Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1844-06-18

slutiOn. The statement VI tie Oa'7 III
md lis re-stalcment BY his honorable colleague
DIV. relieve him from the task of going through
;, recital of the proceeding so far as such reclta,
,.,s necessary TO present the case properly ana
c,;rlv before the House That statement haa 10
tally retu,ed the ingenious arguments ol the gen
,lsm,n from Massachusetts, who had cndea'oiea
~ nduce the House 10 contound discussion Win
consideration asserting that Il was Du' solc.','
..-alor for the House 10 record their votes With
ant onenins the door for proiracted DEBATE =
Jndring from what had heretofore been the Piac-
ice in this House, debate implied me very r.
verse of nsideraton-prevcntn9 oy It, ia'''u u.
n(ns character. n consideration OF the question
before the House ,,,;,,
an, consideration, whether it were true or false, II
iii moi affect the principle involved IN inns ques
,;on and as 10 the charge that the House MAD s'is
,a;ned the previous question under lalse III,
nrcssion. believing that the main question "ouiu
he ,,pon the motion for po>poneinen II tiielc "tiS
such false impression, the House had an opportu-
p;tv 10 correct il at the time; for upon It's beng
animated by the then occupant OF the Chalr, lna'
the question would be upon po>lponeneht' ho,irc
was given by the gentleman from kenticky WI;
Wh,el as well as himself, that that dcclslon would
be resisted The House, therefore, had luii KNOW"
lctpe that the question would be made. blii When
decision
by The Speaker. that the question would be upon
The massage ot the BILL Notwithstanding The ONCE.
lions of the Presdenl-wllen il was asceralnea
Thai that would be the main questlon-a motion
was made To reconsider the vote by which The
main question was ordered. and The House reills-
ed TO reconsider il. The House iel themselves
enabled without further discussion, 10 record their
votes upon the bill No one, he believed denied
that the proceedings which occurred on the return
of the bill were in pursuance OF, and IN conform
itv with, the Constitution; and the simple queS-
ton now was were those proceedings Delil9 mus
in pursuance Of the Constitution, To be revived ny
indefinite reconSiierations OF every vote
He would not 20 into discussion OF the veto
mower. except simply 10 make reference in con-
nection with the question They knew that u'l-
der The English Government, the veto power was
an absolute power 1t was there veto IN lact
Our Executive was invested with modlca-
ton of that power, and that modification was
Ia make il, conform to our Republican lnStltu-
tons Ii was not. therefore, anti-Democratic
Under the English form Of Government. the mo-
march was hereditary: in ours, the president,
being elective was himself the embodiment ol
the popular voice. Instead, then, oil giving hun
an absolute veto as under the English form OF
Government he was authorized only to inter-
bose his objections. These objections were
they might review their aci, and ascertain whc-
Their. in those objections. lhc President had 81
ven expression 10 the popular voice In tins
view of il. the exercise of the veto power was
but the exercise of The right oi The people TO
inicrpoSc If the veto power was absolute. Inc
HouS. could take M further proceedings; bn he
cause il was modified into Executive objections,
the Constitution itself had provided proceeding
founded upon those objections. And they were
A 4 nj tar q fp
for those proceedings for. while the Constitution
authorized The House to determine rules for the
government! Of its proceedings, those rules mus
bc in conformity with, and in subordnaiun 10.
the law of the land As prescribed by The Conali-
tuition. In addition 10 the passage in the Con-
,,uion which permitted the House 10 frame lis
own rules, there was another provision 10 ms
effect: Every order or resolution shall be present
cd Ia The President OF The United States and, be-
fore the same shall lake effect shall he approved
bc him. or, being diSaPproved 10y him, shall fc
rt.paSSctl by lwu-tliirdS of the Senate ana House
of Representatives, according 10 the rules and IL
mutations prescribed in the ease ol bill When
therefore, the question arose under Inc Con>utu-
ton. shall the bill pass, notwithstanding the OBJ
icctions of the President 2" that question was
subject TO all the rules and limitations prescribed
in the case of a bill What were those rules and
limitations? Why. if the majority were not pre-
pared al once 10 act, il would b. competent to
postpone The consideration 10 another day so
The majority il they had not been prepared Ia :Icl
in the case Of the bill which gave rise To Tins
question: might nave refused 10 entertain The pre-
yiolls question. They had all the protection al
lolied them BIZ The rules and Limitations prescribed
in case OF bill. The House sustained the pre-
yious question. thereby declaring that they were
ready 10 ;ic and that no debate was necessary.
