The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1859-11-22

the proceedings of the last session of Congress, and
think we ought to refer that for the action in regard
to the P. Q. Appropriation Bill, and to Senator
Clingmans statement We regret to have to say that
we have not copy of the last Congressional Globe
IF some body will send one will readily pay all
charges But think Mr. CIingmans statement in
the MAN, correct, especially to the action of the
House. The Observer says:
"The Democrat says that we were mistaken in alleg-
ing that the House rejected the Senate's amendments
reference to page 1867 of the Congressional Globe
will show the Democrat that right. The SEN
ates amendments were contained in section 18th. Mr.
Grows resolution stated that that section 18th sis in
the nature of revenue BILL" (Which the Senate has
right originate and that therefore it be
ed to the Senate. The House adopted the resolution,
and thus, to all intents and purposes, rejected the
amendments"
We certainly cannot and never shall agree that the
action of the House, stated by the Observer
rejection of the Senate's ENTHUSIASTICALLY, it
treating the Senate with contempt and insult. The de-
caration that the 18th section is in the nature of
revenue b and therefore it she returned to the Sen
ate" was not what legislators understand rejection
Of course it indirect rejection and that is the
cause of complaint. If it not the intention of
Grow, and Vance and Gmer throw the responsible
the Senate for the failure of the BILL why did they
nave the taken directly the amendments,
either rejecting approving them? In that way all
the difficulty would have been avoided. But they did
not do that and the above quotation does show that
they did So it would that the Congressional
Globe sustans Mr. Cs statement that the House neither
rejected accepted the Senate amendments, but did
actually return the bill without acting them.
The Observer still contends that the Journal of Com
from which it previously quocd) is democra-
tic paper, and not 'neutral paper classed it.
We admit that that paper is supporting the demo-
cratic party How could it consistently otherwise
in the present state ofaairs, while there only two
parties at the North the democratic and black republic
can? There it is either democracy black republican
ism, and the editors of the Jour. of Com too good
national men choose support the democracy.
In that they showed their good sense and hope
esteemed friends of the Observer think too But we
have always looked upon that paper commercial,
neutral newspaper, and up to 1852 SO with strong
old-line Wing sentiments. We know that many
sdered it, originally, organ of od-ne Whiggery.
We know the Observer says, that Crows resolu-
ton contained such language that "the Senate
had violated the constitution but we know that that
was the meaning of the resolution, fairly construed
AS the time which the matter taken up in the
House. the Observer says the morning of the last
day-Mr Clingman says it was at night. But suppose
Mr. c. is mistaken, is it likely the bill retained
in the House and not sent to the Senate until night?
The Observer says Messrs Branch and Letcher dems
were the House branch Of the committee of confer
ence which insisted new bll-we don't doubt that,
but Messrs Branch and Letcher did not (nor did any
democrat of the n c. delegation Cor Grows fac
tious resolution did John A. Gmer ard z. B. Vance.
Tie Observer is mistaken in surprising that we have
admitted that the bill offered by the conference COM
mittee to the Senate bill, but the old
with the amendments omitted-we do not admit any
such thing. Our understanding is that the bill offered
to the Senate one, but represented to be
similar to the old one, without the amendments of
course and to properly consider that bill, and learn
its provisions the Senate did have time enough left
after it received To have passed the bill through
without reading and understanding it would have been
wrong and hasy legislation, and we know the Observer
is very properly opposed to hasty action
We friends of the Observer that soon
as get the Congressional Globe will refer to it
and have something more to say the subject In the
meantime have no idea that Vance and Gimer can
be cleared Of the charge at first brought against
them (about which the discussion commenced) that
hey voted for Grows resolution with the expectation
and hope of embarrassing democratic Administration.
That they voted have charged is denied, and
our inference their object is fair and deducble
from the circumsta nces.