the alarm.
In spite of these suspicious circumstances preparation
was made for the funeral and the cortége was on
the point of starting for the burial ground before
the law ordered a medical inquiry.
ARREST OF THE MURDERER.
The examination of the body revealed thirty-one
wounds and bruises, fourteen of which were on the
head. As a matter of course the arrest of Shaffer
followed, and subsequently an analysis of the
stomach showed that the woman had been poisoned
as well as beaten to death. On the trial
it was found that ten days before Mrs.
Shaffer's death Shaffer had borrowed a horse
from a neighbor to come to this place to buy medicine
for his wife. The only medicine he bought was a
quantity of arsenic. That he administered the poison
there is no doubt, for during the last thirty hours of
her life Mrs. Shaffer showed every symptom of
arsenical poisoning. At the time Shaffer bought the
arsenic his wife was in good health; but on the
evening of the 19th she was taken suddenly ill in
church and vomited profusely.  Shaffer was in the
church at the time, but he paid no attention to his
wife's condition, and when she went out on account of
her illness he did not accompany her.  Indeed, when the
service was over he joined Harriet Gerhart, a young
woman living in the neighborhood, with whom he
was subsequently shown to have been criminally
intimate, and walked with her for a considerable
distance. It was also shown that
Shaffer lived unhappily with his wife, and
that he frequently complained to his neighbors
in regard to her and said he would get rid of her and
get a better one. He even asked his little son how
he would like Harriet Gerhart for a mother,
and it was in evidence that it was his
attentions to the Gerhart woman that caused the
domestic bickerings in his household. The motives
for the crime, the fact of the murder and the inevitable
conclusion that Shaffer was the murderer of
his wife were all clearly established and conviction
was unavoidable.
THE DEFENCE AND THE MURDER.
The theory of the defence was suicide. It was
claimed that Shaffer made no secret of his purchase
of the arsenic, and that his wife, who had previously
threatened to destroy her life, took some of it herself
and gave some of it to her child and to Shaffer,
both of whom were ill in consequence.  The wounds
were accounted for on the assumption that they were
either self-inflicted or were received falling down
stairs.  It was evident, however, from all the circumstances
surrounding the case, that these theories
were fallacious.  Mrs. Shaffer had been first attacked
in the loft where she slept, probably hours before
the scream was heard, and the final conflict took
place on the landing down stairs, where the blood
was.  It is not probably the body was thrown down
the stairs; but, if such was the case, it was only a
ruse of the murderer on which to base the pretext
by which he hoped to escape the hangman.  It
was unavailing, and, in his last hours, the dreadful
scene in which he played the butcher's part, as is
evident from his attempts at suicide, must rise up in
tormenting visions before his eyes.  Maddened by a
guilty love for a woman who encouraged his
passion, anxious to be rid of the wife
whose life was a bar to his desires
and disappointed in his efforts to destroy
her by poisoning he went to her bedside in the night
and struck the blows which caused her death.  Perhaps
she called him to assist her, perhaps to upbraid him;
and the blows with the bootjack may have been struck
at the beginning of the quarrel without deadly
intent.  Be this as it may, it was plain
the woman tried to defend herself, and
it is likely after she reached the foot of the
stairs she was the first to seize the axe with which the final
blow was struck.  But not all the blows were given
with the weapons by means of which some of them
were inflicted.  The struggle began under the roof and
rafters of a low garret, and the poor woman must
have come into contact with them while her furious
husband held her by the throat, as it was evident he
did from the imprints which his fingers left.  With
her it was a fight for life both above and below
stairs; with him the fury of a maddened beast, and
when his work was done he waited through the
silent hours of the night while his victim's blood
was becoming dry and hard until he saw his sister-in-law
astir, and then, pretending to throw the body
down the stairs with a scream, he went out boldly to
proclaim the accident which he asserted had caused
his wife's death.
SINCE SHAFFER'S CONVICTION.
After Shaffer's trial and conviction a determined
effort was made by a few persons, who believed in
his innocence, to secure a commutation of his sentence
to imprisonment for life, but the evidence
of the bootjack and the axe, with some
of the woman's hair still clinging to them, was
considered overwhelming by the Board of Pardons,
and so the murderer's doom was sealed.  When it became
known that there was no longer any hope for
Shaffer much interest was felt in the question of a
confession on his part.  A quiet community like this
is averse to seeing a man die upon the gallows
without an acknowledgement of his guilt,
and this natural interest was enhanced
by a local publication which announced
a life of the murderer, with an implied promise of a
forthcoming confession.  This publication caused
quite a little breeze, and a conference was held in
Shaffer's cell, at which the murderer shed tears over
"man's ingratitude to man."  It seems that Shaffer
had dictated his life story to a brother of the editor of
one of the papers here, intending
the pamphlet to be sold for the benefit of his son.
This story came into the possession of the editor,
who determined to publish it for his own
advantage, and at last only yielded
sufficiently to the tears and entreaties
of the doomed man to agree to pay a royalty of ten
cents per copy to the unfortunate offspring of the
murderer and his victim.  When all this was arranged
Shaffer printed the following rather ghastly card: —
CHAMBERSBURG, April 10, 1879.
I desire to contradict the statement that has gained considerable
ground in reference to my having made a confession
of the murder of my wife to some of my friends in
town.  This I declare to be entirely incorrect
and false, having made no such confession to any
one.  I have dictated a full history of my life (written
by J. S. Kennedy), with the true history of the death of my
wife.  The book will contain a full account of everything,
even to the most minute details of my execution.  It will
be issued as soon after the execution as possible to have it
put into type.  This will be the only official story issued
by me.  The proceeds of the sale of this book will be for the
benefit of my child. 
HEZEKIAH SHAFFER.
Great excitement was caused this morning by
the announcement of the attempt at suicide,
and much interest is felt as to whether the
murderer will escape the hangman or be carried
to the gallows in a dying condition.
It is said the Sheriff will exclude the press on the
day of the execution, in the hope of escaping comment
and condemnation for the carelessness which
led to the horrible scene likely to be enacted when 
 the wretch is dragged to the scaffold, if he lives to
be hanged.
THE LECTURE SEASON.
"GEOFFERY CHAUCER."
The seventh lecture of a course on English
language and literature by Mr. John Albee was delivered
yesterday afternoon in the Union Square
Theatre.  The subject was "Geoffrey Chaucer," who,
the lecturer said, was the first of the English poets
to condense thought into a few lines.  His language
was the old English, with a mixture of Norman-French,
but much of the beauty of the poet would
be lost were the language modernized.  Chaucer,
Milton and Shakespeare should be the text books of
our schools, for they presented the "well of English
undefiled."  The school books used in our public
schools are wanting in this direction, the speaker
thought.  The compilers were generally the employes
of book publishers, and some great name was
borrowed to give a title to the compilation.  In one
case it was that of a great lawyer and in another that
of a novelist.  The selections made were generally
from second rate literature, and were arranged without
sequence or order.
Chaucer was a successful man, said Mr. Albee, for
he was a poet and earned a large income—a circumstance
which may be regarded as remarkable, for
he who cultivates poetry is generally poor in pocket.
There was no venom in Chaucer's pen.  The laugh
was always turned upon vice and wickedness.  He
seemed to have Voltaire's idea, that a man might
have preferences, but no exclusions, and that life
was large and roomy enough for everything.
ON TRIAL FOR EXTRAVAGANCE.
The trial of City Works Commissioners Flaherty
and Bennett and Water Purveyor Milne was resumed
in the City Court, Brooklyn, before Judge Neilson,
yesterday.  The court room was well filled
by politicians, and a large number of witnesses
were examined for the prosecution.
Charles A. Bartow, formerly an inspector of sewers
and foreman and examiner of sewers, testified that
Superintendent of Sewers Dady had told him while
on the River street sewer, where fifty-three men
were employed, that the "work must last until election
or the day after."  Witness thought they could
get along with one-third the force employed.  He
took down about two hundred and fifty feet
of the arch, under orders of Dady, although it
was not necessary to go beyond 150 feet; the work
could have been done in one-third the time; five
names of men who were not on the work with the
witness had been added to the time book; nine other
men mentioned on the roll were also unknown to the
witness.  John S. Bogart, inspector of sewers, testified
that work on a water course in Cook street was
done at an expense of $750, which should have been
done for $30. The trial will be resumed to-day.NEW YORK HERALD, TUESDAY, APRIL [?]

WASHINGTON.

Debate in the Senate on
the Army Bill.

SPEECHES BY BLAINE AND WALLACE.

Awkward Position of the Republican Leaders.

GREENBACKERS SUPPRESSED

Measures Brought Forward Through the
Right of Petition.

FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.

