Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-07-08

the House had been full yesterday, the bill would
have been defeated bya much larger majority than
il was. He wanted to repudiale and put down
this system of log-roling.
Mr.. ORR said, in reply to the remark Of Mr.;
PRESTON, namely: That this bill was strengthened
by the custom-house amendment that he had
merely TO point the gentleman the action on the
deficiency bill. Those custom houses were voted
into that BILL which only received fifty votes in its
favor, and was therefore rejected. He would say
TO the gentleman, if all Of those who voted 10 put
the custom-houses into the civil and diplomatic
appropriation bill had stood firm there would have
been no difficulty in its passage. The difficulty
seemed 10 be the voting for odious amendments,
and those voting against the bill with the amend
ments incorporated. He appealed 10 all sides who
did not desire TO embarrass the operations OF gov
eminent, TO vote against putting them IN this bill
Let us have bill legitimate and fair He had no
quarrel against gentlemen who voted for those
custom-houses. The bill should include only the
items provided for by general law.
Mr.. STANTON, of Tennessee, inquired OF the
gentleman how he could maintain that the amend
ment was put in the bill, odious 10 majority Of
the House, when the majority had sustained il by
yeas and nays.
Mr.. ORR explained He had intended 10 say
the amendment was odious to those without whose
votes the bill could not be passed.
He moved the previous question, under the ope-
ration of which the House reconsidered the vote
by which the bill was rejected And then recon-
sdcred The vote by Wncn the Dill was ordered 10
be engrossed for third readng.-Yeas IS, nays
&c.
Mr.. STANTON, of Kentucky, moved recon-
sideration of the vote by which the custom house
amendment was agreed 10. He said he had voted
for it, and was in favor Of those custom-houses.
But finding that, out of the number who voted
with him for them, seventeen voted against the
bill on its final passage, he had come TO the con-
clusion that they had better sacrifice the custom
houses for the present than the great interests of
the country.
The motion was agreed o--Yeas 81, nays g.
The question now REQUIRED on agreeing to the
amendment, which appropriates, for the compile
ton of the custom-honses, at ST. Louis, 100000
Mobile, 5000; Cincinnati, $4,000; Louisville.
$4,000; Bangor, $4,000; Bath, $4,000; Will
mington, Delaware, $4,000; and for custom
house site at Providence, $24 900 lin ALL 1921 900.
Mr.. ORR demanded the previous question, but
it was not seconded-yeas 60, nays 70.
Mr.. HAVEN, although he had voted against
putting the above-named amendment into the de-
iciency bill, gave his reasons for voting TO incor
porate it in the civil and diplomatic appropriation
bill. He intended TO vote for the bill with or with
out that amendment
Mr.. PRESTON addressed the House in favor
of the amendment and concluded his remarks by
moving the previous question which was seconded;
and under its operation, the custom-house amend
ment was again concurred in--yeas II, nays IA.
The bill was then, under the operation of the
previous question: passed-yeas 90, nays 81.
The bill for settling the claims ofthe legal repre-
sentatives of Richard w. Meade was laid on the
table.
And the House adjourned.