The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-12-03


very end of the list voted against the propositions
proposition almost in terms identical with that now
offered by the gentleman from Kentucky. On that
occasion, a distinguished gentleman from New
York Ogden Hofman) took the position which
he Mr.. BAYLY) now maintained that, I'LL the law
i in question was repealed, such a PROPOSE
lion could not bc entertained He took that ground
now. He insisted the execution of the law as il
is. His resolution proposed TO effect the election OF
| a public printer in the manner prescribed by the
law. Before Lc concluded, he would propose a
modification of his resolution providing for the rails
| ing of committee to inquire whether any change
was expcdient, and, IL so, what change should be
made, in the mode of executing the public printing
He had but additional remark TO make, IN refer
encc to so much Of the honorable gentleman's argu-
ment was pertinent to the subject before the
| House. The gentleman had told them that there
was proposition from one establishment to do the
printing for twenty per cent less than was charged
under the mode now prescribed by law But the
fact was, that that proposition really amounted to
offer to reduce the cost only five per cent That he
! (Mr B. would show in moment. He took boldly
the ground that these propositions had been thrown
in, not with aview to an economical expenditure Of
the public money, but TO embarass, if possible the
democratic party, and to afford an opportunity of
assault on the part Of the gentleman from Ken
lucky. Before he made any further remark on that
view of the question, he would advert to what the
practical reduction proposed by the gentleman really
amounted to- The first proposition for the printing
submitted TO the House purported to reduce the
price allowed Ivy the law Of 1919 IS per cent. But
that had already been reduced 20 per cent. So that
after all, the practical reduction proposed amounted
| to just per cent! But he had remarkable dis
closure TO make to the House in reference to these
| gentlemen who made that proposition. He had al
ready referred 10 the fact that the 9th Congress
the rate Of compensation was reduced 20 per cent.
on the cost Of the work as previously charged.
But, before the end of the session, Gales &
Seaton, who executed the work, came in
| and asked TO have the former rates re-
stored, and--would the chair believe it, The testi-
mony produced TO sustain this request that of the
very men who are now proposing TO SO much
money by executing the work for so much less.
These very men-one Of them, at least, to his Mr.
b. - knowledge before the committee, and tes
titled that, unless the former rates restored the
public printer would be ruined, And yet these very
men, who thus testified before the committee, in the
case Of Gales & Seaton, that, unless the old rates
were restored, the public printer would be ruined
now come before the House, and propose to do il at
| reduction of rs per cent. Did any man in the
House--would any man in the nation--be so credu-
lous as TO believe that these really believed that
the present rates of compensation were extrava.
CANT as they affected to represent that they werei
They had involved themselves in this dilemma; either
their memorial is untrue, or the testimony they gave
in the case of Gales & Seaton was untrue. His own
belief was that both propositions were made purely
for political effect He trusted the House was bold
people of the country were sufficiently well inform
cd to understand the motives and object Of all such
| attempts.
| Yesterday, the honorable gentleman from Ken
lucky informed the House that he was a strict con-
sructionist and asked him Mr. B.. in what part Of
the constitution of the United States in the
lutions of DS, could be found the power to estab-
lish political press. When he (Mr. B. made such
| + proposition, il would be time enough for him to
look up that clause Of the constitution which justif
ed such a procedure He had not proposed to es-
tabsh, by government patronage, political press.
All that he proposed was, that that law should be
adhered to which had regulated the public printing
from the days of Washington TO the present time
even under the pure administration, the gentleman
characterized it, Of the honorable gentleman from
Massachusetts,. IL was not necessary for him to
defend a proposition which he had never made,
and which he assured the gentleman from
Kentucky he never would make But if,
| hereafter, under any political halucinaton, he
should attempt to make proposition for the es-
adjustment Of a government press he supposed he
could find in the constitution the power to do So
just as readily he could the power to open canals
to construct railroads, or charter corporations
The same latitude Of construction which justified
these measures justified the establishment OF gov
eminent press. The honorable gentleman had UNI
dertaken to remind him that he was from the Acco-
mac district and that his Mr.. Bs) ilusirious pre-
decessor was one Of the foremost in this reform
The honorable gentleman thus seemed to admonish
him to be careful how he departed from the foot
steps of that predecessor. He believed that the
honorable gentleman himself come from the Lex
ngton district and perhaps it might sound strange
ly in his ears that the district which he (Mr. b.
represented expected him to think for himself.
Perhaps he Mr.. ID. took it for granted that in Ac-
conac district, as in some others, the represent
alive Of the people not permitted exercise his
own free judgment, but was bound to follow in the
footsteps of iliustrous predecessors, Ia laugh As
he believed that district which he had the honor to
represent never asgraccd itself in sending to that
House such shacked representative But the
honorable gentleman from Kentucky, not satisfied
with giving him an ilustrious predecessor, whose
political course he was bound TO follow with inn
plict faith had proceeded farther and, in an effort
to parry the charge of inconsistency which he
had fastened upon him, attempted TO charge him
(Mr b. with political Inconsistency. He, (Mr B. y
in convictng the gentleman from Kentucky Of an
inconsistency pertincn, to the subject before the
| House, had only had OCCASION to refer TO his VOTE
standing the records of the House, in order TO
show that, although now declamng so violently
about extravagant expenditures for the pub
| lie printing, he had actually been guilty Of vo-
ting money out of the public treasury as gra-
tiity to partisan editors The gentleman might
take either horn of the dlemna il was per.
feet he might choose the one or other He (Mr.
| b. would leave to the country the decision as to
which Of them had taken the course most likely to
corrupt the purity of the press-hc, who was only
adhcring to the system which had uniformly pre-
/ vailed under the law, or the gentleman from Ken
lucky, who voted large gratuites to partisan editors
1 Whenever he (Mr. b, should be convicted of vo-
ting gratuities party editors, then lie would in
deed deserve to be branded guilty Of seeking to
corrupt the party press. But the gentleman did not
choose TO confnc himself TO accusations Of incon-
ssiency in reference merely TO the question before
the House: he had travelled out of the record, as
the lawyers say, in order to inform the House that
in 1910, he (Mr. BIZ was wing, and had, at one
period, made wing speeches in Ohio. He told the
| gentleman that no was totally misinformed
| He dsliked the appearance Of vanity--lhc ego
tism which speaking Of himself implied. The
remark of the gentleman however, made it necessa-
ry to give formal contradiction of his statements
The first vote that he (Mr B. had given in his
life for General Jackson, in 1892, against the
venerable gentleman from, Massachusetts,. IA mem
bcr---Mr. ClayI He thanked his colleague for the
correction; it was against the Magnus Apollo OF
Kentucky that hc had cast his vote in favor of Gen
| cral Jackson vH, is AtiAi sh
! Mr. DAVIS. May ask the gentleman aucs-