                                WASHINGTON, April 14, 1879.
THE ARMY BILL IN THE SENATE-SPEECHES OF
           SENATORS BLAINE AND WALLACE.
   In the Senate Mr. Blaine made his expected speech
to-day, and the galleries were densely crowded to 
hear him. He was very happy in that part of his
speech in which he showed how ridiculously small
is the number of troops in each State, and made a 
good deal of legitimate sport of people of Alabama,
ground down under the iron heel of a military despotism with the help of twenty-nine soldiers; North
Carolina, prostrate beneath an army of thirty men;
Arkansas, intimidated by fifty-seven regular troops;
Delaware, groaning under the oppression of three
privates and a signal sergeant, and so on, but
like all the republicans he was embarrassed by
the awkward position into which his party has
fallen of defending the use of the troops at 
the polls. He tried to change the issue, but was not 
successful, but he had evidently followed the House 
debate sufficiently to avoid the blunder which some
of the republicans there made of defending the use
of troops for political purposes, a blunder which 
General Garfield in his last speech carefully and successfully retrieved by offering 
to repeal the whole sections. Mr. Blaine 
took a different way. He dropped the Army bill and 
the troops at the polls and began to discuss other
measures which are not yet before the Senate and
have not been considered even by the House, and 
which he had therefore to describe by guess work.
He then when into the cry of revolution and coercion
of the Executive, which was really not worthy of him
for it had been done to death in the House, and 
finished with a declaration that it is the duty of the 
President to veto the bill, which led to the general 
remark among his hearers that it would be wiser to 
wait until the bill is framed and passed, so as to see
whether it is right or wrong before deciding that it 
ought to be vetoed by the President.
   The general effect of the debate on the Army bill
in the House has undoubtedly embarrassed the republicans, and they feel it keenly. They began with
cries of "Revolution," and yet General Garfield had 
to confess at the close that the houses were within
their constitutional rights in passing the appropriation bills with riders, and thus the republicans were compelled to admit what the General public already saw that a veto could not rest upon 
the mere fact of extraneous legislation being tacked
to the bills. But this is not all. The republicans 
discovered before the House debate closed that 
they could not safely put themselves on the
ground that troops ought to be used at 
the polls, and General Garfield had to extricate them from the dilemma also. They are not as grateful to him as they ought to be; they growl that he gave up everything, but in fact he very skilfully and bravely extricated them from a totally untenable position. If they had been wise they would have made no fight at all on the Army bill, and they are now trying to conceal their blunder in this matter by endeavoring to intimidate the President into vetoing it right or wrong.
   "Veto it," said a republican Senator the other day, 
"of course, he must veto it. Of what use would all
the debate in the House be if Hayes should, after all, 
sign the bill?"
   Mr. Blaine did one good thing. He proposed the
following amendment:--
   And any military, naval or civil officer, 
or any other person, who shall, except 
for the purposes herein named, appear armed with a 
deadly weapon of any description, either concealed
or displayed, within a mile of any polling place 
where a general or special election for representatives to Congress is being held, shall on conviction be 
punished with a fine not less than $500 nor more
than $5,000, or with imprisonment for a period not 
less than six months nor more than five years, or 
with both fine and imprisonment, at the discretion
of the Court.
   Deadly weapons is a vague term, but the democrats 
cannot refuse to accept the amendment and help to 
prohibit the carrying of weapons near the polls,
just as in most of the States dram shops are closed 
by law on election day.
   Mr. Wallace made a temperate and very effective 
reply to Mr. Blaine. He remarked that the question 
before the Senate and the country is not how many
or how few troops there may be in any State, but it 
is whether war measures shall be enforced in times 
of peace. One soldier on ten thousand square miles, 
he said, is as strong as ten thousand soldiers, so long 
as all the government is behind him.
   "We have no intentions of revolution," he said. 
"Our processes are defined by the constitution. The 
President has no right to say how the laws shall be 
made; he has no right to criticise our methods of 
legislation, or base his veto thereon, but he has a 
right to criticise the matter. The President has 
a right to veto. It is guaranteed to him by 
the constitution, and I would not take 
the right from him.  We do not purpose 
to go beyond the limits of constitutional rights and 
privileges. We mean to act in accordance with the 
laws, and believe that we are right and that the 
people will sustain us."
   This precise and emphatic declaration of the intention of the majority to act within the constitution coming from Mr. Wallace, who speaks with authority for his party, ought to silence the stupid cry of "Revolution and coercion of the President."
   To-morrow General Logan will speak, and there is
much curiosity as to what he will find to say.
BILL DAY IN THE HOUSE--FILIBUSTERING BY
   THE REPUBLICANS THAT WILL NOT BE RE-
   PEATED--SMALL DANGER OF GENERAL LEGIS-
   LATION.
  The House wasted the day in filibustering by the 
republican side to prevent the introduction of currency and other bills. It will not do so any more, for enough republicans see the folly and uselessness of such a course to-day 
to unite with the democrats and let in everybody 
and everything next Monday. It was significant that 
Mr. Monroe's resolution--that it is inexpedient at the 
present session to change the tariff and currency 
laws--had only nine majority, although this particular way of putting it might well have got more 
votes. The hard money men of both sides begin 
to see that it is wiser to let every member trot out 
his hobby, and it is now certain that no further 
attempts to gag the House will be successful. 
At least seven-eighths of the propositions 
that will be rushed in next Monday are 
so transparently absurd that even a speech by the 
mover would expose their folly to the House, Mr. 
Buckner, for instance, proposes to direct the Treasury to buy and coin $6,000,000 worth of silver per month, and to continue doing so until the eighty-two cent dollars shall rise to par with gold. That is to say, he wants to buy all the depreciated silver of all the world and enable every country in Europe, as well as India, to go on a gold basis at our expense. Such a bill cannot become a law, but a thorough debate would do very much good in enlightening  Congressmen and the voters. 
    There is not much danger of general legislation at this session. Congress will go home just as soon as the appropriation bills are done. Nobody wants to stay here, and if the bills were completed and signed by the President to-morrow, no earthly power

could keep Congress here even twenty-four hours longer.

GENERAL WASHINGTON DESPATCHES.
               WASHINGTON, April 14, 1879.
FINANCIAL, CURRENCY AND OTHER BILLS FILED UNDER THE 
     HEAD OF PETITIONS IN THE HOUSE.
    The following bills were filed under the head of petitions in the House of Representatives to-day: --
    By Mr. Vance, of North Carolina, providing for the free coinage of the standard silver dollar of 412 1/2 grains troy, of standard value, the same to be a legal tender at its nominal value for all debts and dues, public and private, except where otherwise provided by contract; and further, that any owner of silver bullion may deposit the same at any United States coinage mint or assay office to be coined into such dollars for his benefit upon the same terms as gold bullion is deposited under existing laws.
    By Mr. Springer, of Illinois, authorizing and requiring the Secretary of the Treasury to purchases from time to time silver bullion at the market price thereof to the amount such bullion may be offered, provided such bullion is the product of any mine within the jurisdiction of the United States. He shall cause the bullion so purchased to be coined into standard silver dollars, to the capacity of the mints, in connection with other coinage. He is also required to issue silver certificates in denominations corresponding with the denominations of United States Treasury notes to the amount of the silver bullion purchased, as provided by the bill.
    Such certificates shall be deposited in the Treasury and shall be deemed a part of the current revenues of the United States, and shall be a legal tender at their nominal value.
    They shall be redeemed by the United States on demand in the silver bullion or standard silver dollars at the option of the government, and an amount of such bullion and coin, equal to the outstanding silver certificates, shall be retained in the Treasury for such redemption.
    It authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury and Director of the Mint to make such regulations for carrying this act into effect as will best protect the interests of the United States, and a sum sufficient to purchase the bullion authorized is appropriated.
    A petition signed by Messrs. Warner, Atherton and Geddes, of Ohio; Manning, Money and Muldrow, of Mississippi; Ladd, of Maine; Steele, of North Carolina; Speer, of Georgia, and Young, of Tennessee, was filed, embracing a bill authorizing owners of silver bullion to have it coined into standard silver dollars, the provisions of which are substantially the same as those contained in the petition of Mr. Springer.
    A petition from the New York Gaslight Company was presented by Representative Stephens, of Georgia, signed by Samuel Carter and many others, praying that a bill introduced in the Senate during the Forty-fifth Congress and referred to the Committee on Finance, may be passed at the earliest possible day. The provisions of the bill are as follows:--
    That the holders of any silver coins of the United States of any smaller denomination than $1, may, on presentation of the same in sums of $20, or any multiple thereof, at the office of the Treasurer or any Assistant Treasurer of the United States, receive therefor United States legal tender notes.
    The Treasurer or any assistant treasurer of the United States who shall receive any coin under the provisions of this act shall exchange the same in sums of $20 or any multiple thereof for United States legal tender notes on the demand of any holder thereof.
    The object of the above bill is to enable persons who in the course of business transactions receive an inconvenient amount of subsidiary silver coins to deposit them at the United States Sub-Treasury and receive paper money in exchange therefor, the same as is done with the new silver dollars. It does not touch upon the "trade dollar" questions. 
    Mr. Stephens also filed petitions of W.W. Hubbell and others, of Pennsylvania, praying for the passage of bills authorizing the coinage of the goloid metric dollar, two dollars and fractions of a dollar, and also the coinage of the metric gold double eagle and half eagle, all of standard value. 
    Also to authorize a new metric gold coin for international use, to be known as the "Stella."
    Also to authorize the mintage of ingots of metric gold alloy and of metric goloid alloy, its deposit in the treasury and issue of certificates therefor.
    A petition embracing a bill was presented by A.J. Warner, of Ohio, asking that sections 3, 511,  3,513,  3,524,  3,527 and 254 of the Revised Statutes relating to coinage be amended so as to admit silver to coinage on the same conditions with gold. The bill provides that the gold coins of the United States shall be one dollar piece or unit, a quarter eagle or two and one-half dollar piece, a three dollar piece, a half eagle or five dollar piece, and eagle or ten dollar piece, a double eagle or twenty dollar piece, and the standard weight of the gold dollar shall be 25 8-10 grains, of the eagle 258 grains, or the half eagle 129 grains, of the eagle 258 grains, of the double eagle 516 grains. The silver coins of the United States shall be a dollar or unit, a half dollar or fifty cent piece, a quarter or twenty-five cent piece, a dime or ten cent piece, and the weight of the dollar shall be 412 1/8 grains troy; the half dollar 12 [?1/2] grammes, the quarter dollars and the dime shall be respectively one-half and one-fifth of the half dollar.
    Any owner of the silver bullion may deposit the same at any mint to be formed into bars or into standard silver dollars of the weight of 412 1/2 grains for his benefit, and no deposit of silver for other coinage shall be received. Silver bullion contained in gold deposits and separated therefrom may, however, be paid for in silver coin, at such valuation as may from time to time be established by the Director of the Mint.
    The charges for melting and refining, when bullion is below standard, [?c.,] shall be fixed by the Director of the Mint, with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Treasury, so as to equal but not exceed the actual average cost to each mint and assay office of the material, labor, wastage and use of machinery employed.
    Subsidiary silver coins shall be paid out at the several mints and at the Assay Office in New York in exchange for gold coins or for standard silver dollars or for united States notes at par, in sums not less than $50.
    The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to receive deposits of gold and silver coin and bullion, with the treasurer or any assistant treasurer of the United States, in sums not less than $20, and to issue certificates therefor, in denominations not less than $20 each, corresponding with the denominations of the United States notes.
    The coin and bullion deposited for or representing the certificate of deposit shall be retained in the Treasury for the payment of the same, on demand, and certificates representing coin in the Treasury may be issued in payment of interest on the public debt, which certificates, together with those issued for coin and bullion deposited, shall not at any time exceed twenty per cent beyond the amount of coin and bullion in the 
treasury, and the certificates for coin and bullion in the Treasury shall be received at par in payment for duties on imports. All the above measures were referred to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, who, under the rules recently adopted by the House, have leave to report at any time.
    Among other petitions filed to-day by Representative Reagan, of Texas, embracing bills, were the following:--
    To regulate interstate commerce and to prohibit unjust discrimination by common carriers.
    To amend the Revised Statutes concerning commerce and navigation and the regulation of steam vessels.
    Providing that from and after July 1 next the customs duties on quinine and salt of quinine shall be reduced to twenty per cent ad valorem.
    Authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to pay to the State of Texas $1,[?3?5]000,000 on account of moneys paid out by the State for frontier defense.
    Authorizing payment of the balance of the fund appropriated for the payment of creditors of the State of Texas, and authorizing the immediate payment of the money appropriated in 1877 to pay mail contractors of the following States:--Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.