II was in vain Ia say that The requirements 81 me
Constitution had 10. been compiled with. Hey
had been complied with 10 the very letter
What would b. The eiicc; lthc opinion OF The
Chair should bc overrulcd! If reconsideration
could be had in such 4 ease, where would he The
limitation? The IIousc would he involved in
endless lcconsideralions. which would be absurd.
Mr. Dromgooe having concluded his remarks;
The Speaker explained. in reference 10 The de-
cison made by the Chair, that he was under a
miSapprehenson al the time a 10 the decision
pronounced by his predecessor Mr.. Boyd The
motion upon which that decision was made being
motion 10 refer the message of The President with
out the hill The decision was perfectly correct.
Mr.. Holmes rose and addressed The COMMITTEE.
He commenced hy saving that he approved Of The
veto; but there was higher question before the
House, viz whether they should pursue Inc
course prescribed by the Constitution itself on re-
considering the bill The Constitution directed,
That Wilcll al Blll Wis lttullltti
of the President the objections shouldbc spread nj
length upon the journal, and that the House should
then proceed 10 reconsidcrthc bill. The question
was had they entered the objections al length upon
the journal! The answer was plain one, they
had not. because they could not. But the Chair
had declared. that the acquisitions of the Consti-
tuition were complied with, and the bill had been
reconsdcred With all Difference TO the Chair,
he thought Otherwise. The rule of the House
prescribed that they should reconsider any vote
upon motion Iur that purpose, provided twenty
| four hours notice were given oil such motion
| Mr. Cobb moved the previous question
Mr.. jameson moved that the whole subject be
laid upon the table.
| A call of the House was demanded, but mol or
! dcrcd--avcs 61. noes IL, by telers.
| Mr.. Jameson. al the request OF several mem
berS, Withdrew his motion; and the question
recurrcd on secondin. the demand for the previous
| question II was seconded. and the main question
| ordered to he now put-viZ: "Shall the opinion oi
the Chair stand rs the judgment OF The House
Mr.. White demanded the yeas and nays
And they were ordered: and beng lakeh were
veas o. nays So, As follows:
Yr,s-AIesSrs Anderson, Arlington Akin
son. Bayiv. Benton Edward J. Black, James
Black. James A. Black, Blackwell, Bower, Bow
lin. Boyd. Brinkerhoti,, Brodhcad Burt Aaron V.
Brown. Caldwell Campbell Shepherd Cary, Reu
ben Chapman, Augustus A. Chapman, Cobb,
Coles, Cross, Cullom Daniel, Richard D. Davis,
Dawson Dillingham; Douglass, Dromgoole, FL
mer, Farce, Ficklin, French, Hale, Hammet,
HARRISON, Hogc Hopkins, Houston, Hubbard,
Hubbell, Hughes, James b. Hunt, G. J. Insersoll,
Jameson, Cave Johnson, George w. Jones, An
drew Kennedy Preston King, Kirkpatrick La
branche, Lucas. Lumpkin. McCauslcn, Maclay,
McClcmard, Mcconnell Mcdowell Mckay,
Mathews, Joseph Morris, Murphy, Norris, Owen,
PAYNE, David $ Reid Rcdins, Relle, Rhctt, Rit-
ter, Roberts, Robinson, Russell. ST. John, Saun-
ders. Thongs H. Seymour Simons, Simpson,
Slidell, John T. Smith, Thomas Smith, Robert
Smith, Stccnrod, Sleson, John Stewart, Stone
Taylor, Thompson. Tibbalt>, Tucker Went
worth, Williams, woodward, Joseph A. Wright,
and Yosi--91.
NAYs-Mes~rs Abbot Adams, Ashc, Baker
| Barrnecr. Barnard jeremiah Brown, Buihng