their dreams, and for three years they have been howling like maniacs for more "Greenbacks." Two years ago, in Cooper Institute, New York, William M. Evarts disposed of these fellows in one sentence, and not one of his long ones either, telling them that the trouble with the greenbacks then was not that they purchased too little, but that they purchased too much; that the greenbacks purchased the musket and the cannon; the powder and the ball, and the rations and clothes for the Union soldiers who used these apt and happy means to put the traitors under and save the Union.

Is not the conduct of these friends (?) of the soldiers in Indiana during those days a matter of history, when a Legislature, a majority of whom turned out after to be "Knights of the Golden Circle," refused to the lamented Morton a dollar to put his troops in the field, and that patriot of patriots had to come to Washington and appeal to his friend, President Lincoln, who promptly supplied him with the necessary funds?

To be sure they are the soldier's friend, and, accordingly, last year, when they had two splendid Union soldiers on their ticket in Ohio, whose valor and patriotism were never doubted, the Democratic press all over Ohio claimed for General Rice the credit of having secured the passage of the Arrears of Pensions Bill, and of being its author. I don't believe Mr. Rice ever did or would make such a claim himself. But see how easy that wooden gun is spiked.

The following appears in the Congressional Record of the 2d of April, 1878:

"ARREARS OF PENSIONS.

Mr. CUMMINGS-I move that the rules be suspended and the bill which I send to the Clerk's desk be passed.

The Clerk read as follows:

A bill to provide that all pensions on account of death, or wounds received, or disease contracted in the service of the United States during the late war of the rebellion, which have been granted, or which shall hereafter be granted, shall commence from the date of death or discharge from the service of the United States; for the payment of arrears of pensions and other purposes.

Be it enacted, &c.. That all pensions which have been granted under the general laws regulating pensions, or may hereafter be, in consequence of death from a cause which originated in the United States service during the continuance of the late war of the rebellion, or in consequence of wounds, injuries or disease received or contracted in said service during said war of the rebellion, shall commence from the date of the death or discharge from said service of the person on whose account the claim has been or shall hereafter be granted, or from the termination of the right of the party having prior title to such pension: Provided, The rate of pension for the intervening time for which arrears of pension are hereby granted shall be the same per month for which the pension was originally granted.

SEC. 2. That the Commissioner of Pensions is hereby authorized and directed to adopt such rules and regulations for the payment of the arrears of pensions hereby granted as will be necessary to cause to be paid to such pensioners, or, if the pensioners shall have died, to the person or persons entitled to the same, all such arrears of pension as the pensioner may be or would have been entitled to under this act.

SEC. 3. That section 4717 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, which provides that no claim for pension not prosecuted to a successful issue within five years from the date of filing the same shall be admitted without recordevidence from the War or Navy Department of the injury or disease which resulted in the disability or death of the person on whose account the claim is made: Provided, That in any case in which the limitation prescribed by this section bars the further prosecution of the claim the claimant may present, through the Pension Office, to the Adjutant-General of the Army or the SurgeonGeneral of the Navy evidence that the disease or injury which resulted in the disability or death of the person on whose account the claim is made originated in the service and in the line of duty; and if such evidence is deemed satisfactory by the officer to whom it may be submitted he shall cause a record of the fact so proved to be made, and a copy of the same to be transmitted to the Commissioner of Pensions, and the bar to the prosecution of the claim shall thereby be removed,' be, and the same is hereby, repealed.

SEC. 4. That all acts, or parts of acts, so far as they may conflict with the provisions of this act, be, and the same are hereby, repealed.

Mr. BEEBE-I would like to ask the gentleman from Iowa if he is prepared to state how many hundreds of millions of dollars this bill will take out of the Treasury?

Mr. CUMMINGS-Is debate in order?

Mr. BEEBE-I simply rise to make an inquiry.

Mr. CUMMINGS-I object to any inquiry unless it is a parliamentary one, and that, of course, should not be addressed to me.

Mr. RICE, of Ohio-I ask that the bill be referred to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

The SPEAKER-That motion is not in order; the motion of the gentleman from Iowa is to suspend the rules and pass the bill.

Mr. RICE, of Ohio-I wish to state to the House

Mr. CUMMINGS-I object to any debate whatever.

Mr. BEEBE—I desire to make an inquiry of the Chair.

The SPEAKER-The gentleman can make any parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. BEEBE-I would respectfully inquire of the gentleman from Iowa through the Chair how many millions of dollars this would take from the Treasury?

The SPEAKER-That is in the nature of an argument why the bill should not pass; the Chair cannot entertain it.

Mr. BEEBE-Then I withdraw it.

Mr. CLYMER-Would it be parliamentary to inquire whether this bill has been considered by any committee of the House?