PROCEEDINGS OF CONGRESS.
               SENATE.
               WASHINGTON, April 14, 1879.
    The Senate resumed consideration of the Army Appropriation bill, the pending question being on 

the amendment offered by Mr. Blaine, which is to add the following words at the end of the sixth section:--
    And any military, naval or civil officer, or any other person who shall, except for the purpose herein named, appear armed with a deadly weapon of any description, either concealed or displayed, within a mile of any polling place where a general or special election for Representatives to Congress is being held, shall, on conviction, be punished with a fine not less than $500 nor more than $5,000, or with imprisonment for a period not less than six months nor more than five years, or with both fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court.
        SPEECH OF MR. BLAINE.
    Mr. BLAINE, (rep.) of Me., said the method adopted in the pending section to get rid of the eight closing words of the section of the Revised Statutes proposed to be repealed -- namely, "or to keep the peace at the polls," was an unusual and extraordinary method. The ordinary way to repeal a single sentence is to strike out the particular words objected to, but the mode chosen in this bill is to repeal and re-enact the whole section except the last eight words. He was persuaded that this unusual course was not taken accidentally, but designedly. If he might so speak it came of cunning, the intent being to create the impression that the republicans in the administration of the general government had used troops right and left in every direction, and that as soon as the democrats get int power they proceeded to enact this prohibitory sixth section, and democratic stump speakers would doubtless make great political capital out of this idea, whereas every word of it from first to last was the enactment of the republican party. Whether intentionally or not, the issue thus presented was a dishonest one. The law was passed by a republican Congress. There were forty-six Senators sitting in the Senate Chamber at this time, of whom only ten, or at most eleven, were democrats and the House of Representatives was overwhelmingly republican. We were in the midst of war. The republican administration had 1,000,000 or possibly 1,200,000 bayonets at its command, and, under the circumstances, with the amplest power to interfere with the elections had they so chosen, with soldiers in every hamlet and county of the United States, the republican party themselves placed that on the statute book and Abraham Lincoln signed it. He asked attention to the fact that this was the first instance in the legislation of the United States in which any restrictive clause whatever was put upon the statute books in regard to the use of troops at the polls, and that it was passed by the republican party and signed by Abraham Lincoln when he had more troops under his control than Napoleon Bonaparte ever had. But the point is, to strike out the few words authorizing the use of troops to keep the peace at the polls, and the country is alarmed -- or, he would rather say, amused -- at the effort made to create the impression that the republican party relied for its popular strength upon the use of bayonets. 
            A FALSE ISSUE.
     This democratic Congress has attempted, by raising an issue false in every detail, to create the impression not only in American but in Europe, and throughout the civilized world, that elections in this country are attempted to be controlled by the bayonet. He denounced the issue as false; and, though not at liberty to say that any gentleman making it knew its falsity, and though he hoped they did not, he proposed to prove its utter lack of foundation. He held in his hand an abstract of all the troops of the United States east of Omaha, including the States bordering the Mississippi River on the west, embracing a territory populated by 41,000,000 at least out of the 45,000,000 supposed to be in this country to-day. By this statement he showed that in all that great territory only 2,797 soldiers are stationed--within this domain forty-five fortifications are manned and eleven arsenals protected. To every 1,000,000 people there are about sixty soldiers. The honorable Senator from Delaware was alarmed about the overriding of the popular ballot by the troops of the United States, but there is not a single federal soldier in Delaware. The honorable Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Hereford) had spoken of his State being trodden by the iron heel of military despotism, but there is not a solitary man in United States uniform on the soil of West Virginia. In Maryland 172 artillerymen at Fort McHenry guard the entrance to Baltimore's beautiful harbor, in Virginia there is a school of practice at Fortress Monroe. Outside of that school there is not a federal soldier in the State. There are but thirty soldiers in North Carolina guarding a fort at the mouth of Cape Fear River. In South Carolina there are 120 artillerymen to guard the entrance to Charleston harbor. There are twenty-nine soldiers in Georgia and 182 in Florida. There is not one in Tennessee, Kentucky or Missouri. There are fifty-seven in Arkansas, thirty-two in Alabama and 239 in Louisiana. The great State of Mississippi has not one on its soil, nor has Texas, except those guarding the frontier on the Rio Grande. In the entire South there are 1,155 soldiers to intimidate overrun, oppress and destroy the liberties of 15,000,000 or people in 1,203 counties, or not quite one soldier to each county-- one soldier to about seven hundred square miles of territory. There was an old saying, he continued, that there were soothsayers in Rome who could not look each other in the face without smiling, and not two democratic Senators on the floor can go into the cloakroom and look each other in the face without smiling or rather blushing over this talk, the whole thing was such a miserable pretence--such a miserably manufactured issue. In New England they had 380 soldiers, or about one hundred and twenty to every million people, whereas the ratio in the South was not quite seventy: yet the people of New England never complained of the military power. The tendency of this talk, as he had said, was to misrepresent us abroad, and this democratic party stood indicted and he hereby charged them with public slander of their country, creating the impression in the civilized world that we are under military despotism. What would any European, familiar with large armies, think of such assertions when he learned that 1,155 soldiers were spread over a territory larger than France, Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, Belgium, Holland and the German Empire?
          MOTIVE OF THE DEMOCRATS.
    But, continued Mr. Blaine, the real motive of the democrats must be looked for elsewhere. It is simply to get rid of the federal supervision at the federal elections, to get rid of the civil power of the United States in the election of Representatives to Congress, and therefore this bill connects itself directly with the bill which was before Congress at the last session known as the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Appropriation Bill. He was aware that parliamentary rules forbade him to discuss a bill pending before the House of Representatives, but he also knew that nothing forbade him to speak of what was not done in the House, but in democratic caucus, where this legislation was perfected.
    MR.WITHERS (dem.) of Va.--Was it not reported by the Committee of the Whole, House of Representatives, and referred in this body to a committee?
    MR. BLAINE--Now you are asking me to say what the House did. i would not do that, it is against parliamentary law. As to what passed in the committee of the Senate it can be inferred from what occurred in this body on Friday last, when you sat in solid phalanx and would not allow even a grammatical error to be corrected. I was allowed to offer amendments in the committee, but only to see them voted down.
    Mr. BLAINE went on to say that one of these appropriation bills could not be debated without also debating the other, because the clauses under discussion in the Army bill prohibited the presence of civil officers at the polls. He was not now speaking of military officers. He did not believe any gentleman on the other side had ever seen a military officer at the polls on election day.
    Mr. HEREFORD, (dem.) of W. Va., said he had seen soldiers make arrrests at the polls in his State.
    Mr. BLAINE--When?
    Mr. HEREFORD--In 1870, after the war.
    Mr. BLAINE--What did they arrest anybody for?
    Mr. HEREFORD--For the purpose of intimidation.
    Mr. BLAINE--Oh! Yes! (Laughter.)
    Mr. WILLIAMS, (dem.) of Ky., said he knew of troops being present and stacking their arms in the vicinity of the polls in Kentucky, so that voters passed through files of soldiers to vote.. This was in 1865.
    Mr. BLAINE reminded him that Kentucky was in a very disturbed condition about that time, and that it was settled by Supreme Court decision that the war did not close until 1865.
    Mr. LOGAN, (rep.) of Ill., said that he knew something about the presence of troops at the polls in Kentucky in 1865. He was then commanding 83,000 men around Louisville, and he never saw a more peaceable election in his life. Under his orders the troops kept away from the city and away from the polls. 
6      NEW YORK HERALD, TUESD

TAMMANY TRIUMPHANT.
Judge Barrett's Decision in the Injunction Proceedings 
Overruled by the General Term.
WHERE THE "ANTIS" ERRED.
Nothing to Prevent the New Members 
from Being Initiated.
    The Supreme Court, general Term, gave its decision
yesterday on the appeal, by the Tammany Society,
from the recent injunction granted by Judge
Barrett in the suit brought by Hubert O. Thompson,
restraining the society initiating as members 147
candidates elected on the night of December 31, 1878,
at a meeting alleged to have been irregularly called
and fraudulently held. As will be remembered, the
case has been hotly contested in the courts, Mr.
Thompson Thompson being represented by ex-Judge Porter and 
Mr. Allison and the Tammany Society by Messrs. A.
J. Vanderpool, John D. Townsend, ex-Judge Spencer
and William Vanderveer. As an appeal was taken from
Judge Barrett's decision by Tammany, it is now understood
that Mr. Thompson, having been victorious
in the outset, proposes to carry the case to the Court
of Appeals for final adjudication.

