The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-02-19


ing examined copy OF this bill which is moi the one
under consideration AN under that impression from
knowledge Of The ac 10 relation to of The judges
WHO communicated 10 writing hts objections 10 the ball.
and ose objections were removed by reference 10 NE
bill which has been under consideration by The senase
HIS objections therefore Withdrawn IN consequence
oil the correction OF that error. do mol believe tla
any one OF the Judges who has examined The Oil mat has
been discussed by the Senate has stalled any objections
Mr. BUTLER | will not the gentleman
fefred To- perhaps that is not parliamentary, would IL
be entirely right, but Of the judges waited upon
Yesterday and said he thought that in respects the
principles OF the bill We're Objectionable and that he had
the authority Of the Chief justice IN saying the same
thing ior him told hin that bill of The kind
absolutely necessary, but hat of bill una
BILE TO Say His reply was very much ike that made by
the honorable senator from North Carolina the other
day. that bill to e9ualize the fees Of clerks, mashals
and attorneys would be unjust BILL SO far regards
different parts OF the United States.
MIR DOWNS Ii is very evident from the converse
ton now taking place, that the difficulties in regard to
this bill ATE increasing. When the fee bill was first
taken up seemed TO be universally acquiesced in and IL
was said The Judges Of the Supreme Court agreed TO l
We ind now the discussion has progressed that that
not the fact aud lind that, The discussion goes
on. and as msnbers look into H. more become opposed
ton
Mr.. BUTLER l did not say that was opposed to it.
Mr., DOWNS. admit that this is a bill OF Importance,
and ought be disposed OF hastily do not know
what the senator from Georgia meant by the remarks
which he made in relation TO amendments But | am
sure he have very different views from those which
entertain in relation to the duties of senators here, if he
supposes that however urgent lac may be TO get through
The subject other senators are not 10 propose amendments
when they think the interests OF the country require
More especially is this the in regard TO this bill ),
which Is wide spread in its effects which to operate
every State in the Union, and which adopts new prnc-
pies and new features with regard to the subject OF cost
Many oil the provisions, think, make The law worse
than was before therefore, is not to be supposed that
will 60 through without any impeachment such as the
Offering Of amendments. Gentlemen must not suppose
that because they think there is pressing necessity IN
this BILL their views are To govern the actions OF all
the senators. have not had opportunity 10 offer sew
sIsl amendments which | propose to offer They are
amendments OF Importance and perhaps may lead 10 dls
cusson do not intend that bill OF this Importance
shall be hurried through IN such manner that the Sen
ate and the country cannot look into and Judge OF It as
it is Having this idea, and possessing some knowledge
Of tbs subject shall not allow j, to be passed in hot
Mr. BERRlEN. am bound to answer the inquiry OF
the senator from Louisiana My observation IN rea-
ton to amendments simply this: that il the declara
ton by any senator OF the Intention to move amendments
TO the bill would prevent the Senate from entering upon
its discussion. would be in the power OF any senator
to stay that discussion any moment he pleased beg
10 say also, that hope the Senate about adopt
. rule OF its action the opinions which may be entertain
ed beyond these walls BY any individuals however ee-
waited their station regard 10 pending here
We have been engaged IN the discussion Of the bill 10
which referred for two days. That time will be los, TO
the county, if lay the bill aside not urging IL
beyond the duty imposed on me by my position. That
the senator from Louisiana, member OF the Judiciary
Committee, by whom this bill has been reported, should
not have had opportunity o' informing himself as 10
its provisions, regret trust the question will be pre-
scented the Senate and shall have discharged my duty
when the Senate shall have acted upon the motion which
has been made.
Mr.. DOWNS | wish 10 state in reply to the remarks
which have Just been made by the senator from Georgia.
that, although am member OF the Judiciary Committee,
never, until the discussion arose. examined the details
OF that bill think may venture 10 say that other
member OF the committee examined the bull IN detail ex
Cep the senator from Georgia. Like many other
ures OF the kind which require the examination OF de-
talr, II placed IN the hands OF member OF the
committee, who took upon himself the labor OF collecting
the materials and preparing the bill IL was in this
certainly did not examine the details OF the bill
and that is no extraordinary occurrence, ! think. Ii |
4 80 informed myself, | certainly should not have
Ken q different view OF the bill from what | have
ken. Certainly II cannot be supposed that senator,
ing member oil a committee which reports BILL is
pfecluded from Offering endmens making objections
10 the bill when il comes up.
The question was taken on the motion to postpone the
prior orders for the purpose Indicated BY ans nays
with the following result:
YEAS-Mcssrs Achson, Badger, Baldwin Cass, Clarke,
Dodge Of Wisconsin, Dodge of Iowa, Douglas, D,wn,,
Fcch, Gvin Houston, Hunter, Jones' Morris Pau, Rusk,
6ou!e Sturgeon. Underwood, Uphsm, and Walkers
NAYS-Messrs. Bell, Berien. Borlaud, Chase, Clay.
Morton, Phelps Seward Smith, Sprusncc, Turney, Whit
comb, and Yulee-20
So the motion agreed 10.
REDUCTION POSTAGE
The Senate, as in committee OF The whole, proceeded
10 the consideration OF the bill reduce and modify the
OF postage, and TO authorize the coinage OF three
cent piece.
Alter some discussion on amendments offered OF which
report will be given hereafter and withou, dsposing Of
the BILL
The Senate adjourned