The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-10-09

= 20 modify changc
said rules and regulations III such manner msy seem
TO him discreet and and may prescribe and esab
and arrange proper for the execution of said laws
and appoint aud commission such officers as may be ne
cessary administer such laws IN said Territory fol
such he may prescribe, whose authority
shall continue until otherwise provided by Congress- said
officers to receive such compensation as the President
may prescribe, not exceeding double the compensation
paid similar officers of the United States
its Territories for like servces and to enable the same
10 be done the OF two hundred thousand dollars be
appropriated OF any money in the Treasury not other
| wise appropriated"
Messrs. Bell, Butler, Douglas, Fitzpatrick
Houston, Hunter, Mason Rusk, Sebastian, Yu-
lee-ten Senators on the other side of the Cham
! ber-voted in 1849 to incorporate this extra
ordinary proposition into the civil and diplo-
matte bill. 1t was carried through the Senate
| by a vote of 80 to 27-lost in the House by 100
yeas to ia nays. Gen. Dix, Of New York, thus
described this proposition:
"H is literally or,ni,.z hin tci dictaoriaI poscsrs
appears delegate him. nearly in the language
OF the Constitution the power under which the authority
establish Governments for the Territories has been
claimed The object of the amendment Of the
Senator from Wisconsin is more than temporary, what
its language may import II has no limitation in
point Of time 7ne it eonrs as equally nnli'itsd
| an scope an duration"
The Hon. John NJ. Niles, of Connecticut
characterized the proposition in language not to
| be misunderstood. He said:
"The proposition startling and is there any example
for it? deny the night and authority of Congress 10
delegate It's legislative powers TO the Executive. ihe
supposed that the people of these territories will quietly
submit TO arbitrary government of this kind? vii
| they submit a desposm-to the government of one
ma-sBd be deprived of all participation in the Gov
| eminent you establish them, = Can there
be any example found in modern times, Of colonial sys
tenn like ths Are the colonies of of the European
Powers subjected to system go despoc as this we
AZ arstocratic and arbitrary but has it any colonies
subject to a despotic system like this, Would any Min
| lister dare TO propose such SYSTEM"
terized by these two distinguished statesmen
was sustained by the Senator from Virginia Mr.
HUNTER in an earnest and, need not say, elo-
| quent speech. Mr. Walker, on opening his re-
marks for the proposition, said that several Sena-
| tors had requested him to withdraw the amend
ment from the civil and diplomatic BILL and he
expressed willingness to do so, if the Senate in
dictated a wish that he should. The Senator from
| Virginia TMr. Mason promptly responded by
saying, that if the Senator withdrew it, he would
renew it. Yes, sir, this Senator, who now pro-
nounces the action of the House "unparliament-
airy, unconstitutional, revolutionary" not only
sustained this proposition, which clothed the
Executive with mighty powers" by his vote,
but he threatened to renew it if it should be with
drawn by the mover, in compliance with the re-
quest of other Senators. The Senator was will
| ling to unite with twenty-eight other Senators,
| and force twenty-seven Senators, who were OPP
appropriation bill, or vote for propositir
they could not approve
AT the last session of the Thirty-third Con-
| gress the House of Representatives incorporated
| into the civil and diplomatic bill five sections
making a sweeping change in the revenue laws.
This was not only general legislation upon an
appropriation bill, but it was legislation of the
highest importance to the people and the Gov
| ernment-a proposition not only affecting the
revenue, but affecting the business interests of
| the people. The bill was referred to the Com
mittee on Finance, at the head of which was the
Senator from Virginia Mr.. HcNTER.1 He as
chairman of the committee, reported in favor of
this general legislation upon the appropriation
BILL The veteran Senator from Delaware mir.
CLAYTON moved to strike out these five sections
concerning the revision of the tariff The Sem
ator from Virginia resisted the motion, and in
reply to the remarks of the Senator from Della
ware and others, he defended this proposed gen.
eral legislation. He admitted that he was usual
ly opposed to lacking" upon the appropra-
ton bills measures of general legislation, but he
contended that the practice had been in favor of
such legislation. l quote from his speeches on
that occasion to show that he did not think in
1855, any more than in lS49 that this kind of
legislation was supplementary, unconstitu-
tional, revolutionary"
"There may be precedent says the Senator,
g which has gone TO this length, but there have been
precedents-dsed hardly appropriation passes, which
does contain far the principle srned
And while ! admit the general rule, must
the time be allowed 10 say that there eIcep
lions and think this case presents one.
"The Senate whenever i, has any favoriie object in
view makes no scrupe in overriding the rule for the
purpose of putting bill which may through
My friend from South Carolina MT Butlerl has referred
to the fact that they put the ncongruous clause abolish
ay dat nc nc
aud army has BEEN toy The last fee or sx years done
erdt appropriation bulls"
U -
the Senator from Virginia, " which does not con-
tain general legislation, 80 far as the principle
is concerned" "The general legislation for the
army and navy" he tells US, has been done
on general appropriation bills" Now it is Gun
parliamentary" for the House to put this proviso
into the bill! ]"
The Senator from Virginia nearest to me, mr.
Mason, who will not even consider the expe-
diency of repeating the obnoxious Kansas laws,
until the House backs square down from this
stnendment, supported his colleague in the eff
forts to force through revision of the tariff by
means Of the civil and diplomatic bill. He said :
.sir have found, from practical experience that, at
least at the short session Of Congress- you
through UNLESS you make that itself of the
rehisis of appropriation BILL This not the first in
stance There precedent his The precedent has
BEEN sstablishsd before 1t starss honorable gentlemen
Gle, in order to get through but have asures COM
paratvely minor every day. made to avail themselves of
the same aid OF getting through in Legislation"
"There is no precedent" exclaims the Senator
ain this !" The precedent has been established
beforel" Yes, sir, "the precedent has been estab-
lished; yet the Senator who uttered those words
in March, 1855, makes this Chamber echo with
his anathemas upon the House, for acting upon
established precedent Q consistency thou art
indeed jewel
The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. ToucEYl
came to the aid of his friends from Virginia.
That Senator said
"But ! rose only for the purpose of vindca,ng the
our legislation subjects that connected think
u IS wrong When say scrong, mean inpoitie. We
adopt this measure five approve of it, We have right,
perfect right, to reject it If we disapprove ofn
In 1885, it was only "impolitic to blend in
legislation subjects not connected |" "Wben 7
say wrong, I mean impolitic" exclaimed the
Senator from Connecticut then. Now it is Gun
parliamentary, unconstitutional revolutionary !n
Is this statesmanlike Is this worthy of the
Senate of the United States That Senator
went so far the other day as to tell US that the
House kpeE the Senate was opposed to the pro-
viso Well, sir, suppOsing the House did know
| that the Senator from Connecticut, and his COM
peers on that side of the Chamber did not relish
this proviso, were the members bound to surren-
der their own judgments, to crafty the wishes
| and meet the exigenciss of those Senators? Per-
haps it would save great deal of trouble if the
Senate should send down to the House, whenever
it made proposition, that it would be distasteful
to the Senate to send the matter up here. Such
sentiment il better fitted for the Senate of Louis
Napoleon than for this Chamber. This proviso
is revolutionary, supplementary, unconstitu-
tional, because the House knew that it was dis
tasteful to the Senate. Sir, spch suggestion as
this would excite smile, if uttered BY a third
rate county court lawyer in some Justices court
| dismiss it from this Chamber
While the proposition of the Senator from
Delaware was pendinp tn sfrike out of Tho hin