JUDGE DANIELS' OPINION.
    The leading opinion in the case is written by
Judge Daniels. After stating the facts of the case he
says:—
    "The main point to be considered is whether, assuming
it to have been established as a matter of
fact that the election was illegal, the right to the injunction
has been maintained." He then cites the
provisions of the original charter of the society,
passed in 1805, and the amendment of 1867, which
extended the amount of real and personal property
which the society was allowed to hold to a yearly
income not exceeding $50,000. "This was for the
purpose, as the charter expressed it, 'of enabling
them the better to carry into effect the benevolent 
purpose of affording relied to the indigent
and distressed.'" The Judge next cited various 
provisions of the Revised Statutes applicable
to the case, and goes on to say that "in a
strictly legal sense the right of membership in a corporation
of that description in a franchise, and when
claimed by virtue of contested election it will be
brought within the controlling authority of the
statutory remedy." He holds that the right claimed
by the plaintiff in this case was of like description.
"For that reason the controversy was placed under
the jurisdiction of this court as a court of law, and
it results from this conclusion that an action for an
injunction was no the appropriate remedy. If,
under preceding practice of courts of equity they
had acquired jurisdiction over the unqualified subject
of contested corporate elections the enactment
of this remedy would not have superseded such
authority. But that was not the case, for courts of
equity exercised no such previous authority."
    The opinion concludes as follows:—
    "The injunction in this case was claimed for the 
simple reason that the corporation, unless restrained
from doing so, would initiate persons whose election
was questioned as members, which would injure and
deprive the plaintiff of his legal rights, privileges
and powers as a member and of his rightful voice in
the management and disposition of the property and 
affairs of the corporation, and the other members, it
was alleged, were in danger of sustaining similar injury.
but it was not stated that either would be deprived
of any pecuniary benefit which, in any
event, he might be entitled to enjoy under
the charter or bylaws. The only apprehended
injury was that his controlling ability as a voter
would be diminished. That however, would not
certainly follow, for it was not shown that these
persons were reasonably sure to cote the other way.
No good ground existed for supposing that the plaintiff
would sustain even this injury by their admission.
One-half, or even more than that, might vote
with him, and if they did he could sustain no possible
injury from them in the effect of his vote. The
injury anticipated was merely conjectural, dependent
on the views those persons, or such of them as
should vote, might entertain on the subject to be
settled in that way. It was not shown that they had
become committed to any adverse policy for the government
of the corporate affairs. But it did appear
from the evidence of sixty-seven of them that they
had espoused no course of conduct inconsistent with
the true interests and future prosperity of the society.

    "NOT IN DANGER."
    "For these reasons it was not proved, either by the
complaint or the affidavits, that plaintiffs stood in
danger or any act on their part that would produce
injury to him, or that the defendant threatened he
was about to do any act in violation of his rights,
and one or the other was required by the statute to
entitle him to an injunction. It does not appear
when the injunction order was served, but it could
not have been before the 6th day of January, which
was the day of its date, and by the complaint it was
shown that a regular meeting of the corporation
might be held on the evening of that day. By the
affidavit of the secretary that meeting appears to
have been so held and the plaintiff was present at
the time as one of the members. Then the subject
of the meeting at which the controverted erection
was held was considered, and, to the extent of approving
the minutes, what had then taken place was
approved by the order of this meeting. This was
not conclusive over the controversy, but it showed
by the action of a regular meeting that
the members of the society, who, as they had been
convened, were competent to elect all those persons
as new members, were not disposed to disapprove of
what, it is alleged to have been so irregularly performed.
Without placing any special stress upon
this approval, it is enough for the disposition of the
appeal that the remedy of the plaintiff is by the summary
application specially provided by the statute,
and not by means of injunction; and that no such
impending injury to the plaintiff's right had been
shown to be probable as will justify resort to an
order of that nature. The order continuing the injunction
should be reversed, and the appeal taken
from the order denying the motion to strike out certain
portions of the complaint dismissed without
costs to either party, and without prejudice to the
application which the statute had authorized to be
made." 

    OPINION OF JUDGE POTTER.
    Judge Potter in a concurring opinion says that he
is not prepared to decide that the statute referred to
by Judge Daniels is applicable to an election to membership
in a social club or benevolent society. He is
willing, however, to concur in the view that there is
no occasion for nor propriety is a resort to the extraordinary
remedy of an injunction. "Upon the
case as presented by the papers," says Judge Potter,
"it would seem that one member assumes to restrain
the action of the society of which he is a member.
It is practically the case of a single member attempting
to control the body of which he is but one. If
the election of the 147 members were illegal that can
be determined in the due course of proceedings, and
the illegitimate members ejected, or the society can
refuse to initiate them. I therefore think no sufficient
case is made for an injunction, and concur in
the result that the injunction shall be dissolved."

THE DECISION SPOILS THE AMMUNITION IN THE
ANTI-TAMMANY CAMP—THE FIGHT IN THE SOCIETY
ABANDONED, BUT TO BE CONTINUED
AT THE POLLS—AS EXCITING DISCUSSION—
THE END NOT YET.
    The adjourned meeting of the promoters of the
attempt to rescue the Tammany Society from the
men who now rule it was resumed last evening in
Clarendon Hall, in East Thirteenth street There
were eighty-seven members of the society
present. The following gentlemen conspicuous
in city politics took part in the proceedings:
—George W. McLean, Professor James
E. Morrison, ex-Senator Hayes, ex-Civil Justice J. W.
Fowler, ex-Senator Hugh H. Moore, ex-Deputy Register
John Y. Savage, County Clerk Hubert O. Thompson,
ex-Congressman Andrew Jackson Rogers,
Charles A. Jackson, ex-Alderman Des Robinson, ex-Alderman
Thomas W. Adams, Mayor's Marshal
Hart, ex-Alderman John T. McGowan, ex-Alderman
William Arrowsmith, Casper C. Childs,
Maurice J. Powers, Alderman Robert Hall, Alderman
Richard Haughton, Alderman Ambrose H. Purdy,
ex-Commissioner H. H. Porter, Major Oscar F. Outman,
Dr. Feodor Mierson and Charles Harvie.

    "A WET BLANKET"
    It was evident soon after eight o'clock had come
and gone that the decision of the General Term of
the Supreme Court dissolving the injunction interdicting
the Tammany Society from initiating
the 147 new members, which it is
claimed were illegally elected, had demoralized
the anti-Kelley opposition, as the warriors
came but slowly to the rendezvous, and the opening
was delayed for some time. At length, when Mr.
Thompson appeared, he mounted the platform,
called for order, and, announcing with regret the
absence of Mr. Wheeler H. Peckham, nominated
Mr. George Washington McLean as
chairman. The latter, in his acceptance; counselled
caution and firmness in the action to
be taken relative to their legal defeat. That section
would be not only for to-day but for future time,
and the hope of success must not be wholly resigned,
Mr. Charles A. Jackson presented the report
of the committee appointed at the last meeting
to make nominations for officers to be elected in

the Tammany Society. The Sense of the committee
until yesterday had been fully in favor of making a
ticket in accordance with their instructions, but at
their third meeting, after the falling "from a clear
sky of a judicial thunderbolt with a sulphurious
smell," they had concluded that that course would 
be useless, and that now the only way
to overthrow the Kelly despotism was to
assail it at the ballot box. He could not
impugn the ability or integrity of the judges who
had rendered the decision , nor the ability and zeal of
the advocates who had striven to support the injunction;
but it now appeared that the Tammany
Society possessed in itself inadequate 
means of protection for the majority 
against a minority which happened to be 
in power. As it was in such a position it was best to 
leave it, as the rats leave a sinking ship, to purify or
putrefy itself. It was doubly incapable of taking
care of the democratic party.

    THE FIELD ABANDONED.
    The committee tendered the following resolution
for adoption by the meeting: --
    Whereas the absolute control exercised by the Tammany
Society over the democracy of this city by despotically
determining and deciding all questions of regularity, is
utterly inconsistent with the independence of the party
and fatal to its consolidation and success, and
whereas the members of the society now present,
in proposing to nominate and elect a body of sachems,
were alone actuated by an earnest desire that this system
should be repudiated, and the annual election of a general
committee and the nominations of municipal and county
officers should be forever severed from the private interests
and despotism of a secret society, composed of a
few hundred men; and whereas the General
Term of the Supreme Court has decided that
the society, under its constitution and bylaws, however
inequitable and unjust, imperfect and unfair in themselves,
possessed the privilege of electing new members without
giving reasonable and adequate notice, practically subverting
the rights of their associates and creating at any
time fraudulent majorities; therefore be it
    Resolved, Since the Supreme Court has decided in effect
that seven sachems possess authority, without sufficient
and ordinary notices, to introduce and instal
147 members into the society with the obvious 
designs of arbitrarily controlling the democracy
of this city, that further resistance with the expectation
of reform is hopeless, and that the only effectual means to
overthrow such a conspiracy is by the united action of the
democracy at the ballot box in November, and that we
deem it inexpedient to nominate any ticket.

TO NOMINATE OR NOT TO NOMINATE.
    Professor Morrison, the Mayor's private secretary,
spoke eloquently and at length in favor of the report.
The Tammany Society was the most rotten, corrupt
and indefensible that existed in the United States.
    Ex-Congressman Rogers made an impetuous
speech in opposition to an abandonment of the field
of contest within the society. He instanced the persistence,
heroic courage and final success of the abolitionists
as an example which they ought to follow
if they hoped to lift the democratic party out of the
slough of despond. He was a member of the Tammany
Committee on Organization -- he was unremoved as
yet, but probably would be disciplined in the future -- (laughter) -- and he knew the infamy of the
proceedings of the secret clique whose control the
people must throw off. Here was an organization
which arrayed itself against the Governor of
the State, a man at the very head of the democratic
party -- (loud applause) -- against the President-elect
of the United States (tremendous applause); 
against the Speaker of the House of Representatives
and against the Mayor of New York. (Great applause).
He thought it would indicate a lack of pluck and
manhood if the fight for the control was so easily
abandoned.

    CONFUSED COUNSELS.
    Ambrose H. Purdy, in a few judicious remarks,
argued that a respectable anti-Kelly ticket, secretly
nominated and announced at the last moment
before the election, would compel the nomination of
a respectable Kelly ticket. He, therefore, moved an
amendment to the effect that the committee be instructed
to make such a ticket.
    Mr. Thompson rose in opposition. A fight was a
very good thing, even if it was a losing fight, so long
as the weapons were fair, but John Kelly did not use
fair weapons. The decision which had been rendered
was no doubt correct in law. He looked to the
democratic party and not to the Tammany Society --
which had been improperly captured by improper
persons -- for the means of victory.
    Mr. John B. Billings offered an amendment to the
amendment of Mr. Purdy, to the effect that the
ticket be made public immediately after it was
chosen.
    Mr. Jackson humorously favored a system of tactics
in emulation of an ancient gentleman named
Fabius.
    Mr. Rogers accepted Mr. Billings' suggestion, and
the motion seemed likely to be carried in its new
form when Mr. Morrison, speaking it was said for
Mayor Cooper and ex-Governor Tilden, threw oil
upon the raging waters. County Clerk Thompson
sarcastically said that the committee had better be
discharged if they were thought to lack intelligence
and a new one appointed. Justice
Murray declared that the preposition to run a ticket
had now become an absurdity. He for one did not
care to associate with men who had perpetuated the
mean and shabby trick of stealing into the society
147 repeators. The fight should be carried on in another
direction, in which there was still a good
chance of success.

   TWO DECISIVE VOTES.
    The motion to commit the report was lost by a 
vote of 22 to 43. The report and resolutions were
then adopted with 46 yeas and 13 nays. The meeting
then adjourned.
    It is hinted that the anti-Kelly tactics will now be
to wait until after the new members of Tammany
have been initiated and the new officers elected and
then to begin a quo warranto proceeding, intended to
invalidate the positions of all of them. This is what
Mr. Jackson meant by his allusions to the great
roman strategist.

DECLINED WITH THANKS.
    The following letter, in reply to the anti-Tammany
circular, was sent to Mr. Tiemann last Saturday: --
    MANHATTAN CLUB, NO. 96 FIFTH AVENUE
Daniel F. Tiemann, Esq. --
    Sir -- Your invitation to attend a meeting of the members
of the Tammany Society to be held on Monday evening
next for the purpose of nominating officers to
be voted for at the coming annual election, containing ninety-eight names in addition to
your own, is received. I reply to you personally
because I have been informed that some 
of the gentlemen whose names are signed did not sign and
do not indorse the sentiments expressed in the invitation
and therefore I do not know to whom to address
my reply except to you. It may be that
I, in assuming that you, as the first person
whose name appears on the list, concur in all the opinions 
therein contained, do you injustice as a democrat. If so I
beg your pardon.
    Nevertheless, as a member of the Tammany Society, and
always a democrat, I desire to say that I decline your invitation
for the following reasons: --
    First -- Because I believe that this meeting
is against the interests of the democratic
party, a large majority of whom -- viz. over 60,000 --
at the last election voted against the views
of the signers of this invitation, and are
now opposed to their attempt to assume control of the
organization.
    Second --- That it is intended in the interest of the
republican ticket which was successful at the
last election, in which, as you are well aware,
we lost the city and the State, and endangered
our success at the next Presidential election, only
because of the combination which you and your
associates saw fit to make with what in your invitation,
you very justly term "our common enemy."
    Third -- Because I believe that every single one
of the signers voted the republican ticket at
the last municipal election, and because in the
signers I recognize, with some exceptions, a complete
list of the men whose association in times past
with the democratic party has tended to make its
name disreputable, and who have been professional
traders in politics, and who ought to carry no weight
whatever in its councils.
    To you, as an old democrat hertofore honored by the
party, I desire to say that I thank you for your
invitation, and that I regret to be obliged to decline it
on account of the reasons that I have given. I am, sir, 
respectfully yours,
CADWALADER EVANS.
April 12, 1879.
------------------------------------
    DEMOCRATIC ACTIVITY.
    ORGANIZING FOR THE STATE AND NATIONAL
CAMPAIGN -- MEETING OF INFLUENTIAL DEMOCRATS
AT THE ST. JAMES HOTEL.
    About fifty prominent democrats met at the St.
James Hotel last evening and reorganized the democratic
union which made itself conspicuous during
the war by promoting war measures and adhering to
democratic doctrines. Among those present were
George Ticknor Curtis, Orlando B. Potter, Luke F.
Cozans, William H. Secor, John H. Strahan, Andrew
blessing, Charles Price, ex-Judge Kane, John H.
McConnell, John M. Coman, ex-Assemblyman John
Hayes, Warden Finn, of the Tombs; Assemblyman
Kirk, John A. O'Brien, Dr. Foch and Augustus Phillips.
Mr. Luke F. Cozans presided, and on calling 
the meeting to order explained that ever since the
last election, when the democracy was defeated -- he
cared not to ascertain how that came about -- it had
occurred, he thought, to many gentlemen that it
would be well to revive interest in old democratic
union, which had rendered such effective service
in 1862, 1863 and 1864. There was a democratic
majority in the State, he said, and all that was required
was to concentrate the strength of the party,
to begin early, come together for consultation frequently,
spread democratic documents broadcast
over the State, organize branch unions
in every county, and then the triumph
of democratic principles would be assured.
The republicans were already organized, they had
through the aid of federal patronage succeeded in
making every petty postmaster control his postal
district. All the democratic union needed to do was
to meet these false doctrines inch by inch, and there
could be not such word as fail for them next time.
The question was then discussed in regard to the
constitution of the association, which contains a 
clause forbidding any "participation in local issues
or nominations of office, " and limiting the operations
of the union to State and federal affairs. Mr.
George Ticknor Curtis said that he could
not conscientiously sign the roll of such an 
organization. For sixteen years now, though not an
active politician, he had taken a deep interest
in local affairs, and he, for one, could not now
ignore them. Further, he had as a democratic voter
ever stood by the side of Tammany, supporting its
measures and voting for its men. Why should he
abandon it now? he asked. This constitution, 
though not commanding such an abandonment, 
nevertheless seemed to favor it indirectly by ordering
them all to abstain from local affairs. The
speaker had ever co-operated with Tammany, and
certainly now that it was better administered, more
ably handed than ever before, he could not think
of signing the roll until he better understood the
aims and purposes of the new union. 
At the conclusion of Mr. Curtis' speech the roll
was rapidly signed by all the gentlemen present, and
after the last man had affixed his signature Mr. 
Curtis rose once more and said th[?]
credibly informed that it was the in[?]
democratic union not to oppose the [?]
terefere in the least with the doings of [?]
izatiions, and was, therefore, ready to s[?]
motion was then made to go into an [?]
manent officers, but at the suggestion [?]
committee of seven gentlemen was [?]
Chair to report a complete list of office[?]
ing to be held on Monday, 28th, inst.

