Weekly national intelligencer., 1848-07-22

suppose be mr. B. had been present that day could
be the succeeding day and have his recorded
To puta stongcase Suppose he had been his seat and
had not voted could he vote the next day after the Journal
was read
The SPEAKER explained that the course which was pur-
sued was justified by many precedents.
Mr. BAYLY said he did charge the Speaker with any
intentional usupaon FOR he knew he would be the last man
TO do SO.
Mr. BURT explained that since he had been member Of
this House, the Of circumstances had occurred
when the Speaker member Of the Democratic party,
and the same course pursued II done by Mr. John
w. Davis, the last Speaker Of this House.
Mr. BAYLY said he recoected no such instance but if
there were, 1t did not alter his views He could why
Speaker should vote the day any than the
bes OF the House II the Speaker did exercise his right
when the question put be should be presumed to have
waived IL and the privilege longer existed He then
tnued at some length the passage of the bill
with the clause which Objectionable many and said
he could not but view an attempt to provoke Execu-
tive veto
Mr.. STEPHENS said the gentleman from Virginia (Afr.
BArLr and some other gentlemen complained that this item
for the removal Of instructions the Savannah had been
put in this bill purposey procure Executive Now
who advocated this appropriation, only this
son but at every session since he had been member Of this
House, be could that he had heard such na
ton until this morning He did not dream that any ndlv
dual could possibly expect the President would this sp
popnaton He had always understood that his Democratic
colleague had uniformly voted for this appropriations except
this session. and that supported because il stood
ground different from other appropriations for the
OF harbors lie believed he right in saying that his De-
mocrac colleague had heretofore voted for but he had
ted against the bills containing the appropriation other
matters different from this put in them and for his col
league, who member of the Committee of Ways and
Means, (r TooMBs who had this item put in the bill not
for veto but the money, he would he agreed
points with the gentleman from Virginia in opposing
general Of internal improvements bat consttu-
ona grounds That colleague happened be absent day.
S.1 he forh udsfa
explicitly that his object not to provoke by putting
this item in the civil and diplomatic appropriation bill; but
was TO dsconnect this from other habo improvements
which stand upon entirely different grounds He knew this
the object Of his colleague and that this the history
the true reason for this appropriation in this bill.
Mr.. McCLELLAND inquired if the genlemans colleague
not in favor Of separating this item from this BILL that the
merits OF every such item should be discussed by itself
Mr.. STEPHENS said il necessary that he should
go into detail OF the views of his colleague the subject Of
internal improvements probably before the adjournment his
colleague would speak for himself But be satisfied that
his colleague had doubt Of the constuonaty of mprov
ing harbors for the benefit of the people of this Union If
they could not egae upon this subject what Gov
eminent had they He repeated that he knew his colleague
was opposed to large, unlimited, and exravagan system of
internal improvements he himself but that he had al
ways disconnected this case from Others
And now what was the argument of the gentleman from
Virginia He says this does not differ from other cases. be-
these Instructions put into this river by the Gov
ernmen before the adoption Of the federal constitution This
the ground which the gentleman makes this analo
gous all Others and wishes get rid Of the obligation
ing to make the removal Now he (Mr S. intended
to show that it but qubbe to say that these obsruc
tons put there before the adoption Of the present con
tuton and that heefoe this appropriation for their removal
was unconstitutional He supposed from this argument that
if this Government should put such obs,rucons this Gov
eminent could take them though he did know but
that might be conended that this Government should
in time Of put in such distractions it could again
move them. Was he to argue such question that He
appealed 10 the gentleman from Virginia. and asked he
terained such constitutional opinions that this Government
could block up the mouth OF for the national defence
but that it could afterwards such distractions
No gentlemen could entertain such opinions The gentleman
from Vgna speaking Of the President said that he would
longer erfy this side by abiding the Executive
Now he bad not known that side Of the House quaed
became terrified any threat the Executive had he
heard that side Of the House until this morning that the
President would this bill If this item inserted and
yet the representative of American eemen, by message
of the Executive, communication from any Of his minons
such threat should be made he Mr. would maintain his
rights, and vote for Notwithstanding No,hrea Of the Ex
ecuve would have any terror for that side OF the House. and
Mr.. s. would fan hope that il would have influence with
the other side During the revolutionary these distractions
put into this river in part by officers and in part by
the British and he maintained that rested with the Govern
them and rested solely construction,
but the plain OF the constitution for by the consu
ton the new assumed all the obligations Of the
old Confederation But this assumption IN effect would have
been made by the change without the express provision
When The Government of any people from one form to
last Of Its powers the Government
Suppose had adopted the constitution and that the
States had remained confederaed republic, would any
gentleman doubt that the duty of the Federal Govern
to remove the distractions from that river He could
not argue such question this. He believed the gentle
from Virginia lawyer and sometimes spoke from
the book and he asked him in such case the duty would
have rested upon the Confederation make the removal did
now devove the present Government discharge
this old obligation He asonshed, then, 10 hear gentle
say unconstitutional because those distractions had
been placed there before the adoption Of the present constu
Government took with il oil the and responsibilities
federscy. No principle in public law the laws Of nations
was palmer better settled.
He wished to call the attention Of the House and Of the
support of the Government rejected because contained
item for the improvement Of the Savannah ver when all
the other items called for by the Executive and the
Committee Of Ways and Means. And what that item
He here read the item sppopatng $50, for the removal
Of distractions In the Savannah rve Fort Pulaski and
the anchorage and said they told by the other side
Of the House that IL this item retained in this bill it
would be vetoed by the President Although gentleman
bad authority say the gentleman from Virginia said he
bad doubt Of it. Now this extraordinary spec
sce present the country, when the Chief Magistrate OF
this Union undertook say the Representatives Of the Peo
pie that the wheels Of Government should stop they dared
exercise Of their rights and make appropriation 10
distractions from river which the Government had put
there itself The gentleman from Virginia told them he
this conclusion from the general knowledge he had Of the
Presidents previous yeoes Consequently the wheels Of the
u