Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-09-23

whole class it would exclude only the soldiers bu
all others-those who desire take advantage of the
homestead provision and every body else Hence there
such distinction If they take the whole class there
is Distinction IL they do not take it. there is dis
tinction and hence his whole objection falls to the
/ ground according to hisown argument. Then the rea
son why voted against the amendment this saw
the enemies Of the bill coming in solid phalanx to put
on the amendment as believed to load the bill down
and kill IT, and inasmuch in favor of both pro-
positions did not like TO allow the enemy to play that
4 trick on If they will come forward now and say
they will support the bill when II Is put will move
10 reconsider so put the amendment and
then put the bill through thus amended That will be
! u test of sincerity. .... ....
Mr.. PRATT. only desire to snswert the aryrmentu,a
al hoagnem which the gentleman has used lie supposes
that his position is justified by that which he ascrihes to
me on the Kansas and Nebraska BILL Now, will submit
to his capdor whether there is any analogy between
the two case There he concurred with me that the
adoption of the Clayton amendment as it was termed,
which had then been proposed by honorable colleague
would endanger the BILL Every body who voted against
the Clayton amendment and friendly to it in reality
announced his ground that he believed the adoption
of it would defeat the bill in the House of Represen
tatves
Sir was unfortunate in the remarks / made, or
think must have clearly shown that that is not the po
stion of those Senators who the friends of the bill
because they that they all for the amendment of
the Senator from Pennsylvania and they would prefer
the bill with it. and yet the Senator supposes the bill
would stand greater chance Of being rejected if the
amendment made. Why sir, it is to be bill
altogether and has to 60 back to the House of Repre-
sentaves any how. Who will say that it will stand
chance of being passed there if the soldiers be in
Guided than if they be incuded Unless the Senator
makes that assertion there is analogy between the po
son which he occupies and that which occupied
on the occasion to which he has referred.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. / voted against it solely the ap-
prehension that such might be the case. .,..@ ..
Mr. PRATT. Hence, of course, without meaning to
be to the honorable Senator brought forward
the question Of sincerity How you can endanger mea-
sure by putting into it proposition to which both the
friends and enemies of the bill favorable, and
which the friends of the bill have majority to passAfter
you put it on, must admit cannot comprehend do
not use the term invidously towards the honorable
Senator
Now, Mr.. President with regard to the other part of
the Senator's argument, think, with due Difference to
him. he has been equally unfortunate. If this bill passes
the Senate the Senator says that according to my
ment, the States may take all the land and consequent
y the effect is to be the upon the old soldier
every body ese and therefore he supposes my argument
is destroyed by the force of that suggestion submit to
the honorable Senator that he has entirely misunderstood
the drift of the argument which proposed for the
sideraton of the Senate Why, sir if you to put
the amendmentn the BILL you would give the old soldier
preferable right to that Of the States themselves and
you would secure to him that which, without putting it
into the bill, he would not have BY giving him his right
to go to THE Land Office and get out his patent, pro-
posed by the amendment of the honorable Senator from
Pennsylvania you secure the soldier that which the
State holding the lands cannot deprive him Of because it
right of the State and therefore, pass it,
the right is conclusive one and the soldier entitled
soon as the bill passes with that amendment to his land
warrant. Hence he is not deprived of it. he would be
by the passage Of the bill it stands The State would
have no power the subject, far as he was con-
carned He would have preference claim over that of
the State ITSELF and every body else therefore
humby submit to the Senate that the honorable Senator
has not been fortunate lie usually is in answering
the arguments of those opposed to him.
Mr. BUTLER. know, sir, that the honorable Senator
from Illinois would be the last to do to any who
had voted for the amendment Of the honorable Senator
from Pennsylvania voted for it in good faith shall
vote for the proposition Of honorable friend from Vir
gina, and therefore the Senator from Illinois has double
assurance But, Sir l never do disguise my reasons
when vote upon matter of this kind IF these lands
are to be distributed in the form of donation, have
idea ofsubecting the old soldier in the Of 1872 to
the resdium to take what is left in the Territories
wish to give him fair option. do not disguise the
fact that shall vote for the amendment, for perhaps the
reason that it will give to my section Of the country
larger share Of public lands than any form of distribution
you indicate. ~ . Ell.
The yeas and nays ordered upon the amendment
OF Mr. FTzrATR1cK and being taken resulted as follows
YEAS-Messrs Allen, Bell, Benjamin, Bright, Brown,
Cass Chase, Clay Douglas Fessenden, Fitzpatrick, Gwn,
Houston Hunter Jones Of Tennessee Mallory Mason Petit
Rockwell. Rust Sebastian Shields Slide Sumner, Toucey,
Walker, and Weller--27
NAYSMessrs Achson Badger, Bayard, Brodhead, Clay
ton Dawson, Dodge Of Wisconsin, Dodge of Iowa, Foot
Gcyer Hamln. johnson, Jones of Iowa, Pearce, Pratt
Thompson Of Kentucky, Thomson of New jersey Toomb,
and Wade--l9.
So the amendment to the amendment was adopted.