THE STATE CAPIT[?]
PASSAGE OF A BILL AUTHORIZIN[?]
SHALS TO ISSUE PEOCESSES
MARINE COURT.
[BY TELEGRAPH TO THE HE[/]]
ALBANY, A[?]
The Legislator reassembled this [?]
recess, and was occupied with the thi[?]
bills, principally of an unimp[?]
acter. A long discussion took [?]
the bill permitting the issue [?]
out of the Marine Court to mar[?]
city of New York. instead of [?]
to the Sheriff, as at present. Mr. Gr[?]
strike out the enacting clause. In [?]
described the abuses practised by the [?]
urged the utter irresponsibility of t[?]
He also alluded to the political comp[?]
measure. Mr. Langbein advocated [?]
called attention to the corruptions [?]
grown up in the management of [?]
office. General Husted took part[?]
gument, and referred to the spectacle o[?]
Mayor preferring charges to a democra[?]
against democratic officials. Mr. Gra[?]
to this attack by asserting that Mayo[?]
been elected through a republican and a[?]
combination, for which the democratic [?]
metropolis was in no way responsible [?]
had been governed since 1857 from Al[?]
about time for the local authorities t[?]
thing to say in relation to their own aff[?]
BILLS INTRODUCED
The following bills were introduced [?]
ate:-
By Mr. Ecclesine--To increase an[?]
supply of water in the city of New Yo[?]
struct the necessary connections. A si[?]
introduced in the House last week.
By Mr. SESSIONS--To authorize the l[?]
in the streets, avenues and public pla[?]
rious cities, towns and villages of t[?]
heating and other purposes. 
By Mr. ROCKWELL-- In regard to pi[?]
harbor of New York.
THIRD READING.
In Committee of the Whole the follow[?]
ordered to a third reading:--
Altering the map of the city of New [?]
discontinue certain proposed streets. [?]
To facilitate the trail of certain acti[?]
vide for counting the ballots in the b[?]
with the Police Department of Brooklyn [?]
THE "L" ROADS. [?]
THEIR RESPECTIVE COMMITTEES D[?]
TO DISCUSSION REGARDING THE [?]
BUT ARRIVE AT NO AGREEMENT. [?]
A private meeting of the committee [?]
"L" roads, who are endeavoring to [?]
amicable understanding regarding cross[?]
change of route, was held at eleven o'cl[?]
morning in the rooms of the directors [?]
politan "L", No. 71 Broadway. Mr. H. [?]
the New York "L". was unavoidably a [?]
were present Messrs. H. R. Bishop, Ben[?]
ter and J. M. Fiske. of the New Yo[?]
Messrs. Wiliam R. Garrison. John H[?]
Horace Porter and Jose de Navarro, of [?]
tan "L". The meeting then continu[?]
o'clock in the evening, when it was ad[?]
ten o'clock this morning.
Nothing definite was proposed or do[?]
conference, but the gentlemen prese[?]
cussed the subject of crossings should be[?]
as the public safety would be greatl[?]
by their use, and it was debated [?]
along without them. The represent[?]
two roads, however, were not willing t[?]
tresets of their respective corporations [?]
to any course which seemed likely to [?]
terests. The whole afternoon was ther[?]
to discussion, and when the gentlem[?]
nothing had been agreed upon. 
A HERALD reporter called upon Mr. [?]
evening at his residence in Washingto[?]
that gentlemen said:--"We went over [?]
thoroughly. Although we agreed upon [?]
day. I think we paved the was for to-m[?]
ference, when, in all probability, we s[?]
an understanding. We talked among [?]
favored the idea of east and west side [?]
located by the HERALD, and, in fact, di[?]
plan that seemed feasible."
Mr. Cyrus W. Field was seen by the r[?]
residence in East Twenty-first street. [?]
posed altogether." said Mr. Field, "to [?]
ings. They are dangerous, too dang[?]
countenanced. We are peaceful, an[?]
stretch a point in favor of the other roa[?]
to-morrow the committees will have [?]
ready to be made to the companies."
NIGHT TRAINS ON THE LAST [?]
The New York "L" road will hereafte[?]
on the east side like all night at interv[?]
minutes from midnight until five o[?]
morning.
TRAFFIC ON THE NEW YORK [?]
The New York "L" road carried 101,2[?]
on Saturday last, of which 87,420 rod[?]
and 13,859 on the west side. The nu[?]
singers carried on Sunday was 70,747.
LITERARY CHIT-CHA[?]
The Bond street publishers are march[?]
A.D.F. Randolph, the publisher, be[?]
likeness to Milton. 
Houghton, Osgood & Co.'s new illust[?]
fellow" will be one of the most impor[?]
the season.
Mr. Charles Barnard, who wrote th[?]
Mollenhauer's "Mask-Ball," is the scien[?]
a New York magazine.
William Winter is fortunate in havin[?]
artist as Abbey to illustrate his article [?]
upon-Avon" in the May Harper.
The Illustrated Woodworker is the title [?]
publication described by its title. Th[?]
ber contains some handsome furniture [?]
The Army and Navy Journal republ[?]
the report of the Board of Inquiry in[?]
General Fitz John Porter. It is accom[?]
colored map to illustrate the operations [?]
this report. 
D. Appleton & Co. publish a revis[?]
Henry Ward Beecher's "Lectures to Y[?]
book which has been selling largely fo[?]
a century and has apparently furnished [?]
for some thousands of other lectures [?]
men have heard.
"Early Christian Architecture in Ir[?]
title of a new book by Miss Margaret S[?]
Bell, London), which is warmly praised [?]
side of the Atlantic for its literary no[?]
archaeological merit. The earliest o[?]
towers she dates from the beginning [?]
centry. 
"Moses, the Lawgiver," is the title o[?]
Dr. w. m. Taylor's collections of leading charac[???]
of Bible history. The discourses are merely chapters
of quite a complete biography, and are written 
with a view to entertainment as well as instruction.
An admirable drawing of Michael Angelo's famous
statue of Moses adds to the attractiveness of the
work.
"Baths and Bathing," the latest of the series of
Health Primers (D. Appleton & Co.), reprinted from
the English edition, is a very useful little treatise on
the rationale of the bath, and contains besides a description of all kinds of baths, as well as the principal places where curative bathing at thermal or
mineral springs is practiced in Europe. It is a pity
that the slight amount of additional work necessary
to enhance the value of the primer for American
bathing, was not undertaken. 
"The Hamilton Speaker" is the title of a book
compiled by Mr. O. E. Branch (Dick & Fitzgerald)
for elocutionary students to practice on. Mr. 
Branch describes it rather astoundingly as consisting 
of "new and original extracts." His great point
is to have every extract "a specimen of good English
composition," and hence, very naturally, it contains
four pieces by Mr. Branch to one by Edmond Burke.
This would establish its valuable character sufficiently, 
but its sublime excellence is evinced by the 
vaunted fact that "While a few pieces of a humorous
style have been used, nothing of a comic style has
been admitted. " "Dick's Recitations, " No 9. of this 
series, is a capital of unpretending collection 




15, 1879 -- QUADRUPLE SHEET 
the law in regard to marshals and super-
be worth nothing, since there would be
led in the federal government to enforce
. 
PEAL OR NO APPROPRIATION 
l, said Mr. Blaine, and it is rather a 
that if we do not agree to the bills as 
not to have the appropriation. That 
ounced in both branches of Congress, 
on the authority of the democratic
merely the army appropriation; they did
life, but in the Legislative bill, as it 
an caucus, there was an appropriation 
f the expenses of the Supreme Court, 
ts and District courts of the United 
ded that certain sections of the Revised 
pealed. He had always understood that 
ant was divided into three distinct de-
gislative, executive and judicial. 
he legislative branch steps forward
f the executive does not sign the 
ers it will starve the judiciary. 
rying the matter further than he had 
t to go before, and, besides starving the 
e other side would refuse to appropriate
he expenses of the Capitol building and 
the public printing, or for the Congres-
r. The Department of State, of which 
ied reason to be proud for its conduct
in affairs, was to be disabled, and our 
relations must cease, unless the Pres-
these bills. The beacons and warn-
en 17,000 miles of coast must 
[?] mints of New Orleans, Denver, San
nd Philadelphia must stop: the Pen-
must suspend operations: all the Ex
ions of the government are taken by the
hwayman style and commanded to stand
n the name of th[?] democratic caucus. 
n of either branch of Congress had ever 
d such legislation, but the democratic 
adopted it. He thought no parallel to 
could be found in our history. 
      PRESIDENTIAL VETOES. 
n this floor could remember some Presi-
that shook the country to its centre
dent. Some of the oldest of them re-
eto of the National bank bill in 1841 by Tyler. 
shook the country with political ex-
h as bad, up to that time, hardly a 
was then believed, whether rightly or 
immaterial now, by those who ad-
ve measures. that they were of the 
ortance to the welfare of the people. 
ster believed them to be so, but when 
ere vetoed no suggestion was made to 
ers on appropriation bills and refuse 
y to carry on the government unless
re signed. In 1841, when the feeling 
ght, when the whig party, in addition 
r great measure, lost it under the sting 
of what they believed was a deser-
[?] President whom they had chosen, 
r, Clay, goaded by all those considera-
o debate the question in the Senate he
with having made some threat involv-
npendence of the Executive. Rising to 
t he responded:-
hing whatever of any obligation on the 
resident to conform his judgment to the 
he Senate and the House of Representa-
and I respect the perfect independence 
riment, acting within its proper sphere, 
Departments."
. Mr. Blaine said a leading democrat, 
man, who had courage, frankness and 
ualities, boasts publicly that the demo-
ower for the first time in eighteen years 
do not indent to stop until the have 
ery vestige of the republican war mess-
warned is forearmed, and the
began properly on a measure 
Abraham Lincoln. The picture was
one, and a strange time had 
men, fresh from the battlefields of the 
ok their seats here and proposed to re-
enacted while they were trying to de-
ion. The Vice President of the Confed-
ted that for sixty or seventy years pre-
bellion, from the foundation of the gov-
South, though in a minority, had, by
ith, what he termed the anti-centralists 
ruled the country, and in 1866 the same 
aid, in a speech before the Georgia Legis-
by a return to Congress the South might 
experiment with the same success. He 
had read that speech at the time of its 
l had little thought he would live to 
[?]ecy fulfilled. But now we see those 
tured in a democratic caucus, in which 
as an overwhelming majority of two-
e House and thirty out of forty-two
wenty-three of whom -- a positive and 
majority -- participated in the war 
Union, either in civil or military situa-
s our legislation is shaped and fashioned
in which the ex-Confederates have a
d Mr. Stephens' prophecy is realized.
riately the Congress controlled by the
o the President, remaining branch
ment elected on republican principles
to the party now in power, that he
cise his power to veto a bill.
THE "REVOLUTION" QUESTION.
we call it revolutionary, continued Mr.
t amendments on appropriation bills?
t. There have been a great many amend-
such bills, some mischievous and some
I call it the audacity of revolution for
or Representative, or say caucus of Sen-
presentatives, to get together and say
ill have certain legislation or stop the
of the government. That is revolu-
on't think it will be revolution. It will
on that will not revolve; it won't work.
tion if persisted in, and if not persisted
backed out from ignominiously, and
ll probably be the result.
proceeded to say that the extent to
outh controlled the legislation of the
worth pointing out. That section con-
one-third of the population of the
he last House of Representative, of
was allowed to speak, the South had
out of the forty-two standing commit-
Senate it has twenty-two out of thirty-
ttees. He was not calling these things
in reproach, but only showing what an
rophet that Vice President of the Con-
, and how entirely true all his words
 nd how he has lived to see them ful-
HAT THE PRESIDENT WILL DO.
concluded as follows:-  I do not pro-
, Mr. President, least of all Senators on
rtainly as little as any Senator on this
rofess to know, what the President of
tates will do when these bills are pre-
, as I suppose in due course of time
e. I certainly should never speak a
rd of disrespect of the gentleman
exalted position, and I hope I shall not
unbefitting the dignity of the office of
the United States, but as there has been
more and there on both sides as to what
it seems to me that the dead heroes of
ould rise from their graves if he should
intimidated and outraged in his proper
power by threats like these.
measures of Abraham Lincoln are to be
say leading democrats. The Bourbons
sled themselves, I believe, after the res-
removing every trace of Napoleon's
grandeur, even chiselling the "N" from
ments raised to perpetuate his glory;
man's hand from St. Helena reached
stroyed them in their pride and in
. And I tell the Senators on the
of this chamber, I tell the dem-
y North and South -- South in the
the following -- that the slow, unmoving
ru from the tomb of the martyred Presi-
prairies of Illinois, will wither and de-
-- "Though dead, he speaketh." (Great 
the galleries.).
present these bills with these threats
President, who bore the commission of
ncoln and served with honor in the army
, which Lincoln restored and preserved,
only of one appropriate response from
is en. He should say to you, with all
fitting his station, "Is thy servant a dog,
ld do this thing?"
SPEECH OF MR. WALLACE.
ce, (dem.) of Pa., in reply to Mr. Blaine
is bill came from a committee. It did
om a secret consultation of democrats.
us clearly because he was one of the
the committee. He would not now
oor if he had not been charged by the
give the reasons for the insertion of
of the bill disputed by the Senator
. The bill came here from the
taken to the clerk's desk and
sent to the Committee on Appropria-
d been reported back from that commit-
as the very bill almost in word and let-
reported by the Committee of Confer-
the last session, and would have been
the two houses and passed but for their
on amendments. The bill was now
here on its passage. It contained a single disputed
section, to which he would now address
himself. The war caused many departures from
principles which were essential to our liberties.
Necessity made people bear subjection of civil to
military power, suspension of habeas corpus and the
presence of armed troops at the polls. These pass
away with the necessity that produce them. The
single issue in this bill was, Shall the Executive
longer, possess the power to place troops at
the polls? Their presence was a menace
upon the right of free elections. This right
is fixed and certain. It came to us from
England, and is a part of our system of laws. Its
protection rests in the States. The federal government
has nothing to do with it. This is, said Mr.
Wallace, the only issue in the contest. We will not
be diverted from it. On this line we stand, by it we
fall. It is whether the federal government shall
place troops at the polls, or whether the States,
free from federal interference, shall preserve
the peace and secure free elections. I repeat,
the placing of troops at the polls is a menace, a
threat, and no free people can bear it. In the bill of
rights of nearly every State "free elections" are
guaranteed, while no such power is given to the federal
government anywhere in the constitution. The
statues of many States assert and protect this right.
In 1803 Pennsylvania asserted it by statute; New
York, Maryland and many others have like provisions.
No attempt was made by the federal government
until it was exercised in the Border States under
the war power. The exercise of this power was 
force alone.
TROOPS IN PHILADELPHIA.
In Philadelphia, in 1869 during the election of
Governor, an armed body closed the polls in the
Third precinct of the Fifth ward for an hour, or
until they saw fit to reopen them and let vote
those whom they thought ought to vote.
The people want no more of this. They
want free elections, without the shadow or 
substance of military power, whether State
or federal. He wanted the provisions of the constitution
to be the law of the land. In the name of
the people he in part represented he asked that this
menace be removed and that the States have the control
in the preservation of peace at the polls, as
they should. Even in poor down-trodden Mexico,
when our troops were there in 1847, a request was
make that they should not appear at the
polls, as it might be supposed they were
there to control the election in progress.
Our military commander obeyed the law
o f Mexico. Free election was impossible if we put
it in the power of the President to send on men to
the polls. He did not care whether there was only
one soldier to two or twenty thousand square miles.
That one soldier acted under the authority of military
power, and the man in the blue coat, with a
gun in his hand, was the representative of
forty millions of people. We propose to restore to
the civil power its absolute control over the
military power. We propose to restore to 
the American people their own system.
We are denied the right to mould legislation and
charged with coercion of the Executive and with intent
to break down the government. We pursue the
processes of the constitution and follow precedent.
We neither seek to coerce the Executive nor submit
to be coerced by it. It is the right of the legislative
power "to raise and support armies, to make rules
and to enact laws," and we follow our plain duty.
This bill votes the pay of the troops. Cannot the
lawmaking power say how they should be employed?
We violate no provision of the constitution; no one
pretends we do. We act within the scope of our
power as we judge our duty calls us.
PROPOSITIONS AFFIRMED.
Four propositions can be affirmed -- 
First -- The right to place legislation for the protection
of the rights of the people upon money bills
belongs to the legislative power, and cannot be denied
by any other branch of the government. We
are the judges of our power and duties in this regard.
Our judgment cannot be impugned by the
Executive or the judiciary. They may criticize the
subject matter, but not the form.
Second --This right is sanctioned by the practice of
Congress for many years. The Revised Statutes, under
the head of "General and Permanent Statutes
Affecting the Army," contain 268 sections. Of these
ninety-two came directly from Appropriation acts.
Third -- It is sustained by precedent as old as the
time of Charles I , and no power dreams of denying
its possession by the commons.
Fourth -- The legislation proposed is constitutional
and necessary, and violates no right of any branch of
the federal government. We have no right to assume
that any feature of this bill will meet disapproval
anywhere. This bill makes not threat to deny supplies.
THE QUESTION OF COERCION.
Let us look at the subject of coercion. The President,
Senate and House are independent each in its
sphere. Each possesses a negative upon the other.
The Senate and the House each has an absolute veto
upon the other while that of the Executive is limited.
If the Senate refuses to pass a House bill
because of objectionable matter and makes its
removal a condition of its passage it
coerces the House to that extent. It has this right.
It is not revolutionary. It exercised its constitutional
right to judge of the measure. This right is
vital; the check invaluable. The same is true of the
Executive dissents, and on reconsideration there
are not two-thirds, the legislative branch
may decline to act. it has this right
or it has no independence of action.
It alone for itself must judge of the fitness, necessity
and constitutionality of the measure proposed.
It cannot coerce the Executive, nor can the Executive
coerce it. Each is responsible to the people for its
conclusions and actions, and must act in full view of
that tribunal. If the legislature branch could be coerced
to act in this mode the will of the majority
would be controlled by the minority. The patronage
of an unscrupulous President and the minority
could dictate legislation. No such purpose is intended
by the constitutional negative. The defensive
power of non-action is the protection of the liberty
of the people. Mr. Clay in 1817 expressly asserted the
right of non-action in the legislative power. It has
limits to its use. It is an appeal to the people.
Its power for the destruction of unconstitutional
or hasty legislation is invaluable;
but it was never intended and never used to deprive the
people of free elections or to strike down the rights
of a free people. When it is used for such a purpose
the people will correct the wrong. This legislation
places a check on the military power. That
duty is placed upon us. In the interest
of the people we must restore the original
principles from which four years of war have 
diverted the government, bring the military to strict
subordination to the civil power, permit a free system
of laws to be based upon a free ballot and expunge
a standing menace upon free institutions.
    Mr. Wallace in the course of his remarks asked
whether the Senator from Maine or any other Senator
would deny the right to restore to the people their
own system of free election. Would the Senator
deny that it belonged to the people? If not, why
not restore it? The Senator from Maine said there
are so many troops and you have not been interfered
with; but there is a law which give the President
power to interfere at elections. Nobody contends
that partisan control is right.
    The Senator from Maine said that this bill was the
dictate of a democratic caucus, but he (Mr. Wallace)
asserted that no caucus ever saw this bill. It was the
production of the House Committee on Appropriations.
    Mr. Blaine (interrupting) said that the admission
came from the Senator from Kentucky (Mr.
Bock) that a committee of the democratic caucus was
preparing these measures. It was an issue of fact
between the Senator from Pennsylvania and the Senator
from Kentucky.  Mr. Blaine read from the Congressional
Record in support of his assertion.
    Mr. Wallace, resuming, repeated that no democratic
caucus ever saw the pending bill, and, in conclusion,
repeated that its only object was to restore
to the people the rights of which they had been deprived.
    Mr. Logan, of Illinois, obtained the floor, but gave
way to Senator Perry, who moved that the Senate
proceed to the considerations of executive business.
It was now a quarter to four o'clock.
    Mr. Davis, (dem.) of W.Va., thought the Senate
might remain in open session and hour longer. If
any Senator was ready to speak on the pending bill
let him do so; if not, let the Senate vote.
    The Senate, by a vote of 35 to 17, went into executive
session, and when the doors were reopened adjourned
at ten minutes past four P.M.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Washington, April 14, 1879.
    Immediately after the reading of the journal the
Speaker proceeded to the call of States for bills for
reference, beginning with the State of Maine.
    The first response was made by Mr. Ladd, of Maine,
who introduced a bill to put the coinage of gold
and silver on the same footing.
    A point of order was thereupon raised by Mr.
Conger, of Michigan, that the introduction of bills
required one day's notice, and that no such notice
had been given.
    The Speaker, after quoting several rules bearing
on the subject, overruled the point of order. An
appeal from the decision was taken by Mr. Conger,
and a motion to lay the appeal on the table was made
by Mr. Cox, of New Jersey.
    The question was debated by Mr. Stephens, of
Georgia, who expressed the opinion that the decision
was clearly right, and that , at all events, the object
of a bill could always be attained by presenting a
petition on the same subject -- a course which he
himself had pursued this morning in regard to all
the objects of legislation which he desired to promote.
    After a brief argument by  Mr. Reed, of Maine, in
support of the point of order, and by Mr. Cox, of
New York, against it, Mr. Conger called for tellers
on the motion to lay on the table. Thereupon Mr.
Springer, of Illinois, (remarking that he wished to
expedite the decision of the question), called for the
yeas and nays, which were ordered, and on which Mr.
Conger's ludicrous comment was that he was glad
to see that the delay was being occasioned by the
action of the democratic side of the House.
    The appeal was laid on the table -- yeas 139, nays
75; but the morning hour was used up in the objection,
the discussion and the taking of the vote.
    ON the announcement of the vote Mr. Springer, of
Illinois, inquired whether a member might not put
in the petition box a memorial requesting the passage 
of a bill attached, and whether the committee to
which the memorial referred might not report the
bill.
    The Speaker said that he never decided a case until
it actually occurred. The question the gentleman
from Illinois referred to would come up when the
committee reported.
    Mr. Springer, (dem.) of Ill., then said that in order
to test the question he would send to the Clerk's
desk for reference a memorial, accompanied by a 
bill.
    The Speaker ruled that that required unanimous
consent, inasmuch as the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Monroe) was on the floor for the purpose of moving
to suspend the rules.
    Mr. Monroe, (rep.) of Ohio, here moved to suspend
the rules and adopt the following resolution: --
    Resolved, That in the judgment of this House the
business interests of the country require that no legislation
changing the law in regard to the currency or tariff
should be passed at the present session of Congress.
    Mr. Kelley, (rep.) of Pa., inquired whether the
resolution was divisible.
    The Speaker replied that it was not.
    Mr. Morrison (dem.) of Ill., suggested that the
word "passed" in the resolution should be changed
to undertaken." While he believed that the tariff
ought to be changed, he believed that it could not be
and would not be during the present session, nor
probably during the present Congress, and he did
not think the business interests of the country should
be disturbed by unsuccessful attempts to change the
tariff.
    Mr. Monroe, of Ohio, accepted the suggestion and
the resolution was changed accordingly.
    The vote was then taken and the resolution was 
rejected -- yeas 108, nays 117.
    When the name of Mr. Kelley, of Pennsylvania,
was called, that gentleman said that, finding a divided
duty, he declined to vote.
    The following is the vote in detail: --
    Yeas -- Messrs. Aldrich of Rhode Island, Aldrich of Illinois,
Anderson, Baker, Barber, Barlow, Bayon, Bedford,
Bicknell, Blake, Bliss, Bourse, Boyd, Brewer, Briggs,
Brigham, Browne, Burrows, Butterworth, Cannon, Carpenter,
Caswell, Chittenden, Claffin, Clark of Iowa, Conger,
Covert, Cowgill, Crapo, Daggett, Davis of Illinois,
Deering, Demster, Dunwell, Dwight, Errett, Farr,
Ferdon, Field, Frye, Garfield, Godschalk, Hall,
Hammond of New York, Harris of Massachusetts,
Haskell, Hawk, Hawler, Hayes, Hazelton,
Henderson, Houk, Humphrey, Hurd, James, Johnston,
Joyce, Keifer, Ketcham, Lapham, Lindsey, Loring, Marsh,
McGowan, McKinley, McLane, Monroe, Morrison, Neal
Newberry, Nurcross, O'Neill, Orth, Osimer, Pound, Prescott,
Price, Reed, Rice Richardson of New York, Roberson,
Robinson, Ross, Russell of Massachusetts, Ryan of Kansas,
Sapp, Shallenberger, Sherwin, Stone, Talbott, Thomas,
Townsend of Ohio, Tyler, Undergraff of Ohio, Updegraff of
Iowa, Urmer, Valentine, Van Aernam, Voorhis, Van Voorhis, Wait, Ward, Washburn, Wilber, Williams of Wisconsin,
Willits, W.A. Wood, and Young of Ohio -- 108.
The following pairs were announced: --Overton
and Davis of North Carolina, Jorgensen and Bosle,
Hiseock and Bragg, Horr and Bouck, Bingham and 
Knott, McCook and Dibrell, Miles and Morse, Ballou
and McMahon, Mason and Bachman, Harmor and 
Klotz, Smith of Pennsylvania and Clymer, Einstein
and O'Brien, Dick and Lay.
    Mr. Atkins, (dem.) of Tenn., then moved to go into
Committee of the Whole on the Legislative bill.
    Mr. Ewino, (dem.) of Ohio, demanded the yeas and 
nays, whereupon Mr. Atkins withdraw his motion
and moved to adjourn.
    Pending which Mr. Young, (dem.) of Tenn., introduced
a bill to increase the efficiency of the National
Board of Health and to prevent the introduction and
spread of contagious diseases. Referred.
    Mr. Atkins' motion was agreed to--yeas 123, nays
92--and the House, at half-past two, adjourned until
to-morrow.
ARMY INTELLIGENCE
                                           Washington, April 14, 1879.
    The superintendent of the army recruiting service
has been ordered to prepare and forward 120 recruits
to Ford Snelling, Minn., for assignment to the Second
cavalry.
    Leave of absence for six months, on a surgeon's
certificate of disability, has been granted to Surgeon
F. W. Elbery, United States Army.
    Captain W. H. Bayle, Twenty-first infantry, has
been ordered to proceed from Fort Vancouver to this
elty and return on business connected with the public
services. 
    By direction of the Secretary of War, upon the 
recommendation of the General of the Army, so
much of the unexecuted portion of the sentence of
the court martial in the case of Colonel Oliver L.
Shepherd, United States Army (retired), as imposes
confinement at a military post is remitted.
NAVAL INTELLIGENCE
THE FLAGSHIP HARTFORD AT MONTEVIDEO--
MOVEMENT OF NATIONAL VESSELS--CONFIRMATIONS.
                                           Washington, April 14, 1879.
    Rear Admiral Nichols, in a despatch to the Secretary 
of the Navy, dated United States Flagship Hartford,
Montevideo, March 6, reports that Colonel
Don Lorenzo Latorre, who for nearly two 
years had been the supreme ruler of
Uruguay, with the powers of a dictator,
was, on the 1st of March, elected President
of the Republic. The day was celebrated as a holiday
at Montevideo, in honor of the re-establishment
of the constitutional government. Admiral Nichols
joined in the celebration by dressing his ship in
colors and firing a national salute to the Uruguayan
flag. Washington's Birthday was also celebrated on
board the Hartford, and salutes were fired by the
foreign ships-of-war in the harbor and by the batteries
on shore.
    Admiral Nichols reports the Essex at Montevideo,
undergoing some slight repairs, on the completion
of which he intended to send her to run a line of
soundings along the coast north of the mouth of the 
La Plata River.
YELLOW FEVER
    Yellow fever prevailed at Rio Janeiro, but, owing to
the strict quarantine restrictions and infrequent
communication with that part, that disease had not 
appeared in Uraguay.
    Her Britannic Majesty's steamer Garnet had arrived
at Montevideo, and the command of the British
naval force at that station had been assumed by Captain
James F. Erskine, R. N. The former commander,
Captain Richard Carter, sailed for home in
his flagship the Volage on the 24th ult.
    The health of the officers and men on board the
Hartford and Essex [?] good. 
THE LACKAWANNA.
    The Navy Department is informed that the Lackawanna, 
Captain R. Chandler commanding, was at
Payta, Peru, on March 19. On the 17th Francis Johnson, captain of the maintop, was instantly killed from falling from the maintopsail yard while assisting in making sail.
First Lieutenant H. G. Ellsworth, United States Marine Corps, has been ordered to command the marine guard on board the Jamestown, now fitting out for Sitka.
CONFIRMATIONS.
The Senate, in executive session, to-day confirmed all the nominations which were received from the President on the 9th inst. for the promotion of twenty-six midshipmen to be ensigns in the navy. The following nominations of midshipmen to be confirmed:-
Stimson J. Brown, James H. Scars, A. E. Culver, Stephen Jenkins, Walter McLean, and W. J. Chambers of New York; Henry C. Gearing, George C. Foulte, and William L. Varnum, of Pennsylvania; W. D. Rose of New Jersey; Henry J. Mayo, pf Vermont; Charles A. Gove, of New Hampshire; Charles F. Pond, of Connecticut; Burns F. Walling, John T. Newton, and L. A. Piepmeyer, of Ohio; William H. Allen, of Illinois; Edward M. Kats, of Wisconsin Charles C. Rogers, of Tennessee; T. M. Potta and Robert C. Ray, of the District of Columbia; C. J. Bouah, of Virginia; Richard Henderson, of North Carolina; L. K. Reynolds, of Alabama; Benjamin Tappan, of Arkansas, and James C. Gilmore, of Arizona.
THE VANDALIA AT NORFOLK.
Norfolk, Va., April 14, 1879
The United States steamer Vandalia, from Boston, has arrived here.
THE TICONDEROGA AT THE LIBERIAN CAPITAL, 
[BY CABLE TO THE HERALD.]
LONDON, April 14, 1879.
The United States steamer Ticonderoga arrived at Monrovia, west coast of Africa.
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.
ANNUAL WASHINGTON SESSION - SUBJECTS OF PAPERS TO BE READ.
WASHINGTON, April 14, 1879.
The National Academy of Sciences will begin its annual Washington session to-morrow morning.  The meetings for scientific communications will be held in the chapel of All Souls' Church, commencing at noon, and are open to the public.  The academy will be presided over by its Vice President, Professor O.C. Marsh, of New Haven, in consequence of the demise of the late President, Joseph Haury, whose successor will be chosen at this sessions.
PAPERS TO BE READ.
The following are the titles of some of the papers that will probably be read on Tuesday:-
C.S. Peirce - On Ghosts in Diffraction Spectra; also on Comparison of Wave Lengths with the Meter, S.H. Scudder - The Paleozoid Cockroaches.  Henry Draper - Confirmation by Spectrum; Photographs of the Discovery of Oxygen in the Sun.  S. Weir Mitchell - The Relation of Neuralgic Pains to Storms and the Earth's Magnetism.  C. H. Peters - Critical Remarks on Observations alleged to be of Intra Mercurial Planets.  E. C. Pickering - Eclipses of Jupiter's Satellites, C. S. F. Peirce - On a Method of Swinging Pendulums Proposed by M. Faye; also on the errors of Pendular Experiments.  E. D. Cape - On the Extinct Species of Rhinoceros and Allied Forms of North America.
THE NATIONAL CAPITOL "LIFE,"
WASHINGTON, April 14, 1879.
In the month of November last the receiver of the American Mutual Insurance Company, of New Haven, with which, it will be remembered, "President" Noyes amalgamated the interests of the National Capitol, and several other life insurance companies came to Washington, and in view of the contract implied in this amalgamation sued out a write and replevined the books of the National Capitol Company from the officers made a motion to quash the write of replevin and the argument was heard by Judge Cox of the District Supreme Court, who on Saturday granted the motion and ordered the return of the books.  The company will also bring suit for damages occasioned by their alleged illegal seizure and detention.
CAPTAIN WILLIAMS' TRIAL.
The persons who assembled in the court room of the Police Commissioners yesterday morning were disappointed at the extreme brevity of the proceedings.  Captain Williams and the counsel for both sides were present, but the only Commissioner on the bench was Mr. Sidney P. Nicols.  Immediately after order was called he announced that in deference to a request by letter from General Smith and as Mr. Erhardt was also absent, the three cases against Captain Williams were adjourned until Thursday, at ten A. M..