The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-08-13
MIR. SPEAKER WHITE IN A PREDI-
CAMENT!


of referring the Presidents Veto Message TO
stocked pack, of 9 to A on the Committee, and
of violating the Constitution by laying the Ia
riff bill upon the table, action equivalent TO in
definite Postponement, instead of proceeding,
upon the return of the bill to the House with
the objections of the President, TO reconsider
ii, the Speaker was sorely pressed for authori-
ty to justify his decision that Mr.. Adams's mo-
ton was in order. Whilst the question was
pending, some ran to him with the House
Journal of the I'd session of the 22d Congress,
and put into his hands the Message of General
Jackson, dated December 9th, 1882, assigning
10 the House his reasons for withholding his
signature from the act for the improvement of
certain harbors, and the navigation of certain
rivers"
This act had been passed at the previous
sion within less than ten days prior to the ad-
journment of Congress In such cases the
Constitution provides eff any bill shall not be
returned by the President within ten days
Sundays excepted) after il shall have been
presented to him, the same shall be law, in
like manner as if he had signed it, unless the
Congress, by their adjournment, prepentS its
return, IN WHICH CASE 1T SHALL NOT BE A
LAW"
The Congress, by its adjournment, did pre-
vent the return of this bill it was not signed,
and of course, it did not become a law but
pred forever by the adjournment before the eY-
piration of the ten days. The Message, then,
was not a Teto Message, and the bill was not
al
not be re-considered, or acted on in any
manner whatever, either by Congress or the Elk
ecutve. The President only informed Con-
gress what had become of it, and why he had
permitted it to die The Message, therefore,
went without the BILL which was dead already
without reconsideration by Congress. This
was the truth of the case.
But what does Mr.. Speaker do with it ? In
the Intelligencer of the 18th we see report of
his speech on this precedent from the Chair.
He says: {" He had looked into the authorities
and found, TO his satisfaction, that this rery
question had been solemny settled. In the
case to which the Chair referred, motion had
been made precisely in the words of the present
motion of the gentleman from Massachusetts.
com nunication was received Gin May, 1922
from the President of the United States-a We
TO Message on the act entitled An act for the
improvement of certain harbors and the naviga-
ton of certain rivers The first order that was
taken on that Message was precisely the motion
now submitted, with the exception that in that
case standing and not select committee was
proposed The motion was submitted by MIR.
Wicklifie, now holding a seat in the Cabinet
The language of the order was that the Mes
sage be referred to the Committee on Roads
and Canals. Upon that motion, the Message
and the bill went together TO standing com
mittee, and the bill never came back TO the
House. There the matter ended"
Now, in this short speech upon recorded
facts, there are no less than six material errors.
1st. The precedent is no authority at all for
ing that the question before Mr.. Speaker
had been solemnly settled" by it.
I'd. No such motion as that made by Mr..
Adams was made in the case
3D.. The Message of General Jackson on
its face and in fact no Veto Message at all.
4th. The bill never went to standing com
mittee or any other committee. There aoas no
bill at all returned to go TO any committee.
The bill died by the ad ournment of the preced-
ing session.
9th. Neither Message bill ever went to
any Committee at all. See Journal referred to,
18th page =" Ordered that the said Message
be referred to the Committee on Roads and
Canals"
ID rcember 9th, 1882, Uhe same day, ga mo-
ton was made by Mr.. Clay, Of Alabama, to
reconsider the vote on this order, and II was
ordered " that the consideration of the said
motion be postponed"
9th. The bill could never " come back to the
House, because it was never returned to the
House and never sent from it."
Such errors as these are too gross for Speak
er. He is either grossly ignorant of what the
Constitution is upon the distinction between the
he practised fraud on the House over which
he presdes. And the reflection which he at
tempted to cast upon the present Postmaster
General, Mr.. Wicklife, was an utter failure
He can find nothing in the history of that gen
tleman to justify such decisions as he made on
this occasion and nothing in the parliamentary
precedents of this country to justify the palpa-
bic and wilful refusal of the House to discharge
its constitutional duty to proceed to recousl-
der' the bill now lying on their table Why did
they refuse to proceed to reconsider II 2" The
real reason is, that they feared they could not
obtain majority, much less two-thirds, to pass
1t! Such is the fact, we believe, that it is a mat,
ter of real doubt whether majority even vii
vote for the bill.