The SPEAKER-The Chair cannot answer that question.

Mr. RICE, of Ohio-It has not.

Mr. CUMMINGS-I insist upon the regular order.

The SPEAKER-The regular order is the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill which has been read.

Mr. MCMAHON—I desire to inquire of the gentleman how this bill compares with the bill which has already been reported—

The SPEAKER-That is in the nature of debate.

Mr. CUMMINGS-I ask for the yeas and nays on my motion.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. RICE-I move that the House now adjourn, and on that motion I call the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and there were-yeas, 75; nays, 148; not voting, 58; as follows:

Acklen,
Aiken,
Aldrich,

Goode,
Gunter,
Hardenbergh,
Harris, Henry R.
Harris, John T.
Hartridge,
Hatcher,
Henry,
Hewitt, G. W.

NAYS-148.

Robinson, M. S.
Ryan,
Sampson,

Muller,
Reagan,
Riddle,

Hunter,

Ittner,

James,

Bacon,

Crapo,

Jones, James T.

Sapp,

Bagley,

Culberson,

Jones, John S.

Sayler,

Baker, John H.

So the motion to adjourn was not agreed to.

During the call of the roll the following announcements were made:

Mr. HARRIS, of Virginia-My colleagues, Mr. PRIDEMORE and Mr. JORGENSEN, are paired on all political questions. Mr. PRIDEMORE is detained at home by illness in his family.

Mr. FOSTER-I am paired on all political questions with Mr. Waddell, of North Carolina. As I do not regard this a political question, I will vote in the negative.

Mr. PATTERSON, of Colorado-I am paired with Mr. Errett, of Pennsylvania. Mr. MARTIN—I am paired with Mr. Hubbell, of Michigan.

The result of the vote was then announced as above stated.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

A message from the Senate, by Mr. Sympson, one of its clerks, informed the House that the Senate had passed, without amendment, a joint resolution of the House of the following title:

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 142) making an appropriation for filling up, draining, and placing in good sanitary condition the grounds south of the Capitol along the line of the old canal, and for other purposes.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed, with amendments in which the concurrence of the House was requested, a bill of the House of the following title:

A bill (H. R. No. 3987) to regulate the advertising of mail-lettings.

The message further announced that the Senate had passed and requested the concurrence of the House in a bill of the following title:

A bill (S. No. 1014) requiring the commissioner for preparing and publishing a new edition of the Revised Statutes of the United States to revise and perfect the index to the first volume of the same,

ARREARS OF PENSIONS.

The question recurred on the motion of Mr. Cummings to suspend the rules and and pass the bill indicated by him.

Mr. SPRINGER-Has this bill been reported from the Committee on Invalid Pensions?

Mr. RICE, of Ohio-It has not been; the committee have matured a bill of like import.

Mr. CUMMINGS-I object to debate and insist on the regular order.

Mr. SPRINGER-In order that we may have an opportunity to ascertain what this bill is, I move that the House now adjourn.

The SPEAKER-That motion is not now in order.

Mr. SPRINGER Business has intervened since the last motion to adjourn was decided.

The SPEAKER-What business?

Mr. SPRINGER-The bill has been read.

The SPEAKER-That was for the information of the House.

Mr. BEEBE-Has not the House received a message from the Senate since the last motion to adjourn? And is not that business of so much importance that it even necessitates the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole leaving the chair?

The SPEAKER-The Chair will direct the Clerk to read Rule 161, which is very plain.

The Clerk read as follows:

Pending a motion to suspend the rules, the Speaker may entertain one motion that the House do now adjourn; but after the result thereon is announced he shall not entertain any other dilatory motion till the vote is taken on suspension.

Mr. SPRINGER-A motion to adjourn is not necessarily a dilatory motion.
The SPEAKER-The Clerk will read from page 151 of the Digest.
The Clerk read as follows:

A motion to adjourn may be repeated, although no question has been put or decided since the former motion, but there must have been some intervening business. Another motion submitted, progress in debate, or reading a paper by the Clerk, an order of the yeas and nays, &c., has been considered such intervening business' as will authorize the repetition of the motion to adjourn.

The SPEAKER-The Chair does not think that a message from the Senate ever has been considered ‘intervening business' in the sense of the rule.

Mr. SPRINGER-The reading of the bill is intervening business according to the rule.

The SPEAKER-The bill was read for the information of the House, being the bill upon which the House was about to vote, and it was entirely within the right of any single member to call for its reading.

Mr. WILSON-I desire to ask the gentleman offering this bill one question.
Mr. CUMMINGS-Regular order!

The SPEAKER-The gentleman declines to answer the question, and demands the regular order. The Clerk will call the roll.

The question was taken: and there were-yeas 145, nays 76, not voting 70; as follows: